Plant Ontology Relationship type ?

[Pankaj Jaiswal]

Dear Michael,

I have a question about the "term type". In the following example(GPO:IDs are my
internal work IDs) from a plant anatomy, there are several terms under
%androecium_type ; GPO:0200060 as its instances, however, all these terms are
actually various "TYPES of" or modifications of androecium found in various
plant genera. Same is true for instances of  %stamen_structure ; GPO:0200458,
where the terms are instances of various structural forms of  stamen.

    %flower ; GPO:0200470
     <androecium ; GPO:0200002 < floret ; GPO:0200464 < flower ; GPO:0200038
      %androecium_type ; GPO:0200060
       %apostemonous ; GPO:0200455
       %diadelphous ; GPO:0200388
       %gynandrial ; GPO:0200453 ; synonym:gynosteminal
       %monadelphous ; GPO:0200452
       %petalostemonous ; GPO:0200454
       %polyandrous ; GPO:0200465
       %polydelphous ; GPO:0200456
       %syngenesious ; GPO:0200457
      <stamen ; GPO:0200190
       <anther ; GPO:0200187
        <anther locule ; GPO:0200025 ; synonym:anther lobe
         <pollen sac ; GPO:0200026
         <tapetum ; GPO:0200152
        <pollen ; GPO:0200151 ; synonym:microspore ; synonym:pollen grain
       <anther filament ; GPO:0200189
        <filament connective ; GPO:0200188
       %stamen_structure ; GPO:0200458
        %stamen_appendicular ; GPO:0200459
        %stamen_filantherous ; GPO:0200463
        %stamen_laminar ; GPO:0200461
        %stamen_petalantherous ; GPO:0200460
        %stamen_petaloid ; GPO:0200462
      %staminodium ; GPO:0200041
       %staminal disc ; GPO:0200040

We can consider them using as attributes, however they are very specific to the
plant part anatomy. In the examples, I have tried to represent the terms as
either

      %androecium_type ; GPO:0200060
       %apostemonous ; GPO:0200455
       %diadelphous ; GPO:0200388
or

       %stamen_structure ; GPO:0200458
        %stamen_appendicular ; GPO:0200459
        %stamen_filantherous ; GPO:0200463

Can you suggest which is the best way to represent them in plant ontology.
Should I use them like       
      %androecium_type ; GPO:0200060
       %apostemonous ; GPO:0200455
       %diadelphous ; GPO:0200388

or 

      %androecium_type ; GPO:0200060
       %androecium_apostemonous ; GPO:0200455
       %androecium_diadelphous ; GPO:0200388

Second question is on relating them as instances of either %androecium_type ;
GPO:0200060  or %stamen_structure ; GPO:0200458.  If we can use a different
relationship type as "TYPEOF" androecium or stamen, then we may avoid using the
X_structure or X_type term. If you think I can do as said just now, then can you
recommend using a particular character for the "TYPEOF" relationship. It is not
a derived from relationship

    

Regards

Pankaj


******************************************
Pankaj Jaiswal, Ph.D.                                   
Postdoctoral Associate
Dept. of Plant Breeding                             
Cornell University                                   
Ithaca, NY-14853, USA   

Tel:+1-607-255-3103 / Fax:+1-607-255-6683
E mail: pj37 at cornell.edu
http://www.gramene.org   
******************************************