gocentral
commented
19 years ago Logged In: YES user_id=436423
We will not make physiological process or cellular physiological process obsolete; as one can see from the top-level children of biological process, we make a distinction betweeen physiological and developmental processes that is biologically meaningful and practically useful. There is extensive background material in the mailing list archives and meeting minutes.
Metabolism has a child, cellular metabolism, that is also a child of cellular physiological process; there is an analogous structure for homeostasis. If more such arrangements are needed (e.g. for cellular photosynthesis, which may be useful for annotating photosynthetic bacterial gene products), they can be added.
Original comment by: mah11
I see that many of the children terms from physiological processes can qualify for cellular processes, but have missing parent. e.g. homeostsis, localization, photosynthesis, metabolism, bioluminence etc. Using the term "physiological process" is somewhat very broad. This term was presumably used a lot in older times when many of the cellular processes, known today were studied at whole organism level.
Therefore my suggestion is to obsolete/merge this term with biological processes and place all the children appropriately under either cellular process and/or directly under GO:0008150 biological process.
Similarly, obsoletion/merger of cellular physiological process GO:0050875 with cellular process GO:0009987 is suggested.
-Pankaj
Reported by: jaiswalp
Original Ticket: "geneontology/ontology-requests/2405":https://sourceforge.net/p/geneontology/ontology-requests/2405