Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Human / Host / Animal sex (vs gender) (discussion) #838

Open
jjkoehorst opened this issue Aug 14, 2024 · 9 comments
Open

Human / Host / Animal sex (vs gender) (discussion) #838

jjkoehorst opened this issue Aug 14, 2024 · 9 comments
Labels
3-CIG Issues that should be handled by the CIG

Comments

@jjkoehorst
Copy link

I would like to start a discussion on the host sex term. As mentioned in slack

We are currently working on a pig dataset with a lot of castrated entries. We are currently using the FAIR Data Station https://fairds.fairbydesign.nl/terms which uses most of the terms from the ENA checklists and the host sex is the only term available related to the sex of the animal. I see in mixs there is animal sex but this is not synced with ENA. What would be a good way to continue? Could we expand host_sex in mixs to include castrated and other terms or should we try to convince ENA to include animal sex? although the host-associated package https://genomicsstandardsconsortium.github.io/mixs/0016002/ does focus on host_sex and not animal sex. Any ideas?

Now this started a discussion on slack (@mslarae13 @only1chunts , @jfy133 , @Woolly-at-EBI ) feel free to post your comment if you would like to.

In summary, there is a term for animal sex as part of the https://genomicsstandardsconsortium.github.io/mixs/0016019/ package
There is a term for host sex in human / host associated packages ( we actually use host associated mostly for non-human studies but I guess we are wrong here?)

Maybe a silly question? But why make the distinction? I know there are some transgender terms but I think it might be fine if we merge this with all the possible sex related terms? Animal (Human/and the rest) / Plant ?

@jfy133
Copy link
Collaborator

jfy133 commented Aug 14, 2024

I agree it's not optimal.

The side issue I brought up on slack was that gender != biological/physical sex (this is something that upset a lot of people in the ancient DNA community).

I wonder if this has partly lead to the slightly odd distinction between host and animal... the host sex says it's an enumeration but there is no enumeration defined: https://genomicsstandardsconsortium.github.io/mixs/0000811/, so it's hard to me see- but I wonder if self-defined gender options are allowed there, whereas the animal sex has a strict enumeration. However it looks rather mammalian focused?

It's a good question, but I imagine it may be tricky to come up with a common consensus - particularly to try and unify them all.

@jjkoehorst
Copy link
Author

If you unfold the linkml blob at the end it might give some clarification

But then there should be a distinction between biological sex and gender and solve that particular issue that way?

name: host_sex
annotations:
  Expected_value:
    tag: Expected_value
    value: enumeration
description: Gender or physical sex of the host
title: host sex
comments:
- example of non-binary from Excel sheets does not match any of the enumerated values
from_schema: https://w3id.org/mixs
keywords:
- host
- host.
string_serialization: '[female|hermaphrodite|non-binary|male|transgender|transgender
  (female to male)|transgender (male to female)

  |undeclared]'
slot_uri: MIXS:0000811
alias: host_sex
domain_of:
- HostAssociated
- HumanAssociated
- HumanGut
- HumanOral
- HumanSkin
- HumanVaginal
range: string

@jfy133
Copy link
Collaborator

jfy133 commented Aug 14, 2024

Aha, I didn't see that Indeed! I expected a dedicated enum object like in the animal one...

But yes, exactly. That's what the aDNA community will eventually propose

@turbomam
Copy link
Member

Anywhere one sees a string_serialization in the schema, it's just becasuse I didn't get around to doing the conversion to an enumeration. In this case its becasuse there was a time when permissible values containing punctuation weren't serialized in OWL very well. I think that's a thing of the past now.

There are also some terms with string_serialization annotations because one or ore of the permissible values contains something that looks like a variable like

'steak|burrito|soup|pizza (N pieces)'

I have no idea how to get those out of string_serialization hell while preserving the implied expectation of expressiveness.

@turbomam
Copy link
Member

I really appreciate it when you guys find bugs, inconsistencies etc. in the MIxS schema. I could use some help planning and applying the fixes.

@jfy133
Copy link
Collaborator

jfy133 commented Aug 14, 2024

I really appreciate it when you guys find bugs, inconsistencies etc. in the MIxS schema. I could use some help planning and applying the fixes.

Gonna make a separate issue for this so we don't derail the topic!

@turbomam
Copy link
Member

@lschriml lschriml added the 3-CIG Issues that should be handled by the CIG label Aug 19, 2024
@pbuttigieg
Copy link
Collaborator

xref #517

@jfy133 jfy133 changed the title Human / Host / Animal sex (discussion) Human / Host / Animal sex (vs gender) (discussion) Dec 18, 2024
@jfy133
Copy link
Collaborator

jfy133 commented Dec 18, 2024

This discussion also plays into the propsoal to split sex vs gender, for a previous discussion on a PR see: #849 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3-CIG Issues that should be handled by the CIG
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants