“muscle layer of X” vs “X smooth muscle”

[gouttegd]

There are several cases in Uberon of an organ X for which we have both a term like “muscle layer of X” and “X smooth muscle”.

For example, we have both

• ‘muscle layer of oviduct’ (a ‘muscular coat’ that is part of some ‘fallopian tube’), and
• ‘oviduct smooth muscle’ (a ‘smooth muscle tissue’ that is part of some ‘fallopian tube’).

Other examples include ‘muscle layer of epididymis’ / ‘epididymis smooth muscle’ or ‘muscle layer of vagina’ / ‘vagina smooth muscle’.

Do we need that distinction between the muscle layer and the tissue that make up said layer? At first sight this seems like a needless complication to me.

If we do need/want that distinction, then shouldn’t the “X muscle tissue” part be at least somehow connected to the “muscle layer of X” part (e.g. ‘X muscle tissue’ part of some ‘muscle layer of X‘)? Currently, they are not – neither through explicit assertions or through inferred ones.

[github-actions]

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.

[gouttegd]

For information: that issue had been briefly discussed in a Uberon call on January 15, 2024, where it was noted that there could be at least one reason for maintaining a distinction between the muscle layer and the muscle tissue: if there are also non-muscular cells (not part of the muscle tissue) that are “resident“ within the muscle layer.

Not sure how many muscle layers are concerned, but for example the 'muscle layer of intestine' contains some 'myenteric nerve plexus'