Difference between revisions of "Manager Call 2016-06-1"

From GO Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Minutes)
(Identifier Space in GAF and GPAD)
Line 32: Line 32:
 
*Much of the discussion was centered around cost/benefit for curators and users of using gene or gene-centric protein identifiers vs using more specific or granular identifiers, such as UniProtKB protein isoform IDs or PRO IDs for modified forms of proteins, for annotations.
 
*Much of the discussion was centered around cost/benefit for curators and users of using gene or gene-centric protein identifiers vs using more specific or granular identifiers, such as UniProtKB protein isoform IDs or PRO IDs for modified forms of proteins, for annotations.
 
*There is currently an important distinction between GAF and GPAD in that GPAD specs indicate that Column 2 can use the more granular identifier, e.g. P34187-1, while in GAF Column 2 uses canonical identifiers for gene, protein, ncRNA, or protein complex.
 
*There is currently an important distinction between GAF and GPAD in that GPAD specs indicate that Column 2 can use the more granular identifier, e.g. P34187-1, while in GAF Column 2 uses canonical identifiers for gene, protein, ncRNA, or protein complex.
 +
*Curators may want to capture the most granular information possible, but what use cases do we have for use of that more granular info?
 +
*Enrichment analysis still seems to be the more common use case of GO annotations and for that, most users still just use gene or gene-centric annotations
 +
*
 +
*'''AI:'''Determine if there currently are uses cases for the more granular gene or gene product information in AEs and With/From.  Consult with Val and Ruth on this.
 +
*'''AI:'''More generally, look for examples of AE usage in literature. 
 +
**One possible use case mentioned in the Discussion of [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27092072 Gene Prioritization for Imaging Genetics Studies Using Gene Ontology and a Stratified False Discovery Rate Approach]
  
 
[[Category:GO Managers Meetings ]]
 
[[Category:GO Managers Meetings ]]

Revision as of 07:25, 2 June 2016

Agenda

Identifier Space in GO Annotations

  • In response to the May 18th call's discussion on gene and gene product identifier space (see minutes), I've put together a spreadsheet that documents our current practice wrt for GAF and GPAD:
    • Annotated Entity IDs
    • With/From Entity IDs (note only for gene and gene product)
    • Annotation Extension Entity IDs (note only for gene and gene product)
    • Annotation Isoform Entity IDs
  • Then, for the purposes of discussion, I also added two other possible approaches:
    • Gene IDs only
    • Broad range of gene, transcript, protein, protein complex entity IDs
  • At the top of the spreadsheet are three general questions that we need to consider - there may be more; please add if needed
  • The plan was to review the different approaches, debate the pros and cons and then either get more feedback or finalize the proposal for presentation on an annotation or all-hands call

Review action items from Geneva meeting, and add items to Trello if necessary

Periodic review of the Trello board

https://trello.com/b/IdtTLGEt/go-priorities

Minutes

Attendees: Chris, David H, Kimberly, Moni, Paola, Paul T.

Regrets: Moni Munoz-Torres (Teaching 9th & 10th graders about research and the scientific method from 7:00AM - 9:30AM PDT).

Agenda: Paola; Minutes: Kimberly

Identifier Space in GAF and GPAD

  • We discussed different options for what to use as gene and gene product identifiers in GAF and GPAD.
  • Much of the discussion was centered around cost/benefit for curators and users of using gene or gene-centric protein identifiers vs using more specific or granular identifiers, such as UniProtKB protein isoform IDs or PRO IDs for modified forms of proteins, for annotations.
  • There is currently an important distinction between GAF and GPAD in that GPAD specs indicate that Column 2 can use the more granular identifier, e.g. P34187-1, while in GAF Column 2 uses canonical identifiers for gene, protein, ncRNA, or protein complex.
  • Curators may want to capture the most granular information possible, but what use cases do we have for use of that more granular info?
  • Enrichment analysis still seems to be the more common use case of GO annotations and for that, most users still just use gene or gene-centric annotations
  • AI:Determine if there currently are uses cases for the more granular gene or gene product information in AEs and With/From. Consult with Val and Ruth on this.
  • AI:More generally, look for examples of AE usage in literature.