4.5 Article

ONTOLOGIES AS INTEGRATIVE TOOLS FOR PLANT SCIENCE

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 99, 期 8, 页码 1263-1275

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1200222

关键词

bio-ontologies; genome annotation; OBO Foundry; phenomics; plant anatomy; plant genomics; Plant Ontology; plant systematics; semantic web

资金

  1. U. S. National Science Foundation [IOS: 0822201]
  2. Division Of Environmental Biology
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [0829762] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [0822201] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Premise of the study: Bio-ontologies are essential tools for accessing and analyzing the rapidly growing pool of plant genomic and phenomic data. Ontologies provide structured vocabularies to support consistent aggregation of data and a semantic framework for automated analyses and reasoning. They are a key component of the semantic web. Methods: This paper provides background on what bio-ontologies are, why they are relevant to botany, and the principles of ontology development. It includes an overview of ontologies and related resources that are relevant to plant science, with a detailed description of the Plant Ontology (PO). We discuss the challenges of building an ontology that covers all green plants (Viridiplantae). Key results: Ontologies can advance plant science in four keys areas: (1) comparative genetics, genomics, phenomics, and development; (2) taxonomy and systematics; (3) semantic applications; and (4) education. Conclusions: Bio-ontologies offer a flexible framework for comparative plant biology, based on common botanical understanding. As genomic and phenomic data become available for more species, we anticipate that the annotation of data with ontology terms will become less centralized, while at the same time, the need for cross-species queries will become more common, causing more researchers in plant science to turn to ontologies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据