Wikidata:Property proposal/homologous with

sexually homologous to edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science

Done: sexually homologous with (P4545) (Talk and documentation)

Description	body part that originates from the same tissue or cell during fetal development in the opposing sex
Represents	homology (Q224180)
Data type	Item
Domain	gendered anatomical structure (Q43022214)
Example	penis (Q58) ⇄ clitoris (Q873072) testicle (Q9384) ⇄ ovary (Q9631) prostate (Q9625) ⇄ Skene's gland (Q1762220)
Robot and gadget jobs	Maybe a bot can import or copy data about sexual homologous body parts from the database Uberon.

Motivation

This might be a useful property to save sexually homologous body parts. Details should probably be worked out by somebody who knowns more about biology and homology. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 15:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment A good idea, but I think the uses will be very few so there is no need to create this David (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that this warrants it's own property if it just focuses on human anatomy. We can presently display this kind of information by having thattesticle (Q9384) and ovary (Q9631) both subclass gonad (Q213456). If you really want a property for this, I would like to see a background search of prior art and how homology is modeled in other systems. ChristianKl (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- That is also a good solution, I think. I created prepuce (Q42120949) and made foreskin (Q673203) and clitoral hood (Q503427) subclasses. I couldn't find a common word for prostate (Q9625) and Skene's gland (Q1762220). Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 22:49, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Robin van der Vliet, ChristianKl:I suggest expanding the proposal by making it for all areas: Description Will be:Something equal to the element elsewhere.Greetings David (talk) 07:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think that would be too broad. This specific property would be useful for saving specific sex differences. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 18:24, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Robin van der Vliet: I looked at Uberon's modeling of the issue. On Uberon's item about Skene's gland there's a property with the name "sexually_homologous_to". I would be willing to support this property when we change the name and scope to copy Uberon's. ChristianKl (talk) 15:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChristianKl: I changed the name and the scope. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 12:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support in the new form. ChristianKl (talk) 18:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine ChristianKl (talk) 15:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's interesting, but i don't know if necessary.--Geoide (talk) 16:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is meaningful from the point of view of embryology. --Okkn (talk) 07:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Okkn, Robin van der Vliet: What do you think of the new descrition? ChristianKl (✉) 02:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks better to me, it is more descriptive. I updated the translations too. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 10:59, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChristianKl, Robin van der Vliet: It looks good, but how about replacing "the same tissue" by "the same tissue or cell"? We can apply this property to the relation between egg cell (Q1321695) and spermatozoon (Q74560), or between oocyte (Q3246226) and spermatocyte (Q3486515). --Okkn (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I also specified the domain to an actual item. ChristianKl (✉) 15:52, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKl: Thanks! By the way, are cells "anatomical structure" (anatomical structure (Q4936952))? In UBERON, "cell group" is a "anatomical structure", but they don't have "cell". I'm not sure whether cell type (Q189118) should be a subclass of anatomical structure (Q4936952). --Okkn (talk) 17:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why "cell type" shouldn't subclass "anatomical structure". A cell has a single connected structure with inherent 3D shape and it's generated by coordinated expression of the organism's own genome. ChristianKl (✉) 17:44, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know a cell has its own structure and I think cells should be anatomical entity (Q27043950), but, in general, cell biology (Q7141) is probably not a branch of anatomy (Q514), i.e. the structure of a cell consisted of cellular components is out of range of anatomy, isn't it? So, is a cell really anatomically structured? --Okkn (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to the difference between entities and structure it's worth looking at what the definition means with structure. Both human eyes together for example don't form a "anatomical structure" because it's no single connected entity. oral cavity (Q27042858) would be another example of something that doesn't fulfill the criteria because the space inside a cavity is considered "immatrial". "T cell domain" is on the other hand something in the tree that does subclass as "anatomical structure".

EnWiki writes "Microscopic anatomy involves the use of optical instruments in the study of the tissues of various structures, known as histology, and also in the study of cells." and links for cells to cell biology. That suggests that it considers cell biology to be a subfield of microscoic anatomy. ChristianKl (✉) 19:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Okkn, Robin van der Vliet, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: Done Created as sexually homologous with (P4545). ChristianKl (✉) 19:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]