GO:0021750-vestibular nucleus development and pons

[gocentral]

we have:

po GO:0021548 ! pons development --- po GO:0021750 ! vestibular nucleus development ***

however, in FMA and ABA, the vestibular nuclear complex are part of the medulla, not the pons

Reported by: cmungall

Original Ticket: geneontology/ontology-requests/8817

[gocentral]

• labels: --> neurobiology
• assigned_to: nobody --> paolaroncaglia

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

Hi Chris,

This seems to be another foggy area in neuroscience nomenclature. It's often the case with neurons belonging to a not-very-numerous, not-well-characterized (by specific molecular markers) class. Here are my thoughts:

According to coronal sections of the mouse brain in the Allen Brain Atlas, the (4) vestibular nuclei are all part of the medulla; but according to the same resource, it seems that, in human, vestibular nuclei are in both pons and medulla (though I couldn't look at the details as I didn't have the appropriate plugin installed).

For what it's worth, Wikipedia places 3 out of 4 nuclei in the medulla, but 1 (the superior vestibular nucleus) in the pons.

This seems to be a good reference: PMID:16221589, from 2006: "The Anatomy of the vestibular nuclei" http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079612305510069 It states that "The vestibular nuclei are located within the medulla and pons of the brainstem"...

However I haven't managed to find other reliable publications stating the same. There is this neuroscience e-textbook: http://neuroscience.uth.tmc.edu/s2/chapter11.html "...All four [vestibular] nuclei are found beneath the floor of the fourth ventricle in the medulla and pons...".

I'd be tempted to make vestibular nucleus development part_of both pons development and medulla development. Would PMID:16221589 be enough to support that change? Other ontologies such as FMA and UBERON would need to replace vestibular nuclei accordingly. What do you think? Anyone else we could point to this issue?

Thanks, Paola

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

I'll ask Maryann - Neurolex doesn't have much about it there at the moment.

One option is to make the AO relationships overlaps, which is enough to justify the dual part of parenthood in GO (we add an axiom: if X overlaps Y, then development of X is part of development of Y).

Original comment by: cmungall

[gocentral]

Thanks Chris, I'll set this to pending, waiting for further feedback. Paola

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

• status: open --> pending

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

Maryann says:

"Hmmm. Traditionally, we list the vestibular nuclei as part of the medulla, but it really depends on how you slice the brain as to whether some might appear in the pontine area. I don't know enough about the development of the nuclei to know whether they all develop from a common pool or whether they might have different components, as there are at least 4 different vestibular nuclei that are typically recognized."

Original comment by: cmungall

[gocentral]

• status: pending --> open

Original comment by: cmungall

[gocentral]

OK then, unless you have any objections, I'll make vestibular nucleus development part_of pons development and part_of medulla development with Dbxref PMID:16221589. Paola

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

Done. Paola

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia

[gocentral]

• status: open --> closed-accepted

Original comment by: paolaroncaglia