https://www.na-mic.org/w/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=The_States_8The States 8 - Revision history2026-04-17T15:33:26ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.33.0https://www.na-mic.org/w/index.php?title=The_States_8&diff=4345&oldid=prevAndy: Update from Wiki2006-12-18T13:41:11Z<p>Update from Wiki</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>'''Proposal for common reference ontologies/vocabularies (The States 8)'''<br />
<br />
(To go back to the top page of the NCBC Scientific Ontologies discussion click http://na-mic.org/Wiki/index.php/SDIWG:_NCBC_Scientific_Ontologies)<br />
<br />
As a starting list of established standards we can/need to live with:<br />
<br />
NCBI taxonomy<br />
<br />
Gene names and symbols<br />
<br />
Human - HGNC<br />
Mouse - JAX/MGI<br />
Drosophila - flybase<br />
C. elegans - wormbase<br />
Saccharomyces cerevisiae - SGDB<br />
<br />
Protein names derived from gene names<br />
<br />
Primary molecular sequence data<br />
<br />
IUPAC single letter<br />
<br />
Genomic sequence coordinates<br />
<br />
NCBI genome builds<br />
<br />
Gene/Protein sequences<br />
<br />
NCBI RefSeq<br />
<br />
I would like to add:<br />
<br />
MeSH headings<br />
Gene Ontology<br />
<br />
But MeSH and GO overlap in numerous areas and mapping between them is non-trivial. de facto, GO => model organism annotation while MeSH => literature indexing, but that does not tell us which to use in describing our own findings. My vote is for MeSH because it covers disease states, provides useful synonym data, and the links to literature are important, but there are lots of areas where specialized ontologies like GO offer useful detail not present in MeSH.<br />
<br />
David States</div>Andy