Skip to content

Add “cryo-EM” and “cryo-ET”.#32

Merged
gouttegd merged 5 commits intomasterfrom
issue29
Feb 16, 2026
Merged

Add “cryo-EM” and “cryo-ET”.#32
gouttegd merged 5 commits intomasterfrom
issue29

Conversation

@gouttegd
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR adds the two new terms requested in #29:

  • “cryogenic transmission electron microscopy” (cryo-EM),
  • “cryogenic electron tomography” (cryo-ET).

We will soon start to record abbreviations as "related synonyms of type
'abbreviation'" (formally: a oboInOwl:hasRelaatedSynonym annotation
assertion axiom that is itself annotated with a oboInOwl:hasSynonymType
annotation with the value OMO:0003000), so we need to import the OBO
Metadata Ontology, which defines the OMO:0003000 "abbreviation" synonym
type.
We add two terms representing specialised forms of transmission electron
microscopy:

* `cryogenic transmission electron microscopy` (a form of TEM using a
  cryofixed sample);
* `cryogenic electron tomography` (a form of both TEM and tomography
  using a cryofixed sample).

closes #29
The current label of FBbi:00000258 ("transmission electron microscopy
(TEM)") includes both an actual label and a synonym. These two should
not be conflated in a single annotation.

Make the label simply "transmission electron microscopy", and move "TEM"
to a related synonym with type "abbreviation".
@gouttegd gouttegd self-assigned this Feb 16, 2026
@gouttegd gouttegd requested a review from lubianat February 16, 2026 13:26
AnnotationAssertion(<http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasBroadSynonym> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/FBbi_00100014> "cryogenic-sample electron microscopy")
AnnotationAssertion(<http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasExactSynonym> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/FBbi_00100014> "cryo-transmission electron microscopy")
AnnotationAssertion(Annotation(<http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasSynonymType> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OMO_0003000>) <http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasRelatedSynonym> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/FBbi_00100014> "cryo-EM")
AnnotationAssertion(Annotation(<http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasSynonymType> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OMO_0003000>) <http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasRelatedSynonym> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/FBbi_00100014> "cryo-TEM")
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is "cryo-TEM" a related or an exact synonym?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe the standard is RelatedSynonym for all abbreviations?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, exactly. Abbreviations are represented as “related synonyms” with an additional “synonym type“ set to “abbreviation“ (OMO:0003000).

Ontology(<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/fbbi/imports/merged_import.owl>
<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/fbbi/releases/2026-01-23/imports/merged_import.owl>
Annotation(owl:versionInfo "2026-01-23")
<http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/fbbi/releases/2026-02-16/imports/merged_import.owl>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I went through this file quickly and I see no issues, but I am not sure on what to look for too.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This file was automatically refreshed because I had to import OMO:0003000 (the “abbreviation” synonym type). :)

Copy link
Collaborator

@lubianat lubianat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just a minor typo-ish, otherwise looks good

@gouttegd gouttegd merged commit e5c0ec1 into master Feb 16, 2026
1 check passed
@gouttegd gouttegd deleted the issue29 branch February 16, 2026 17:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants