[Ontology-editors] CC, PRO and CORUM

[Chris Mungall]

Reading Judy's slides from PRO.

* Relationship between PRO and CC
The slides suggest: contributes_to
I think it would be <CC complex term> has_part <PRO protein term>
Optionally with cardinality restrictions

Also, if PRO also represents, and these are intended to be more  
specific than the ones in GO, is_a should be used.

We may want to keep the inter-ontology links in a separate bridging  
file.

* Mapping CORUM to GO.

I see we have 18 CC terms with synonyms with CORUM as provenance. It  
may be an idea to have a separate xref too (e.g. if the CORUM name is  
identical). So there's another ~1200 to be added? I couldn't find the  
tracker item for this.

There are quite a few that could be trivially mapped. E.g:

[Term]
id: GO:0016580
name: Sin3 complex
namespace: cellular_component
def: "A multiprotein complex that functions broadly in eukaryotic  
organisms as a transcriptional repressor of protein-coding genes,  
through the gene-specific deacetylation of histones. Amongst its  
subunits, the Sin3 complex contains Sin3-like proteins, and a number  
of core proteins that are shared with the NuRD complex (including  
histone deacetylases and histone binding proteins). The Sin3 complex  
does not directly bind DNA itself, but is targeted to specific genes  
through protein-protein interactions with DNA-binding proteins." [PMID: 
10589671, PMID:11743021, PMID:12865422]
is_a: GO:0000118 ! histone deacetylase complex

To:

http://mips.gsf.de/genre/proj/corum/complexdetails.html?id=54

Note that MIPS localizes this to the nucleus. Can we just import MIPS  
localizations, or are they not as rigorous as us in forcing an all- 
some relation?

Once we have these we can also use mips2go and the mips funcat entry  
for each complex to get CC->MF/MP links