
Developing a protein‐interactions ontology
Author(s) -
Ratsch Esther,
Schultz Jörg,
Saric Jasmin,
Lavin Philipp Cimiano,
Wittig Ulrike,
Reyle Uwe,
Rojas Isabel
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
comparative and functional genomics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1532-6268
pISSN - 1531-6912
DOI - 10.1002/cfg.244
Subject(s) - ontology , computer science , function (biology) , annotation , vocabulary , data science , focus (optics) , domain (mathematical analysis) , field (mathematics) , gene ontology , information retrieval , open biomedical ontologies , process ontology , upper ontology , suggested upper merged ontology , semantic web , artificial intelligence , philosophy , biology , epistemology , mathematics , mathematical analysis , linguistics , gene expression , chemistry , optics , biochemistry , evolutionary biology , physics , pure mathematics , gene
The prediction and analysis of a protein’s function is an ongoing challenge in the field of genomics. With upcoming datasets on protein interactions [9], it is becoming evident that the function of a protein can only be understood when taking its interaction with other molecules into account. Most current approaches to the classification and description of protein function, such as the Gene Ontology [8], focus on single proteins. These annotation efforts should be paralleled by the development of ontologies dealing with the interactions of a protein with other biomolecules. Currently, most approaches to building such ontologies focus on metabolism [3,6]. So far, for interactions, only high-level classifications have been created [4], developed to assist information extraction from text. In addition to assisting text mining, a more fine-grained (in comparison to these classifications) ontology on protein interactions could be helpful in database development and information mining. As an ontology captures domain knowledge in a computer-understandable way, it can be used for inferencing, i.e. deriving new knowledge from existing data. There are two important points to consider in developing such a formal ontology: (a) it should be independent of its final use; and (b) it should not only restrict itself to a controlled vocabulary but the concepts should be related to each other in a semantically consistent manner, and rules governing these definitions and relations should be incorporated whenever necessary. Here we describe our approach for developing such an ontology.