[Go] MT attachment to chromosome

Midori Harris midori at ebi.ac.uk
Mon Nov 24 02:16:54 PST 2008


Hi Lisa,

Although I added the terms, I don't have any specialist knowledge about 
these complexes, so most likely I put them under the more generic parent 
because I wasn't completely confident that the more specific parent would 
always be correct.

Maybe it would be good to put the question to Iain along with the rest -- 
unless the SGD curators or Val know of anything more specific. In any 
case, if the verdict is that the terms should be moved down to part_of 
condensed chromosome kinetochore, that'll be easy to do.

Midori

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, Lisa Matthews wrote:

> Hi Midori,
> I know, it's good to be back in touch! I'm back in the USA now.
> , I just had one question before popping the question over to Iain.  Based on 
> the definition of Ndc80 complex and NMS Complex (and the fact that Ndc80 
> associates with the kinetochore only during mitosis), I would have thought 
> that these terms would be "part of" condensed chromosome kinetochore rather 
> that the more generic  kinetochore or  am I missing something(?)
>
>   * part_of relationship GO:0000776 : kinetochore [234 gene products]
>     <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>   *
>         o close
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?action=minus_node&target=GO:0000777&term=GO:0000776&open_1=GO:0000777,GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122#lineage>
>           is_a relationship GO:0000777 : condensed chromosome
>           kinetochore
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0000777&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>           [134 gene products]
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000777&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>         o
>               + open
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?action=plus_node&target=GO:0000778&term=GO:0000776&open_1=GO:0000777,GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122#lineage>
>                 is_a relationship GO:0000778 : condensed nuclear
>                 chromosome kinetochore
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0000778&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>                 [69 gene products]
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000778&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>               + open
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?action=plus_node&target=GO:0000939&term=GO:0000776&open_1=GO:0000777,GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122#lineage>
>                 part_of relationship GO:0000939 : inner kinetochore of
>                 condensed chromosome
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0000939&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>                 [34 gene products]
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000939&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>               + open
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?action=plus_node&target=GO:0000444&term=GO:0000776&open_1=GO:0000777,GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122#lineage>
>                 part_of relationship GO:0000444 : MIS12/MIND type
>                 complex
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0000444&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>                 [18 gene products]
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000444&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>               + leaf node part_of relationship GO:0033551 : monopolin
>                 complex
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0033551&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>                 [8 gene products]
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0033551&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>               + open
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?action=plus_node&target=GO:0000940&term=GO:0000776&open_1=GO:0000777,GO:0000776&session_id=7795amigo1227278122#lineage>
>                 part_of relationship GO:0000940 : outer kinetochore of
>                 condensed chromosome
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0000940&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>                 [17 gene products]
>                 <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0000940&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>         o leaf node part_of relationship GO:0031262 : Ndc80 complex
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0031262&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>           [16 gene products]
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0031262&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
>         o leaf node part_of relationship GO:0031617 : NMS complex
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-details.cgi?term=GO:0031617&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>           [13 gene products]
>           <http://amigo.geneontology.org/cgi-bin/amigo/term-assoc.cgi?term=GO:0031617&session_id=7795amigo1227278122>
>
> :
> Ndc80 Complex
> A supercomplex formed by the association of two subcomplexes (known as MIND 
> and Ndc80 in Schizosaccharomyces) with additional proteins at the 
> kinetochores of condensed nuclear chromosomes. [source: PMID:16079914 
> <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079914>]
>
> NMS Complex:
>   A supercomplex formed by the association of two subcomplexes (known
>   as MIND and Ndc80 in Schizosaccharomyces) with additional proteins
>   at the kinetochores of condensed nuclear chromosomes. [source:
>   PMID:16079914 <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079914>] 
>
> Thanks,
> Lisa
>
>
> Midori Harris wrote:
>> Hi Lisa,
>> 
>> It would be great if you could ask Iain Cheeseman what he thinks. We seem 
>> to be converging on agreeing that kinetochore-port_of-chromosome is the 
>> best we can do for now, until we implement more relationship types, but it 
>> can't hurt to get an expert's view.
>> 
>> (Great to hear fraom you again, too -- it's been a while!)
>> 
>> Midori
>> 
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, Lisa Matthews wrote:
>> 
>>> 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
>>>> 
>


More information about the Go mailing list