'rectum' subclassof 'hermaphrodite-specific'?

[chris-grove]

It appears that the term 'rectum' is a child of the term 'hermaphrodite-specific'; was this intentional? Can it be a subclass of 'organ' instead? This is causing some strange inferences in the phenotype ontology.

[chris-grove]

I realize after some reading that the proctodeum is the male equivalent of the rectum. That said I would think from the descriptions in Worm Atlas that the proctodeum is another name for the male rectum, so the proctodeum is a male-specific entity, but I don't conclude that the rectum is then hermaphrodite-specific. @raymond91125 what do you think?

The issue is that the phenotype term "rectal development variant" is being inferred to be a subclass of "sexually dimorphic development variant" because of this relationship. If the rectum is truly mutually exclusive with (disjoint with) the proctodeum, then I guess all is fine as is.