HELP!: GO Term Error

[Pankaj Jaiswal]

Midori Harris wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Sue Rhee wrote:
> 
> > how about:
> >
> > nutrient reserve
> >  amino acid reserve
> >   amino acid reserve in seed syn: seed storage protein
> 
> we could add 'amino acid reserve' if it's useful -- opinions?
> 
> '... in seed' is still problematic -- we don't want function terms to
> include cellular component or anatomy info.
> 
> m

We also don't want to include anatomy or cellular component info into the term
though sometimes its unavoidable, unless we have a crossproduct ontology to
combine anatomy_seed "as location" to function_amino_acid_reserve "as function"
to define an explicit meaning to the new term "amino acid reserve in seed". 

For example mitochondrial H+ ATPase and Chloroplast ATPase. Both of them have
the same EC number because they carry out the same function H+ translocation
coupled to ATP asynthesis. But the way they are localized in the subcellular
compartment is different. The F1-subcomplex of mitochondria faces(present in)
the lumen where as that of chloroplast is present in the intermembrane space
between inner and outer thylakoid membranes. Going by the GO version, didn't we
bring in the explicit meaning to the term H+ATPase by intergrating the cellular
component term, even though at the sequence as well as at the function or
structure level the subunits are similar. Unfortunately the only option we have
is to use "sensu" but we cannot use this for anatomy term.

So I suggest to have either amino acid reserve in seed or seed storage protein.
I think the function is very much clear from the term and in a way also makes it
explicit.

That's my opinion, I might be wrong!

Pankaj