Chemical Knowledge for the Semantic Web

  • Mykola Konyk
  • Alexander De Leon
  • Michel Dumontier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5109)

Abstract

With over 80 file formats to represent various chemical attributes, the conversion between one format and another is invariably lossy due to informal specifications. In contrast, the use of a formal knowledge representation language such as the Web Ontology Language (OWL) enables precise molecular descriptions that can be reasoned about in a logically valid manner. In this paper, we describe a chemical knowledge representation using OWL. We demonstrate its utility in querying a new drug repository created from PubChem, DrugBank and DBpedia. By leveraging Semantic Web technologies, it becomes possible to integrate chemical information at differing levels of detail and granularity, opening new avenues for life science knowledge discovery.

Keywords

semantic web knowledge representation knowledge engineering ontology life sciences question answering OWL chemistry molecule mashup 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Murray-Rust, P., Rzepa, H.S.: Chemical markup, XML and the World-Wide Web. 2. Information objects and the CMLDOM. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41, 1113–1123 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Feldman, H.J., Dumontier, M., Ling, S., Haider, N., Hogue, C.W.: CO: A chemical ontology for identification of functional groups and semantic comparison of small molecules. FEBS Lett. 579, 4685–4691 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brooksbank, C., Cameron, G., Thornton, J.: The European Bioinformatics Institute’s data resources: towards systems biology. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, 46–53 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W3C: OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. In: Smith, M.K., Welty, C., McGuinness, D.L. (eds.): W3C Recommendation (2004) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horrocks, I.: Applications of Description Logics: State of the Art and Research Challenges. In: Dau, F., Mugnier, M.-L., Stumme, G. (eds.) ICCS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3596, pp. 78–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grenon, P., Smith, B., Goldberg, L.: Biodynamic ontology: applying BFO in the biomedical domain. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 102, 20–38 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith, B., Ceusters, W., Klagges, B., Kohler, J., Kumar, A., Lomax, J., Mungall, C., Neuhaus, F., Rector, A.L., Rosse, C.: Relations in biomedical ontologies. Genome Biol. 6, R46 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Sattler, U., Parsia, B., Motik, B., Bechhofer, S., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.d., Lutz, C.: OWL 1.1 Specification (2006) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wishart, D.S., Knox, C., Guo, A.C., Shrivastava, S., Hassanali, M., Stothard, P., Chang, Z., Woolsey, J.: DrugBank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, 668–672 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Horridge, M., Drummond, N., Goodwin, J., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wang, H.H.: The Manchester OWL Syntax. OWL Experiences and Design, Athens, Georgia (2006) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Motik, B., Grau, B.C., Sattler, U.: Structured Objects in OWL: Representation and Reasoning. In: 17th Int. World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2008), pp. 169–182. ACM Press, Beijing, China (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mykola Konyk
    • 1
  • Alexander De Leon
    • 1
  • Michel Dumontier
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Department of BiologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Institute of BiochemistryCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations