title: Anatomy ontologies and potential users: bridging the gap.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  To evaluate how well current anatomical ontologies fit the way real-world users apply anatomy terms in their data annotations.
  
  
  METHODS
  Annotations from three diverse multi-species public-domain datasets provided a set of use cases for matching anatomical terms in two major anatomical ontologies (the Foundational Model of Anatomy and Uberon), using two lexical-matching applications (Zooma and Ontology Mapper).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Approximately 1500 terms were identified; Uberon/Zooma mappings provided 286 matches, compared to the control and Ontology Mapper returned 319 matches. For the Foundational Model of Anatomy, Zooma returned 312 matches, and Ontology Mapper returned 397.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our results indicate that for our datasets the anatomical entities or concepts are embedded in user-generated complex terms, and while lexical mapping works, anatomy ontologies do not provide the majority of terms users supply when annotating data. Provision of searchable cross-products for compositional terms is a key requirement for using ontologies.
authors: EMBL-EBI, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridgeshire CB10 1SD, UK. raven@ebi.ac.uk.
authors: Ravensara S
authors: RS
authors: Travillian
authors: Tomasz
authors: T
authors: Adamusiak
authors: Tony
authors: T
authors: Burdett
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Gruenberger
authors: John
authors: J
authors: Hancock
authors: Ann-Marie
authors: AM
authors: Mallon
authors: James
authors: J
authors: Malone
authors: Paul
authors: P
authors: Schofield
authors: Helen
authors: H
authors: Parkinson