NTR: has allelopath

[mdrishti]

The following term request is for the inverse interaction of 'allelopath of' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002555. Linked to https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/globalbioticinteractions/issues/993#issuecomment-2291292052

Preferred term label

has allelopath

Synonyms

none

Textual definition

A relationship between organisms where one organism is influenced by the biochemical processes of another.

Additional context: Allelopathy is a process whereby biochemicals produced by one organism positively or negatively influences growth, survival or reproduction of other organisms. See also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10172429/

Suggested parent term

(http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002321) -> (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002437) -> (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/RO_0002574)

Attribution

Disha Tandon (https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5515-1230)

[nataled]

Not an expert here, but just wondering if the second paragraph under Textual Definition is intended as part of the definition, or is just there to explain allelopathy to us non-experts? My understanding of how definitions are supposed to work is that such explanatory sentences are better as 'comment' (but I do very often see the two mixed).

[mdrishti]

@nataled , yes in this case, the 2nd paragraph of the textual definition provides additional context behind allelopathy. I plan to put this definition under 'see also' or 'comment, while describing this term.

I added it because allelopathy IMO is a broad area and in fact, in some fields like plant biology it has been thought to be a negative influence of one organism's biochemicals on another, which is not exactly right. Hence, the definition.

[nataled]

Thanks for the clarification about the clarification ;)

I'm a bit confused by your followup statement regarding how the term has been (mis?)used in plant biology. I see a few different ways to interpret that statement:

1) Plant biologists use 'allelopathy' to refer specifically to negative influences, but it should actually be positive influences. 2) Plant biologists use 'allelopathy' to refer specifically to negative influences, but it should actually be positive OR negative influences.

I doubt anything that has exclusively a positive influence would be labeled with -pathy, so I'm guessing the second interpretation is correct? If so, I'd recommend that explanatory sentence be revised to say that explicitly:

"Allelopathy is a process whereby biochemicals produced by one organism positively or negatively influences growth, survival or reproduction of other organisms."

Obviously, if I'm incorrect, ignore my suggestion! But I think at least the word 'grow' should be 'growth'?

[nataled]

I reviewed the changes made and see that they address my concerns. Please create the appropriate pull request and reference this issue.