Open Robbie1977 opened 8 years ago
A bunch of tracts were never mapped.
These do appear to be missing though and should be fixed.
301 377.573,164.324,79.0452 0,0,44 mALT FBbt_00003985 medial antennal lobe tract
302 231.134,163.014,59.4772 0,0,123 AOT FBbt_00100337 anterior optic tract
303 315.342,282.915,84.5578 0,0,255 POC FBbt_00007427 posterior optic tract
304 403.326,234.279,72.9831 0,70,149 GC FBbt_00007080 great commissure
(Test query MATCH (i:Individual)-[r:INSTANCEOF]-(c:Class) WHERE i.annotation-database_cross_reference
[0]='source:BrainName_Ito_half_brain' RETURN i.label, r, c.label;)
Two of these are duplicate domains mALT FBbt_00003985 medial antennal lobe tract GC FBbt_00007080 great commissure
Happy to add these, but presumably we should just display 1.
I've been thinking about control of display. Think it makes sense to have booleans on datasets and individual inds (anatomy? channel?) to mark for display not.
We do have this:
AOT VFB_00030827 anterior optic tract FBbt_00100337
I've just realised that unique label assumption means that we can't add multiple domains with the same name to the DB. Perhaps easiest if we choose tracts from the tract mask over those from the neuropil mask if they are in both.
Also clearly need to switch to adding domain IDs during loading inds.
Note to self - can use owl_individual.ID_in_source to add domain IDs to lmb db, but better to use attribute on channel KB.
Most have missing FB refs but also some with FB refs are missing VFB individual ids
Keep in mind some are also duplicates #2
https://github.com/VirtualFlyBrain/DrosAdultHalfBRAINdomains/blob/master/refData/merged_domains.tsv