rdfs:label "glandular epithelial cell"
definition "A specialized epithelial cell that is capable of synthesizing and secreting certain biomolecules."
SubClassOf:
'epithelial cell'
'part of' some 'glandular epithelium'
'secretory cell'
Based on the textual definition, this this refers to any epithelial cell specialised for secretion. But we also have the logical axiom:
SubClassOf 'part of' some 'glandular epithelium'
rdfs:label "glandular epithelium"
definition "An epithelium that is composed primarily of secretory cells."
EquivalentTo: epithelium and ('composed primarily of' some 'glandular epithelial cell')
Some epithelial cells spaciralised for secretion are scattered through an epithelium, rather than being part of an epithelium primarily composed of epithelial cells specialised for secretion. goblet cells are an obvious example.
[x] Remove subClassOf part_of some 'glandular epithelium'
Note - we also don't have a good differentium for secretory cell (see below), but we may be able to get some useful autoclassification by:
[x] Add EquivalentTo: 'epithelial cell' and 'secretory cell'
rdfs:label "secretory cell"
definition "A cell that specializes in controlled release of one or more substances."
EquivalentTo: cell and ('capable of' some 'secretion by cell')
On the one hand - this looks llike a meaningless EquivalentClass expression. Aren't all cells capable of exocytosis? The point is that these are cell types specialised for secretion, rather than being able to secrete some things. This not amenable to a formal definition. On the other hand, it may do some useful work It would therefore be important to test the effects of removing it on classification before commiting to deleting from the ontology.
A third potential issue - one reasonable interpretation of the name 'glandular epithelial cell' is that it refers to all epithelial cells in a gland. This would seem to be consistent with some logical definitions of manually asserted descendants of the term. We should review for this.
rdfs:label "glandular epithelial cell" definition "A specialized epithelial cell that is capable of synthesizing and secreting certain biomolecules." SubClassOf:
Based on the textual definition, this this refers to any epithelial cell specialised for secretion. But we also have the logical axiom:
SubClassOf 'part of' some 'glandular epithelium'
rdfs:label "glandular epithelium" definition "An epithelium that is composed primarily of secretory cells." EquivalentTo: epithelium and ('composed primarily of' some 'glandular epithelial cell')
Some epithelial cells spaciralised for secretion are scattered through an epithelium, rather than being part of an epithelium primarily composed of epithelial cells specialised for secretion. goblet cells are an obvious example.
Note - we also don't have a good differentium for secretory cell (see below), but we may be able to get some useful autoclassification by:
rdfs:label "secretory cell" definition "A cell that specializes in controlled release of one or more substances." EquivalentTo: cell and ('capable of' some 'secretion by cell')
On the one hand - this looks llike a meaningless EquivalentClass expression. Aren't all cells capable of exocytosis? The point is that these are cell types specialised for secretion, rather than being able to secrete some things. This not amenable to a formal definition. On the other hand, it may do some useful work It would therefore be important to test the effects of removing it on classification before commiting to deleting from the ontology.
A third potential issue - one reasonable interpretation of the name 'glandular epithelial cell' is that it refers to all epithelial cells in a gland. This would seem to be consistent with some logical definitions of manually asserted descendants of the term. We should review for this.