Ryan Miller just published work on the interactions in WikiPathways: Understanding signaling and metabolic paths using semantified and harmonized information about biological interactions (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0263057). We already had some good understanding about the harmonization of data nodes (genes, proteins, metabolites) in the pathways. Here, BridgeDb is an important component and the databases identifiers help software understand the biological meaning of a data node in a pathway drawing.
However, for interactions the situation is more complex. First, it relies on the database identifiers of the nodes. For example, are these consistent with each other? And what if we consider the meaning of the interaction? Is it ligand binding? A protein-protein interaction? Do the database identifiers still make sense then?
Another complications is actually that WikiPathways is more liberal with what biology authors describe. That leads to a higher amount of variation of drawing styles. Some of these are formalized in standards like MIM and SBGN (see above example for inhibition). Can this be harmonized? I guess it is clear how important understanding these aspects are if you use the information in network analyses, something we regularly do.
Ryan developed a framework to keep track of these things and along the way applied it to the WikiPathways release of June 2019. I'm quite happy this work is now published: it gives us something (a scalable and semantic approach) we can build upon.
Happy reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment