The Foundational Model of Anatomy (FMA), initially developed as an enhancement of the anatomical content of UMLS, is a domain ontology of the concepts and relationships that pertain to the structural organization of the human body. It encompasses the material objects from the molecular to the macroscopic levels that constitute the body and associates with them non-material entities (spaces, surfaces, lines, and points) required for describing structural relationships. The disciplined modeling approach employed for the development of the FMA relies on a set of declared principles, high level schemes, Aristotelian definitions and a frame-based authoring environment. We propose the FMA as a reference ontology in biomedical informatics for correlating different views of anatomy, aligning existing and emerging ontologies in bioinformatics ontologies and providing a structure-based template for representing biological functions.

No abstract

The ontology formulated for the thorax is extendible to microscopic and cellular levels, as well as to other body parts, in that its classes subsume essentially all anatomical entities that constitute the body. Explicit definitions of these entities and their relationships provide the first requirement for standards in anatomical concept representation. Conceived from an anatomical viewpoint, the ontology can be generalized and mapped to other biomedical domains and problem solving tasks that require anatomical knowledge.

No abstract

BackgroundThe diverse set of human brain structure and function analysis methods represents a difficult challenge for reconciling multiple views of neuroanatomical organization. While different views of organization are expected and valid, no widely adopted approach exists to harmonize different brain labeling protocols and terminologies. Our approach uses the natural organizing framework provided by anatomical structure to correlate terminologies commonly used in neuroimaging.DescriptionThe Foundational Model of Anatomy (FMA) Ontology provides a semantic framework for representing the anatomical entities and relationships that constitute the phenotypic organization of the human body. In this paper we describe recent enhancements to the neuroanatomical content of the FMA that models cytoarchitectural and morphological regions of the cerebral cortex, as well as white matter structure and connectivity. This modeling effort is driven by the need to correlate and reconcile the terms used in neuroanatomical labeling protocols. By providing an ontological framework that harmonizes multiple views of neuroanatomical organization, the FMA provides developers with reusable and computable knowledge for a range of biomedical applications.ConclusionsA requirement for facilitating the integration of basic and clinical neuroscience data from diverse sources is a well-structured ontology that can incorporate, organize, and associate neuroanatomical data. We applied the ontological framework of the FMA to align the vocabularies used by several human brain atlases, and to encode emerging knowledge about structural connectivity in the brain. We highlighted several use cases of these extensions, including ontology reuse, neuroimaging data annotation, and organizing 3D brain models.

The annotation of functional neuroimaging results for data sharing and re-use is particularly challenging, due to the diversity of terminologies of neuroanatomical structures and cortical parcellation schemes. To address this challenge, we extended the Foundational Model of Anatomy Ontology (FMA) to include cytoarchitectural, Brodmann area labels, and a morphological cortical labeling scheme (e.g., the part of Brodmann area 6 in the left precentral gyrus). This representation was also used to augment the neuroanatomical axis of RadLex, the ontology for clinical imaging. The resulting neuroanatomical ontology contains explicit relationships indicating which brain regions are “part of” which other regions, across cytoarchitectural and morphological labeling schemas. We annotated a large functional neuroimaging dataset with terms from the ontology and applied a reasoning engine to analyze this dataset in conjunction with the ontology, and achieved successful inferences from the most specific level (e.g., how many subjects showed activation in a subpart of the middle frontal gyrus) to more general (how many activations were found in areas connected via a known white matter tract?). In summary, we have produced a neuroanatomical ontology that harmonizes several different terminologies of neuroanatomical structures and cortical parcellation schemes. This neuroanatomical ontology is publicly available as a view of FMA at the Bioportal website1. The ontological encoding of anatomic knowledge can be exploited by computer reasoning engines to make inferences about neuroanatomical relationships described in imaging datasets using different terminologies. This approach could ultimately enable knowledge discovery from large, distributed fMRI studies or medical record mining.

Orofacial clefting is a common birth defect with wide phenotypic variability. Many systems have been developed to classify cleft patterns to facilitate diagnosis, management, surgical treatment, and research. In this review, we examine the rationale for different existing classification schemes and determine their inter-relationships, as well as strengths and deficiencies for subclassification of clefts of the lip. The various systems differ in how they describe and define attributes of cleft lip (CL) phenotypes. Application and analysis of the CL classifications reveal discrepancies that may result in errors when comparing studies that use different systems. These inconsistencies in terminology, variable levels of subclassification, and ambiguity in some descriptions may confound analyses and impede further research aimed at understanding the genetics and etiology of clefts, development of effective treatment options for patients, as well as cross-institutional comparisons of outcome measures. Identification and reconciliation of discrepancies among existing systems is the first step toward creating a common standard to allow for a more explicit interpretation that will ultimately lead to a better understanding of the causes and manifestations of phenotypic variations in clefting.

We introduce the Ontology of Craniofacial Development and Malformation (OCDM) as a mechanism for representing knowledge about craniofacial development and malformation, and for using that knowledge to facilitate integrating craniofacial data obtained via multiple techniques from multiple labs and at multiple levels of granularity. The OCDM is a project of the NIDCR-sponsored FaceBase Consortium, whose goal is to promote and enable research into the genetic and epigenetic causes of specific craniofacial abnormalities through the provision of publicly accessible, integrated craniofacial data. However, the OCDM should be usable for integrating any web-accessible craniofacial data, not just those data available through FaceBase. The OCDM is based on the Foundational Model of Anatomy (FMA), our comprehensive ontology of canonical human adult anatomy, and includes modules to represent adult and developmental craniofacial anatomy in both human and mouse, mappings between homologous structures in human and mouse, and associated malformations. We describe these modules, as well as prototype uses of the OCDM for integrating craniofacial data. By using the terms from the OCDM to annotate data, and by combining queries over the ontology with those over annotated data, it becomes possible to create “intelligent” queries that can, for example, find gene expression data obtained from mouse structures that are precursors to homologous human structures involved in malformations such as cleft lip. We suggest that the OCDM can be useful not only for integrating craniofacial data, but also for expressing new knowledge gained from analyzing the integrated data