[Go] seeking comment on GO:0004772 (SF 1953281)

[Midori Harris]

Hi,

I've had no replies to this, so I'm going to give it one more week, and 
then rename GO:0004772. Some mouse and rat annotations will then lose a 
bit of specificity, but no annotations will be wrong.

m

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Midori Harris wrote:

> Dear GO,
>
> SF 1953281 reports a problem with GO:0004772. At present the term name is
> 'sterol O-acyltransferase activity', but the definition is specific for
> cholesterol, not generally applicable to any sterol:
>
>   id: GO:0004772
>   name: sterol O-acyltransferase activity
>   namespace: molecular_function
>   def: "Catalysis of the reaction: acyl-CoA + cholesterol = CoA +
>     cholesterol ester." [EC:2.3.1.26]
>   xref: EC:2.3.1.26
>
> The definition is derived from the cross-referenced EC entry, and is also
> consistent with some, but not all, of the synonyms. It is clear that we
> will have to diverge from EC slightly, because the current term name their
> recommended name, and for GO we want the name and definition to be
> consistent.
>
> We intend to implement this structure:
>
>   sterol O-acyltransferase activity GO:term1
>   --[i] cholesterol O-acyltransferase activity GO:term2
>   --[i] ergosterol O-acyltransferase activity GO:term3
>   --[i] lanosterol O-acyltransferase activity GO:term4
>
> The question is whether GO:0004772 will become term1 or term2 in the new
> structure, i.e. whether to change its name or its definition.
>
> - If we change the name to match the definition, SGD, CGD and GeneDB S.
> pombe will have to change their annotations.
>
> - If we change the definition (and  remove the EC dbxref) to match the
> name, MGI, RGD, UniProt and (I think) Flybase annotations will be less
> specific, and should be changed.
>
> - If we make the term obsolete, everyone will have to change annotations.
> This option is perhaps the most correct given the name/definition
> mismatch, but would mean the most work for annotators.
>
> SGD and CGD curators have expressed an understandable preference for the
> first option, renaming GO:0004772. Does anyone -- especially annotators
> who would have to change existing annotations to maintain specificity --
> object?
>
> SF link:
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1953281&group_id=36855&atid=440764
>
> Thanks,
> Midori
> _______________________________________________
> Go mailing list
> Go at geneontology.org
> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>