Cargando…

An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants

BACKGROUND: Plant phenotype datasets include many different types of data, formats, and terms from specialized vocabularies. Because these datasets were designed for different audiences, they frequently contain language and details tailored to investigators with different research objectives and bac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oellrich, Anika, Walls, Ramona L, Cannon, Ethalinda KS, Cannon, Steven B, Cooper, Laurel, Gardiner, Jack, Gkoutos, Georgios V, Harper, Lisa, He, Mingze, Hoehndorf, Robert, Jaiswal, Pankaj, Kalberer, Scott R, Lloyd, John P, Meinke, David, Menda, Naama, Moore, Laura, Nelson, Rex T, Pujar, Anuradha, Lawrence, Carolyn J, Huala, Eva
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4359497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25774204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0053-y
_version_ 1782361417965371392
author Oellrich, Anika
Walls, Ramona L
Cannon, Ethalinda KS
Cannon, Steven B
Cooper, Laurel
Gardiner, Jack
Gkoutos, Georgios V
Harper, Lisa
He, Mingze
Hoehndorf, Robert
Jaiswal, Pankaj
Kalberer, Scott R
Lloyd, John P
Meinke, David
Menda, Naama
Moore, Laura
Nelson, Rex T
Pujar, Anuradha
Lawrence, Carolyn J
Huala, Eva
author_facet Oellrich, Anika
Walls, Ramona L
Cannon, Ethalinda KS
Cannon, Steven B
Cooper, Laurel
Gardiner, Jack
Gkoutos, Georgios V
Harper, Lisa
He, Mingze
Hoehndorf, Robert
Jaiswal, Pankaj
Kalberer, Scott R
Lloyd, John P
Meinke, David
Menda, Naama
Moore, Laura
Nelson, Rex T
Pujar, Anuradha
Lawrence, Carolyn J
Huala, Eva
author_sort Oellrich, Anika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Plant phenotype datasets include many different types of data, formats, and terms from specialized vocabularies. Because these datasets were designed for different audiences, they frequently contain language and details tailored to investigators with different research objectives and backgrounds. Although phenotype comparisons across datasets have long been possible on a small scale, comprehensive queries and analyses that span a broad set of reference species, research disciplines, and knowledge domains continue to be severely limited by the absence of a common semantic framework. RESULTS: We developed a workflow to curate and standardize existing phenotype datasets for six plant species, encompassing both model species and crop plants with established genetic resources. Our effort focused on mutant phenotypes associated with genes of known sequence in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. (Arabidopsis), Zea mays L. subsp. mays (maize), Medicago truncatula Gaertn. (barrel medic or Medicago), Oryza sativa L. (rice), Glycine max (L.) Merr. (soybean), and Solanum lycopersicum L. (tomato). We applied the same ontologies, annotation standards, formats, and best practices across all six species, thereby ensuring that the shared dataset could be used for cross-species querying and semantic similarity analyses. Curated phenotypes were first converted into a common format using taxonomically broad ontologies such as the Plant Ontology, Gene Ontology, and Phenotype and Trait Ontology. We then compared ontology-based phenotypic descriptions with an existing classification system for plant phenotypes and evaluated our semantic similarity dataset for its ability to enhance predictions of gene families, protein functions, and shared metabolic pathways that underlie informative plant phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ontologies, annotation standards, shared formats, and best practices for cross-taxon phenotype data analyses represents a novel approach to plant phenomics that enhances the utility of model genetic organisms and can be readily applied to species with fewer genetic resources and less well-characterized genomes. In addition, these tools should enhance future efforts to explore the relationships among phenotypic similarity, gene function, and sequence similarity in plants, and to make genotype-to-phenotype predictions relevant to plant biology, crop improvement, and potentially even human health. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13007-015-0053-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4359497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43594972015-03-15 An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants Oellrich, Anika Walls, Ramona L Cannon, Ethalinda KS Cannon, Steven B Cooper, Laurel Gardiner, Jack Gkoutos, Georgios V Harper, Lisa He, Mingze Hoehndorf, Robert Jaiswal, Pankaj Kalberer, Scott R Lloyd, John P Meinke, David Menda, Naama Moore, Laura Nelson, Rex T Pujar, Anuradha Lawrence, Carolyn J Huala, Eva Plant Methods Methodology BACKGROUND: Plant phenotype datasets include many different types of data, formats, and terms from specialized vocabularies. Because these datasets were designed for different audiences, they frequently contain language and details tailored to investigators with different research objectives and backgrounds. Although phenotype comparisons across datasets have long been possible on a small scale, comprehensive queries and analyses that span a broad set of reference species, research disciplines, and knowledge domains continue to be severely limited by the absence of a common semantic framework. RESULTS: We developed a workflow to curate and standardize existing phenotype datasets for six plant species, encompassing both model species and crop plants with established genetic resources. Our effort focused on mutant phenotypes associated with genes of known sequence in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. (Arabidopsis), Zea mays L. subsp. mays (maize), Medicago truncatula Gaertn. (barrel medic or Medicago), Oryza sativa L. (rice), Glycine max (L.) Merr. (soybean), and Solanum lycopersicum L. (tomato). We applied the same ontologies, annotation standards, formats, and best practices across all six species, thereby ensuring that the shared dataset could be used for cross-species querying and semantic similarity analyses. Curated phenotypes were first converted into a common format using taxonomically broad ontologies such as the Plant Ontology, Gene Ontology, and Phenotype and Trait Ontology. We then compared ontology-based phenotypic descriptions with an existing classification system for plant phenotypes and evaluated our semantic similarity dataset for its ability to enhance predictions of gene families, protein functions, and shared metabolic pathways that underlie informative plant phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ontologies, annotation standards, shared formats, and best practices for cross-taxon phenotype data analyses represents a novel approach to plant phenomics that enhances the utility of model genetic organisms and can be readily applied to species with fewer genetic resources and less well-characterized genomes. In addition, these tools should enhance future efforts to explore the relationships among phenotypic similarity, gene function, and sequence similarity in plants, and to make genotype-to-phenotype predictions relevant to plant biology, crop improvement, and potentially even human health. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13007-015-0053-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4359497/ /pubmed/25774204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0053-y Text en © Oellrich et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Oellrich, Anika
Walls, Ramona L
Cannon, Ethalinda KS
Cannon, Steven B
Cooper, Laurel
Gardiner, Jack
Gkoutos, Georgios V
Harper, Lisa
He, Mingze
Hoehndorf, Robert
Jaiswal, Pankaj
Kalberer, Scott R
Lloyd, John P
Meinke, David
Menda, Naama
Moore, Laura
Nelson, Rex T
Pujar, Anuradha
Lawrence, Carolyn J
Huala, Eva
An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title_full An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title_fullStr An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title_full_unstemmed An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title_short An ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
title_sort ontology approach to comparative phenomics in plants
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4359497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25774204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0053-y
work_keys_str_mv AT oellrichanika anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT wallsramonal anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cannonethalindaks anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cannonstevenb anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cooperlaurel anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT gardinerjack anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT gkoutosgeorgiosv anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT harperlisa anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hemingze anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hoehndorfrobert anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT jaiswalpankaj anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT kalbererscottr anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT lloydjohnp anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT meinkedavid anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT mendanaama anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT moorelaura anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT nelsonrext anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT pujaranuradha anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT lawrencecarolynj anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hualaeva anontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT oellrichanika ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT wallsramonal ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cannonethalindaks ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cannonstevenb ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT cooperlaurel ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT gardinerjack ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT gkoutosgeorgiosv ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT harperlisa ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hemingze ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hoehndorfrobert ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT jaiswalpankaj ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT kalbererscottr ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT lloydjohnp ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT meinkedavid ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT mendanaama ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT moorelaura ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT nelsonrext ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT pujaranuradha ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT lawrencecarolynj ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants
AT hualaeva ontologyapproachtocomparativephenomicsinplants