Add taxon constraints to display (redux)

[kltm]

This was first attempted with #56 but, due to confusion in some cases, it was removed from view.

With the addition of pre-computed ontology terms with geneontology/go-ontology#28760, we'd like to re-add these to the display.

We'll do a cross-check with the issues found in #712 and make sure we're correct this time around.

[kltm]

GO:0007117

https://golr.geneontology.org/solr/select?defType=edismax&qt=standard&indent=on&wt=json&rows=10&start=0&fl=*,score&facet=true&facet.mincount=1&facet.sort=count&json.nl=arrarr&facet.limit=25&hl=true&hl.simple.pre=%3Cem%20class=%22hilite%22%3E&hl.snippets=1000&fq=document_category:%22ontology_class%22&q=id:%22GO:0007117%22

Noting:

{
  "nodes": [
    {
      "id": "NCBITaxon:131567",
      "lbl": "cellular organisms"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0007114",
      "lbl": "cell budding"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0007118",
      "lbl": "budding cell apical bud growth"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:1990252",
      "lbl": "Syp1 complex"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0007119",
      "lbl": "budding cell isotropic bud growth"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0007117",
      "lbl": "budding cell bud growth"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0040007",
      "lbl": "growth"
    }
  ],
  "edges": [
    {
      "sub": "GO:0007118",
      "obj": "GO:0007117",
      "pred": "is_a"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:0007117",
      "obj": "NCBITaxon:131567",
      "pred": "RO:0002162"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:0007119",
      "obj": "GO:0007117",
      "pred": "is_a"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:1990252",
      "obj": "GO:0007117",
      "pred": "RO:0002216"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:0007117",
      "obj": "GO:0040007",
      "pred": "is_a"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:0007117",
      "obj": "GO:0007114",
      "pred": "BFO:0000050"
    }
  ],
  "meta": {
  }
}

GO:0000804

https://golr.geneontology.org/solr/select?defType=edismax&qt=standard&indent=on&wt=json&rows=10&start=0&fl=*,score&facet=true&facet.mincount=1&facet.sort=count&json.nl=arrarr&facet.limit=25&hl=true&hl.simple.pre=%3Cem%20class=%22hilite%22%3E&hl.snippets=1000&fq=document_category:%22ontology_class%22&q=id:%22GO:0000804%22

{
  "nodes": [
    {
      "id": "NCBITaxon:131567",
      "lbl": "cellular organisms"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0000804",
      "lbl": "W chromosome"
    },
    {
      "id": "GO:0000803",
      "lbl": "sex chromosome"
    }
  ],
  "edges": [
    {
      "sub": "GO:0000804",
      "obj": "GO:0000803",
      "pred": "is_a"
    },
    {
      "sub": "GO:0000804",
      "obj": "NCBITaxon:131567",
      "pred": "RO:0002162"
    }
  ],
  "meta": {
  }
}

never_in_taxon (RO:0002161) not showing up; compare to:
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/QuickGO/term/GO:0007117
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/QuickGO/term/GO:0000804

[balhoff]

@kltm do we need this merged first for never_in_taxon to show up? #720

[kltm]

@balhoff My understanding is "no". I was under the (possibly erroneous) belief that the addition of the pre-computed ontology terms would have these appear in the usual "neighborhood" graph . Let's touch bases on this this week?

[balhoff]

I don't think you will get the never_in_taxon without Chris's PR. The precomputed taxon constraints just adds more, in different places, of the same things we had before.

[kltm]

@balhoff Okay, that's the info I was looking for--thank you!

[kltm]

Needs to be tested out in derivatives build.