Annotation QC: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
===Omission of annotations=== | ===Omission of annotations=== | ||
===Problems in the ontology=== | ===Problems in the ontology=== | ||
When annotations in different organisms are very different, it may reflect problems in the ontology which makes certain terms unusable when curating genes from certain organisms; or it may be due to a complicated branch of the graph that curators have difficulty selecting from. | |||
===Varying granularity of annotations === | ===Varying granularity of annotations === | ||
Possible causes: | Possible causes: | ||
Revision as of 10:25, 22 January 2008
The purpose of this page is to find methods to check the quality of the GO annotations. There are four types of errors that we would like to find easily:
- Omission of annotations
- Problems in the ontology
- Varying granularity of annotations
- Incorrect annotations
Omission of annotations
Problems in the ontology
When annotations in different organisms are very different, it may reflect problems in the ontology which makes certain terms unusable when curating genes from certain organisms; or it may be due to a complicated branch of the graph that curators have difficulty selecting from.
Varying granularity of annotations
Possible causes:
- New (more granular) term was created since the annotation was made.
How to address this: Should we warn curator when a more granular term is created an their database have annotations to the parent term?
- Curator feels they do not have the expertise to annotate a gene.
How to address this: Better communication: SF annotation tracker, email, wiki
Incorrect annotations
Errors during annotation. How to address this: See graphs; also queries Reference_Genome_Database_Reports, in particular "non-IEA outliers"
Return to [Reference_Genome_Annotation_Project]