Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25972520›Full record

ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2015

Moving the mountain: analysis of the effort required to transform comparative anatomy into computable anatomy.

Wasila Dahdul, T Alexander Dececchi, Nizar Ibrahim, Hilmar Lapp, Paula Mabee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Large Language Models in Bio-Ontology Research: A Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. STOREFISH 2.0: a database on the reproductive strategies of teleost fishes.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Wasila DahdulDepartment of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA, Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA and National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, Durham, NC, USA Wasila.Dahdul@usd.edu.
T Alexander DececchiDepartment of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA, Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA and National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Nizar IbrahimDepartment of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA, Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA and National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Hilmar LappDepartment of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA, Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA and National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Paula MabeeDepartment of Biology, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA, Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA and National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diverse phenotypes of living organisms have been described for centuries, and though they may be digitized, they are not readily available in a computable form. Using over 100 morphological studies, the Phenoscape project has demonstrated that by annotating characters with community ontology terms, links between novel species anatomy and the genes that may underlie them can be made. But given the enormity of the legacy literature, how can this largely unexploited wealth of descriptive data be rendered amenable to large-scale computation? To identify the bottlenecks, we quantified the time involved in the major aspects of phenotype curation as we annotated characters from the vertebrate phylogenetic systematics literature. This involves attaching fully computable logical expressions consisting of ontology terms to the descriptions in character-by-taxon matrices. The workflow consists of: (i) data preparation, (ii) phenotype annotation, (iii) ontology development and (iv) curation team discussions and software development feedback. Our results showed that the completion of this work required two person-years by a team of two post-docs, a lead data curator, and students. Manual data preparation required close to 13% of the effort. This part in particular could be reduced substantially with better community data practices, such as depositing fully populated matrices in public repositories. Phenotype annotation required ∼40% of the effort. We are working to make this more efficient with Natural Language Processing tools. Ontology development (40%), however, remains a highly manual task requiring domain (anatomical) expertise and use of specialized software. The large overhead required for data preparation and ontology development contributed to a low annotation rate of approximately two characters per hour, compared with 14 characters per hour when activity was restricted to character annotation. Unlocking the potential of the vast stores of morphological descriptions requires better tools for efficiently processing natural language, and better community practices towards a born-digital morphology. Database URL: http://kb.phenoscape.org

Indexed as

Anatomy, ComparativeBiological OntologiesDatabases, FactualNatural Language ProcessingAnimalsData CurationData MiningHumans

Identifiers

PMID25972520
PMCPMC4429748

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.