Open mslarae13 opened 3 years ago
See isotope & isotopologue & isotopolog_dose & isotopolog_incu_time https://github.com/GenomicsStandardsConsortium/mixs/issues/576 https://github.com/GenomicsStandardsConsortium/mixs/issues/586 https://github.com/GenomicsStandardsConsortium/mixs/issues/577 https://github.com/GenomicsStandardsConsortium/mixs/issues/588
These terms are proposed at the checklist level. Is it acceptable with GSC standards to use a checklist term in an extension? If so, isotope_exposure is not needed and the above 4 terms will satisfy
this term should not be added as it's satisfied by the 4 separate terms being added for SIP checklist.
Leaving open as a place to discuss how to collected 'slots in a slot' complex terms.
Examples
Agro_chem_addition= {“chemical”: “raw sulfur”, “concentration”: “1 kg/acre”, “start_date”: “2023-01-15”} Suggested
isotope_exposure= isotope: 13C, isotopologue: glucose, dose: 200µg of C, duration: full incubation | isotope: 13C, isotopologue: glucose, dose: 200µg of 13C, start: 2021-01-01T1200, stop: 2021-01-01T1500
Could researchers do this? Is it too complex? Are complex slots better captured as single columns (less terms / columns) or individual columns (less complex)?
New term details For us to assess a new term request we require the following details:
Additional context Add any other context about the new term here.
Isotope exposure can be an important data search factor to include or exclude. this provides a way to standardize that and make it directly identified