obophenotype
Add missing formal axioms to RGC types based on text defs
There are many cases with details of synaptic IO and morphology (mono vs bis-stratified) that are not reflected in formal axioms. A more complete representation might help with reconciliation..
See also: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WVy8AiGKmOeUoz10Sr1uXtkbHCSNuze0WFZtbQrcmYY/edit?tab=t.0
- Reference Hahn et al., 2023
@dosumis finished reviewing the publications. I agree we can add the oRGCs as you suggested, but there are some additional terms we should include. The paper bases its assignments on a mouse RGC nomenclature from an earlier study by the same group, and that structure is not represented in CL.
My view is that we should add the alpha RGC classes with a mouse-specific taxon constraint, then introduce their children for sustained and transient ON and OFF types. After that, we can use the oRGCs to align with the existing CL terms for ON and OFF midget and parasol RGCs in primates.
Does this approach make sense to you?
@dosumis finished reviewing the publications. I agree we can add the oRGCs as you suggested, but there are some additional terms we should include. The paper bases its assignments on a mouse RGC nomenclature from an earlier study by the same group, and that structure is not represented in CL.
My view is that we should add the alpha RGC classes with a mouse-specific taxon constraint, then introduce their children for sustained and transient ON and OFF types. After that, we can use the oRGCs to align with the existing CL terms for ON and OFF midget and parasol RGCs in primates.
Does this approach make sense to you?
I think so. (Note - I think this work fits better under #3178 . As this ticket is about missing axiomatization of RGCs types more broadly)