Closed dustine32 closed 3 years ago
Sure, why not?
Thanks @kltm!
Adding this new note for @ukemi as the OWL consistency checks just finished. Only one model failed: MGI:MGI:2684893
Luckily there are only three annotations for this gene in the upstream file so, should be quick to figure out:
MGI:MGI:2684893 RO:0002327 GO:0003674 MGI:MGI:2156816|GO_REF:0000015 ECO:0000307 2010-02-02 MGI creation-date=2010-02-02|modification-date=2010-02-02|contributor-id=https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3394-9805
MGI:MGI:2684893 RO:0001025 GO:0005634 MGI:MGI:6359626|PMID:27165042 ECO:0000314 2021-02-26 MGI BFO:0000050(CL:0000017)|BFO:0000050(CL:0000023),RO:0002092(GO:0000239) creation-date=2021-02-26|modification-date=2021-02-26|contributor-id=https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9796-7693
MGI:MGI:2684893 RO:0002331 GO:0008150 MGI:MGI:2156816|GO_REF:0000015 ECO:0000307 2010-02-02 MGI creation-date=2010-02-02|modification-date=2010-02-02|contributor-id=https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3394-9805
Latest MGI import models for testing using new upstream data. Details in PR to mgi-go-cams repo: https://github.com/geneontology/mgi-go-cams/pull/2
Note: This new data caused an MGI model count jump from 13475 to 28033. Also, there are some GPI missing ID errors listed in the report here.
Tagging @ukemi