imaginal disc development

[gocentral]

Hi,

I just noticed that 'imaginal disc development' is not part of 'larval or pupal development (sensu insecta)'. I asked Becky why that is and she says she thinks it's because the imaginal discs are specified in the embryo. However, I thought I understood that we did not include specification as part of development and that development begins after the identity of a structure has been specified. If this is true then I could make the relationship:

[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---[p]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444

larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 def: The process whose specific outcome is the progression of the larva or pupa over time, from its formation to the mature structure. As in, but not restricted to, the true insects (Insecta, ncbi_taxonomy_id:50557).

imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444 def: The process whose specific outcome is the progression of the imaginal disc over time, from its formation to the metamorphosis to form adult structures. Imaginal discs are epithelial infoldings in the larvae of holometabolous insects that develop into adult structures (legs, antennae, wings, etc.).

Does anybody see any reason not to do this?

Thanks,

Jen

Reported by: jenclark

Original Ticket: "geneontology/ontology-requests/3322":https://sourceforge.net/p/geneontology/ontology-requests/3322

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=631592

Hi Jen,

This has come up recently in another context and is very similar to the discussion we have about cell development all the time. To be consistent, we could have the structure as you represent it above, but we need to have the process of imaginal disc specification in the ontology.

Up until now we have reserved the term specification to describe a process that happens in cells. I actually think that this is what is happening here as well. The cells that will form the imaginal disc are being specified. I think we might want to have a term like "imaginal disc field formation" as a primary term with a synonym "imaginal disc specification". Then the children of this term would include the cell specification terms, and may be a part of embryonic development. Again as I have said before, I am no expert at imaginal discs so we need to check to make sure this works.

If we keep this consistency and some day want to make changes with the way we represent "development" it will make it a lot easier.

David

Original comment by: ukemi

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=735846

Hi David,

That sounds like a good plan to me. I will go and run that idea past all the nice friendly metamorphosis enthusiasts that I have here. I'm sure they will be able to give me some input from the fruitfly expert perspective.

Ta.

Jen

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=735846

Hi David,

I just nipped round to see Becky. She says that 'determination of imaginal disc primordium ; GO:0007445' is basically the same as the term you're suggesting: "imaginal disc specification".

Going by the def, she says that this is really an 'imaginal disc primordium cell fate determination' term def: Allocation of embryonic cells to the imaginal disc founder populations, groups of cells that are committed to contribute to the formation of an imaginal disc compartment.

I will try to rig up a graph structure proposal to incorporate this term in the plan.

Jen

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=735846

Hi,

Here's the structure:

[i]development ; GO:0007275 ---[i]post-embryonic development ; GO:0009791 ------[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---------[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444 ------------[p]imaginal disc primordium formation ; GO:new ---------------[p]determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO:0007445 ---[i]embryonic development ; GO:0009790 ------[i]embryonic development (sensu Metazoa) ; GO:0009792 ---------[i]embryonic development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0001700 ------------[p]determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO: 0007445 ---[i]cell differentiation ; GO:0030154 ------[i]cell fate commitment ; GO:0045165 ---------[i]cell fate determination ; GO:0001709 ------------[p]determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO: 0007445

Does it matter that determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO: 0007445 is a descendent of post-embryonic development ; GO:0009791 as well as a descendent of embryonic development ; GO:0009790?

Jen

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=735846

Becky and I were just discussing this just now and I would like to note here the reason that I am asking this question because imaginal disc morphogenesis is a descendent of larval/pupal development sensu insecta whereas imaginal disc development is not. The parentage is via the metamorphosis (sensu insecta) term. Perhaps this relationship to larval/pupal development is not necessary?

Jen

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

Logged In: YES user_id=735846

Becky and I have figured this out.

Currently we have this relationship indirectly:

[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---[p]imaginal disc morphogenesis

We also have this one:

[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444 ---[p]imaginal disc morphogenesis

I was wondering why we did not add this:

[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444

Becky explains that we cannot have this relationship because the specification of the imaginal disc cells happens in the embryo, and is part of imaginal disc development.

[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444 ---[p]determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO:0007445

Creation of this relationship:

[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444

would make this transitive relationship

[i]larval or pupal development (sensu insecta) ; GO:0002165 ---[i]imaginal disc development ; GO:0007444 ------[p]determination of imaginal disc primordium (cell fate) ; GO:0007445

which would be wrong, because specification of the cells occurs entirely in the embryo and not in the larval/pupal stage.

So though the graph is ugly, it is biologically correct. We could make the graph less ugly by taking out the time terms like embryonic development and larval/pupal development but Becky says they were put in because they are useful so that is unlikely to happen.

Thanks,

Jen

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

• status: open --> closed-rejected

Original comment by: jenclark

[gocentral]

• assigned_to: Jennifer Deegan --> nobody
• Group: Plant Ontology --> None

Original comment by: cooperl09