-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
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
add term request "teat skin" #2353
Comments
FoodOn term request : |
If this new term is created, I'd consider making it part_of 'nipple' - its Uberon definition sounds broad enough to encompass non-human species, and it has a narrow synonym of 'teat'. |
assigning myself, but its low priority for me, happy for someone to take over if its more urgently needed. |
I was wondering if http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0005083 'nipple sheath' would work? |
The "nipple sheath" is a structure in formation as referred by the "mammary sprout" term. The teat skin can be defined in this figure and publication. The "nipple sheath" do not correspond to the part of the animal that is sampled in our experiments. |
I'm trying to understand the difference between nipple sheath and teat skin so we can model this properly:
While the figure is useful, we still would need a textual definition and a logical definition that matches. If I were to create a term, it would be: Label: nipple skin The above would automatically place nipple sheath as a nipple skin - but that would be the only class under it which is generally frowned upon (what other classes should be there if so?) Thanks |
I agree with the term definition but I do not understand why it places nipple sheath as a nipple skin ? (sorry) |
Current nipple sheath has the following logical axioms: |
Is the difference between a nipple and a teat made clear anywhere in the
ontology? The definition of nipple (
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0002030) is "Projection of skin
containing the outlets for 15-20 lactiferous ducts arranged cylindrically
around the tip.) This definition is 1) anthropocentric, because the number
of ducts varies across species, and 2) is not the definition of a teat. In
a nipple, the individual lactiferous ducts open directly to the outside
world. Most of the outlets are found in the nipple but some are in the
areola. In a teat the lactiferous ducts 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. While many lay sources
treat nipple and teat as synonyms, mammalogists do not.
Robert E. Druzinsky, Ph.D.
Clinical Associate Professor
Dept. of Oral Biology
College of Dentistry
University of Illinois at Chicago
801 S. Paulina
Chicago, IL 60612
***@***.***
Office: 312-996-0406
Lab: 312-996-0629
Website: www.peerj.com/RobertDruzinsky
…On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 5:03 AM Shawn Tan ***@***.***> wrote:
Current nipple sheath has the following logical axioms:
[image: Screenshot 2022-06-23 at 17 11 04]
<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/76212760/175262926-60eebc69-47b6-41f5-9587-744911b8c609.png>
If I make an equivalent class (which makes sense given the name)
"Skin epidermis and ("part of" some nipple)" for nipple skin - a reasoner
would reason that nipple sheath is a type of nipple skin
I think I'm a little stuck here now - perhaps @ddooley
<https://github.com/ddooley> might have a suggestion here?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2353 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABASAOEJIGOEQDEPIXNWRCTVQQY7JANCNFSM5Q6BMBEA>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
It isn't, teat isnt a term in the ontology - it is currently a narrow synonym of nipple (which makes sense after what you mentioned). I think perhaps it might be sensible to create a new term "teat" and define the distinction in the ontology. Depending on the urgency on this term, I can add "teat skin" first and leave a comment that teat needs to be formalise to make proper logical axioms (so basically the only axiom will be that it is_a "skin epidermis". However the proper thing to do would be to formalise "teat" and maybe have a pairwise homology relation (in_historical_homology_relationship, or whatever the accurate version of that is) with nipple (I assume evolutionarily speaking, they came from the same ancestory?) The other thing I would like, if possible, is to have taxon restrictions on teat - I would need to know where in the evolutionary branch is it teat instead of nipple. But I need direction input on all the above and I'm guessing that will take quite awhile. That being said what @RDruzinsky wrote is a really good starting point :)
PS sorry for making a simple request so complicated - I honestly did not expect this too >.< |
Thanks everybody for the effort for defining this term. @RDruzinsky definition is indeed a good starting point to define "teat" term. But I'm suprized that I can't find a clear definition since teat placement and size are a strong criteria of selection for cows, goats, ... For the taxonomic restriction, I have found two mammals that are producing milk that do not have teat : Echidna and the Platypus. But for the distinction between nipple and teat I did not found anything revelant. |
Hopefully this can be rolled out soon? |
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
This issue has not seen any activity in the past 6 months; it will be closed automatically one year from now if no action is taken. |
This issue has been closed automatically because it has not been updated in 18 months. Please re-open if you still need this to be addressed. |
Preferred term label:
"teat skin" from cow.
Synonyms
Definition (free text, please give PubMed ID)
In figure 1.1.
publication
Parent term (use https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ols/ontologies/uberon)
skin epidermis ?
Your nano-attribution (ORCID)
0000-0001-7361-4159
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: