Short verdict: Keep, but avoid treating granule localization as fate. Stress granules and P-bodies are related but distinct and not always liquid-like.
What the current graph claims
Node definition: Stress granules and P-bodies: dynamic cytoplasmic RNP assemblies linked to storage, repression, decay, and stress adaptation.
Incoming edges:
TIMER -> VAULT: stored or / degraded (bidirectional)
Outgoing edges:
None shown in current DOT.
Literature-grounded assessment
What is strongly supported: G3BP-dependent stress granules and decapping-enriched P-bodies dynamically exchange mRNPs; they reflect translational repression and RNA triage under stress.
What is context-dependent: Granule composition and material state vary by stress, cell type, and time; many RNAs/proteins pass through without being degraded.
What is weak, controversial, or assay-biased: LLPS claims can be overextended; puncta formation, 1,6-hexanediol sensitivity, or FRAP alone do not prove functional phase separation.
What may be duplicate biology under another name: Overlaps with TIMER and READERS.
Missing or excessive graph structure
Missing edges: Add BRAKE -> VAULT because ISR/eIF2alpha phosphorylation triggers many stress-granule contexts.
Excess edges: TIMER <-> VAULT should be caveated because P-bodies can store as well as decay and stress granules are not decay sites per se.
Candidate splits: Optionally split stress granules and P-bodies if the figure has room.
Candidate merges: No merge.
Candidate renames: RNP-GRANULES.
Recommendation
Concrete graph change, if any: Keep; add ISR connection and LLPS assay caveat.
Concrete technical-notes/blog wording change, if any: Mirror the graph recommendation in the glossary and relation catalogue, and explicitly mark the confidence/caveat where the claim is context-dependent or assay-sensitive.