2011
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Logical Development of the Cell Ontology

Abstract: BackgroundThe Cell Ontology (CL) is an ontology for the representation of in vivo cell types. As biological ontologies such as the CL grow in complexity, they become increasingly difficult to use and maintain. By making the information in the ontology computable, we can use automated reasoners to detect errors and assist with classification. Here we report on the generation of computable definitions for the hematopoietic cell types in the CL.ResultsComputable definitions for over 340 CL classes have been creat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
122
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 123 publications
(124 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
122
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We then calculated the statistical significance of expression enrichment or depletion of each miRNA (Table S13) with respect to cell ontology clusters (Table S14) defined by the FANTOM5 cell ontology annotation 30,31 , which organizes FANTOM5 samples by cell type in a hierarchical framework. Of miRNAs in the robust set, 54% had enriched expression in their statistically most significant cell ontology cluster, whereas 27% were broadly expressed, with depleted expression in their statistically most significant cell ontology cluster.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We then calculated the statistical significance of expression enrichment or depletion of each miRNA (Table S13) with respect to cell ontology clusters (Table S14) defined by the FANTOM5 cell ontology annotation 30,31 , which organizes FANTOM5 samples by cell type in a hierarchical framework. Of miRNAs in the robust set, 54% had enriched expression in their statistically most significant cell ontology cluster, whereas 27% were broadly expressed, with depleted expression in their statistically most significant cell ontology cluster.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used the FANTOM5 cell ontology 30,31 to create cell ontology clusters (Tables S14 and S20). We performed a likelihood-ratio test comparing the expression data between the samples in each cell ontology cluster and the background, consisting of all other samples listed in Tables S14 and S20, modeling the tag counts by a negative binomial distribution.…”
Section: Cell Type Specificity Indexmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1a; see the full sample list in Supplementary Table 1). To facilitate data mining all samples were annotated using structured ontologies (Cell Ontology 7 , Uberon 8 , Disease Ontology 9 ). The results of all analyses are summarized in the FANTOM5 online resource (http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5).…”
Section: The Fantom5 Promoter Atlasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the January 2013 version of CellType ontology [19,20] (available via http://bioportal.bioontology.org) does not yet support the functionally critical distinction [21] between dermal fibroblasts of papillary and reticular origin);…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%