An ontology-based comparative anatomy information system

INTRODUCTION This paper describes the design, implementation, and potential use of a comparative anatomy information system (CAIS) for querying on similarities and differences between homologous anatomical structures across species, the knowledge base it operates upon, the method it uses for determining the answers to the queries, and the user interface it employs to present the results. The relevant informatics contributions of our work include (1) the development and application of the structural difference method, a formalism for symbolically representing anatomical similarities and differences across species; (2) the design of the structure of a mapping between the anatomical models of two different species and its application to information about specific structures in humans, mice, and rats; and (3) the design of the internal syntax and semantics of the query language. These contributions provide the foundation for the development of a working system that allows users to submit queries about the similarities and differences between mouse, rat, and human anatomy; delivers result sets that describe those similarities and differences in symbolic terms; and serves as a prototype for the extension of the knowledge base to any number of species. Additionally, we expanded the domain knowledge by identifying medically relevant structural questions for the human, the mouse, and the rat, and made an initial foray into the validation of the application and its content by means of user questionnaires, software testing, and other feedback. METHODS The anatomical structures of the species to be compared, as well as the mappings between species, are modeled on templates from the Foundational Model of Anatomy knowledge base, and compared using graph-matching techniques. A graphical user interface allows users to issue queries that retrieve information concerning similarities and differences between structures in the species being examined. Queries from diverse information sources, including domain experts, peer-reviewed articles, and reference books, have been used to test the system and to illustrate its potential use in comparative anatomy studies. RESULTS 157 test queries were submitted to the CAIS system, and all of them were correctly answered. The interface was evaluated in terms of clarity and ease of use. This testing determined that the application works well, and is fairly intuitive to use, but users want to see more clarification of the meaning of the different types of possible queries. Some of the interface issues will naturally be resolved as we refine our conceptual model to deal with partial and complex homologies in the content. CONCLUSIONS The CAIS system and its associated methods are expected to be useful to biologists and translational medicine researchers. Possible applications range from supporting theoretical work in clarifying and modeling ontogenetic, physiological, pathological, and evolutionary transformations, to concrete techniques for improving the analysis of genotype-phenotype relationships among various animal models in support of a wide array of clinical and scientific initiatives.

[1]  Linda G. Shapiro,et al.  Of Mice and Men: Design of a Comparative Anatomy Information System , 2005, AMIA.

[2]  Mark A. Musen,et al.  Research Paper: A Logical Foundation for Representation of Clinical Data , 1994, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[3]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  A vision for management of complex models , 2000, SGMD.

[4]  Carol Friedman,et al.  PhenoGO: Assigning Phenotypic Context to Gene Ontology Annotations with Natural Language Processing , 2005, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[5]  Anthony Kosky,et al.  Extending traditional query-based integration approaches for functional characterization of post-genomic data , 2001, Bioinform..

[6]  S S Stevens,et al.  On the Theory of Scales of Measurement. , 1946, Science.

[7]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  A Metric for Comparing Relational Descriptions , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[8]  John M. Hancock,et al.  Understanding Mammalian Genetic Systems: The Challenge of Phenotyping in the Mouse , 2006, PLoS genetics.

[9]  Patricia K. Baskin,et al.  GeneTests‐GeneClinics: Genetic testing information for a growing audience , 2002, Human mutation.

[10]  Barry Smith,et al.  On Carcinomas and Other Pathological Entities , 2005, Comparative and functional genomics.

[11]  Linda G. Shapiro,et al.  An Approach to the Anatomical Correlation of Species through the Foundational Model of Anatomy , 2003, AMIA.

[12]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): a community resource. Status and enhancements. The Mouse Genome Informatics Group , 1998, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Linda G. Shapiro,et al.  A Graphical User Interface for a Comparative Anatomy Information System: Design, Implementation and Usage Scenarios , 2006, AMIA.

[14]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Merging Models Based on Given Correspondences , 2003, VLDB.

[15]  Mary E. Mangan,et al.  The Adult Mouse Anatomical Dictionary: a tool for annotating and integrating data , 2005, Genome Biology.

[16]  Linda G. Shapiro,et al.  Application of Information Technology: Processes and Problems in the Formative Evaluation of an Interface to the Foundational Model of Anatomy Knowledge Base , 2005, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[17]  J. Euzenat,et al.  Ontology Matching , 2007, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[18]  Robert W. Williams,et al.  An integrative genomics strategy for systematic characterization of genetic loci modulating phenotypes. , 2007, Human molecular genetics.

[19]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): updates and enhancements , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  E. Friedberg,et al.  Database of mouse strains carrying targeted mutations in genes affecting biological responses to DNA damage Version 7. , 2004, DNA repair.

[21]  Jennifer L. Leopold,et al.  An Anatomical Ontology for Amphibians , 2006, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[22]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  Using C-OWL for the alignment and merging of medical ontologies , 2004, KR-MED.

[24]  Ute Baumann,et al.  BMC Bioinformatics BioMed Central Methodology article Automated methods of predicting the function of biological sequences using GO and BLAST , 2005 .

[25]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Challenges in Precisely Aligning Models of Human Anatomy Using Generic Schema Matching , 2004, MedInfo.

[26]  Samson W. Tu,et al.  Protégé-2000: An Open-Source Ontology-Development and Knowledge-Acquisition Environment: AMIA 2003 Open Source Expo , 2003, AMIA.

[27]  M Fieschi,et al.  A conceptual graphs modeling of UMLS components. , 1995, Medinfo. MEDINFO.

[28]  Carol J. Bult,et al.  Mouse Phenome Database (MPD) , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[29]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Model management 2.0: manipulating richer mappings , 2007, SIGMOD '07.

[30]  C. Bult.  From information to understanding: the role of model organism databases in comparative and functional genomics. , 2006, Animal genetics.

[31]  José L. V. Mejino,et al.  Efficient Web-Based Navigation of the Foundational Model of Anatomy , 2003, AMIA.

[32]  Linda G. Shapiro,et al.  A Relation-Centric Query Engine for the Foundational Model of Anatomy , 2004, MedInfo.

[33]  Barry Smith,et al.  A Strategy for Improving and Integrating Biomedical Ontologies , 2005, AMIA.

[34]  José L. V. Mejino,et al.  Research Paper: Motivation and Organizational Principles for Anatomical Knowledge Representation: The Digital Anatomist Symbolic Knowledge Base , 1998, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[35]  Mary Shimoyama,et al.  The Rat Genome Database, update 2007—Easing the path from disease to data and back again , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[36]  Joel H. Saltz,et al.  An XML-based System for Synthesis of Data from Disparate Databases , 2006, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association.

[37]  José L. V. Mejino,et al.  Evolution of a Foundational Model of Physiology: Symbolic Representation for Functional Bioinformatics , 2004, MedInfo.

[38]  John M. Hancock,et al.  BIOINFORMATICS APPLICATIONS NOTE Databases and ontologies EMPReSS: European Mouse Phenotyping Resource for Standardized Screens , 2005 .

[39]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Adapting a generic match algorithm to align ontologies of human anatomy , 2004, Proceedings. 20th International Conference on Data Engineering.

[40]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Organization of Relational Models for Scene Analysis , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[41]  Mark A. Musen,et al.  Anchor-PROMPT: Using Non-Local Context for Semantic Matching , 2001, OIS@IJCAI.

[42]  M A Musen,et al.  Representation of clinical data using SNOMED III and conceptual graphs. , 1992, Proceedings. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care.

[43]  Michael P. H. Stumpf,et al.  SNPSTR: a database of compound microsatellite-SNP markers , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[44]  King-Sun Fu,et al.  A distance measure between attributed relational graphs for pattern recognition , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[45]  Janan T. Eppig,et al.  A mouse phenome project , 2000, Mammalian Genome.

[46]  A Robert,et al.  Proposed terminology for the anatomy of the rat stomach. , 1971, Gastroenterology.

[47]  P Topalis,et al.  Anatomical ontologies of mosquitoes and ticks, and their web browsers in VectorBase , 2008, Insect molecular biology.

[48]  J. Stuart Aitken,et al.  Formalizing concepts of species, sex and developmental stage in anatomical ontologies , 2005, Bioinform..

[49]  Michael Gruenberger,et al.  Pathbase: a database of mutant mouse pathology , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[50]  Werner Müller,et al.  Introducing the German Mouse Clinic: open access platform for standardized phenotyping , 2005, Nature Methods.

[51]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): genetic and genomic information about the laboratory mouse. The Mouse Genome Database Group , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..

[52]  A. Butte,et al.  Creation and implications of a phenome-genome network , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[53]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  The mouse genome database (MGD): new features facilitating a model system , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[54]  Chris Mungall,et al.  Phenotype ontologies: the bridge between genomics and evolution. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[55]  Stefan Schulz,et al.  Part-whole representation and reasoning in formal biomedical ontologies , 2005, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[56]  J. Bolker,et al.  Embryonic and larval staging of summer flounder (paralichthys dentatus) , 2003, Journal of morphology.

[57]  José L. V. Mejino,et al.  A reference ontology for biomedical informatics: the Foundational Model of Anatomy , 2003, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[58]  Thomas Meitinger,et al.  MitoP2: the mitochondrial proteome database—now including mouse data , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..