mesomere terminology

[cmungall]

Compare the following classes:

• UBERON:0014776 ! mesomere [DEF: "A neuromere that is part of the presumptive midbrain"]
• UBERON:4200160 ! mesomere (fin) [DEF: "The median series of bones supporting the pectoral fin of sarcopterygian fish. See Dipnomorpha. In the pectoral fin, the first mesomere is the humerus, the second the ulna, and the third probably the intermedium. The radius is the first preaxial radial. All other homologies are suspect. from http://palaeos.com/vertebrates/glossary"]
• UBERON:4200161 ! mesomere 5
• UBERON:4200162 ! mesomere 4

Multiple issues here:

• potential confusion between brain mesomeres and skeletal mesomeres. The primary labels for both should be qualified
• The definition for 'mesomere (fin)' cites palaeos without giving a specific page in palaeos. In fact if we search the palaeos glossary the definition here is for a kidney mesomere! There is another definition here
• The definition for 'mesomere (fin)' says it is a "series of bones", and the superclass is 'subdivision of skeleton'. But are the individual mesomeres (subclasses mesomere 4 and 5) really series of bones? If the first is really the humerus then these should be classified as bones or bone elements
  • The def states "In the pectoral fin, the first mesomere is the humerus, the second the ulna, and the third probably the intermedium. The radius is the first preaxial radial. All other homologies are suspect.". However, I didn't see any requests to add synonyms for humerus, ulna etc, and I don't see this in the homology table
• mesomeres 4 and 5 have no definition

Overall this needs thought out more

[cmungall]

Hall 2007:

• (the humerus is) "homologous to proximal metapterygial mesomere of pectoral appendage"
• (the femur is) "homologous to proximal metapterygial mesomere of pelvic appendage"

[cmungall]

Additional suggestions: relabel the sarcop mesomeres as 'metapterygial mesomeres' (following Hall).

Is 'proximal mesomere' the same as mesomere 1? What was the rationale behind making a class for this, but not 2-3?

We can either create separate classes for these, and add them to the homology table - or if the homology is uncontroversial we can roll everything into the same class. Either way more discussion required

[gouttegd]

WARNING: This issue has been automatically closed because it has not been updated in more than 3 years. Please re-open it if you still need this to be addressed addressed addressed – we are now getting some resources to deal with such issues.