-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Addresses #1759 NTR valve endothelial cell #1763
Conversation
Here's a diff of how these changes impact the classified ontology (on -simple file):Ontology comparisonLeft
Right
Ontology importsOntology annotationsCL_4030033
|
Here's a diff of your edit file (unreasoned)Ontology comparisonLeft
Right
Ontology importsOntology annotationsCL_4030033
|
Declarations can happen depending on how you add new terms for import. If you paste the IRIs straight into Protege, that => a declaration in the edit file. |
Yes, I have done that for other tickets as it is listed as the first option here. The page says this method is "to be avoided" but does not give a reason and it has consistently worked for prior tickets. The declarations appearing in this PR, however, are a surprise since I did not add them. If I had to guess, they may be coming from PR #1727 since they all seem to appear there. |
removing unexpected declarations
OH! yeah I rmbr writing that, the reason its there was this:
We should consider removing that whole part and just saying make a request for someone to import the term for you >.< But yeah, probs best not to use it, its a hacky work around that might cause issues down the road |
{ Off topic for this PR but: adding IRIs directly has the great advantage that it can be used instantly without having to wait for someone to help or disrupting your editing flow run a slow import update. I wonder if we should tolerate it and have a clean-up job that removes stray declarations from the edtor's file. Alternatively maybe we could have some super minimal temp import update (say IRI + label only) that editors can use rapidly while working on a PR, postponing a full update to later - Maybe add to agenda for Monday tech call? } |
The following new term has been added to CL and will be available in the next release: CL:4030033 'valve endothelial cell' |
Should this have the GO term attached to it like in #1761? |
Not totally sure about this... the reference notes they secrete paracrine molecules, but I have not found a reference that explicitly states VECs secrete extracellular matrix constituents. Activated VICs are noted explicitly to secrete fibrous matrix proteins (collagen), which is why the GO axiom was added to that term. From https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485434/: "VECs also secrete paracrine factors, including nitric oxide, endothelin-1, and C-type natriuretic peptide. Most biochemical factors secreted by VECs (except endothelin-1) function to reduce the pathogenic phenotypes of VICs." vs. "In addition, VICs secrete fibrous matrix proteins, matrix metalloproteinases (such as MMP1 and MMP2), biochemical factors, and can differentiate into myofibroblasts or osteoblast-like cells or undergo cell death-mediated calcification" If you think appropriate, I could edit the text definition and/or add a less specific axiom regarding secretion. |
Addresses #1759 NTR valve endothelial cell
#gogoeditdiff
Appears to contain some extra changes from the recently merged PR #1727. (EDIT: these have been removed)