Ontologies for data and knowledge sharing in biology: plant ROS signaling as a case study

Modern technologies have rapidly transformed biology into a data-intensive discipline. In addition to the enormous amounts of existing experimental data in the literature, every new study can produce a large amount of new data, resulting in novel ideas and more publications. In order to understand a biological process as completely as possible, scientists should be able to combine and analyze all such information. Not only molecular biology and bioinformatics, but all the other domains of biology including plant biology, require tools and technologies that enable experts to capture knowledge within distributed and heterogeneous sources of information. Ontologies have proven to be one of the most-useful means of constructing and formalizing expert knowledge. The key feature of an ontology is that it represents a computer-interpretable model of a particular subject area. This article outlines the importance of ontologies for systems biology, data integration and information analyses, as illustrated through the example of reactive oxygen species (ROS) signaling networks in plants.     

Ontology annotation: mapping genomic regions to biological function

With numerous whole genomes now in hand, and experimental data about genes and biological pathways on the increase, a systems approach to biological research is becoming essential. Ontologies provide a formal representation of knowledge that is amenable to computational as well as human analysis, an obvious underpinning of systems biology. Mapping function to gene products in the genome consists of two, somewhat intertwined enterprises: ontology building and ontology annotation. Ontology building is the formal representation of a domain of knowledge; ontology annotation is association of specific genomic regions (which we refer to simply as 'genes', including genes and their regulatory elements and products such as proteins and functional RNAs) to parts of the ontology. We consider two complementary representations of gene function: the Gene Ontology (GO) and pathway ontologies. GO represents function from the gene's eye view, in relation to a large and growing context of biological knowledge at all levels. Pathway ontologies represent function from the point of view of biochemical reactions and interactions, which are ordered into networks and causal cascades. The more mature GO provides an example of ontology annotation: how conclusions from the scientific literature and from evolutionary relationships are converted into formal statements about gene function. Annotations are made using a variety of different types of evidence, which can be used to estimate the relative reliability of different annotations.     

Biomedical ontologies: a functional perspective

The information explosion in biology makes it difficult for researchers to stay abreast of current biomedical knowledge and to make sense of the massive amounts of online information. Ontologies--specifications of the entities, their attributes and relationships among the entities in a domain of discourse--are increasingly enabling biomedical researchers to accomplish these tasks. In fact, bio-ontologies are beginning to proliferate in step with accruing biological data. The myriad of ontologies being created enables researchers not only to solve some of the problems in handling the data explosion but also introduces new challenges. One of the key difficulties in realizing the full potential of ontologies in biomedical research is the isolation of various communities involved: some workers spend their career developing ontologies and ontology-related tools, while few researchers (biologists and physicians) know how ontologies can accelerate their research. The objective of this review is to give an overview of biomedical ontology in practical terms by providing a functional perspective--describing how bio-ontologies can and are being used. As biomedical scientists begin to recognize the many different ways ontologies enable biomedical research, they will drive the emergence of new computer applications that will help them exploit the wealth of research data now at their fingertips.     

PIDO: the primary immunodeficiency disease ontology

MOTIVATION: Primary immunodeficiency diseases (PIDs) are Mendelian conditions of high phenotypic complexity and low incidence. They usually manifest in toddlers and infants, although they can also occur much later in life. Information about PIDs is often widely scattered throughout the clinical as well as the research literature and hard to find for both generalists as well as experienced clinicians. Semantic Web technologies coupled to clinical information systems can go some way toward addressing this problem. Ontologies are a central component of such a system, containing and centralizing knowledge about primary immunodeficiencies in both a human- and computer-comprehensible form. The development of an ontology of PIDs is therefore a central step toward developing informatics tools, which can support the clinician in the diagnosis and treatment of these diseases. RESULTS: We present PIDO, the primary immunodeficiency disease ontology. PIDO characterizes PIDs in terms of the phenotypes commonly observed by clinicians during a diagnosis process. Phenotype terms in PIDO are formally defined using complex definitions based on qualities, functions, processes and structures. We provide mappings to biomedical reference ontologies to ensure interoperability with ontologies in other domains. Based on PIDO, we developed the PIDFinder, an ontology-driven software prototype that can facilitate clinical decision support. PIDO connects immunological knowledge across resources within a common framework and thereby enables translational research and the development of medical applications for the domain of immunology and primary immunodeficiency diseases.     

Quality control for terms and definitions in ontologies and taxonomies

Background  

Ontologies and taxonomies are among the most important computational resources for molecular biology and bioinformatics. A series of recent papers has shown that the Gene Ontology (GO), the most prominent taxonomic resource in these fields, is marked by flaws of certain characteristic types, which flow from a failure to address basic ontological principles. As yet, no methods have been proposed which would allow ontology curators to pinpoint flawed terms or definitions in ontologies in a systematic way.     

Physical properties of biological entities: an introduction to the ontology of physics for biology

As biomedical investigators strive to integrate data and analyses across spatiotemporal scales and biomedical domains, they have recognized the benefits of formalizing languages and terminologies via computational ontologies. Although ontologies for biological entities-molecules, cells, organs-are well-established, there are no principled ontologies of physical properties-energies, volumes, flow rates-of those entities. In this paper, we introduce the Ontology of Physics for Biology (OPB), a reference ontology of classical physics designed for annotating biophysical content of growing repositories of biomedical datasets and analytical models. The OPB's semantic framework, traceable to James Clerk Maxwell, encompasses modern theories of system dynamics and thermodynamics, and is implemented as a computational ontology that references available upper ontologies. In this paper we focus on the OPB classes that are designed for annotating physical properties encoded in biomedical datasets and computational models, and we discuss how the OPB framework will facilitate biomedical knowledge integration.     

Benchmarking ontologies: bigger or better?

A scientific ontology is a formal representation of knowledge within a domain, typically including central concepts, their properties, and relations. With the rise of computers and high-throughput data collection, ontologies have become essential to data mining and sharing across communities in the biomedical sciences. Powerful approaches exist for testing the internal consistency of an ontology, but not for assessing the fidelity of its domain representation. We introduce a family of metrics that describe the breadth and depth with which an ontology represents its knowledge domain. We then test these metrics using (1) four of the most common medical ontologies with respect to a corpus of medical documents and (2) seven of the most popular English thesauri with respect to three corpora that sample language from medicine, news, and novels. Here we show that our approach captures the quality of ontological representation and guides efforts to narrow the breach between ontology and collective discourse within a domain. Our results also demonstrate key features of medical ontologies, English thesauri, and discourse from different domains. Medical ontologies have a small intersection, as do English thesauri. Moreover, dialects characteristic of distinct domains vary strikingly as many of the same words are used quite differently in medicine, news, and novels. As ontologies are intended to mirror the state of knowledge, our methods to tighten the fit between ontology and domain will increase their relevance for new areas of biomedical science and improve the accuracy and power of inferences computed across them.     

Accommodating ontologies to biological reality--top-level categories of cumulative-constitutively organized material entities

Background

The Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) is a top-level formal foundational ontology for the biomedical domain. It has been developed with the purpose to serve as an ontologically consistent template for top-level categories of application oriented and domain reference ontologies within the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies Foundry (OBO). BFO is important for enabling OBO ontologies to facilitate in reliably communicating and managing data and metadata within and across biomedical databases. Following its intended single inheritance policy, BFO''s three top-level categories of material entity (i.e. ‘object’, ‘fiat object part’, ‘object aggregate’) must be exhaustive and mutually disjoint. We have shown elsewhere that for accommodating all types of constitutively organized material entities, BFO must be extended by additional categories of material entity.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Unfortunately, most biomedical material entities are cumulative-constitutively organized. We show that even the extended BFO does not exhaustively cover cumulative-constitutively organized material entities. We provide examples from biology and everyday life that demonstrate the necessity for ‘portion of matter’ as another material building block. This implies the necessity for further extending BFO by ‘portion of matter’ as well as three additional categories that possess portions of matter as aggregate components. These extensions are necessary if the basic assumption that all parts that share the same granularity level exhaustively sum to the whole should also apply to cumulative-constitutively organized material entities. By suggesting a notion of granular representation we provide a way to maintain the single inheritance principle when dealing with cumulative-constitutively organized material entities.

Conclusions/Significance

We suggest to extend BFO to incorporate additional categories of material entity and to rearrange its top-level material entity taxonomy. With these additions and the notion of granular representation, BFO would exhaustively cover all top-level types of material entities that application oriented ontologies may use as templates, while still maintaining the single inheritance principle.     

Integrating phenotype ontologies across multiple species

Phenotype ontologies are typically constructed to serve the needs of a particular community, such as annotation of genotype-phenotype associations in mouse or human. Here we demonstrate how these ontologies can be improved through assignment of logical definitions using a core ontology of phenotypic qualities and multiple additional ontologies from the Open Biological Ontologies library. We also show how these logical definitions can be used for data integration when combined with a unified multi-species anatomy ontology.     

Ontologies: Formalising biological knowledge for bioinformatics

An ontology is a domain of knowledge structured through formal rules so that it can be interpreted and used by computers. Ontologies are becoming increasingly important in bioinformatics because they can be linked to the information in databases and their knowledge then used to query the databases. Typical examples in current use are the Gene Ontology, which incorporates much of our knowledge about gene products, and ontologies of developmental anatomy, which, for example, facilitate tissue-based queries to gene expression databases both textually and spatially. This article considers the production, formulation and types of bio-ontologies together with the reasons why they are so useful.     

CRAVE: a database, middleware and visualization system for phenotype ontologies

MOTIVATION: A major challenge in modern biology is to link genome sequence information to organismal function. In many organisms this is being done by characterizing phenotypes resulting from mutations. Efficiently expressing phenotypic information requires combinatorial use of ontologies. However tools are not currently available to visualize combinations of ontologies. Here we describe CRAVE (Concept Relation Assay Value Explorer), a package allowing storage, active updating and visualization of multiple ontologies. RESULTS: CRAVE is a web-accessible JAVA application that accesses an underlying MySQL database of ontologies via a JAVA persistent middleware layer (Chameleon). This maps the database tables into discrete JAVA classes and creates memory resident, interlinked objects corresponding to the ontology data. These JAVA objects are accessed via calls through the middleware's application programming interface. CRAVE allows simultaneous display and linking of multiple ontologies and searching using Boolean and advanced searches.     

Owlifier: Creating OWL-DL ontologies from simple spreadsheet-based knowledge descriptions

Discovery and integration of data is important in many ecological studies, especially those that concern broad-scale ecological questions. Data discovery and integration are often difficult and time consuming tasks for researchers, which is due in part to the use of informal, ambiguous, and sometimes inconsistent terms for describing data content. Ontologies offer a solution to this problem by providing consistent definitions of ecological concepts that in turn can be used to annotate, relate, and search for data sets. However, unlike in molecular biology or biomedicine, few ontology development efforts exist within ecology. Ontology development often requires considerable expertise in ontology languages and development tools, which is often a barrier for ontology creation in ecology. In this paper we describe an approach for ontology creation that allows ecologists to use common spreadsheet tools to describe different aspects of an ontology. We present conventions for creating, relating, and constraining concepts through spreadsheets, and provide software tools for converting these ontologies into equivalent OWL-DL representations. We also consider inverse translations, i.e., to convert ontologies represented using OWL-DL into our spreadsheet format. Our approach allows large lists of terms to be easily related and organized into concept hierarchies, and generally provides a more intuitive and natural interface for ontology development by ecologists.     

Systems chemical biology

The increasing availability of data related to genes, proteins and their modulation by small molecules has provided a vast amount of biological information leading to the emergence of systems biology and the broad use of simulation tools for data analysis. However, there is a critical need to develop cheminformatics tools that can integrate chemical knowledge with these biological databases and simulation approaches, with the goal of creating systems chemical biology.     

Ontologies for behavior

SUMMARY: Although dozens of biological ontologies have been created and deployed, relatively little attention has been given to using ontologies to represent behavior. Ontologies for two different behavior systems are described here. One ontology was a translation of a published ethogram, and the second was coded from video clips in a comparative study of jumping spider courtship. AVAILABILITY: http://mesquiteproject.org/ontology/.     

OBO Explorer: an editor for Open Biomedical Ontologies in OWL

MOTIVATION: To clarify the semantics, and take advantage of tools and algorithms developed for the Semantic Web, a mapping from the Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) format to the Web Ontology Language (OWL) has been established. We present an ontology editor that allows end users to work directly with this OWL representation of OBO format ontologies. AVAILABILITY: http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/cobra-ct.     

Populous: a tool for building OWL ontologies from templates

BACKGROUND: Ontologies are being developed for the life sciences to standardise the way we describe and interpret the wealth of data currently being generated. As more ontology based applications begin to emerge, tools are required that enable domain experts to contribute their knowledge to the growing pool of ontologies. There are many barriers that prevent domain experts engaging in the ontology development process and novel tools are needed to break down these barriers to engage a wider community of scientists. RESULTS: We present Populous, a tool for gathering content with which to construct an ontology. Domain experts need to add content, that is often repetitive in its form, but without having to tackle the underlying ontological representation. Populous presents users with a table based form in which columns are constrained to take values from particular ontologies. Populated tables are mapped to patterns that can then be used to automatically generate the ontology's content. These forms can be exported as spreadsheets, providing an interface that is much more familiar to many biologists. CONCLUSIONS: Populous's contribution is in the knowledge gathering stage of ontology development; it separates knowledge gathering from the conceptualisation and axiomatisation, as well as separating the user from the standard ontology authoring environments. Populous is by no means a replacement for standard ontology editing tools, but instead provides a useful platform for engaging a wider community of scientists in the mass production of ontology content.