2010 GO-camp Response to terms issues: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* What evidence code should be used to 'response to' annotations? | * What evidence code should be used to 'response to' annotations? | ||
** (A) For example in PMID: 2071672, the authors say "Exposure of the latter cells to 45 degrees C resulted in over 15-fold increase in the apparent level of the 25-kD IAP protein, confirming that its expression is regulated by heat shock". '''Should this protein (Q00649) be annotated to "response to heat" by IDA or IEP? ''' | ** (A) For example in PMID: 2071672, the authors say "Exposure of the latter cells to 45 degrees C resulted in over 15-fold increase in the apparent level of the 25-kD IAP protein, confirming that its expression is regulated by heat shock". '''Should this protein (Q00649) be annotated to "response to heat" by IDA or IEP? ''' | ||
** (B) Similar to (A) example: "Two highly divergent human MHC class I genes, MICA (Q29983) and MICB (Q29980), are regulated by promoter heat shock elements", protein: PMID: 8901601 | ** (B) Similar to (A) example: "Two highly divergent human MHC class I genes, MICA (Q29983) and MICB (Q29980), are regulated by promoter heat shock elements", protein: PMID: 8901601. '''Should this protein (Q00649) be annotated to "response to heat" by IDA or IEP? ''' | ||
** (C) Q16576 Sc RBBP7 (aka RBAP46) is annotated to "cellular heat acclimation" by IDA from PMID:7503932. Is this annotation correct? | ** (C) Q16576 Sc RBBP7 (aka RBAP46) is annotated to "cellular heat acclimation" by IDA from PMID:7503932. Is this annotation correct? | ||
** Transcription factors: O35780 (BHE40_RAT) is annotated to "entrainment of circadian clock" from PMID 12397359. The experiments show it is a transcription factor for genes involved in the circadian clock. Two questions: (i) is the term correct? or should it be annotated to the parent (regulation of circadian rhythm); (ii) is the IDA evidence code correct? | ** Transcription factors: O35780 (BHE40_RAT) is annotated to "entrainment of circadian clock" from PMID 12397359. The experiments show it is a transcription factor for genes involved in the circadian clock. Two questions: (i) is the term correct? or should it be annotated to the parent (regulation of circadian rhythm); (ii) is the IDA evidence code correct? | ||
Revision as of 06:45, 17 March 2010
- how will these relate to signaling terms and to final cellular effect
- What evidence code should be used to 'response to' annotations?
- (A) For example in PMID: 2071672, the authors say "Exposure of the latter cells to 45 degrees C resulted in over 15-fold increase in the apparent level of the 25-kD IAP protein, confirming that its expression is regulated by heat shock". Should this protein (Q00649) be annotated to "response to heat" by IDA or IEP?
- (B) Similar to (A) example: "Two highly divergent human MHC class I genes, MICA (Q29983) and MICB (Q29980), are regulated by promoter heat shock elements", protein: PMID: 8901601. Should this protein (Q00649) be annotated to "response to heat" by IDA or IEP?
- (C) Q16576 Sc RBBP7 (aka RBAP46) is annotated to "cellular heat acclimation" by IDA from PMID:7503932. Is this annotation correct?
- Transcription factors: O35780 (BHE40_RAT) is annotated to "entrainment of circadian clock" from PMID 12397359. The experiments show it is a transcription factor for genes involved in the circadian clock. Two questions: (i) is the term correct? or should it be annotated to the parent (regulation of circadian rhythm); (ii) is the IDA evidence code correct?
- The F/P transcription regulator activity IDA annotations are missing. Is there any way we could have checks that would catch that?
Back to 2010_GO_camp_Meeting_Agenda