Add teat and teat skin #2650
Add teat and teat skin #2650
Conversation
Fixes #2353 Would like the following: - are nipple and teat in historical or serial homology? (I assume historical but wanted to check) - currently there isnt any taxon restrictions, would like to have some, but have left it as a editors note for now
Here's a diff of how these changes impact the classified ontology (on -simple file):Ontology comparisonLeft
Right
Ontology importsOntology annotationsUBERON_8440078
|
Here's a diff of your edit file (unreasoned)Ontology comparisonLeft
Right
Ontology importsOntology annotationsUBERON_8440078
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, this makes the ontology far less useful. We are splitting a single coherent concept into unconnected parts of the ontology. This will actively hinder inter operation. What if MP uses one and HP the other? How will we unify in upheno?
There are many classes in uberon where human has a different morphology from other mammals. If the differences are substantial enough, we make two classes with a common parent. But even here we must think carefully. The main ten e cost of latticization is really high. Does the use case justify it? Or is this really just a matter of giving people their own terminology?
Sorry to be negative your work in this is much appreciated.. apologies for lack of documentation on patterns.
| name: teat | ||
| def: "The projection from the mammary glands of mammals from which milk flows or is ejected for the purpose of feeding young. As compared to a nipple, where the individual lactiferous ducts open directly to the outside world, a teat has lactiferous ducts that converge on a large lactiferous sac at the base of the teat and there is a single, large duct that runs through the teat with an outlet at the end of the teat." [https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1572-1316, WikipediaVersioned:Teat&oldid=1107850923] | ||
| comment: While many lay sources treat nipple and teat as synonyms, mammalogists do not. {xref="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1572-1316"} | ||
| is_a: UBERON:0000475 ! organism subdivision |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is that all we can say? No part of?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh defs not, I 100% want a link to nipple and from what I understand from the discussion, teat is a homologous to nipple - hence the above asking if its historical or serial. As for part_of -> I'm following nipple which does not have any
|
Over to you @stheil15 ! |
| id: UBERON:8440079 | ||
| name: teat skin | ||
| def: "The skin that is part of the teat." [https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7258-9596] | ||
| intersection_of: UBERON:0001003 ! skin epidermis |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
general red flag here: label, text def, and logical def should be inconcordance
in general in uberon, skin = epidermis + dermis, so we shouldn't conflate the two - even if there are some zones where dermis is lacking.
Also I don't think we can address this issue coherently until we resolve #1873. If teat/nipple is a projection of the skin, as proposed there, then teat skin = teat!
We really need clear boundaries defined for all terms
Fixes #2353
Questions/notes:
Tagging @ddooley & @stheil15