Difference between revisions of "Phenoscape Grant Renewal Workshop/Notes"
From phenoscape
(→Idea bin) |
Paula Mabee (talk | contribs) (→Phenoscape II: Tuesday, April 28, 1:00-5:30) |
||
(21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | == Tuesday | + | == Phenoscape II: Tuesday, April 28, 1:00-5:30 == |
+ | Participating: Phenoscape: Paula Mabee, Todd Vision, Monte Westerfield, Hilmar Lapp, Wasila Dahdul, Jim Balhoff, Cartik Kothari, Peter Midford, John Lundberg; Suzanna Lewis, Judy Blake, Peter Vize, Anne Maglia | ||
* Will be extending the taxonomic scope to extant and extinct vertebrates | * Will be extending the taxonomic scope to extant and extinct vertebrates | ||
Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
* EQ support in all involved model organism databases | * EQ support in all involved model organism databases | ||
** Structure of MP is not consistent with anatomy, or with PATO | ** Structure of MP is not consistent with anatomy, or with PATO | ||
− | ** Mapping from MP to EQ syntax is being worked on | + | ** Mapping from MP to EQ syntax is being worked on (George Gkoutos) |
− | ** MGI isn't in a position to use EQ internally, but for example Phenoscape could provide an EQ-view on mouse phenotypes, using the decomposition of MP into anatomy (or entity) and quality term cross-product | + | *** How is this supported in MGI? |
+ | **** Could spit back EQ, but could not allow users to search | ||
+ | ** MGI isn't in a position to use EQ internally, but for example Phenoscape II could provide an EQ-view on mouse phenotypes, using the decomposition of MP into anatomy (or entity) and quality term cross-product | ||
** Full EQ annotation for OMIM is being planned but not yet funded | ** Full EQ annotation for OMIM is being planned but not yet funded | ||
** MGI, Xenbase, and ZFIN all have links from their phenotype data to OMIM | ** MGI, Xenbase, and ZFIN all have links from their phenotype data to OMIM | ||
− | * Development of anatomy | + | * Phenoscape II: Development of anatomy - new queries supported; would generate testable hypotheses; how exactly do those queries rely on developmental data? |
** Different approaches between MGI and ZFIN: | ** Different approaches between MGI and ZFIN: | ||
*** MGI uses complete anatomy at different developmental stages | *** MGI uses complete anatomy at different developmental stages | ||
*** ZFIN uses one anatomy ontology and adds start and end dates to indicate the developmental period during which it appears (adult structures don't have an end date) | *** ZFIN uses one anatomy ontology and adds start and end dates to indicate the developmental period during which it appears (adult structures don't have an end date) | ||
*** Xenbase uses the ZFIN approach | *** Xenbase uses the ZFIN approach | ||
− | ** Candidate genes for evolutionary change could be derived from anatomy-annotated gene expression studies during development | + | ** Candidate genes for evolutionary change could be derived from anatomy-annotated gene expression studies during development; Where do mouse and Xenopus share gene sets in early development? |
*** genes responsible for or associated with morphological changes during individual development could be candidates for evolutionary change | *** genes responsible for or associated with morphological changes during individual development could be candidates for evolutionary change | ||
*** evolutionary phenotype changes could be used to query morphological changes during development | *** evolutionary phenotype changes could be used to query morphological changes during development | ||
− | ** Can we enable queries to generate | + | ** Can we enable queries to generate hypotheses based on ontogeny reflecting evolutionary history? |
+ | ** Powerful tool in interpreting microarray data downstream from node; know candidate genes without mutants using this approach | ||
+ | ** See phenotypic differences between 2 taxa – where do you see similar changes? | ||
+ | ** Cell types and associate with time and space – can reason from, neural crest, etc. | ||
+ | |||
*** Evolutionary developmental data could come from medaka, stickleback | *** Evolutionary developmental data could come from medaka, stickleback | ||
* Sequence of steps: | * Sequence of steps: | ||
*# Ontology building | *# Ontology building | ||
*#* Adult phenotype annotations for mutants in Xenbase | *#* Adult phenotype annotations for mutants in Xenbase | ||
− | *#* Presently only 3 species for amphibians: Xenopus, Dermophis, Salamandria | + | *#* Presently only 3 species for amphibians: Xenopus, Dermophis, Salamandria (integration beginning in July; phenotypes/mutants, adulta; L. Zimmerman (GB)) |
− | *#* Development decoupling from anatomy ontology in mouse | + | *#* Development decoupling from anatomy ontology in mouse (as per above) |
+ | *#** Requirements: | ||
+ | *#*** QC required – 1 person to find orphans and generate reports (80% complete); make decisions | ||
+ | *#*** 1st: alignment of MP and mouse anatomy, then QC of MP-EQ; use Mouse anatomy to initalize Paul’s ontology | ||
+ | *#*** 2nd: Mouse staging-> ZFIN + Xenbase style | ||
+ | *#*** Phenoscape II: Time required for above (1st and 2nd) is 1 person over 3 years | ||
*#* Expanding mammalian anatomy to include extinct species | *#* Expanding mammalian anatomy to include extinct species | ||
+ | *#*** Judy mentioned Fiona McCarthy (chick ontology? Judy will ask) | ||
*#* Anatomy for amniotes (the clade including mouse and dinosaurs), including extinct taxa (such as dinosaurs) | *#* Anatomy for amniotes (the clade including mouse and dinosaurs), including extinct taxa (such as dinosaurs) | ||
*#** Scope of this could be overwhelming | *#** Scope of this could be overwhelming | ||
Line 34: | Line 47: | ||
*#** Work on any smaller-scope anatomy (or multi-species anatomy) ontology will contribute terms that apply more broadly | *#** Work on any smaller-scope anatomy (or multi-species anatomy) ontology will contribute terms that apply more broadly | ||
*#** There may not be very many neomorphs between birds and mammals, though there are a few areas such as the digits in birds where the exact homology relationships aren't as clearly agreed upon. | *#** There may not be very many neomorphs between birds and mammals, though there are a few areas such as the digits in birds where the exact homology relationships aren't as clearly agreed upon. | ||
+ | *#** set up ontology and extend to fossils that Paul knows best; | ||
+ | *#** also need taxonomy onotlogy (from suprageneric filemaker database?) | ||
*# Mammalian phenotype decomposition | *# Mammalian phenotype decomposition | ||
*#* Need support for QC'ing the results of automated decomposition | *#* Need support for QC'ing the results of automated decomposition | ||
Line 42: | Line 57: | ||
** Need to align teleost and amphibian anatomy to mouse. | ** Need to align teleost and amphibian anatomy to mouse. | ||
** Mouse and chicken need to be mapped to amniote anatomy. Mouse is a better start because there are genetic data. | ** Mouse and chicken need to be mapped to amniote anatomy. Mouse is a better start because there are genetic data. | ||
− | * | + | * Paul Sereno gave short presentation on reconciling character-derived trees and character definition and use between different matrices and trees that share taxa |
** [http://taxonsearch.org TaxonSearch] | ** [http://taxonsearch.org TaxonSearch] | ||
** Formalizing and generating grammar of character coding and character state definition | ** Formalizing and generating grammar of character coding and character state definition | ||
+ | *** Phenoscape II grant activity could be to produce EQ primer | ||
+ | ** presented summaries of annotations, by region, by authors, by structure, by quality | ||
+ | ** Paul’s question: Why are 2 trees different? A: Particular characters and types of coding; If you are trying to develop a consensus tree – can see how authors’ differ | ||
** Analyzing character usage (shared, not shared, rejected) between trees that share taxa | ** Analyzing character usage (shared, not shared, rejected) between trees that share taxa | ||
** Conflicting phylogenies for the same set of taxa often turn out to be based on character codings that are not consistent or not compatible | ** Conflicting phylogenies for the same set of taxa often turn out to be based on character codings that are not consistent or not compatible | ||
+ | ** need to not only curate legacy data but be proactive in terms of syntax etc. of future data; use cases looking forward; morphology in crisis, wallowing in a sea of data | ||
+ | * Re: direct submission --Monte: ZFIN has 6,000 users, but 4-5 labs do direct submission of a lot of data; he suggested Phenex modified as a web tool to put in data; also ontology modification/use of Mesquite | ||
+ | |||
+ | == == | ||
+ | * Miscellaneous discussion following above (Tuesday pm) | ||
+ | * Open to communities | ||
+ | ** Phenoscape has public data, but can upload private data and use visualization tool | ||
+ | ** working environment enabling exploration of data for analysis | ||
+ | ** would allow people temporarily to overlay on whole data store | ||
+ | |||
+ | * NCBI blast similarity – phenoblast | ||
+ | ** Will need term tracker | ||
+ | ** Monte: Issue of best practice for global size/shape | ||
+ | ** Todd: (here is forest of EQs that match) | ||
+ | *** can move up and down ontology | ||
+ | *** shape and syntax; best practice | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Discussion of images (linked to AO, PATO) – definitional, put in ontology; browsing, finding right AO term | ||
+ | ** could call for images in particular sets of species | ||
− | + | * Are ontologies useful for phylogenetics? ATOL data and relationships are a challenge (Paul) | |
+ | ** Can a matrix be reconstructed and can data be related in an effective way? | ||
+ | ** Do ontologies serve this community well? | ||
+ | ** Limiting from community? | ||
+ | ** Explore whether useful for phylogenetics? | ||
+ | ** Capability of characters for phylogenetic studies? | ||
+ | * Viability of PhenoscapeII depends on morphologists using it! | ||
+ | ** vast phylogenetic branches – does character annotation at gross level conceal or reveal phylogenetic information? | ||
+ | ** Can we retrieve the characters that are discordant? | ||
+ | * What question motivates character matrix? | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Developmental time & misc discussion == | ||
+ | * Development of mouse and Xenopus: | ||
+ | ** Notochord in adult example | ||
+ | * Phenoscape II: create developmental time ontology for vertebrates. | ||
+ | * Compare heterochronies: | ||
+ | ** relative ordering of entities and associated gene expression | ||
+ | ** Anne’s example of heterochronic frogs… | ||
+ | |||
+ | ** Notochord-hedgehog at particular times & wnts | ||
+ | * For a given evolutionary change, what are genes expressed in a time at a place? | ||
+ | ** pick ~ 12 terms and make table and map for multiples species | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Phenoscape and vertebrate development ontology (?) | ||
+ | ** would facilitate finding genes responsible | ||
+ | ** without start and stop times, would have develops_from only | ||
+ | ** enables placement of a phenotypic information into a developmental framework; develops_from | ||
+ | ** what are the sets of characters that evolve at derived condition; see how phenotypic characters cluster at particular branch points; even do math, counting nodes; can do stats at branch points. | ||
+ | ** creating diff definitions of homology; try to experimentally differentiate species | ||
+ | * Evolutionary time: use cases; compare sister groups | ||
+ | ** Rates | ||
+ | ** Dating clades – minimum age | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Database discussion – Todd/Jim | ||
+ | |||
+ | * OBD – Suzi – Need to work on ability to pull things back on basis of similarity; on basis of phenotype – what else is there that affects a bone? | ||
+ | * Suzi & co. would adopt single searches by gene or body parts | ||
+ | |||
+ | ** Cartik: Support units and measures | ||
+ | ** Jim: User see OBD structure – enter a term and visualize EQ annotations in relation to it; | ||
+ | ** See Ensemble – Phenoscape Mammals; Phenoscape Amphibs; Phenoscape Fishes – Allow user to move between taxonomic stashes without mapping | ||
+ | |||
+ | ** Sparkle: Chris: issue generic queries – return data in generic format | ||
+ | |||
+ | ** | ||
+ | ** Suzi: Allow people to add term if they are making query and not finding anything | ||
+ | *** could repurpose protein tree/ GO | ||
+ | *** relative ordering of entities and associated gene expression | ||
− | == Wednesday morning == | + | == Wednesday morning, April 29, 2009 == |
− | * Nomenclatural history of terms in ontologies | + | * Expanding taxonomic coverage to Vertebrata |
+ | ** Phenoscape has about 15,000 species of teleosts untouched (half that number is sampled in a typical study) and approx 200 matrices to target | ||
+ | ** Amphibanat estimates 3,000 amphib species and approx 36 matrices | ||
+ | ** Plan to maintain skeletal focus for anatomy development | ||
+ | * How best to keep nomenclature history? | ||
+ | ** Nomenclatural history of terms in ontologies | ||
+ | ** mechanism to keep track of in OBO-edit? No | ||
+ | ** keep track of this information on the database side | ||
** Current exchange format standards don't support this really beyond obsoletion | ** Current exchange format standards don't support this really beyond obsoletion | ||
− | ** ZFIN tracks within the database the complete nomenclatural history of gene names | + | ** ZFIN tracks within the database the complete nomenclatural history of gene names; (ZFIN records the reason, comments etc…in database comments) |
** RDBOM tracks literature and author attribution for anatomy terms but not yet nomenclatural history | ** RDBOM tracks literature and author attribution for anatomy terms but not yet nomenclatural history | ||
+ | *** Amphibanat handles comments with fields: | ||
+ | **** Is_defined_by: | ||
+ | **** Is_discussed_by: | ||
+ | **** Literature citations are an ontology linked to other concepts | ||
* Character quality profiles for data matrices | * Character quality profiles for data matrices | ||
** Addresses the question of "Where in the skeleton are the changes occurring that drive the phylogeny" | ** Addresses the question of "Where in the skeleton are the changes occurring that drive the phylogeny" | ||
Line 61: | Line 156: | ||
** Distribution of missing data across the anatomy, at different hierarchy levels | ** Distribution of missing data across the anatomy, at different hierarchy levels | ||
** How many taxa have how much missing data, distributed on which anatomical parts | ** How many taxa have how much missing data, distributed on which anatomical parts | ||
+ | * DRIVING QUESTIONS: | ||
+ | ** What parts are of phenotype are variable a) in particular taxonomic groups; b) in particular author’s studies? | ||
+ | *** Where are the gaps in character variation? In taxon sampling? | ||
+ | *** Why are there gaps in phenotype variation? Missing data, fossils | ||
+ | *** What is not changing – not in matrix – | ||
+ | *** Because extinct not in fossil record (no a??) | ||
+ | *** Or constrained (just no variation) | ||
+ | *** To get at redundancy, have to factor in taxonomic sampling and character sampling. | ||
+ | ** Q: Who much is good data? How much is redundant? | ||
+ | *** What is redundancy? Identical EQs? Action: curate to fine grain in order to match; develop tool to be able to see other EQ annotations | ||
+ | ** Q: How does the order of development correspond to the order to evolution? | ||
* Use case: Character redundancy | * Use case: Character redundancy | ||
** Deriving a character profile across the anatomy could help visualize the redundancy between annotations | ** Deriving a character profile across the anatomy could help visualize the redundancy between annotations | ||
Line 70: | Line 176: | ||
#* Mouse is done but needs to be rearranged (MP decomposition) | #* Mouse is done but needs to be rearranged (MP decomposition) | ||
#* Amniotes need to be done from the ground up | #* Amniotes need to be done from the ground up | ||
+ | |||
== Wednesday afternoon == | == Wednesday afternoon == | ||
Line 79: | Line 186: | ||
** Annotating at very granular levels is entirely possible but can take a lot of time because many of the ontology terms needed are likely not to be present yet in the ontology. | ** Annotating at very granular levels is entirely possible but can take a lot of time because many of the ontology terms needed are likely not to be present yet in the ontology. | ||
** How does this impact phylogeny and data matrix reconciliation, or phylogenetic reconstruction on the basis of the EQ annotations? | ** How does this impact phylogeny and data matrix reconciliation, or phylogenetic reconstruction on the basis of the EQ annotations? | ||
+ | |||
* Use-case for development | * Use-case for development | ||
** Heterochrony would be interesting if one can pull it out of the database | ** Heterochrony would be interesting if one can pull it out of the database | ||
− | ** Developmental ordering relationships currently used are confined to develops_from and transforms-into. | + | ** Ordering of developmental landmarks uses develops_from; Developmental ordering relationships currently used are confined to develops_from and transforms-into. |
*** This is missing yet for mouse. | *** This is missing yet for mouse. | ||
*** Wouldn't really allow inferring heterochrony. | *** Wouldn't really allow inferring heterochrony. | ||
*** Would allow though to place and compare the placement of phenotypes into a developmental chain of transformations. | *** Would allow though to place and compare the placement of phenotypes into a developmental chain of transformations. | ||
+ | ** Use case to compare sequence of ossification in ontogeny of an individual vs. among species variation in degree of ossification of a structure; idea is to visualize where these structures are on the developmental sequence of a MOD | ||
+ | ** Homology and develops_from: | ||
+ | ** Juvenile wing primordiium homologous to adult limb? | ||
+ | ** John: should add the phrase to any homology statement: “two things are homologous as _______” | ||
+ | |||
+ | *Evolutionary time: | ||
+ | ** TimeTree www.timetree.com; pairwise comparisons to get ages | ||
+ | ** Questions that can be asked regarding geologic time: | ||
+ | *** How far back in time do you need to go to find a particular change in phenotype? | ||
+ | *** Does this type of character change occur during a particular time period? | ||
+ | **** Requires trees | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Informatics: what do you want to see? | ||
+ | ** Cartik: measurements displayed in web interface (it’s supported in Phenex and OBD currently) | ||
+ | ** Jim: user upload; group annotations and click through neigborhoods…see Hilmar notes | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Tree visualization | ||
+ | ** Nodes don’t have ancestral state reconstruction, they are the union of phenotypes in the database; displays all the phenotypes that are recorded in a clade, not mapping of characters. | ||
+ | ** PhyloWidget developed in 2007 summer of code | ||
+ | *** Annotate parts of the tree with images, phenotypes, etc.. to a tree topology | ||
+ | ** Character optimization for Phenoscape II | ||
+ | *** Optimizing EQs involves deciding which EQ is alternative to another | ||
+ | *** Todd: Easier for user to download data and create matrix on their own | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Phenex stuff: | ||
+ | ** Add skeletal parts in association with museum voucher for paleo data; for extant dry skeletal vs. cl/st. Could help discern WHY, e.g., cartilage is not variable in data matrix. | ||
* Demonstration of Phenoscape KB | * Demonstration of Phenoscape KB | ||
** Some of the features we are developing (the 3 principle queries) would be very useful to MOD users | ** Some of the features we are developing (the 3 principle queries) would be very useful to MOD users | ||
− | * Informatics goals for Phenoscape 2: | + | * Informatics goals for Phenoscape 2: |
** Supporting units for measurements | ** Supporting units for measurements | ||
** Allowing others to compare their phenotype data to the knowledge base | ** Allowing others to compare their phenotype data to the knowledge base | ||
Line 106: | Line 240: | ||
# How does logical inference of homology propagate over develops-from relationships. | # How does logical inference of homology propagate over develops-from relationships. | ||
#* E.g., if A and B are asserted homologous, and C develops from A and D develops from B, are then C and D inferred as homologous, and are C and B inferred as homologous. | #* E.g., if A and B are asserted homologous, and C develops from A and D develops from B, are then C and D inferred as homologous, and are C and B inferred as homologous. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category:Events]] |
Latest revision as of 17:34, 22 May 2009
Contents
Phenoscape II: Tuesday, April 28, 1:00-5:30
Participating: Phenoscape: Paula Mabee, Todd Vision, Monte Westerfield, Hilmar Lapp, Wasila Dahdul, Jim Balhoff, Cartik Kothari, Peter Midford, John Lundberg; Suzanna Lewis, Judy Blake, Peter Vize, Anne Maglia
- Will be extending the taxonomic scope to extant and extinct vertebrates
- Create an annotation database spanning the taxonomic scope and their anatomy ontologies
- Three multi-species anatomy ontologies are being developed: teleosts, amphibians, mammalian anatomy
- Tree mapping: show when an evolutionary phenotype first appeared
- EQ support in all involved model organism databases
- Structure of MP is not consistent with anatomy, or with PATO
- Mapping from MP to EQ syntax is being worked on (George Gkoutos)
- How is this supported in MGI?
- Could spit back EQ, but could not allow users to search
- How is this supported in MGI?
- MGI isn't in a position to use EQ internally, but for example Phenoscape II could provide an EQ-view on mouse phenotypes, using the decomposition of MP into anatomy (or entity) and quality term cross-product
- Full EQ annotation for OMIM is being planned but not yet funded
- MGI, Xenbase, and ZFIN all have links from their phenotype data to OMIM
- Phenoscape II: Development of anatomy - new queries supported; would generate testable hypotheses; how exactly do those queries rely on developmental data?
- Different approaches between MGI and ZFIN:
- MGI uses complete anatomy at different developmental stages
- ZFIN uses one anatomy ontology and adds start and end dates to indicate the developmental period during which it appears (adult structures don't have an end date)
- Xenbase uses the ZFIN approach
- Candidate genes for evolutionary change could be derived from anatomy-annotated gene expression studies during development; Where do mouse and Xenopus share gene sets in early development?
- genes responsible for or associated with morphological changes during individual development could be candidates for evolutionary change
- evolutionary phenotype changes could be used to query morphological changes during development
- Can we enable queries to generate hypotheses based on ontogeny reflecting evolutionary history?
- Powerful tool in interpreting microarray data downstream from node; know candidate genes without mutants using this approach
- See phenotypic differences between 2 taxa – where do you see similar changes?
- Cell types and associate with time and space – can reason from, neural crest, etc.
- Different approaches between MGI and ZFIN:
- Evolutionary developmental data could come from medaka, stickleback
- Sequence of steps:
- Ontology building
- Adult phenotype annotations for mutants in Xenbase
- Presently only 3 species for amphibians: Xenopus, Dermophis, Salamandria (integration beginning in July; phenotypes/mutants, adulta; L. Zimmerman (GB))
- Development decoupling from anatomy ontology in mouse (as per above)
- Requirements:
- QC required – 1 person to find orphans and generate reports (80% complete); make decisions
- 1st: alignment of MP and mouse anatomy, then QC of MP-EQ; use Mouse anatomy to initalize Paul’s ontology
- 2nd: Mouse staging-> ZFIN + Xenbase style
- Phenoscape II: Time required for above (1st and 2nd) is 1 person over 3 years
- Requirements:
- Expanding mammalian anatomy to include extinct species
- Judy mentioned Fiona McCarthy (chick ontology? Judy will ask)
- Anatomy for amniotes (the clade including mouse and dinosaurs), including extinct taxa (such as dinosaurs)
- Scope of this could be overwhelming
- Should be strongly driven (or staged) according to the character matrices to be annotated
- Chicken anatomy could provide a starting point?
- There is work on bird anatomy that uses a latin naming scheme
- Work on any smaller-scope anatomy (or multi-species anatomy) ontology will contribute terms that apply more broadly
- There may not be very many neomorphs between birds and mammals, though there are a few areas such as the digits in birds where the exact homology relationships aren't as clearly agreed upon.
- set up ontology and extend to fossils that Paul knows best;
- also need taxonomy onotlogy (from suprageneric filemaker database?)
- Mammalian phenotype decomposition
- Need support for QC'ing the results of automated decomposition
- Alignment of MP with mouse anatomy
- Annotation
- Which published character matrices are there for dinosaurs?
- Ontology building
- Ontology mapping and alignment
- Need to align teleost and amphibian anatomy to mouse.
- Mouse and chicken need to be mapped to amniote anatomy. Mouse is a better start because there are genetic data.
- Paul Sereno gave short presentation on reconciling character-derived trees and character definition and use between different matrices and trees that share taxa
- TaxonSearch
- Formalizing and generating grammar of character coding and character state definition
- Phenoscape II grant activity could be to produce EQ primer
- presented summaries of annotations, by region, by authors, by structure, by quality
- Paul’s question: Why are 2 trees different? A: Particular characters and types of coding; If you are trying to develop a consensus tree – can see how authors’ differ
- Analyzing character usage (shared, not shared, rejected) between trees that share taxa
- Conflicting phylogenies for the same set of taxa often turn out to be based on character codings that are not consistent or not compatible
- need to not only curate legacy data but be proactive in terms of syntax etc. of future data; use cases looking forward; morphology in crisis, wallowing in a sea of data
- Re: direct submission --Monte: ZFIN has 6,000 users, but 4-5 labs do direct submission of a lot of data; he suggested Phenex modified as a web tool to put in data; also ontology modification/use of Mesquite
- Miscellaneous discussion following above (Tuesday pm)
- Open to communities
- Phenoscape has public data, but can upload private data and use visualization tool
- working environment enabling exploration of data for analysis
- would allow people temporarily to overlay on whole data store
- NCBI blast similarity – phenoblast
- Will need term tracker
- Monte: Issue of best practice for global size/shape
- Todd: (here is forest of EQs that match)
- can move up and down ontology
- shape and syntax; best practice
- Discussion of images (linked to AO, PATO) – definitional, put in ontology; browsing, finding right AO term
- could call for images in particular sets of species
- Are ontologies useful for phylogenetics? ATOL data and relationships are a challenge (Paul)
- Can a matrix be reconstructed and can data be related in an effective way?
- Do ontologies serve this community well?
- Limiting from community?
- Explore whether useful for phylogenetics?
- Capability of characters for phylogenetic studies?
- Viability of PhenoscapeII depends on morphologists using it!
- vast phylogenetic branches – does character annotation at gross level conceal or reveal phylogenetic information?
- Can we retrieve the characters that are discordant?
- What question motivates character matrix?
Developmental time & misc discussion
- Development of mouse and Xenopus:
- Notochord in adult example
- Phenoscape II: create developmental time ontology for vertebrates.
- Compare heterochronies:
- relative ordering of entities and associated gene expression
- Anne’s example of heterochronic frogs…
- Notochord-hedgehog at particular times & wnts
- For a given evolutionary change, what are genes expressed in a time at a place?
- pick ~ 12 terms and make table and map for multiples species
- Phenoscape and vertebrate development ontology (?)
- would facilitate finding genes responsible
- without start and stop times, would have develops_from only
- enables placement of a phenotypic information into a developmental framework; develops_from
- what are the sets of characters that evolve at derived condition; see how phenotypic characters cluster at particular branch points; even do math, counting nodes; can do stats at branch points.
- creating diff definitions of homology; try to experimentally differentiate species
- Evolutionary time: use cases; compare sister groups
- Rates
- Dating clades – minimum age
- Database discussion – Todd/Jim
- OBD – Suzi – Need to work on ability to pull things back on basis of similarity; on basis of phenotype – what else is there that affects a bone?
- Suzi & co. would adopt single searches by gene or body parts
- Cartik: Support units and measures
- Jim: User see OBD structure – enter a term and visualize EQ annotations in relation to it;
- See Ensemble – Phenoscape Mammals; Phenoscape Amphibs; Phenoscape Fishes – Allow user to move between taxonomic stashes without mapping
- Sparkle: Chris: issue generic queries – return data in generic format
- Suzi: Allow people to add term if they are making query and not finding anything
- could repurpose protein tree/ GO
- relative ordering of entities and associated gene expression
- Suzi: Allow people to add term if they are making query and not finding anything
Wednesday morning, April 29, 2009
- Expanding taxonomic coverage to Vertebrata
- Phenoscape has about 15,000 species of teleosts untouched (half that number is sampled in a typical study) and approx 200 matrices to target
- Amphibanat estimates 3,000 amphib species and approx 36 matrices
- Plan to maintain skeletal focus for anatomy development
- How best to keep nomenclature history?
- Nomenclatural history of terms in ontologies
- mechanism to keep track of in OBO-edit? No
- keep track of this information on the database side
- Current exchange format standards don't support this really beyond obsoletion
- ZFIN tracks within the database the complete nomenclatural history of gene names; (ZFIN records the reason, comments etc…in database comments)
- RDBOM tracks literature and author attribution for anatomy terms but not yet nomenclatural history
- Amphibanat handles comments with fields:
- Is_defined_by:
- Is_discussed_by:
- Literature citations are an ontology linked to other concepts
- Amphibanat handles comments with fields:
- Character quality profiles for data matrices
- Addresses the question of "Where in the skeleton are the changes occurring that drive the phylogeny"
- Distribution of characters across the skeletal anatomy, at different levels of the hierarchy
- Distribution of missing data across the anatomy, at different hierarchy levels
- How many taxa have how much missing data, distributed on which anatomical parts
- DRIVING QUESTIONS:
- What parts are of phenotype are variable a) in particular taxonomic groups; b) in particular author’s studies?
- Where are the gaps in character variation? In taxon sampling?
- Why are there gaps in phenotype variation? Missing data, fossils
- What is not changing – not in matrix –
- Because extinct not in fossil record (no a??)
- Or constrained (just no variation)
- To get at redundancy, have to factor in taxonomic sampling and character sampling.
- Q: Who much is good data? How much is redundant?
- What is redundancy? Identical EQs? Action: curate to fine grain in order to match; develop tool to be able to see other EQ annotations
- Q: How does the order of development correspond to the order to evolution?
- What parts are of phenotype are variable a) in particular taxonomic groups; b) in particular author’s studies?
- Use case: Character redundancy
- Deriving a character profile across the anatomy could help visualize the redundancy between annotations
- Use case: Mapping the evolutionary characters that lead (and distinguish) to a model organism. Subsequently, see whether these evolutionary changes and the order in which they appear to the ontogeny of the organism.
- Will need to deal with character gaps and with character redundancy for this.
Specific goals:
- Expand taxonomic coverage of Phenoscape to Vertebrata
- Mouse is done but needs to be rearranged (MP decomposition)
- Amniotes need to be done from the ground up
Wednesday afternoon
- Problem of lossy transformation of legacy character data
- EQ annotation is often at a lesser granularity (or level of detail) than the original free text description
- This isn't due to any technological obstacles but rather due to the limited resources available for annotation.
- Annotation effort is best focused to a granularity level where it suffices to solve a use-case of interest.
- Annotating at very granular levels is entirely possible but can take a lot of time because many of the ontology terms needed are likely not to be present yet in the ontology.
- How does this impact phylogeny and data matrix reconciliation, or phylogenetic reconstruction on the basis of the EQ annotations?
- Use-case for development
- Heterochrony would be interesting if one can pull it out of the database
- Ordering of developmental landmarks uses develops_from; Developmental ordering relationships currently used are confined to develops_from and transforms-into.
- This is missing yet for mouse.
- Wouldn't really allow inferring heterochrony.
- Would allow though to place and compare the placement of phenotypes into a developmental chain of transformations.
- Use case to compare sequence of ossification in ontogeny of an individual vs. among species variation in degree of ossification of a structure; idea is to visualize where these structures are on the developmental sequence of a MOD
- Homology and develops_from:
- Juvenile wing primordiium homologous to adult limb?
- John: should add the phrase to any homology statement: “two things are homologous as _______”
- Evolutionary time:
- TimeTree www.timetree.com; pairwise comparisons to get ages
- Questions that can be asked regarding geologic time:
- How far back in time do you need to go to find a particular change in phenotype?
- Does this type of character change occur during a particular time period?
- Requires trees
- Informatics: what do you want to see?
- Cartik: measurements displayed in web interface (it’s supported in Phenex and OBD currently)
- Jim: user upload; group annotations and click through neigborhoods…see Hilmar notes
- Tree visualization
- Nodes don’t have ancestral state reconstruction, they are the union of phenotypes in the database; displays all the phenotypes that are recorded in a clade, not mapping of characters.
- PhyloWidget developed in 2007 summer of code
- Annotate parts of the tree with images, phenotypes, etc.. to a tree topology
- Character optimization for Phenoscape II
- Optimizing EQs involves deciding which EQ is alternative to another
- Todd: Easier for user to download data and create matrix on their own
- Phenex stuff:
- Add skeletal parts in association with museum voucher for paleo data; for extant dry skeletal vs. cl/st. Could help discern WHY, e.g., cartilage is not variable in data matrix.
- Demonstration of Phenoscape KB
- Some of the features we are developing (the 3 principle queries) would be very useful to MOD users
- Informatics goals for Phenoscape 2:
- Supporting units for measurements
- Allowing others to compare their phenotype data to the knowledge base
- Generic ontological queries, such as a SPARQL endpoint
- Private data overlay
- Linked Data and semweb integration
- Tree visualization
- Triple store technology evaluation
- Species ID
- Phylogenetically informative distance metric based on EQ assertions
- NLP-based text processing, Mass curation
Idea bin
- Intermine connection (multiple model organisms, AJAX-based widget for displaying protein family tree)
- Some phenotypes imply developmental abnormalities, differences, or variation.
- For example, a "poorly ossified cranium" in an adult amphibian implies that the developmental process was delayed or did not complete.
- How does logical inference of homology propagate over develops-from relationships.
- E.g., if A and B are asserted homologous, and C develops from A and D develops from B, are then C and D inferred as homologous, and are C and B inferred as homologous.