Closed beckyjackson closed 5 years ago
The DO's design patterns for 'structural variants' --> genetic disease & inheritance are outlined in: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tKLzosBS_WdaJi9PgV3whm_ldmA_FrJd8M2QH6-kQDU/edit
Years ago, we defined the relations we use -- back when we were adding these to textual definitions in" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KoAjHPhqFcLJauMv9vAa8WGcqpqn13RMpud8LoOKjXk/edit#gid=0
Defining 'genetic diseases' ('disease has basis in' some structural_variant)
--> has been used to identify any disease that has a known genetic component,
and thus to have the inferred parent (genetic disease)'
This area of DO is under development, we will be replacing the higher level SO term 'structural
variant' with more specific child terms.
Inheritance: --> Defining Inheritance: 'has material basis' in some 'autosomal dominant inheritance'
'has material basis in' --> has long been used in the DO, to specify
This may or may not be an issue, but if it could be clarified, that would be great!
Some genetic disease classes have logical axioms that state
'has material basis in' some sequence_variant
wheresequence_variant
is a specific one, such asstructural_variant
. For example, 'Prader-Willi syndrome' uses this pattern.Most of the others, such as 'Oguchi disease-2', use 'disease has basis in', e.g.:
And 'genetic disease' is equivalent to:
But, the definition of 'genetic disease' has the phrase 'has_material_basis_in':
It seems like
has material basis in
is used more for 'inheritance pattern' terms, such as 'autosomal recessive disease':And it's also used for bacteria and viruses, e.g. for 'anthrax disease':
Which is the pattern that should be followed? Perhaps adding definitions to these two properties would help clarify?