Occurs in: Difference between revisions
m (moved Occurs in to Annotation Extension Relation:occurs in: To distinguish the annotation extension relations from other relations) |
m (→Domain) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
===Domain=== | ===Domain=== | ||
BFO:0000007 ! | BFO:0000007 ! process (Biological Process or Molecular Function) | ||
===Range=== | ===Range=== |
Revision as of 09:30, 1 August 2012
Definition
p occurs_in c if and only if all of the participants of p are part_of c.
Child terms
- None.
Scope of use
Domain
BFO:0000007 ! process (Biological Process or Molecular Function)
Range
ENTITY_UNION:0000006 ! entity
Annotation Extension Usage Examples
Enhancing Molecular Function and Biological Process Annotations
Specifying the cell or tissue type in which a process happens
Examples of this usage of occurs_in can be found on the documentation page for Column_16:_Cell_Type
Specifying the subcellular location in which a process happens
Biological process terms can be further specified by subcellular location. For example: plastid translational elongation
At the time of writing this term is not declared in GO. We should use the occurs_in relation:
Col 5: GO:0006414 Col 16: occurs_in(GO:0009536)
Why, you might ask, can we not instead make two annotations to:
- GO:0032544 ! plastid translation
- GO:0006414 ! translational elongation
The answer is that co-annotation carries less information. Computationally we have no way of knowing these two processes are linked.
Note that the majority of the time, BP x CC cross-products should be pre-composed in the ontology. If the above scenario comes up, consider requesting a new term plastid translational elongation rather than using col 16.
Also note that when using a GO ID in col 16, a redundant annotation should sometimes be added. See Annotation_Cross_Products#Guidelines
Function-Process-Component threesomes
col5: GO Function ID col16: part_of(GO PROCESS ID),occurs_in(GO CC ID)
Also include 2 redundant annotation lines