Hi everyone,
I’m in the process of setting up openBIS for the lab I work in (based in Poland)
, and I’m trying to figure out the best way to model our workflow using the available data structures.
Our typical workflow is fairly standard for sequencing labs and looks something like this:
Sample > DNA > Library > Pool > Sequencing Run
If I represent each of these steps as an object and add them as collections to the inventory, everything works smoothly. However, I run into issues when I try to introduce experimental steps (e.g., DNA extraction) between objects.
For example, if I structure it as:
Sample (object) > DNA Extraction (experiment/experimental step) > DNA (object)
…then the DNA object is automatically assigned to the DNA Extraction experiment as its parent. This makes it more difficult to trace the direct relationship between the Sample and the DNA object from the inventory collections, which is something we’d ideally like to preserve.
Technically, I can assign multiple parents to the DNA object (e.g., both Sample and DNA Extraction), but I feel like that makes the relationships a bit harder to follow and more complex than necessary.
At the same time, I’d really like to include more experiments or experimental steps in the model - especially to capture metadata related to how each object (e.g., DNA) was generated. This kind of information is important to us and would help provide better traceability.
I’m attaching a sample hierarchy graph to better illustrate the structure I’m describing, since I realize it may sound a bit confusing in writing.
Do you have any best practices or suggestions for modeling such relatively simple workflows in openBIS - ideally in a way that allows all relevant objects to end up in inventory collections for a more LIMS-like experience?
Thanks in advance!
