From: Pankaj J. <pj...@co...> - 2005-02-22 20:56:34
|
Hi Chris and other, I am trying to follow your discussion. We are also having the same problems of instantiations in PO which are either sensu or spatially (space) driven. We haven't yet ventured into the phenotypes. I understand that it is easy to sort the qualifiers if we are dealing with one term (e.g. sessile spikelet) or where you have anatomy term being used as its own qualifier (e.g. epidermis, leaf epidermis, root epidermis), but how will it work, in cases like http://www.plantontology.org/amigo/go.cgi?view=details&search_constraint=terms&depth=0&query=PO:0006352&show_associations=terms where you have some thing like spikelet -i-spikelet sensu maize --i--sessile spikelet ----i--upper floret of sessile spikelet ----i--lower floret of sessile spikelet --i--pedicellate spikelet ----i--upper floret of pedicellate spikelet ----i--lower floret of pedicellate spikelet There are two instances of spikelets (sessile and pedicellate) and both have two instances of florets (upper and lower) defined spatially as well as differentially by spikelet type. I haven't added more here but you must have figured out that each floret (grass flower) will have their own androecium (male organs) and gynoecium (female organs), thus creating more complexity. Also we would like to see these terms as instances of generically defined upper/lower florets and sessile/pedicellate spikelets, which are not under sensu maize terms. What I see is that such kinds of structures are both annotation and ontology driven, but how is it going to work for users that is a big question. Reason being a user would like to query atleast the following three statements show me all the genes expressed in -"androecium of the lower floret of SESSILE spikelet of maize" ??? -"androecium of the lower floret of PEDICELLATE spikelet of maize" ??? -"androecium of the lower floret of SESSILE spikelet BUT NOT in the lower floret of PEDICELLATE spikelet of maize" ??? Pankaj |