Skip to main content
Comparative and Functional Genomics logoLink to Comparative and Functional Genomics
. 2003 Feb;4(1):90–93. doi: 10.1002/cfg.253

Bringing Ontology to the Gene Ontology

Jennifer Williams 1,, William Andersen 1
PMCID: PMC2447385  PMID: 18629099

Abstract

We present an analysis of some considerations involved in expressing the Gene Ontology (GO) as a machine-processible ontology, reflecting principles of formal ontology. GO is a controlled vocabulary that is intended to facilitate communication between biologists by standardizing usage of terms in database annotations. Making such controlled vocabularies maximally useful in support of bioinformatics applications requires explicating in machine-processible form the implicit background information that enables human users to interpret the meaning of the vocabulary terms. In the case of GO, this process would involve rendering the meanings of GO into a formal (logical) language with the help of domain experts, and adding additional information required to support the chosen formalization. A controlled vocabulary augmented in these ways is commonly called an ontology. In this paper, we make a modest exploration to determine the ontological requirements for this extended version of GO. Using the terms within the three GO hierarchies (molecular function, biological process and cellular component), we investigate the facility with which GO concepts can be ontologized, using available tools from the philosophical and ontological engineering literature.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (74.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Gene Ontology Consortium Creating the gene ontology resource: design and implementation. Genome Res. 2001 Aug;11(8):1425–1433. doi: 10.1101/gr.180801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Karp P. D. Pathway databases: a case study in computational symbolic theories. Science. 2001 Sep 14;293(5537):2040–2044. doi: 10.1126/science.1064621. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Rison S. C., Hodgman T. C., Thornton J. M. Comparison of functional annotation schemes for genomes. Funct Integr Genomics. 2000 May;1(1):56–69. doi: 10.1007/s101420000005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Schulze-Kremer S. Ontologies for molecular biology. Pac Symp Biocomput. 1998:695–706. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Stevens R., Goble C. A., Bechhofer S. Ontology-based knowledge representation for bioinformatics. Brief Bioinform. 2000 Nov;1(4):398–414. doi: 10.1093/bib/1.4.398. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Comparative and Functional Genomics are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES