I think we can resolve the K56R type, by always including the gene name in fron of these name types hht1-k56R etc
Some appear to be mistakes (I don't think wee1-50 is a true allele of swr1
The only one I can see which might be a problem right now is abc1 delete...I think that has been used twice as an allele name./ Maybe in this instance abc1 could be made a synonym of allele ybt1(delta) (the approved name for SPAC9E9.12c)
Looks like a Friday afternoon task for us to do the fixes first and take it from there.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I guess these are not an issue anyway, as they have the unique name.
I will lower the priority to 1 and we can have a look in the future if any more have accumulated
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Here's the list of allele names that are duplicated and the count of the number of times the name is used:
And here are the uniquenames/identifiers of the alleles with duplicated names:
Good. Not too many.
I think we can resolve the K56R type, by always including the gene name in fron of these name types hht1-k56R etc
Some appear to be mistakes (I don't think wee1-50 is a true allele of swr1
The only one I can see which might be a problem right now is abc1 delete...I think that has been used twice as an allele name./ Maybe in this instance abc1 could be made a synonym of allele ybt1(delta) (the approved name for SPAC9E9.12c)
Looks like a Friday afternoon task for us to do the fixes first and take it from there.
crm1-N1 SPAC1805.17:allele-6
crm1-N1 SPCC663.03:allele-4
cdc22-M45 SPAC1F7.05:allele-3
cdc22-M45 SPBC582.03:allele-7
cdc22-M45 SPBC11B10.09:allele-14
git6-261 SPBC106.10:allele-13
git6-261 SPAC926.04c:allele-6
wee1-50 SPAC144.13c:allele-2
wee1-50 SPCC18B5.03:allele-2
prp1 SPBC6B1.07:allele-3
prp1 SPAC29E6.02:allele-2
end4-507 SPAC688.11:allele-2
end4-507 SPAC4F10.15c:allele-3
appear to be typos and will be fixed.
I guess these are not an issue anyway, as they have the unique name.
I will lower the priority to 1 and we can have a look in the future if any more have accumulated