[Ontology-editors] disrupting host processes

[Jane Lomax]

Thanks Alex - that's really useful to know. I think you might be right 
suggesting that these should be 'regulation' rather than 'disruption' 
terms. Looking at the other terms in the node they're mostly regulation 
(or 'modification', which we use equivalently). 'Disruption' has been 
used for terms where a structure (e.g. cell) has been physically, well, 
disrupted by e.g. lysis or making it a weird shape.

Jane

Alexander Diehl wrote:
> Jane,
>
> A very prominent area of research in cancer biology currently is the 
> regulation of immune responses to the tumor to favor its avoidance of 
> direct immunological effects and favor its growth.  These are indeed 
> the employment of "normal" regulatory processes in the immune system 
> to favor particular types of immune response favorable to the tumor.  
> The regulation can be both positive and negative, or even more complex.
>
> Similarly, viruses and bacterial have their own means of regulating 
> immune responses to favor themselves.  Calling all these actions 
> simply disruption hides the full molecular characterization of the 
> mechanisms involved and missed the subtle nature of many of these 
> effects.
>
> I favor describing these effects in terms of regulation, both positive 
> and negative, of normal GO processes whereever possible.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
>
> Midori Harris wrote:
>> Good question ... I don't think disruption is necessarily negative 
>> regulation. Overzealous positive regulation could also be pretty 
>> disruptive! And I agree about disruption not even necessarily being 
>> any sort of regulation.
>>
>> I wonder if we could use a cross-product that includes a generic 
>> 'disruption' term -- could use one of those anonymous classes if we 
>> don't want 'disruption' in GO otherwise ...
>>
>> ???
>> m
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Jane Lomax wrote:
>>
>>> Hello - so here's an interesting question...I'm adding some new 
>>> PAMGO terms, one of which is 'disruption by symbiont of host system 
>>> process'.
>>>
>>> We have a term under multicellular organism process 'system 
>>> process'. I feel that we need to make a relationship between 
>>> 'disruption by symbiont of host system process' and 'system process' 
>>> - but what?
>>>
>>> Regulates - or perhaps negatively regulates - would seem the most 
>>> likely, but is that really quite right? If it were, for example, a 
>>> tumor causing the system disruption we wouldn't call that regulation 
>>> would we?
>>>
>>> Jane
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ontology-editors mailing list
>> Ontology-editors at geneontology.org
>> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/ontology-editors
>
>


-- 
Dr Jane Lomax
GO Editorial Office
EMBL-EBI
Wellcome Trust Genome Campus
Hinxton
Cambridgeshire, UK
CB10 1SD

p: +44 1223 492516
f: +44 1223 494468