Difference between revisions of "WormBase-Caltech Weekly Calls"

From WormBaseWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(530 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 21: Line 21:
 
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_2019|2019 Meetings]]
 
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_2019|2019 Meetings]]
  
 +
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_2020|2020 Meetings]]
  
 +
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_2021|2021 Meetings]]
  
 +
= 2022 Meetings =
  
= 2020 Meetings =
+
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_January_2018|January]]
  
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_January_2020|January]]
+
= January 13th, 2022 =
 +
== tm variation - gene associations ==
 +
*Update on progress and some questions for the Caltech curators
 +
*Background: not all variations were being associated with genes in the OA table because some of those associations are in WS but not in geneace, so weren't coming through in the nightly geneace dump.  Some variation-gene associations are made as part of the VEP pipeline during the build.
 +
**https://github.com/WormBase/website/issues/8262
 +
**https://wiki.wormbase.org/index.php/WBGene_information_and_status_pipeline
 +
**https://wiki.wormbase.org/index.php/Source_and_maintenance_of_non-WBGene_info
 +
**https://wiki.wormbase.org/index.php/Updating_Postgres_with_New_WS_Information
 +
*Wen now downloads several full ACeDB classes from the latest WS release in the form of .ace files so we can also have whatever information is in WS.  Raymond wrote a script to sync those files to tazendra for further processing/use.
 +
*A few questions that we want to confirm before going forward:
 +
**In the WS variations file, there are 2,130,801 total variations (1,911,339 total Live) while in postgres there are currently 106,080.
 +
***Only include Status = Live variations?
 +
***Include regardless of whether there is an associated gene (this seems to be the current practice?).
 +
***Currently, some variations with a given Method, e.g. Million_mutation, are NOT included.  We would continue this filtering.
 +
****SNP
 +
****WGS_Hawaiian_Waterston
 +
****WGS_Pasadena_Quinlan
 +
****WGS_Hobert
 +
****Million_mutation
 +
****WGS_Yanai
 +
****WGS_De_Bono
 +
****WGS_Andersen
 +
****WGS_Flibotte
 +
****WGS_Rose
 +
***Do we want other filters?
 +
**For genes, the ace file contains ALL the gene objects in WB regardless of species.
 +
***We've recently had an author request, via the Acknowledge pipeline, to associate genes of other, less well studied Caenorhabditis species, e.g. C. inopinata, to [https://academic.oup.com/g3journal/article/11/3/jkab022/6121926 their paper].
 +
***Do we want all Caenorhabditis (and other nematode) species genes in our various gene tables, e.g. obo, paper? Any other species?
 +
***The effect on the autocomplete, if we include all, probably won't be a problem 1,018,332 vs 306116)
 +
***Some of the gene ids from other species don't have 'WBGene' prefixes, e.g. Sp34_10109610.  Should we keep this in a separate table from genes with 'WBGene' prefixes?
  
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_February_2020|February]]
+
= January 20th, 2022 =
  
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_March_2020|March]]
+
== Proposal for updating gene and variation information from WS releases ==
 
+
=== Genes ===
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_April_2020|April]]
+
*Have two tables:
 
+
**One continues as is - contains only ids for the [https://wormbase.org/species/all core nematode species] (all have WBGene ids)
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_May_2020|May]]
+
**Second, new table - contains non-WGene ids for [https://wormbase.org/species/al comparator nematode genomes]
 
+
***Include other elegans and remanei strains?
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_June_2020|June]]
+
**Would not include ids for non-WB (and WBParaSite) genomes, e.g. Drosophila or budding yeast
 
+
=== Variations ===
[[WormBase-Caltech_Weekly_Calls_July_2020|July]]
+
*Include all variations that have a value for:
 
+
**Method - current filters applied (filter SNP, Million_mutation, WGS's)
 
+
**Species - all
==July 9th, 2020==
+
**Status - include all three status values (Live, Dead, Suppressed)
===Gene names issue in SimpleMine and other mining tools===
+
*Whether a variation has a gene association doesn't matter (not a filter criteria for postgres)
*Wen: Last week, Jonathan Ewbank raised the issue of gene names that may refer to multiple objects.
+
*From Paul D. - a number of variations in geneace were not making their way as individual objects to WS during the build and so were only created in WS via xref (hence the lack of other information). He's updated geneace with Species and other information wherever possible for the next build.
*this can be an issue for multiple data mining tools including WormMine, BioMart, and Gene Set Enrichment.  
+
*Variation merges are infrequent; previous ones may have been due to nameserver issues
*Perhaps have a standalone approach to check if any gene name among a list may refer to multiple objects (users check their name lists before submitting them to any data mining tool).
+
*New Methods arise infrequently, but we could check our parsing script against the list of Methods in each release to make sure we're up-to-date.  Would need an inclusion and exclusion list.
*Jae: The public name issue has heterogeneous natures. That means there may be no single solution to solve all those problems.
 
*Gene list curation from high-throughput studies, confusing usage of public names probably less than 2% (still cannot be ignored). See examples below--
 
**single public name is assigned to multiple WBgene ID, Wen has a list of these genes
 
**overlapped or dicistronic genes, ex. mrpl-44 and F02A9.10
 
**overlapped or dicistronic, but has a single sequence name, examples:
 
    exos-4.1 and tin-9.2 (B0564.1)
 
    eat-18 and lev-10 (Y105E8A.7)
 
    cha-1 and unc-17 (ZC416.8)
 
 
 
**simple confusion from authors, ex. mdh-1 and mdh-2
 
*One of the most significant problems is a propagation to other DB and papers of  these gene name issues.
 
*We can make a special note for each gene page, but the people using batch analysis could not catch that easily.
 
*Conclusion: Jae and Wen will work on a tool that lets Users "sanitize" their gene lists before submission to data mining tools.  They will also write a microPub explaining this issue to the community.
 
 
 
===Wormicloud===
 
*Please test and leave any feedback on the word cloud tool (Wormicloud), https://wormicloud.textpressolab.com/
 
*Valerio and Jae have worked on a tool that uses data in Textpresso; given a keyword, eg. "transposon", the tool generates a word cloud and word trend.
 
*Any keyword can generate a graph that plots trends of occurence across the years in publication abstracts.
 
 
 
===Noctua 2.0 form ready to use===
 
*Caltech summer student will try using Noctua initially for dauer (neuronal signaling) pathways
 
 
 
===Nightly names service updates to postgres===
 
*Nightly using Matt's wb-names-export.jar to get full output of genes from datomic/names service, and updating postgres based on that.
 
 
 
 
 
==July 16th, 2020==
 
===Citing ontologies and their versions===
 
*Came up in the context of the Alliance: It would be best practice to provide users with the list of ontologies used and their versions/date.
 
*If WB ontology developers could make sure their ontology file headers (WB anatomy ontology, WB life stage, etc.) conformed to obo file header specifications, then it would be easy to pull in version and date information into the Alliance.
 
*Some useful links (from DQM meeting minutes)
 
**http://www.obofoundry.org/principles/fp-004-versioning.html
 
**http://obo-dashboard-test.ontodev.com/ (you can see that wbbt, wbls version metadata attribute is generating a warning
 
**Note: OBO-foundry may not have been updated, but good practice to check your headers, anyway.
 

Latest revision as of 15:24, 20 January 2022

Previous Years

2009 Meetings

2011 Meetings

2012 Meetings

2013 Meetings

2014 Meetings

2015 Meetings

2016 Meetings

2017 Meetings

2018 Meetings

2019 Meetings

2020 Meetings

2021 Meetings

2022 Meetings

January

January 13th, 2022

tm variation - gene associations

  • Update on progress and some questions for the Caltech curators
  • Background: not all variations were being associated with genes in the OA table because some of those associations are in WS but not in geneace, so weren't coming through in the nightly geneace dump. Some variation-gene associations are made as part of the VEP pipeline during the build.
  • Wen now downloads several full ACeDB classes from the latest WS release in the form of .ace files so we can also have whatever information is in WS. Raymond wrote a script to sync those files to tazendra for further processing/use.
  • A few questions that we want to confirm before going forward:
    • In the WS variations file, there are 2,130,801 total variations (1,911,339 total Live) while in postgres there are currently 106,080.
      • Only include Status = Live variations?
      • Include regardless of whether there is an associated gene (this seems to be the current practice?).
      • Currently, some variations with a given Method, e.g. Million_mutation, are NOT included. We would continue this filtering.
        • SNP
        • WGS_Hawaiian_Waterston
        • WGS_Pasadena_Quinlan
        • WGS_Hobert
        • Million_mutation
        • WGS_Yanai
        • WGS_De_Bono
        • WGS_Andersen
        • WGS_Flibotte
        • WGS_Rose
      • Do we want other filters?
    • For genes, the ace file contains ALL the gene objects in WB regardless of species.
      • We've recently had an author request, via the Acknowledge pipeline, to associate genes of other, less well studied Caenorhabditis species, e.g. C. inopinata, to their paper.
      • Do we want all Caenorhabditis (and other nematode) species genes in our various gene tables, e.g. obo, paper? Any other species?
      • The effect on the autocomplete, if we include all, probably won't be a problem 1,018,332 vs 306116)
      • Some of the gene ids from other species don't have 'WBGene' prefixes, e.g. Sp34_10109610. Should we keep this in a separate table from genes with 'WBGene' prefixes?

January 20th, 2022

Proposal for updating gene and variation information from WS releases

Genes

  • Have two tables:
    • One continues as is - contains only ids for the core nematode species (all have WBGene ids)
    • Second, new table - contains non-WGene ids for comparator nematode genomes
      • Include other elegans and remanei strains?
    • Would not include ids for non-WB (and WBParaSite) genomes, e.g. Drosophila or budding yeast

Variations

  • Include all variations that have a value for:
    • Method - current filters applied (filter SNP, Million_mutation, WGS's)
    • Species - all
    • Status - include all three status values (Live, Dead, Suppressed)
  • Whether a variation has a gene association doesn't matter (not a filter criteria for postgres)
  • From Paul D. - a number of variations in geneace were not making their way as individual objects to WS during the build and so were only created in WS via xref (hence the lack of other information). He's updated geneace with Species and other information wherever possible for the next build.
  • Variation merges are infrequent; previous ones may have been due to nameserver issues
  • New Methods arise infrequently, but we could check our parsing script against the list of Methods in each release to make sure we're up-to-date. Would need an inclusion and exclusion list.