After PR 192 is implemented there is a broader issue concerning the use case of the Extraction class: this class is currently only used to capture metadata of nucleic acid extractions.
If metadata from a multistep extraction like an MPLEx or NOM extraction is captured, it is more correct to use a sequence of other Material Processing steps (such as DissolvingProcess followed by a ChemicalConversionProcess). An example of this can be found here.
The Extraction class as it stands is more appropriate for single step processes that only capture information about a kit that was used and physical property details about the extraction target.
I suggest that the description of the Extraction class be updated to reflect its usage and constrain it. Without a constraint, the class could mistakenly be used by a multistep extraction to inaccurately capture material processing details.
Related to PR https://github.com/microbiomedata/berkeley-schema-fy24/pull/192 and Issue https://github.com/microbiomedata/nmdc-schema/issues/2043
After PR 192 is implemented there is a broader issue concerning the use case of the Extraction class: this class is currently only used to capture metadata of nucleic acid extractions.
If metadata from a multistep extraction like an MPLEx or NOM extraction is captured, it is more correct to use a sequence of other Material Processing steps (such as
DissolvingProcessfollowed by aChemicalConversionProcess). An example of this can be found here.The
Extractionclass as it stands is more appropriate for single step processes that only capture information about a kit that was used and physical property details about the extraction target.I suggest that the description of the
Extractionclass be updated to reflect its usage and constrain it. Without a constraint, the class could mistakenly be used by a multistep extraction to inaccurately capture material processing details.@kheal @brynnz22