[Go] MT attachment to chromosome

[Lisa Matthews]

Hi all,
There is a really good review that just came out on this written by  the 
Cheeseman group (they've done a lot on defining the highly conserved  
kinetochore DNA to microtubule molecular connectivity  PMID: 19000831.  
I can run this question by  Iain Cheeseman who has recently helped 
Reactome out with some annotations on centrosome function.
Lisa

Valerie Wood wrote:
> Currently a placement of kinetochore under chromosome would be correct
> based on how condensed nuclear centromeric region is defined
>
> def
> condensed nuclear chromosome, centromeric region
> The region of a condensed chromosome in the nucleus that includes the centromere and associated proteins, including the kinetochore. In monocentric chromosomes, this region corresponds to a single area of the chromosome, whereas in holocentric chromosomes, it is evenly distributed along the chromosome.
>
> which  is a child of chromosome
> although at present kinetochore is not a child of this term
>
> I don't know what is right though.
>
> VAl
>
> Midori Harris <midori at ebi.ac.uk> wrote: 
>   
>> I think what would really help are those spatial relationship types that 
>> we've talked about with Chris. Kinetochore-chromosome is one of many cases 
>> where I suspect that biologists would expect to see some connection (tho 
>> I'm sure Rex or Val can correct me if I'm wrong), so we've used part_of 
>> even though it's far from ideal.
>>
>> m
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, David Hill wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> I'm not sure the kinetochore should be a part_of the chromosome. It attaches 
>>> to the centromere, which is part of the chromosome.  I think we might want to 
>>> have Rex weigh in on this too. He's a cell biologist.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> Midori Harris wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Working on some cross-product definitions, I came up with a question about 
>>>> whether two terms that are currently siblings should have an is_a link. The 
>>>> terms are:
>>>>
>>>>   attachment of spindle microtubules to chromosome GO:0051313
>>>>   attachment of spindle microtubules to kinetochore GO:0008608
>>>>
>>>> and I think we shoud have GO:0008608 is_a GO:0051313 because kinetochore is 
>>>> part_of chromosome in the component ontology.
>>>>
>>>> I've opened a SourceForge item, and I'd appreciate any comments.
>>>>
>>>> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=440764&aid=2320413&group_id=36855 
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> midori
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Go mailing list
>>>> Go at geneontology.org
>>>> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>>>>         
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Go mailing list
>> Go at geneontology.org
>> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>>
>>
>>     
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Go mailing list
> Go at geneontology.org
> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>