- From: Chris Mungall <cjm@fruitfly.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:15:36 -0700
- To: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
- Cc: public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
On Jul 17, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Eric Jain wrote: > Chris Mungall wrote: >> We have also switched from talk of defining specific proteins to >> rules to automatically annotate protein records. > > You're right, small digression, hope it's of interest anyway :-) Definitely - although I don't think OWL/SWRL is quite the right tool for this job yet although perhaps getting closer: Putting OWL in Order: Patterns for Sequences in OWL Nick Drummond1, Alan Rector1, Robert Stevens1, Georgina M2Matthew Horridge1, Hai H. Wang1, Julian Seidenberg1 http://owl-workshop.man.ac.uk/acceptedLong/submission_12.pdf (I'm not a big fan of the modeling biological sequences as lists approach, but I think the results could be replicated using a realist representation) I still don't think the HMM gurus have much to worry about yet >> I read "broad classes of proteins" as being more inclusive than >> the class denoted by OPSD_HUMAN in my interpretation, but also >> including for example all human opsin proteins, all vertebrate >> opsins, ... > > At that level of broadness I guess we're talking about protein > families and domains, which is above the abstraction level used in > UniProt. But for some people UniProt is already too broad, so I > guess it's a point of view thing. yes it seems I was misinterpreting Alan here, so we are still talking at the sequence-per-species level >> To summarise: the hypothesis is that any UniProt entry can be >> formally defined using OWL-DL in an automated fashion in a way >> that is reasonably concordant with the intent of UniProt. There >> may well be counter-examples that disprove this. > > One thing that may be worth pointing out here is that when > biologists have some sequences and want to see if there is any > relevant information in UniProt, they'll blast them, and look at > the best matches (subjective). This would seem to be consistent with the hypothesis > The one thing they'll certainly not do is use an inference engine :-) There's an interesting challenge. Sequence alignment in Pellet anyone?
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 06:16:32 UTC