Zebrafish phenotype neoplasm terms not connected to Upheno neoplasm term

[kcortes133]

Mouse and human are both connected to overarching neoplasm terms and upheno neoplasm term but zebrafish terms are not; difficult for phenotype subcategory work

[rays22]

• ZP:0142579 neoplasm heart present, abnormal
  • It does have a logical definition which does not follow uPheno EQ patterns. A uPheno phenotype pattern would likely include the PATO quality PATO:0002011 neoplastic characterising an anatomical entity.

---

• UPHENO:3000003 neoplasm phenotype
  • MP:0002006 neoplasm
    - Does MP:0002006 have a uPheno-aligned EQ axiom? NO
    - Can we group this term computationally with phenotype terms from other model organism ontologies that also have matching uPheno-aligned EQ axioms? NO
  • HP:0002664 Neoplasm
    - Does HP:0002664 have a uPheno-aligned EQ axiom? NO
    - Can we group this term computationally with phenotype terms from other model organism ontologies that also have matching uPheno-aligned EQ axioms? NO

[sbello]

This is arising from some of the top level organization issues we've been trying to work out.
The MP and HP are only under neoplasm because they were manually put there while XP and ZP were not. It looks like ZP and XP don't have neoplasm grouping terms which explains why they weren't added.
We should look into these and see if we can come up with a common pattern as MP and ZP both use MPATH but XP uses PATO, An additional factor is that most MP terms are incidence of [neoplasm] while ZP are presence.

Would it be possible to create a rule that any term that uses MPATH neoplasm (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MPATH_218) or any descendant of this term or PATO neoplastic (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PATO_0002011) should appear under the uPheno header neoplasm phenotype (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UPHENO_3000003)? At least that would get these terms under a common header.