Closed ValWood closed 5 years ago
Although wiht the above fix, the matrix issue is resolved I would question all of the following from the same paper
tim-1 | | | regulation of sister chromatid cohesion | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IGI | WB:WBGene00001860 | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 20080331
| tim-1 | | | regulation of sister chromatid cohesion | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IMP | WB:WBVar00249136 | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 20080331
| tim-1 | | | mitotic sister chromatid cohesion | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IGI | WB:WBGene00001860 | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 20080331
| tim-1 | | | mitotic sister chromatid cohesion | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IMP | | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 20080331
tim-1 | | | meiotic sister chromatid cohesion | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IMP | WB:WBVar00249136 | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 20080331
Because this is a well studied replication fork protection complex subunit. I'll have a quick glance at this paper
These are OK, there is a connection between a DNA checkpoint complex and cohesin. It might be quite indirect, but it is related to cohesin establishment.
So it's just the "complex" term here.
@ValWood - the 'complex' annotation was deleted a while back, but it hasn't yet trickled down to our latest production GAF. I'll go ahead and close this ticket.
tim-1 | | colocalizes_with | mitotic cohesin complex | | WB | Caenorhabditis elegans | IPI | WB:WBGene00001860 | | gene | | PMID:12827206WB_REF:WBPaper00005919 | 2008033
comes up in the cohesin intersection, should this removed? (I think we are obsoleting ~contributes to~ colocalizes_with?)