Abstract The spectacular radiation of insects has produced a stunning diversity of phenotypes. During the past 250 years, research on insect systematics has generated hundreds of terms for naming and comparing them. In its current form, this terminological diversity is presented in natural language and lacks formalization, which prohibits computer-assisted comparison using semantic web technologies. Here we propose a Model for Describing Cuticular Anatomical Structures (MoDCAS) which incorporates structural properties and positional relationships for standardized, consistent, and reproducible descriptions of arthropod phenotypes. We applied the MoDCAS framework in creating the ontology for the Anatomy of the Insect Skeleto-Muscular system (AISM). The AISM is the first general insect ontology that aims to cover all taxa by providing generalized, fully logical, and queryable, definitions for each term. It was built using the Ontology Development Kit (ODK), which maximizes interoperability with Uberon (Uberon multi-species anatomy ontology) and other basic ontologies, enhancing the integration of insect anatomy into the broader biological sciences. A template system for adding new terms, extending, and linking the AISM to additional anatomical, phenotypic, genetic, and chemical ontologies is also introduced. The AISM is proposed as the backbone for taxon-specific insect ontologies and has potential applications spanning systematic biology and biodiversity informatics, allowing users to (1) use controlled vocabularies and create semi-automated computer-parsable insect morphological descriptions; (2) integrate insect morphology into broader fields of research, including ontology-informed phylogenetic methods, logical homology hypothesis testing, evo-devo studies, and genotype to phenotype mapping; and (3) automate the extraction of morphological data from the literature, enabling the generation of large-scale phenomic data, by facilitating the production and testing of informatic tools able to extract, link, annotate, and process morphological data. This descriptive model and its ontological applications will allow for clear and semantically interoperable integration of arthropod phenotypes in biodiversity studies. 
                        more » 
                        « less   
                    
                            
                            A Logical Model of Homology for Comparative Biology
                        
                    
    
            Abstract There is a growing body of research on the evolution of anatomy in a wide variety of organisms. Discoveries in this field could be greatly accelerated by computational methods and resources that enable these findings to be compared across different studies and different organisms and linked with the genes responsible for anatomical modifications. Homology is a key concept in comparative anatomy; two important types are historical homology (the similarity of organisms due to common ancestry) and serial homology (the similarity of repeated structures within an organism). We explored how to most effectively represent historical and serial homology across anatomical structures to facilitate computational reasoning. We assembled a collection of homology assertions from the literature with a set of taxon phenotypes for the skeletal elements of vertebrate fins and limbs from the Phenoscape Knowledgebase. Using seven competency questions, we evaluated the reasoning ramifications of two logical models: the Reciprocal Existential Axioms (REA) homology model and the Ancestral Value Axioms (AVA) homology model. The AVA model returned all user-expected results in addition to the search term and any of its subclasses. The AVA model also returns any superclass of the query term in which a homology relationship has been asserted. The REA model returned the user-expected results for five out of seven queries. We identify some challenges of implementing complete homology queries due to limitations of OWL reasoning. This work lays the foundation for homology reasoning to be incorporated into other ontology-based tools, such as those that enable synthetic supermatrix construction and candidate gene discovery. [Homology; ontology; anatomy; morphology; evolution; knowledgebase; phenoscape.] 
        more » 
        « less   
        
    
    
                            - PAR ID:
- 10188852
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Systematic Biology
- Volume:
- 69
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1063-5157
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 345 to 362
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
- 
            
- 
            Abstract Background Identification of genes responsible for anatomical entities is a major requirement in many fields including developmental biology, medicine, and agriculture. Current wet lab techniques used for this purpose, such as gene knockout, are high in resource and time consumption. Protein–protein interaction (PPI) networks are frequently used to predict disease genes for humans and gene candidates for molecular functions, but they are rarely used to predict genes for anatomical entities. Moreover, PPI networks suffer from network quality issues, which can be a limitation for their usage in predicting candidate genes. Therefore, we developed an integrative framework to improve the candidate gene prediction accuracy for anatomical entities by combining existing experimental knowledge about gene-anatomical entity relationships with PPI networks using anatomy ontology annotations. We hypothesized that this integration improves the quality of the PPI networks by reducing the number of false positive and false negative interactions and is better optimized to predict candidate genes for anatomical entities. We used existing Uberon anatomical entity annotations for zebrafish and mouse genes to construct gene networks by calculating semantic similarity between the genes. These anatomy-based gene networks were semantic networks, as they were constructed based on the anatomy ontology annotations that were obtained from the experimental data in the literature. We integrated these anatomy-based gene networks with mouse and zebrafish PPI networks retrieved from the STRING database and compared the performance of their network-based candidate gene predictions. Results According to evaluations of candidate gene prediction performance tested under four different semantic similarity calculation methods (Lin, Resnik, Schlicker, and Wang), the integrated networks, which were semantically improved PPI networks, showed better performances by having higher area under the curve values for receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall curves than PPI networks for both zebrafish and mouse. Conclusion Integration of existing experimental knowledge about gene-anatomical entity relationships with PPI networks via anatomy ontology improved the candidate gene prediction accuracy and optimized them for predicting candidate genes for anatomical entities.more » « less
- 
            Abstract The Gene Ontology (GO) knowledgebase (http://geneontology.org) is a comprehensive resource concerning the functions of genes and gene products (proteins and noncoding RNAs). GO annotations cover genes from organisms across the tree of life as well as viruses, though most gene function knowledge currently derives from experiments carried out in a relatively small number of model organisms. Here, we provide an updated overview of the GO knowledgebase, as well as the efforts of the broad, international consortium of scientists that develops, maintains, and updates the GO knowledgebase. The GO knowledgebase consists of three components: (1) the GO—a computational knowledge structure describing the functional characteristics of genes; (2) GO annotations—evidence-supported statements asserting that a specific gene product has a particular functional characteristic; and (3) GO Causal Activity Models (GO-CAMs)—mechanistic models of molecular “pathways” (GO biological processes) created by linking multiple GO annotations using defined relations. Each of these components is continually expanded, revised, and updated in response to newly published discoveries and receives extensive QA checks, reviews, and user feedback. For each of these components, we provide a description of the current contents, recent developments to keep the knowledgebase up to date with new discoveries, and guidance on how users can best make use of the data that we provide. We conclude with future directions for the project.more » « less
- 
            Abstract Existing phenotype ontologies were originally developed to represent phenotypes that manifest as a character state in relation to a wild-type or other reference. However, these do not include the phenotypic trait or attribute categories required for the annotation of genome-wide association studies (GWAS), Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) mappings or any population-focussed measurable trait data. The integration of trait and biological attribute information with an ever increasing body of chemical, environmental and biological data greatly facilitates computational analyses and it is also highly relevant to biomedical and clinical applications. The Ontology of Biological Attributes (OBA) is a formalised, species-independent collection of interoperable phenotypic trait categories that is intended to fulfil a data integration role. OBA is a standardised representational framework for observable attributes that are characteristics of biological entities, organisms, or parts of organisms. OBA has a modular design which provides several benefits for users and data integrators, including an automated and meaningful classification of trait terms computed on the basis of logical inferences drawn from domain-specific ontologies for cells, anatomical and other relevant entities. The logical axioms in OBA also provide a previously missing bridge that can computationally link Mendelian phenotypes with GWAS and quantitative traits. The term components in OBA provide semantic links and enable knowledge and data integration across specialised research community boundaries, thereby breaking silos.more » « less
- 
            Abstract Morphology remains a primary source of phylogenetic information for many groups of organisms, and the only one for most fossil taxa. Organismal anatomy is not a collection of randomly assembled and independent “parts”, but instead a set of dependent and hierarchically nested entities resulting from ontogeny and phylogeny. How do we make sense of these dependent and at times redundant characters? One promising approach is using ontologies—structured controlled vocabularies that summarize knowledge about different properties of anatomical entities, including developmental and structural dependencies. Here, we assess whether evolutionary patterns can explain the proximity of ontology-annotated characters within an ontology. To do so, we measure phylogenetic information across characters and evaluate if it matches the hierarchical structure given by ontological knowledge—in much the same way as across-species diversity structure is given by phylogeny. We implement an approach to evaluate the Bayesian phylogenetic information (BPI) content and phylogenetic dissonance among ontology-annotated anatomical data subsets. We applied this to data sets representing two disparate animal groups: bees (Hexapoda: Hymenoptera: Apoidea, 209 chars) and characiform fishes (Actinopterygii: Ostariophysi: Characiformes, 463 chars). For bees, we find that BPI is not substantially explained by anatomy since dissonance is often high among morphologically related anatomical entities. For fishes, we find substantial information for two clusters of anatomical entities instantiating concepts from the jaws and branchial arch bones, but among-subset information decreases and dissonance increases substantially moving to higher-level subsets in the ontology. We further applied our approach to address particular evolutionary hypotheses with an example of morphological evolution in miniature fishes. While we show that phylogenetic information does match ontology structure for some anatomical entities, additional relationships and processes, such as convergence, likely play a substantial role in explaining BPI and dissonance, and merit future investigation. Our work demonstrates how complex morphological data sets can be interrogated with ontologies by allowing one to access how information is spread hierarchically across anatomical concepts, how congruent this information is, and what sorts of processes may play a role in explaining it: phylogeny, development, or convergence. [Apidae; Bayesian phylogenetic information; Ostariophysi; Phenoscape; phylogenetic dissonance; semantic similarity.]more » « less
 An official website of the United States government
An official website of the United States government 
				
			 
					 
					
 
                                    