2010 GO camp downstream effect: Difference between revisions

From GO Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
* Annotating signaling biological processes to transcription factors
* Annotating signaling biological processes to transcription factors
* when not to capture phenotypes : from 22nd Feb Jamboree call [http://gowiki.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Category:RefGenome_Electronic_Jamboree_2010-02_NIPBL#Minutes], Tanya: It's not uncommon for the initial publications to describe a mutant phenotype, with a developmental defect, and then later publications to describe much more explicit functions or processes. You should always annotate based on whatever evidence is available. Once you've done that, the question becomes, "When do we keep or remove the phenotype-based annotations?" At TAIR, their policy is to keep the developmental terms if they think that their users would expect to see them. Some participants suggested that one would expect all orthologs to have the same development-type annotations, across organisms. Others disagreed with this expectation.
* when not to capture phenotypes : from 22nd Feb Jamboree call [http://gowiki.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Category:RefGenome_Electronic_Jamboree_2010-02_NIPBL#Minutes], Tanya: It's not uncommon for the initial publications to describe a mutant phenotype, with a developmental defect, and then later publications to describe much more explicit functions or processes. You should always annotate based on whatever evidence is available. Once you've done that, the question becomes, "When do we keep or remove the phenotype-based annotations?" At TAIR, their policy is to keep the developmental terms if they think that their users would expect to see them. Some participants suggested that one would expect all orthologs to have the same development-type annotations, across organisms. Others disagreed with this expectation.


=3. Proposed annotation policy=
=3. Proposed annotation policy=

Revision as of 09:41, 18 March 2010

1. Background

2. Review of current GO annotation practices

  • Annotating signaling biological processes to transcription factors
  • when not to capture phenotypes : from 22nd Feb Jamboree call [1], Tanya: It's not uncommon for the initial publications to describe a mutant phenotype, with a developmental defect, and then later publications to describe much more explicit functions or processes. You should always annotate based on whatever evidence is available. Once you've done that, the question becomes, "When do we keep or remove the phenotype-based annotations?" At TAIR, their policy is to keep the developmental terms if they think that their users would expect to see them. Some participants suggested that one would expect all orthologs to have the same development-type annotations, across organisms. Others disagreed with this expectation.


3. Proposed annotation policy

4. Examples (papers) and discussion of GO annotation issues

5. Suggestions for Quality Control procedures


Back to 2010_GO_camp_Meeting_Agenda