<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi John:</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing the access database file. I was able to
convert the file to tsv files without too much trouble and had a
look at the examples you shared.<br>
</p>
<p>I appreciate how you normalized the life stages and sex of the
interacting things. also, the reverse interactions and the pairs
help to more intuitively understand and parse the data.<br>
</p>
<p>Re: associationTypes - When looking at the association kinds
(from tblAssocKinds), I realized that bodyPart (e.g., "leaf"),
life stage (e.g., "nymph") and physiological state (e.g., "dead")
are mixed into the interaction type (e.g., "feeding on"). I can
see how this notation can be handy for data entry or capture
writing on labels, however, I would have the tendency to map the
interaction phrases to separate the different kinds of things into
separate columns, just like you did with lifestage and sex. That
said, I'd always want to keep the verbatim interaction phrase
around to preserve the original language.<br>
</p>
<p>Re: list of OBO relations terms - they are listed, but in
specialized formats (e.g., OBO, OWL) at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro.obo">http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro.obo</a> and
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro.owl">http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ro.owl</a> respectively. I've opened an
issue to remind myself to make it easier to provide a list (see
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://github.com/jhpoelen/eol-globi-data/issues/386"><https://github.com/jhpoelen/eol-globi-data/issues/386></a>).
For the time being, you might be inspired by a subset of the
supported interactions types via
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://api.globalbioticinteractions.org/interactionTypes.csv?type=csv"><https://api.globalbioticinteractions.org/interactionTypes.csv?type=csv></a>
. More on that later.</p>
<p>Re: mapping interaction terms - I agree that automated mapping is
tricky business. What I had in mind is more of a static
translation table that is used to maintain how one systems
interaction terms (like yours) would translate into another naming
scheme (like OBO Relations Ontology). In our case, an automation
would use the static translation table to link the RO terms. So,
no fancy methods here. An example of such a translation table can
be found at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist">https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist</a> :
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist/blob/master/interaction_types.csv">https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist/blob/master/interaction_types.csv</a>
translates terms native the iNaturalist into RO .
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist/blob/master/interaction_types_ignored.csv">https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist/blob/master/interaction_types_ignored.csv</a>
contains a list of terms that are explicitly ignored. <br>
</p>
<p>Re: next steps - in my experience, highly normalized data
structures are important and useful when actively managing and
curating data. However, when exporting data to other systems,
often a denormalized format (aka "wide single table") really makes
life a lot easier for moving snapshots of the data around . . . as
long as it's automated and the identifiers are preserved. So, my
suggested next step in our integration would be to figure out how
to create a method that automatically generates a de-normalized
table from your wealth of association data in a similar form as
outlined in
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/template-dataset">https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/template-dataset</a> and,
more specifically in
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/template-dataset/blob/master/interactions.tsv">https://github.com/globalbioticinteractions/template-dataset/blob/master/interactions.tsv</a>
. Once the de-normalization is complete, terms (like assocKinds,
but also lifestage, bodypart, physiological state) can be
translated using static translation tables (see above). <br>
</p>
<p>In short - in my view, an integration would preserve the autonomy
of local data management, including terms, while automating a
translation into a de-normalized format friendly for integration.
This allows to updates to easily flow through the system without
manual intervention without effecting the existing data management
platform. Most importantly perhaps, the process contains
sufficient information for GloBI (or others) to link back into
your database as well as the original sources / specimen. <br>
</p>
<p>I hope this helps and I'd be interested to help document this
integration between your Neuropterida database with GloBI as a use
case to share with our peers.<br>
</p>
<p>Curious to hear your thoughts,</p>
<p>-jorrit<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/27/18 12:29 PM, John Oswald
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b6d5e58e686f458baf499582b636e060@tamu.edu">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \,serif";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Hi Jorrit,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> See below…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>I think that sharing the Access database file would be a
great start. <span style="color:#1F497D">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---I have just shared a Dropbox
folder with you that contains an Access database that
contains the several tables that I am currently working with
to try to formulate a strategy for capturing relationship
data. I’m happy to receive any comments/suggestions for
improvements. The three tables are briefly discussed below.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">tblAssocKinds (association kinds)
– Contains a list of 544 “association kind” text strings.
Many (ca. 200) of these originated with an initial 2010
dataset of associations that had been extracted from insect
specimen labels by Norm Johnson of Ohio State University. I
subsequently tried to standardize the phrasing of the
original association strings, added additional strings, then
tried to write “reverse association” strings so that there
were pairs of phrases that could be used to state the
relationship from the “opposite sides” of the association.
The pairings are held in tblAssocPairs. Not all AssocKinds
have reverse associations, so some are not currently
included in a pair. The AssocKinds are mostly taxon-to-taxon
or taxon-to-inanimate, but there are some outliers as I was
experimenting with different kinds of associations. Is this
kind of “reverse association” information useful in a
broader context?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">tblAssocPairs (association pairs)
– Contains pairings of values from tblAssocKinds.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">frmFlexAssocPairs – A simple
query that contains AssocPairs as both AssocKind IDs and
text strings (easier to read).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">tblAssociations – My current
working table for capturing association data from the
literature. This table currently contains only ca. 150
records of test data entered from the literature (I want to
make sure that I get things set up optimally before
extending the data capture effort). The table is general
structured around a “left” associate and a “right”
associate, “separated” by an AssocPair ID that links to
tblAssocPairs. The table is currently structured for ease of
data capture from the literature, and includes some other
kinds of desirable data (e.g., sex, life stage, geography,
literature source) that would be captured from the same
literature sources. As I get into this though, it seems
clear that many of those other data, which will not be
available for all associations, should probably be removed
to other relationally-linked tables in order to keep the
data normalized. In the current structure the “left”
associate is assumed to be an insect species of the
superorder Neuropterida, which is specified by a
“combination object” ID (field LeftNidaCombObjID). For data
entry purposes this ID links to an episodically
re-calculated lookup table of >20,000
genus-group/species-group scientific name combinations
(essentially a master lookup table of almost every
Neuropterida combination that has ever been used in the
literature). This “combination” ID can be used to link into
most of the related taxonomic and nomenclatural data in my
database. The link to the literature source is specified in
field BibObjPageCiteID (Bibliographic Object Page Citation
ID), which is an identifier that specifies a particular
page/plate in the neuropterid literature (from which can be
looked up all of the typical bibliographic information about
the literature source, plus other data linked to individual
literature pages, e.g., figures, chresonyms, and other
annotations). This links to my bibliographic dataset of
17,000+ published works that contain information on the
Neuropterida.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>I imagine that a first GloBI integration (or any other
integration) would preserve the existing system and implement
an automated translation or mapping procedures (e.g.,
scripts).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---To the extent possible I would
prefer to not have to rely on automated translations, which
are prone to interpretation errors (or maybe I’m
misunderstanding what is automated here…). I would prefer to
“oversplit” the associations that I use in my database, then
re-group those associations into aggregate sets that
correspond to other set(s) of association types used by
other projects. This would give me more flexibility for
defining associations that are useful for my purposes, and
more control over how those associations are mapped when
used in (potentially multiple) other contexts. We’re
probably saying basically the same thing here, but I would
like to retain the ability to control/influence the basic
mapping of associations through relationships defined in my
database.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>One of such procedures would include a mapping from your
internal association types into another naming scheme such as
OBO Relation Onology (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__obofoundry.org_ontology_ro.html&d=DwMDaQ&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=n0isp79O1WSTtoOYJGr1_rF-2PrQuw41UXGiGQ_Rpb8&m=SYaRVnY0jiGjyYGGuj4Lx0dPncmBZFAatHgtwJ-h4Uk&s=so-xkW80dqsEkKPNLOdRhe1JCD0nC8HQgpn-zKjmaDE&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">http://obofoundry.org/ontology/ro.html</a>):
the closer the terms are in meaning, the easier the mapping
is. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---Right, see above. How can I
get a complete listing of the relation strings used in the
Relation Ontology, their definitions (meanings), and their
hierarchical organization? I don’t know how to do that. Is
that something you can conveniently download, put into a
table-based format, then send to me so that I can
incorporate it into my database to experiment with?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---I expect that the relations in
the Relation Ontology are fairly general. Is there another
ontology (or some other source of relation terms) that deals
more specifically (or at least includes) more specific
relations that would pertain between insect taxa and either
insect or non-insect taxa, and/or insect taxa and inanimate
objects? That is something that I would find useful. Does
something like that exist? Outside of the Relation Ontology,
where do you source other kinds of relations? Or, how does
one go about contributing to the development of a more
specific ontology of relations that pertain to insects?
Would that be a useful thing?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>With such a translation / mapping method in place, others can
more easily find your data and you can more easily find
similar projects. Then, hopefully, over time, we'll learn from
each other in discussion forums, professional meetings or
workshops and make it easier to share and capture these
complex datasets. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---I’m interested to know if
others have already developed well-defined sets of
terms/phrases that describe relations/associations among
insects and other organisms and inanimate objects. Can you
make any recommendations for where I might look to find to
find such sets of terms/phrases? Do any of the other
projects involved in GloBI have such term/phrase sets that
are available for examination?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Perhaps we'll even settle on some best practices!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>So, yes, please send a (complete/partial) copy of your native
database files or raw datasets, so I can get a sense of what
your datasets looks like.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---You should have received an
e-mail from Dropbox on this today, or will soon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">John</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Curious to hear your thoughts,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>-jorrit<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 11/21/18 11:32 AM, John Oswald wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Hi Jorrit,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> Thanks
for responding. Deborah Paul mentioned to me at the recent
ESA meeting in Vancouver, BC, that GloBI would be one
place that I should look, so I hoped to make contact with
you by posting to the GloBI listserver. See more
interleaved below…</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">---oo0oo---</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">John D.
Oswald</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Professor
of Entomology</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Curator,
Texas A&M University Insect Collection</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Department
of Entomology</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Texas
A&M University</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">College
Station, TX 77843-2475</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">E-mail: </span><a
href="mailto:j-oswald@tamu.edu" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:blue">j-oswald@tamu.edu</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Phone:
1-979-862-3507</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Lacewing
Digital Library: </span>
<a href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Bibliography
of the Neuropterida:
</span><a href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/Biblio/Main"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/Biblio/Main</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Neuropterida
Species of the World:
</span><a
href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/SpeciesCatalog/Main"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/SpeciesCatalog/Main</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="color:windowtext"> GloBI
</span><a href="mailto:globi-bounces@lists.gbif.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><globi-bounces@lists.gbif.org></a><span
style="color:windowtext">
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jorrit Poelen<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 20, 2018 8:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> </span><a
href="mailto:globi@lists.gbif.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">globi@lists.gbif.org</a><span
style="color:windowtext"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [GloBI] Ontology of Biotic
Interactions?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Hey John - <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Like Robert (hi Robert!) mentioned, GloBI is also using the
OBO Relations Ontology for defining biotic and abiotic
interaction types, just like many other projects.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---As a newbie to ontologies
(and an entomologist, not a computer scientist) I’m still
trying to wrap my head around ontologies. In a nutshell,
so far as I can determine, an ontology is at heart an
extended web of controlled vocabulary terms with
relationships defined between terms at different web nodes
(terms), together with facilities to link to other
ontologies. Is that about right?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>I've been attempting to collect my thoughts on data format
and models at <a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_jhpoelen_globis-2Db-2Dinteractions_blob_master_text_on-2Dspecies-2Dinteraction-2Ddata-2Dmodels-2Dand-2Dformats.md&d=DwMDaQ&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=n0isp79O1WSTtoOYJGr1_rF-2PrQuw41UXGiGQ_Rpb8&m=RumeEb9OhO5-uPYMBvLVR_6mx3SCkPawDJ-uJYJWSC4&s=5rsVFs3GJwqHVhJgL9CJ3zhrFjEJuilAn7bu9SAW91c&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://github.com/jhpoelen/globis-b-interactions/blob/master/text/on-species-interaction-data-models-and-formats.md</a>
.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---Thanks for the link. I have
briefly looked this over just now, but will go back for a
detailed read later. There appears much there that would
be good for me to consider as I continue development on my
end.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>In my experience, an effective way to figure out how to
capture/share your data is to use what you have today (as
is!) and try to integrate a subset of it with other projects
(like GloBI, GBIF).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---For the present, as briefly
explained in my initial e-mail, I’m mostly trying to set
up an efficient way to capture data on
interactions/associations of neuropterid species with
other taxa, inanimate objects, and concepts in my personal
Neuropterida research database on the three insect orders
Neuroptera, Megaloptera, and Raphidioptera. The
Neuropterida database (currently built in Access) is
highly parsed (ca. 350 relationally linked tables,
including ca. 150 standardized ‘lookup’ tables covering
various subjects), and significantly normalized (ca. 300
tables normalized to 3NF or better). The core data are
bibliographic, nomenclatural, taxonomic, and ‘agent
based’, but there are extensions going off in many other
directions. I currently share parts of these data via
episodic downloads to support a variety of projects –
particularly the Neuropterida domain of the Catalogue of
Life (used by GBIF and many other projects globally), and
the various modules of the Lacewing Digital Library
project (lacewing.tamu.edu). I am an insect
systematist/taxonomist by training, but I got into
databasing in the early 1990’s and have been capturing
data on the Neuropterida ever since. I am currently
involved in a project whose primary product will be a new
module in the Lacewing Digital Library that is devoted to
interactions/associations (mostly predator/prey) of
neuropterid insects and hemipterous insects. Thus, my
primary motivation at the current time is to develop an
effective and efficient database subschema for capturing
these kinds of data, and to relationally link that
subschema into my existing overall database schema. I
would like to do this in a fairly general way so that I
can (1) capture a wide variety of different kinds of
interaction/association data into the same subschema of my
database, (2) standardize the terminology/phrasing that I
use so that terms/phrases are based on explicit
definitions and are consistent with other similar
controlled vocabularies for similar projects (to the
extent that this may be possible; thus my foray here into
ontologies…), and (3) be reasonably sure that there is
fairly straightforward pathway through which whatever
interaction/association subschema I develop within my
database that it can be linked out to other projects that
I might get involved with in the future.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Your projects sounds very similar to other projects that
have already been integrated into GloBI - a mix of specimen
and literature data with their own way of describing
interaction terms.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---Yes, I am sure that there
are lots of other projects that are capturing similar
data. I’d like to learn from those projects so that I can
avoid any common pitfalls and ‘start off on the right
foot’ as I get into this. To the extent possible, as I get
started, I’d like to tap into any well-defined sets of
interaction terms that may already exist. My initial
though has been to build out this subschema in my database
starting from my current table of ‘association kinds’. But
I’m open to new ideas, and looking for someone who might
be interested to discuss such issues.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Do you have some samples that you can share so that I can
get a sense of what you currently have?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---Sure. I can export a few
tables to a simple Access database and send that to you.
Can you work with that? Please confirm. If so, I can
e-mail it to you or post it to you via Dropbox (depending
on size).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">---One of the difficulties that
I am currently having is how one might extract the “data
items” (to me this would be the set of controlled
terms/phrases and their linking interaction/association
terms) from one or more ontologies so that those data can
be placed into and manipulated within a relational
database structure. Is there an easy way to do that?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">Cheers,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="color:#1F497D">John</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p>thx,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>-jorrit<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__globalbioticinteractions.org&d=DwMDaQ&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=n0isp79O1WSTtoOYJGr1_rF-2PrQuw41UXGiGQ_Rpb8&m=RumeEb9OhO5-uPYMBvLVR_6mx3SCkPawDJ-uJYJWSC4&s=I3T9B7MwP8QsKCbpPfmjxbX37fWerqfnZPmO9RYlbCM&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">https://globalbioticinteractions.org</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 11/19/18 6:21 PM, Bates, Robert P
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi John,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We’ve been working with subsets of the
OBO Relation Ontology (which if I’m not mistaken is also
what GloBI uses) to provide the concepts for interaction
relationships in our VERA modeling system:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.obofoundry.org_ontology_ro.html&d=DwMDaQ&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=n0isp79O1WSTtoOYJGr1_rF-2PrQuw41UXGiGQ_Rpb8&m=RumeEb9OhO5-uPYMBvLVR_6mx3SCkPawDJ-uJYJWSC4&s=kzb8EYNLqZjOBHOdXtKcwh141kUweLk_nINGFtUMVDc&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.obofoundry.org/ontology/ro.html</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-R<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt">Robert
Bates</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Research Scientist<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Design & Intelligence Lab<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Georgia Institute of Technology</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Technology Square Research Building,
85 5th Street NW, Atlanta, GA 30308<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">e: <a
href="mailto:rbates8@gatech.edu"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:purple">rbates8@gatech.edu</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">m: 770.713.8531<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt">GloBI
</span><a href="mailto:globi-bounces@lists.gbif.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><globi-bounces@lists.gbif.org></span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"> on behalf of John Oswald
</span><a href="mailto:j-oswald@tamu.edu"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><j-oswald@tamu.edu></span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, November 19, 2018 at 9:18 PM<br>
<b>To: </b></span><a
href="mailto:globi@lists.gbif.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">"globi@lists.gbif.org"</span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt">
</span><a href="mailto:globi@lists.gbif.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><globi@lists.gbif.org></span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[GloBI] Ontology of Biotic
Interactions?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I’m growing and extending
interaction/association data in my research database on
the species of the superorder Neuropterida (Insecta:
orders Neuroptera, Megaloptera, and Raphidioptera) of the
world. The data is primarily drawn from the published
literature; some also from specimen labels. I’m interested
in standardizing the terminology that I use to describe
interactions and associations. I’m interested in taxon to
taxon interactions (e.g., species X eats species Y;
species X is phoretic on species Y), taxon to inanimate
object interactions/associations (e.g., species X
oviposits on substrate Y [say, rocks]), and taxon to
concept associations (e.g., species X exhibits behavior
Y). Can anyone recommend any good lists of standardized
terms (with definitions) for this sort of thing? Are there
any good, well developed, ontologies for general
taxon-taxon and/or taxon-inanimate interactions? I have a
list of 500+ “association kinds” (without
well-standardized definitions) that I have scraped
together over the years. I’d like to plug these into (or
convert them into) something more standardized if
something more standard exists. Thanks for any suggestions
on where I might go next on this.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">---oo0oo---<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">John D. Oswald<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Professor of Entomology<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Curator, Texas A&M University
Insect Collection<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Department of Entomology<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Texas A&M University<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">College Station, TX 77843-2475<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">E-mail: <a
href="mailto:j-oswald@tamu.edu" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:blue">j-oswald@tamu.edu</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Phone: 1-979-862-3507<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Lacewing Digital Library: <a
href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/" moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Bibliography of the Neuropterida: <a
href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/Biblio/Main"
moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/Biblio/Main</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Neuropterida Species of the World: <a
href="http://lacewing.tamu.edu/SpeciesCatalog/Main"
moz-do-not-send="true">
<span style="color:blue">http://lacewing.tamu.edu/SpeciesCatalog/Main</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif"><br>
<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>GloBI mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:GloBI@lists.gbif.org" moz-do-not-send="true">GloBI@lists.gbif.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.gbif.org_mailman_listinfo_globi&d=DwMDaQ&c=ODFT-G5SujMiGrKuoJJjVg&r=n0isp79O1WSTtoOYJGr1_rF-2PrQuw41UXGiGQ_Rpb8&m=RumeEb9OhO5-uPYMBvLVR_6mx3SCkPawDJ-uJYJWSC4&s=RymsxaAO66KIoZRhT4qKmGNaLZuQhGlJY83ri2bvwfQ&e=" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/globi</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>