REF GENOMEquery: meiotic DNA double strand break proc parent

Logged In: YES
user_id=516865

also, is this correct?
meiotic gene conversion
--meiotic DNA double-strand break processing
--meiotic DNA double-strand break formation

i.e. meiotic DNA double-strand break s don't always result
in gene conversion?

Logged In: YES
user_id=436423

did you ever hear from Eurie on this one?

Logged In: YES
user_id=554670

It already looks like GO:0000724 (double-strand break repair
via homologous recombination) is a great-grandparent and
GO:0006311 (meiotic gene conversion) is a parent of
GO:0000706 (meiotic DNA double-strand break processing).

I can't tell whether this was done in response to this SF
request or it was originally like that.

I'm trying to reconcile the appropriate use of "part-of"
with the biological issues that Val already pointed out -
not all meiotic DNA double-strand breaks result in gene
conversion. And there's some new evidence out that suggests
that it's not all straightforward homologous recombination.
That duality is represented in the current parentage
(either path up is correct) but is that really how we're
using "part-if" now-adays?

Logged In: YES
user_id=451873

If DNA double-strand breaks don't always result in gene
conversion, then these relationships are incorrect:

meiotic gene conversion
---[p] meiotic DNA double-strand break processing
---[p] meiotic DNA double-strand break formation

it's a tpv - if a gp was annotated to 'meiotic DNA
double-strand break processing' that had nothing to do with
gene conversion, it would still implicitly be annotated to
'meiotic gene conversion'.

Logged In: YES
user_id=516865
Originator: YES

did this get resolved?

cheers

Val

Logged In: YES
user_id=436423
Originator: NO

looks like there's been no change ... Eurie, can you figure out what should be done? We can implement whatever would do the best job of avoiding TPVs ...

thanks,
m

Logged In: YES
user_id=516865
Originator: YES

Would it be OK to just remove the offenting parentages and close this?

Val

Logged In: YES
user_id=436423
Originator: NO

I just spotted some relevant comments on the wiki, coming from the 'regulates' work:

http://gocwiki.geneontology.org/index.php/Transitive_over_part_of_documentation

Logged In: YES
user_id=516865
Originator: YES

I I was looking at meiosis related stuff again, I thought I would look what is outstanding, did this ever get fixed? or is it out-of-date?

Val

We don't think that this should have "double-strand break repair via homologous
recombination; GOid=GO:0000724" as a parent because it's not clear that meiotic DNA dsb processing ONLY occurs during DSB repair via homologous recombination.

We think this can be closed. Eurie, if you agree, please close.

T/D