Binding Terms Conference Call Information
What problems are we trying to solve?
This issue was originally brought up in the GOC meeting in Oregon [binding minutes]
This meeting identified that
- The documentation is confusing on the proper use of binding
- There were conflicting views about whether or not GO should include catalytic substrate annotations such as 'ATP binding' and the problem of including both substrate and product from a catalytic reaction.
- Most people agreed that GO should capture non-transformative binding, eg. binding of X resulting in an allosteric change to the thing doing the binding.
- Perhaps cross product annotations should be used to describe majority of binding annotations (see Annotation_Cross_Products#binding_example)
- There was a concern about how limiting 'binding' annotations to non-catalytic interactions may affect queries for genes involved in 'ATP binding', for example, researchers might reasonably expect to get back kinases by such a query.
- It was unclear whether there should be a transfer of 'binding' term annotations via ISS/ISO
ACTION ITEMS: Peter (lead), Ruth, Debbie, Jim form a workgroup to examine the issues raised in the discussion. Should GO capture catalytic binding?
- Proliferation of "x binding terms" in the MF ontology.
- The binding terms are currently a mess - proliferation will only make it worse
- The ability to annotate to x binding without needing a new term request (NTR)