AtOM, an ontology model to standardize use of brain atlases in tools, workflows, and data infrastructures.

Brain atlases are important reference resources for accurate anatomical description of neuroscience data. Open access, three-dimensional atlases serve as spatial frameworks for integrating experimental data and defining regions-of-interest in analytic workflows. However, naming conventions, parcellation criteria, area definitions, and underlying mapping methodologies differ considerably between atlases and across atlas versions. This lack of standardized description impedes use of atlases in analytic tools and registration of data to different atlases. To establish a machine-readable standard for representing brain atlases, we identified four fundamental atlas elements, defined their relations, and created an ontology model. Here we present our Atlas Ontology Model (AtOM) and exemplify its use by applying it to mouse, rat, and human brain atlases. We discuss how AtOM can facilitate atlas interoperability and data integration, thereby increasing compliance with the FAIR guiding principles. AtOM provides a standardized framework for communication and use of brain atlases to create, use, and refer to specific atlas elements and versions. We argue that AtOM will accelerate analysis, sharing, and reuse of neuroscience data.

Extending and using anatomical vocabularies in the stimulating peripheral activity to relieve conditions project.

The stimulating peripheral activity to relieve conditions (SPARC) program is a US National Institutes of Health-funded effort to improve our understanding of the neural circuitry of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) in support of bioelectronic medicine. As part of this effort, the SPARC project is generating multi-species, multimodal data, models, simulations, and anatomical maps supported by a comprehensive knowledge base of autonomic circuitry. To facilitate the organization of and integration across multi-faceted SPARC data and models, SPARC is implementing the findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) data principles to ensure that all SPARC products are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable. We are therefore annotating and describing all products with a common FAIR vocabulary. The SPARC Vocabulary is built from a set of community ontologies covering major domains relevant to SPARC, including anatomy, physiology, experimental techniques, and molecules. The SPARC Vocabulary is incorporated into tools researchers use to segment and annotate their data, facilitating the application of these ontologies for annotation of research data. However, since investigators perform deep annotations on experimental data, not all terms and relationships are available in community ontologies. We therefore implemented a term management and vocabulary extension pipeline where SPARC researchers may extend the SPARC Vocabulary using InterLex, an online vocabulary management system. To ensure the quality of contributed terms, we have set up a curated term request and review pipeline specifically for anatomical terms involving expert review. Accepted terms are added to the SPARC Vocabulary and, when appropriate, contributed back to community ontologies to enhance ANS coverage. Here, we provide an overview of the SPARC Vocabulary, the infrastructure and process for implementing the term management and review pipeline. In an analysis of >300 anatomical contributed terms, the majority represented composite terms that necessitated combining terms within and across existing ontologies. Although these terms are not good candidates for community ontologies, they can be linked to structures contained within these ontologies. We conclude that the term request pipeline serves as a useful adjunct to community ontologies for annotating experimental data and increases the FAIRness of SPARC data.

The Neuron Phenotype Ontology: A FAIR Approach to Proposing and Classifying Neuronal Types.

The challenge of defining and cataloging the building blocks of the brain requires a standardized approach to naming neurons and organizing knowledge about their properties. The US Brain Initiative Cell Census Network, Human Cell Atlas, Blue Brain Project, and others are generating vast amounts of data and characterizing large numbers of neurons throughout the nervous system. The neuroscientific literature contains many neuron names (e.g. parvalbumin-positive interneuron or layer 5 pyramidal cell) that are commonly used and generally accepted. However, it is often unclear how such common usage types relate to many evidence-based types that are proposed based on the results of new techniques. Further, comparing different types across labs remains a significant challenge. Here, we propose an interoperable knowledge representation, the Neuron Phenotype Ontology (NPO), that provides a standardized and automatable approach for naming cell types and normalizing their constituent phenotypes using identifiers from community ontologies as a common language. The NPO provides a framework for systematically organizing knowledge about cellular properties and enables interoperability with existing neuron naming schemes. We evaluate the NPO by populating a knowledge base with three independent cortical neuron classifications derived from published data sets that describe neurons according to molecular, morphological, electrophysiological, and synaptic properties. Competency queries to this knowledge base demonstrate that the NPO knowledge model enables interoperability between the three test cases and neuron names commonly used in the literature.

Incidences of problematic cell lines are lower in papers that use RRIDs to identify cell lines.

The use of misidentified and contaminated cell lines continues to be a problem in biomedical research. Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) should reduce the prevalence of misidentified and contaminated cell lines in the literature by alerting researchers to cell lines that are on the list of problematic cell lines, which is maintained by the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC) and the Cellosaurus database. To test this assertion, we text-mined the methods sections of about two million papers in PubMed Central, identifying 305,161 unique cell-line names in 150,459 articles. We estimate that 8.6% of these cell lines were on the list of problematic cell lines, whereas only 3.3% of the cell lines in the 634 papers that included RRIDs were on the problematic list. This suggests that the use of RRIDs is associated with a lower reported use of problematic cell lines.