• Info
  • Home
  • About
  • Editorial Board
  • Archive
  • Research Topics
  • View Some Authors
  • Review Guidelines
  • Subscribe to Alerts
  • Search
  • Article Type

    Publication Date

  • Author Info
  • Why Submit?
  • Fees
  • Article Types
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submission Checklist
  • Contact Editorial Office
  • Submit Manuscript
Start date should be earlier than end date. OK Please enter valid date format.

Focused Review ARTICLE

Ontologies for neuroscience: what are they and what are they good for?

Department of Neurosciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
Current information technology practices in neuroscience make it difficult to understand the organization of the brain across spatial scales. Subcellular junctional connectivity, cytoarchitectural local connectivity, and long-range topographical connectivity are just a few of the relevant data domains that must be synthesized in order to make sense of the brain. However, due to the heterogeneity of the data produced within these domains, the landscape of multiscale neuroscience data is fragmented. A standard framework for neuroscience data is needed to bridge existing digital data resources and to help in the conceptual unification of the multiple disciplines of neuroscience. Using our efforts in building ontologies for neuroscience as an example, we examine the benefits and limits of ontologies as a solution for this data integration problem. We provide several examples of their application to problems of image annotation, content-based retrieval of structural data, and integration of data across scales and researchers.
Keywords:
neuroinformatics, neuroanatomy, databases, subcellular anatomy, data integration
Citation:
Larson SD and Martone ME (2009). Ontologies for neuroscience: what are they and what are they good for? Front. Neurosci. 3:1. doi: 10.3389/neuro.01.007.2009
Received:
23 September 2008;
 Paper pending published:
04 November 2008;
Accepted:
22 March 2009;
 Published online:
01 May 2009.

Edited by:

Jan G. Bjaalie, International Neuroinformatics Coordination Facility, Sweden; University of Oslo, Norway

Reviewed by:

Mihail Bota, University of Southern California, USA
Raphael Ritz, INCF, Sweden
Copyright:
© 2009 Larson and Martone. This is an open-access article subject to an exclusive license agreement between the authors and the Frontiers Research Foundation, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited.
*Correspondence:
Dr. Maryann E. Martone, Department of Neurosciences University of California, San Diego San Diego, CA 92093-0446 USA 9500 Gilman Drive San Diego, CA, 92093-0446, USA. email: mmartone@ucsd.edu

People who looked at this article, also looked at:


Focused Review Article, Published on 15 May 2010

Statistical learning analysis in neuroscience: aiming for transparency

Michael Hanke, Yaroslav O Halchenko, James V Haxby and Stefan Pollmann

Front. Neurosci. doi: 10.3389/neuro.01.007.2010

Original Research Article, Published on 24 Nov 2008

Representational similarity analysis - connecting the branches of systems neuroscience

Nikolaus Kriegeskorte, Marieke Mur and Peter A Bandettini

Front. Syst. Neurosci. doi: 10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008

Opinion Article, Published on 06 May 2010

Grand Challenges in Pharmacotherapy of Inflammation for the First Decades of the 21st Century

Paola Patrignani, Stefania Tacconelli and Annalisa Bruno

Front. Pharmacol. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2010.00002

Review Article, Published on 17 Jun 2010

Presynaptic NMDA receptors and spike timing-dependent long-term depression at cortical synapses

Antonio Rodriguez Moreno, Abhishek Banerjee and Ole Paulsen

Front. Syn. Neurosci. doi: 10.3389/fnsyn.2010.00018

Focused Review Article, Published on 15 Dec 2009

Relating population-code representations between man, monkey, and computational models

Nikolaus Kriegeskorte

Front. Neurosci. doi: 10.3389/neuro.01.035.2009


© 2007 - 2012 Frontiers Media S.A. All Rights Reserved