Evan Christensen

> @egchr New rRNA_gene hierarchy looks good, thanks. > > I think these parents need adding though: > > * mt_rRNA_gene: add 'mt_gene' (SO:0000088) as parent > > * plastid_rRNA_gene:...

> Thanks @egchr ! > > SO:0002241 (rRNA_21S_gene) could be made a secondary ID of the new 'mt_LSU_rRNA_gene' term, to at least preserve the ID for searching etc. (I think...

> One other thing - all of the 'old' rRNA_gene terms have a 'derives from' relationship to the corresponding rRNA. E.g.: id: SO:0002236 name: cytosolic_rRNA_18S_gene is_a: SO:0002362 (cytosolic_SSU_rRNA_gene) relationship: derives_from...

OBSOLETED rRNA_21S_gene SO:0002241 and added as a synonym of mt_LSU_rRNA_gene SO:0002364 see GitHub Issue #513. See commit d9afc5372a07fb16815c20c0523fdeb0b385f714.

@keilbeck Do you have any objections to @murphyte's list of proposed actions?

Hello! Apologies for the delay. Thank you for your patience. If this term is commonly being used to annotate a sequence then we'll likely want to include it in the...

Closing this issue for now. Please reopen this issue if you'd like to continue the conversation.

A couple follow-up questions: - I'm wondering if the term 'biallelic_inactivation' might fit under 'loss_of_function_variant' (SO:0002054)? While the parent you proposed might work, I feel like this paper you cited...

@keilbeck Was this term meant to apply to protein coding genes only? It is not specified in the definition, but it can be inferred based on its placement in the...

So, if I understand correctly, it seems that the issue here is that SO is not representing commonly used sub-types of tRNA. My question is what role does location play...