The maximum common substructure as a molecular depiction in a supervised classification context: Experiments in quantitative structure/biodegradability relationships

Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 1043-1052

  Cuissart, B ^a   Touffet, F ^a   Cremilleux B ^a   Bureau, R ^a   Rault, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE CAEN   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS;

ALGORITHMS; BIODEGRADATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA REDUCTION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

MOLECULAR STRUCTURE;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; BIOREMEDIATION; CHEMICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

ALGORITHMS; BIODEGRADATION, ENVIRONMENTAL; BIOMETRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, CHEMICAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 0036708522     PISSN: 00952338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci020017w     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Council Directive 67/548/EEC relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances, as amended [OJ 196, 16.8.1967].
2. Directive 88/379/EEC relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous preparations [OJ L 187, 16.7.1988].
3. Council Regulation (EEC) 793/93 on evaluation and control of risks of existing substances [OJ L 84, 5.4.1993].
4. Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations [OJ L 262, 27.9.1976].
5. White paper Strategy for a future Chemicals Policy [OJ 88, 27.2.2001].
6. Structure-activity relationships for biodegradation. Environment monograph no. 68, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1993.
7. Loonen, H.; Lindgren, F.; Hansen, B.; Karcher, W. Prediction of biodegradability from chemical structure. In Biodegradability prediction; Peijnenburg, W.J.G.M., Damborsky J.I., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: 1996; pp 105-113.
8. Langenberg, J.H.; Peijnenburg, W.J.G.M.; Rorije, E. On the usefulness and reliability of existing QSBRs for risk assessment and priority setting. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 1996, 5, 1-16.
9. Rorije, E.; Loonen, H.; Muller, M.; Klopman, G.; Peijnenburg, W. Evaluation and application of models for the prediction of ready biodegradability in the MITI-I test. Chemosphere 1999, 38, 1409-1417.
10. Howard, P.H.; Boethling, R.S.; Stiteler, W.M. Predictive Model for Aerobic Biodegradability Developed from a File of Evaluated Biodegradation Data. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1992, 11, 593-603.
11. Boethling, R.S.; Howard, P.H.; Meylan, W.; Stiteler, W.M.; Beauman, J.; Tirado, N. Group Contribution Method for Predicting Probability and Rate of Aerobic Biodegradation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1994, 28, 459-465.
12. Loonen, H.; Lindgren, F.; Hansen, B.; Karcher, W.; Niemela, J.; Hiromatsu, K.; Takatsuki, M.; Peijnenburg, W.; Rorije, E.; Struijs, J. Prediction of biodegradability from chemical structure: Modeling of ready biodegradation test data. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1999, 18, 1763-1768.
13. Klopman, G. The META - CASETOX system. In Biodegrndabilily Prediction; Peijnenburg, W.J.G.M., Damborsky J.I., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: 1996; pp 27-40.
14. Council Directive 92/32/EEC amending for the seventh time Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relative to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances, as amended [OJ L154, 5.6.1992].
15. Commission Directive 93/21/EEC adapting to technical progress for the 18th time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances [OJ L 110, 4.5.1993].
16. Commission Directive 96/54/EC adapting to technical progress for the twenty-second time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances [OJ L 248, 30.09.1996].
17. Commission Directive 92/69/EEC to technical progress for the seventeenth time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances [OJ L 383, 29.12.].
18. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, CD-ROM, OECD, Paris, 1998.
19. The OECD Principles of Good Laboratory Practice, OECD, Paris, 1998.
20. Howard, P.H.; Hueber, A.E.; Boethling, R.S. Biodegradation Data Evaluation for Structure/Biodegradability Relations. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1987, 6, 1-10.
21. Takahashi, Y.; Satoh, Y.; Sasaki, S. Recognition of the Largest Common Fragment among a Variety of Chemical Structures. Anal. Sci. 1987, 3, 23-28.
22. Hagadone, T.R. Molecular Substructure Similarity Searching: Efficient Retrieval in two-Dimensional Structure Databases. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 515-521.
23. .
24. Bayada, D.M.; Simpson, R.W.; Johnson, A.P. An Algorithm for the Multiple Common Subgraph Problem. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 680-685.
25. Raymond, J.W.; Gardiner, E.J.; Willett, P. Heuristics for Similarity Searching of Chemical Graphs Using a Maximum Common Edge Subgraph Algorithm. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 305-316.
26. McGregor, J.J.; Willett, P. Use of a maximal common subgraph algorithm in the automatic identification of the ostensible bond changes occurring in chemical reactions. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1981, 21, 137-140.
27. McGregor, J.J. Backtrack Search Algorithms and the Maximal Common Subgraph Problem. Software-Practice Experience 1982, 42, 23-34.
28. Levi, G. A note on the derivation of maximal common subgraphs of two directed or undirected graphs. Calcolo 1972, 9, 341-352.
29. Dacunha-Castelle, D.; Duflo, M. Problèmes à temps fixe. In Probabilités et Statistiques; Ciarlet, P.G., Lions, J.L., Eds.; Masson, 1994; pp 134-138.
30. Dasarathy B.V. Nearest Neighbor (NN) Norms: NN Patterns Classification Techniques. IEEE Computer Society Press: 1991.
31. Hastie, T.; Tobshirani, R.; Friedman J. Model Assessment and Selection. In The Elements of Statistical Learning; Springer-Verlag: 2001; pp 214-217.
32. Moore, A.W.; Lee, M.S. Efficient Algorithms for Minimizing Cross-Validation Error. In Proceedings of the eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning; Morgan Kaufmann: 1994.
33. Egan, J.P. Signal Detection Theory and ROC Analysis; Academic Press: 1975.
34. Friedman, C.; Wyatt, J. Evaluation methods in medical informatics; Springer-Verlag: 1997.
35. Provost, F.; Fawcett, T. Analysis and Vizualisation of Classifier Performance: Comparison under Imprecise Class and Cost Distributions. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD-97); American Association for Artificial Intelligence: 1997.
36. Provost, F.; Fawcett, T. Robust Classification for Imprecise Environments. Machine Learning J. 2001, 42.
37. Fawcett T. . GNU General Public License.
38. Johnson, M.; Maggiora, G. Concepts and applications of molecular similarity; Wiley-Intersciences: 1990.
39. Yuan, S.; Zheng, C.; Zhao, X.; Zeng F. Identification of maximal common substructures in structure/activity studies. Anal. Chim. Acta 1990, 235, 239-241.
40. Takahashi, Y.; Sukekawa, M.; Sasaka, S. Automatic identification of molecular similarity using reduced-graph representation of chemical structure. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1992, 32, 639-643.