The MIBBI Foundryand its modules
Chris Taylor, Susanna Sansone, Dawn Field, The MIBBI Project
Project website: http://mibbi.org/
Mechanisms of scientific advance
ProteoRED’s MIAPE satisfaction survey
Spanish multi-site collaboration: provision of proteomics services MIAPE customer satisfaction survey (compiled November 2008)
— http://www.proteored.org/MIAPE_Survey_Results_Nov08.html— Responses from 31 proteomics experts representing 17 labs
Yes: 95%No: 5%
Technologically-delineated views of the world A: transcriptomics B: proteomics C: metabolomics …and…
Biologically-delineated views of the world A: plant biology B: epidemiology C: microbiology …and…
Generic features (‘common core’) — Description of source biomaterial — Experimental design components
Arrays
Scanning Arrays &Scanning
Columns
GelsMS MS
FTIR
NMR
Columns
Modelling the biosciences
Modelling the biosciences (slightly differently)
Assay: Omics and miscellaneous techniques
Investigation:
Medical syndrome, environmental effect, etc.Study: Toxicology, environmental science, etc.
Investigation / Study / Assay (ISA) Infrastructurehttp://isa-tools.org/
Ontology of Biomedical Investigations (OBI)http://obi.sourceforge.net/
Functional Genomics Experiment (FuGE)http://fuge.sourceforge.net/
Rise of the Metaprojects
Reporting guidelines — a case in point
MIAME, MIAPE, MIAPA, MIACA, MIARE, MIFACE, MISFISHIE, MIGS, MIMIx, MIQAS, MIRIAM, (MIAFGE, MIAO), My Goodness…
‘MI’ checklists usually developed independently, by groups working within particular biological or technological domains
— Difficult to obtain an overview of the full range of checklists
— Tracking the evolution of single checklists is non-trivial— Checklists are inevitably partially redundant one against
another— Where they overlap arbitrary decisions on wording and
sub structuring make integration difficult
Significant difficulties for those who routinely combine information from multiple biological domains and technology platforms
— Example: An investigation looking at the impact of toxins on a sentinel species using proteomics (‘eco-toxico-proteomics’)
— What reporting standard(s) should they be using?
Nature Biotechnol 26(8), 889–896 (2008)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1411
The MIBBI Project (mibbi.org)
[†] Denotes that a specification is provided as a suite of related documents
CONCEPT SPECIALISATION ● C
IMR [†]
● M
IACA
● M
IAM
E
● M
IAM
E/E
nv
● M
IAM
E/N
utr
● M
IAM
E/P
lant
● M
IAM
E/T
ox
● M
IAPA
● M
IAPE [†]
● M
IARE
● M
IFlo
wCyt
● M
IGen
● M
IGS/M
IMS
● M
IMIx
● M
IMPP
● M
INI
study inputs study design ●generic organism ●
cells / microbes
plant
animal
mouse
human
population
environmental sample
environment / habitat
in silico model
study procedures organism maintenance
animal husbandry
cell / microbe culture
plant cultivation
acclimation
preconditioning / pretreatment ●organism manipulation
assay inputs generic study input
organism part ●organism state
organism trait
biomolecule
synthetic analyte ●silencing RNA reagent
Version 0.7 (2008-04-10)
Comparison of MIBBI-registered projects [21] ● Release
Granularity Coarse Medium Fine
Maturity ● Planned ● Drafting
The MIBBI Project (mibbi.org)
The MIBBI Project (mibbi.org)
Interaction graph for projects (line thickness & colour saturation show similarity)
The MIBBI Project (mibbi.org)
Drafting MIBBI Foundry modules
Analytical approach proved challenging Cross analyses were either too coarse or too depressing Conclusion: no ‘perfect’ solution…
If in doubt, hack (a.k.a. ‘iterative development’) Start with one set of guidelines, breaking it into ‘paragraphs’ Add another set, breaking it up similarly (‘shared subject’) Where there are overlaps, seek to resolve
— If similar, aim for an ‘average’ module— If distinct, use core and extension modules— Record dependencies in a matrix (for reference)
‘Normalise’ (look for efficiencies, to a point)
Validation Asking for something like MIxxx should get something like
MIxxx Weigh the conflicts/compromises; reexamine extensions etc.
Current coverage: Portal versus Foundry
Checklists covered to date (x) MIGS/MIMS, MIAPE, MIFlowCyt, MIARE, ‘Env’ extensions
Modules developed to date 35 (set to rise rapidly)…
‘Pedro’ tool → XML → (via XSLT) Wiki code (etc.)
Creating and Using MIBBI Foundry modules
Stage one Pedro tool (Garwood et al., 2004) using the MIBBI module
schema Highly-configurable (mostly XML Schema, partly a
configuration file) Validates data and exports XML (also saves in a ‘native’ zipped
XML)
Stage two Mini shell scripts for XSL transformation using Saxon
— Initially just to get the (media)wiki code for Foundry pages— Now have MediaWiki and HTML (both as table & list), tab-
delimited text, XML Schema (for MDA) and ISA config (XML)
Java (command line) tool (using DOM) built to combine and transform modules using the above XSLTs (=MyMICheckout)
Stage three ‘MICheckout the movie’ built using Flash (catalyst/builder) Same functionality (same XSLTs), rather nicer UI (i.e., it has
one)
MICheckout: Supporting Users
MIBBI and other standardisation efforts
Ontology support: MIBBI module schema allows for specified ontology references
Any number of terms (leaf or node) can be ‘attached’ to an element
— We expect software to offer the specified choices to users
Format support: MIBBI has no specific implementation for data exchange
formats BUT: we can achieve the same end by supporting tools
— Currently implementing ISAcreator configuration file generation
— Will allow capture of MIBBI Foundry-specified content in ISA-Tab
— Also an example of software implementing our ontology links
The International Conference on Systems Biology (ICSB), 22-28 August, 2008 Susanna-Assunta Sansone www.ebi.ac.uk/net-project
20
Example of guiding the experimentalist to search and select a term from the EnvO ontology, to describe the habitat of a sample
Ontologies, accessed in real time via the Ontology Lookup Service and
BioPortal