Definition of labels and reuse of CHEBI terms in the CDNO mineral nutrient class about cdno HOT 15 CLOSED

Thanks for your comment @laurenechan. We have discussed this matter and we think maybe replacing the label of the 'dietary nutritional component' class with 'dietary chemical component' could work? As @maweber-bia mentioned, we need to think about how to define chemical components that are not necessary nutrients but are still in the diet. We presented a Venn diagram of these categories in one of the IFOW monthly meetings in Sept 2021.

In this case, the minerals that are ingested in the diet but that are not nutrients could be classified in a separate subclass, for example ‘mineral non-nutrient’. I’m not sure whether we yet have the ideal label but this is the idea. Here is an example of the hierarchical classifications:

What do you think?

from cdno.

As previously discussed (see issues #65, #30) a "dietary component" can have either a "nutritional" or a "non-nutritional" role

This should be clear in the hierarchy of components as well :

"dietary" indicates that the component is provided by food (in a diet) but we should have dietary nutritional components and dietary non-nutritional components (those components which have a biological role - either positive effect or negative effect- but which are not nutrients)

from cdno.

Looks good to me - your classes like "dietary calcium" reflect the amount of information available from existing datasets. The subclasses can be referenced if more specific calcium form testing data is available.

from cdno.

I fully agree with the proposals, well done!

from cdno.

Brilliant!! I really like it :) Just one suggestion, for iron, you may want to include haem and non-haem into the hierachy.

from cdno.

My apologies if we have already discussed this, but I am slightly concerned with categories like 'dietary lead' or 'dietary arsenic' being subclasses of 'mineral nutrient' given that lead and arsenic are not nutrients. Similar concerns arise for any elements that may be consumed in the diet but do not have actual 'nutrient' capacities for humans. Do we have options for ways to include these dietary components with a different parent class?

from cdno.

@ddooley, @CropStoreDb, @kaiiam, @laurenechan, @LuciaSegovia, @maweber-bia, @mateolan, what do you think?

from cdno.

Great thank you all :) @LuciaSegovia thanks, I will take that into account, I might need your help to check the hierarchical classification at some point, we will be in touch.

from cdno.

Sure! No problem :)

from cdno.

Hello, we have completed a framework proposal for the 'mineral nutrients', please follow the link and feel free to make any comments in column "N", your feedback is much appreciate it :)
@maweber-bia, @LuciaSegovia, @ddooley

from cdno.

Looks good @LilyAndres (from a quick glance I didn't study it all in depth). I'd make sure to add a column of the CHEBI iri's or CURIE's so this can get turned into a robot template.

from cdno.

Nice job! just wondering why you did not include "dietary" in the label of silicon dioxide

What will you do with the scientific publications referenced in the spreadsheet? Actually, it is good to know such references

from cdno.

We can (and I think should) add the publication links as cross-references to the terms.

from cdno.

Good points @laurenechan. We should be really clear about what is meant by mineral and nutrient and based on is definition make sure we don't subsume anything under it that should be.

Like Lauren suggests we should have a different parent, something high-level and perhaps from CHEBI for chemicals that we import from CHEBE and present but don't want to call 'nutrients'

from cdno.

This issue has been solved in the 3.1 release. I will close it now.

from cdno.