Talk:Gene ontology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computational Biology (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computational Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computational Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Definition?[edit]

I would expect an article to start with definition, it starts with structure of the project. First what is it then how it works. --ArazZeynili 14:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I second that. That's what I was searching for initially. I suppose one could infer the meaning, but still... la gaie 23:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you're confusing AMIGO or something similar with what GO actually is? GO is a set of ontologies, as described in the first two paragraphs. Why talk about what GO is used for before saying what it is? Just my 2-cents :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.146.118 (talk) 05:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the assertion that this article requires a definitive section. However, like all things in biology, a definition of anything is usually a function of evolution. Now that's a spanner in the ontological works. ;) But seriously, yes there needs to be a clear and concise way of explaining what the whole idea of Gene Ontology is and what it all means, in one or two sentences. Perhaps one of us can synthesise an explanation. Most biologists get so good at dealing with vast complexity that simplification becomes a secondary priority, and sometimes limiting. But the subject could benefit from construction of simple didactic 'ontologies'. Shinyapple (talk) 23:14, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Gene ontology[edit]

Is the following useful in this article?

Gene name GO accession GO type GO term GO evidence code PO accession PO term
LOC_Os05g03480 GO:0005739 Cellular component mitochondrion IEA
LOC_Os05g03480 GO:0003824 Molecular function catalytic activity IEA
LOC_Os04g52210 PO:0007134 Vegetative growth
LOC_Os04g52210 PO:0007133 Leaf production
LOC_Os04g52210 PO:0009012 Plant growth and development stages
LOC_Os04g52210 GO:0016102 Biological process Diterpenoid biosynthesis
No. girlwithglasses (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Gene OntologyGene ontology – There is no reason to use a capital letter in this case. Keepsgames (talk) 06:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.