Skip to content

Conversation

@ar-ibrahim
Copy link
Collaborator

@ar-ibrahim ar-ibrahim requested a review from rays22 March 2, 2023 13:22
@ar-ibrahim ar-ibrahim self-assigned this Mar 2, 2023
@matentzn
Copy link
Contributor

matentzn commented Mar 2, 2023

I am not opposed to this just note that there is quite some weird resistance on the subject of wether "amount of gene expression" is really a trait in the strict sense, but don't let that hold you up.

@rays22
Copy link
Contributor

rays22 commented Mar 2, 2023

I am not opposed to this just note that there is quite some weird resistance on the subject of wether "amount of gene expression" is really a trait in the strict sense, but don't let that hold you up.

@ar-ibrahim , @matentzn
Do we want this 'gene expression amount' as a grouping category? It does not look like a true trait to me. However, if you want to group gene expression traits, for example 'tumor necrosis factor alpha gene expression' than it is fine.

  • For the specific traits, like ' tumor necrosis factor alpha gene expression', I think we need a new pattern template:

'process quality' and ('characteristic of' some ('gene expression' has participant some %s))

Copy link
Contributor

@rays22 rays22 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suggest we use PATO:0001236 process quality, because I think that is the relevant trait being observed/assessed when they measure gene expression rate of output.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants