Open cmungall opened 9 months ago
autopush down to which term?
waiting for response from @cmungall
Dmel: GO:0009047 ! dosage compensation by hyperactivation of X chromosome Mammals: GO:0009048 ! dosage compensation by inactivation of X chromosome C elegans: GO:0042464 ! dosage compensation by hypoactivation of X chromosome
It may be possible to sometimes further pushdown the mammalian annotations further to random vs imprinted, this is quite interesting, but outside the scope of this simple ticket.
Separate from this, do we believe the annotations here? Is BRCA1 really involved or is this downstream of its normal role? https://amigo.geneontology.org/amigo/reference/PMID:12419249
On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 1:38 PM Val Wood @.***> wrote:
waiting for response from @cmungall https://github.com/cmungall
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/geneontology/go-ontology/issues/26961#issuecomment-2438752289, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAMMONPD4T4TD6XOIAMWQLZ5KT55AVCNFSM6AAAAABQT74ORCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIMZYG42TEMRYHE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
From the PubMed abstract
BRCA1, a breast and ovarian tumor suppressor, colocalizes with markers of the inactive X chromosome (Xi) on Xi in female somatic cells and associates with XIST RNA, as detected by chromatin immunoprecipitation. Breast and ovarian carcinoma cells lacking BRCA1 show evidence of defects in Xi chromatin structure. Reconstitution of BRCA1-deficient cells with wt BRCA1 led to the appearance of focal XIST RNA staining without altering XIST abundance. Inhibiting BRCA1 synthesis in a suitable reporter line led to increased expression of an otherwise silenced Xi-located GFP transgene. These observations suggest that loss of BRCA1 in female cells may lead to Xi perturbation and destabilization of its silenced state.
So the assertion is that BRCA1 gene product, by joining a complex, changes the behavior of that complex so that dosage commpensation is perturbed.
There is no reason to annotate to this directly. You always know the mechanism based on the species
There are 25 direct experimental annotations that could be auto pushed down https://amigo.geneontology.org/amigo/term/GO:0007549
Oddly there are a lot of IBAs to brca1 even though the IBD source uses a mechanism specific term. IMO the source Brca1 annotation seems not quite right