Menu
▾
▴
#552 preceded_by- New Relation for Stages
closed-accepted
1
2014-07-13
2013-06-28
No
We propose adopting the use of the relation: developmentally_preceded_by relation to order the stages of development in the Plant Structure Development Stage branch of the Plant Ontology.
For example: flowering stage (PO:0025586) is developmentally_preceded_by flower formation stage (PO:0025585).
Comments?
will preceded_by suffice in a generic way? Reason being you will probably add this directionality inserted only when it is always certain.
Based on the discussions at POC Conf call 7-2-13, it was decided that it would be better to use the more general form of the relation "preceded_by".
Reasoning was that we are already discussing developmental stages so it is redundant to say "developmentally_preceded_by". Also, some of the stages may not be developmental, per se, such as senescence.
Relations were changed to "preceded_by".
I recommend using the same relations as here:
http://code.google.com/p/developmental-stage-ontologies/
http://code.google.com/p/developmental-stage-ontologies/wiki/Relations
Use 'preceded by' (transitive) when there is the possibility of intermediate stages
Use 'immediately preceded by' (not transitive, but entails 'preceded by') when the stages abut.
The preceded_by relation has been accepted and will be used in Release #20, to order the flower development (PO:0007615) stages.
Icon has been added to the Relations in the PO Page.
Moved xref to BFO:0000062 for the preceded_by relation from the dbxref field to the Xref field.