Search

Background: The biodiversity domain, and in particular biological taxonomy, is moving in the direction of semantization of its research outputs. The present work introduces OpenBiodiv-O, the ontology that serves as the basis of the OpenBiodiv Knowledge Management System. Our intent is to provide an ontology that fills the gaps between ontologies for biodiversity resources, such as DarwinCore-based ontologies, and semantic publishing ontologies, such as the SPAR Ontologies. We bridge this gap by providing an ontology focusing on biological taxonomy. Results: OpenBiodiv-O introduces classes, properties, and axioms in the domains of scholarly biodiversity publishing and biological taxonomy and aligns them with several important domain ontologies (FaBiO, DoCO, DwC, Darwin-SW, NOMEN, ENVO). By doing so, it bridges the ontological gap across scholarly biodiversity publishing and biological taxonomy and allows for the creation of a Linked Open Dataset (LOD) of biodiversity information (a biodiversity knowledge graph) and enables the creation of the OpenBiodiv Knowledge Management System. A key feature of the ontology is that it is an ontology of the scientific process of biological taxonomy and not of any particular state of knowledge. This feature allows it to express a multiplicity of scientific opinions. The resulting OpenBiodiv knowledge system may gain a high level of trust in the scientific community as it does not force a scientific opinion on its users (e.g. practicing taxonomists, library researchers, etc.), but rather provides the tools for experts to encode different views as science progresses. Conclusions: OpenBiodiv-O provides a conceptual model of the structure of a biodiversity publication and the development of related taxonomic concepts. It also serves as the basis for the OpenBiodiv Knowledge Management System. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Biological databases store data about laboratory experiments, together with semantic annotations, in order to support data aggregation and retrieval. The exact meaning of such annotations in the context of a database record is often ambiguous. We address this problem by grounding implicit and explicit database content in a formal-ontological framework. Methods: By using a typical extract from the databases UniProt and Ensembl, annotated with content from GO, PR, ChEBI and NCBI Taxonomy, we created four ontological models (in OWL), which generate explicit, distinct interpretations under the BioTopLite2 (BTL2) upper-level ontology. The first three models interpret database entries as individuals (IND), defined classes (SUBC), and classes with dispositions (DISP), respectively; the fourth model (HYBR) is a combination of SUBC and DISP. For the evaluation of these four models, we consider (i) database content retrieval, using ontologies as query vocabulary; (ii) information completeness; and, (iii) DL complexity and decidability. The models were tested under these criteria against four competency questions (CQs). Results: IND does not raise any ontological claim, besides asserting the existence of sample individuals and relations among them. Modelling patterns have to be created for each type of annotation referent. SUBC is interpreted regarding maximally fine-grained defined subclasses under the classes referred to by the data. DISP attempts to extract truly ontological statements from the database records, claiming the existence of dispositions. HYBR is a hybrid of SUBC and DISP and is more parsimonious regarding expressiveness and query answering complexity. For each of the four models, the four CQs were submitted as DL queries. This shows the ability to retrieve individuals with IND, and classes in SUBC and HYBR. DISP does not retrieve anything because the axioms with disposition are embedded in General Class Inclusion (GCI) statements. Conclusion: Ambiguity of biological database content is addressed by a method that identifies implicit knowledge behind semantic annotations in biological databases and grounds it in an expressive upper-level ontology. The result is a seamless representation of database structure, content and annotations as OWL models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bio-ontologies typically require multiple axes of classification to support the needs of their users. Development of such ontologies can only be made scalable and sustainable by the use of inference to automate classification via consistent patterns of axiomatization. Many bio-ontologies originating in OBO or OWL follow this approach. These patterns need to be documented in a form that requires minimal expertise to understand and edit and that can be validated and applied using any of the various programmatic approaches to working with OWL ontologies. Results: Here we describe a system, Dead Simple OWL Design Patterns (DOS-DPs), which fulfills these requirements, illustrating the system with examples from the Gene Ontology. Conclusions: The rapid adoption of DOS-DPs by multiple ontology development projects illustrates both the ease-of use and the pressing need for the simple design pattern system we have developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reasoning over biomedical ontologies using their OWL semantics has traditionally been a challenging task due to the high theoretical complexity of OWL-based automated reasoning. As a consequence, ontology repositories, as well as most other tools utilizing ontologies, either provide access to ontologies without use of automated reasoning, or limit the number of ontologies for which automated reasoning-based access is provided. Methods: We apply the AberOWL infrastructure to provide automated reasoning-based access to all accessible and consistent ontologies in BioPortal (368 ontologies). We perform an extensive performance evaluation to determine query times, both for queries of different complexity and for queries that are performed in parallel over the ontologie. Results and conclusions: We demonstrate that, with the exception of a few ontologies, even complex and parallel queries can now be answered in milliseconds, therefore allowing automated reasoning to be used on a large scale, to run in parallel, and with rapid response times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although the mouse is widely used to model human lung development, function, and disease, our understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in alveolarization of the peripheral lung is incomplete. Recently, the Molecular Atlas of Lung Development Program (LungMAP) was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to develop an integrated open access database (known as BREATH) to characterize the molecular and cellular anatomy of the developing lung. To support this effort, we designed detailed anatomic and cellular ontologies describing alveolar formation and maturation in both mouse and human lung. Description: While the general anatomic organization of the lung is similar for these two species, there are significant variations in the lung's architectural organization, distribution of connective tissue, and cellular composition along the respiratory tract. Anatomic ontologies for both species were constructed as partonomic hierarchies and organized along the lung's proximal-distal axis into respiratory, vascular, neural, and immunologic components. Terms for developmental and adult lung structures, tissues, and cells were included, providing comprehensive ontologies for application at varying levels of resolution. Using established scientific resources, multiple rounds of comparison were performed to identify common, analogous, and unique terms that describe the lungs of these two species. Existing biological and biomedical ontologies were examined and cross-referenced to facilitate integration at a later time, while additional terms were drawn from the scientific literature as needed. This comparative approach eliminated redundancy and inconsistent terminology, enabling us to differentiate true anatomic variations between mouse and human lungs. As a result, approximately 300 terms for fetal and postnatal lung structures, tissues, and cells were identified for each species. Conclusion: These ontologies standardize and expand current terminology for fetal and adult lungs, providing a qualitative framework for data annotation, retrieval, and integration across a wide variety of datasets in the BREATH database. To our knowledge, these are the first ontologies designed to include terminology specific for developmental structures in the lung, as well as to compare common anatomic features and variations between mouse and human lungs. These ontologies provide a unique resource for the LungMAP, as well as for the broader scientific community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]