rpn15

[ValWood]

DisProt:

rpn15 multifunctional proteasome assembly, lid subcomplex subunit Rpn15/Dss1 GO:0043167 ion binding ChEBI ID | CHEBI:3312 calcium dichloride

might be better to do as "calcium ion binding" rather than ion binding + CHEBI

@pgaudet what do you think?

[ValWood]

@pgaudet should I close this one? But it seems odd to post compose with an extension if we have the term? https://www.uniprot.org/uniprotkb/O14140/entry especially since UniProtKB does not display extensions

[pgaudet]

@victorianugnes Can you please check if this annotation can be updated?

[ValWood]

I will add "ion binding" to the do not annotate list.

[pgaudet]

We may not have all possible ions in the ontology; I guess you can do that and we can see what fails...

the issue is, many groups dont look at these, so we dont really know the impact.

[victorianugnes]

Hi, we will update this annotation to calcium ion binding. We do have other annotations regarding the term GO:0043167 ion binding. We will look to update these to more specific terms. Might take us some time but I'll let you know when it's done

[pgaudet]

Thanks @victorianugnes !

[deustp01]

rpn15 multifunctional proteasome assembly, lid subcomplex subunit Rpn15/Dss1 GO:0043167 ion binding ChEBI ID | CHEBI:3312 calcium dichloride

might be better to do as "calcium ion binding" rather than ion binding + CHEBI

Tangential issue: however GO handles functions involving ions, shouldn't the ChEBI part point to the ion, Ca++ in this case, not to a salt of it CaCl2?

[ValWood]

the issue is, many groups don't look at these, so we dont really know the impact.

• do you mean the log files?
• People should see them though -- and the logs from EBI will report them too, so mapped/IEA annotations will disappear
• my main motivation is to prevent high-level uninformative prediction and automated annotations (this reduces the burden for the human-in-the-loop who needs to check these types of data).
• Ideally over time manual annotation will also be fixed @victorianugnes I'll put a do_not_annotate flag on 'ion binding' but I think it's a soft check so you can fix them in your own time.

[pgaudet]

@deustp01 very good point, people often annotate to the chemical used in the materials and methods of the paper, and not to the relevant ion/molecule.

Using the GO term will resolve at least this instance.