Steven Marygold

> these are not managed by GO, as @deustp01 pointed out. The problem needs to be fixed at the Reactome end (or else we'll loose the 'source of truth' for...

Just to be clear - all of the Reactome-GO relationships shown above mirror those already shown on Reactome pages, so these associations already exist at the Reactome end - seems...

> *R-HSA-446205 xref is currently on "GO:0061729 GDP-mannose biosynthetic process from fructose-6-phosphate", though Reactome website associates R-HSA-446205 with the parental term "GDP-mannose biosynthetic process (GO:0009298) @sjm41 I'm confused. Are you...

Thanks @adamjohnwright Just for checking purposes, could you provide add a file here that **only** contains the BP mappings (i.e. MF mapping removed)? And, if it's easy for you, it...

Thanks @adamjohnwright ! I did a first-pass analysis of the BP mappings here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HSeCrshAhXeyVz1djJ8SL5KP9WXD6eNxc1azYRPPfV0/edit#gid=1698582253 - First tab is a 4-column table (Reactome ID / Reactome Name / GO ID /...

Hi Peter OK, I can see what you mean for your regulation of glycolysis example. In that case, Reactome makes these "Represents GO Biological Process" associations: ``` PATHWAY:R-HSA-9634600 = Regulation...

> I think to do what @sjm41 wants to do, we need to think about two separate pieces of information. > 1. Information that is used to generate annotations. This...

Hi @balhoff It's probably obvious, but this query should be restricted to MF, as we also have lots of MetaCyc xrefs to pathways (BPs) that we want to keep but...

Thanks @balhoff I realise another complication here is that RHEA will sometimes have a MetaCyc xref specifically on a directional RHEA - this is correct in that MetaCyc sometimes only...

Ah OK, thanks @cmungall. So the reason my example ("GO:0004169 2.4.1.109-RXN") was included in Jim's list is just because we don't currently have the RHEA xrefs on that GO term....