Include WBbt & FBbt anatomy ontologies

[kevinschaper]

This will help to connect 400k & 100k gene expression edges respectively into MonarchKG.

https://obofoundry.org/ontology/fbbt.html
https://obofoundry.org/ontology/wbbt.html

[matentzn]

This issue is better placed in phenio, not KG phenio. Its odd though because both are in there:

https://github.com/monarch-initiative/phenio/blob/main/src/ontology/phenio-odk.yaml#L91
https://github.com/monarch-initiative/phenio/blob/main/src/ontology/phenio-odk.yaml#L93

[matentzn]

YOu dont see them in KG phenio?

[caufieldjh]

I also don't see them among the KG-Phenio nodes - just AnnotationProperty types like OBO:fbbt#part_of and OBO:wbbt#part_of

I had the prefix wrong - the FBBT nodes are prefixed with OBO:FBbt_ and the WBBT nodes are, irritatingly, prefixed with both OBO:WBbt_ and WBbt:. Both are present in the graph.

[matentzn]

Yes it is very very important that we all use the same prefix map in monarch

@kevinschaper I would suggest you use https://github.com/linkml/prefixmaps in all Monarch related projects!

[kevinschaper]

I think @caufieldjh is saying that they're OBO:FBbt_ in the Phenio graph? The edges I'm dropping right now due to missing nodes have FBbt: and WBbt: prefixes - but I do see the OBO:FBbt_ and OBO:WBbt_ nodes! Is that something you'll fix in KG Phenio? or should I fix them in our import preprocessing of KG Phenio?

I'll keep an eye out for were we can use prefixmaps. The case we have most often is that we're ingesting files that don't have an ID prefix, or have an ID prefix that we need to change - would it work to use prefixmaps almost like an enumeration to add guard rails?

[matentzn]

In this case it's probably KG phenio that needs to adapt the prefixmap library:)

[caufieldjh]

Yes, +1 to integrating prefixmaps here.
There should be more consistent prefix usage within phenio.owl, too