Introduction of jumping fragments in combination with QSARs for the assessment of classification in ecotoxicology

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 50, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 1330-1339

  Lozano, Sylvain ^a   Poezevara, Guillaume ^b   Halm Lemeille, Marie Pierre ^a   Lescot Fontaine, Elodie ^a   Lepailleur, Alban ^a   Bissell Siders, Ryan ^b   Crémilleux, Bruno ^b   Rault, Sylvain ^a   Cuissart, Bertrand ^b   Bureau, Ronan ^a  

^a CENTRE D ETUDES ET DE RECHERCHE SUR LE MÉDICAMENT DE NORMANDIE   (France)

^b Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; ECOLOGY;

CHEMICAL FRAGMENTS; ECO-TOXICOLOGY; ECOTOXICITY; MODE OF ACTION; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURES; RANDOM SET;

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION);

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; ECOTOXICOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; POLLUTANT; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 77956033183     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci100092x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Guidance to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of substances and mixtures. European Commission, 2008; http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/Classification-Labelling/ CLP-Guidance-to-Regulation.pdf.
2. Globally Harmonized System for the classification and labelling of chemicals. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2007; http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs-rev03/English/04e-part4.pdf.
3. REACH. Registration Evaluation Authorization and restriction of Chemicals. European Commission Environment, 2007; http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/chemicals/reach/reach-intro.htm.
4. Rogers, M. D. The European Commissions White Paper "Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy": A Review Risk Anal. 2003, 23 (2) 381-388
5. Benfenati, E.; Clook, M.; Fryday, S.; Hart, A. QSARs for regulatory purposes: the case for pesticide authorization. In QSARs for regulatory purposes: the case for pesticide authorization; Benfenati, E., Ed.; Elsevier: Milano, Italy, 2007; pp 1 - 54.
6. Benfenati, E.; Gini, G. Computational predictive programs (expert systems) in toxicology Toxicology 1997, 119 (3) 213-225
7. Cronin, M. T. D.; Livingstone, D. J. Predicting chemical toxicity and fate; CRC Press: New York, 2004; pp 263 - 373.
8. Faucon, J. C.; Bureau, R.; Faisant, J.; Briens, F.; Rault, S. Ecotoxicological endpoints in European notification procedure impact on the classification for the aquatic environment Chemosphere 1999, 38 (12) 2849-2863
9. Weyers, A.; Vollmer, G. Algal growth inhibition: effect of the choice of growth rate or biomass as endpoint on the classification and labelling of new substances notified in the EU Chemosphere 2000, 41 (7) 1007-1010
10. ECOSAR, Estimation Programs Interface Suite (EPI Suite) for Microsoft Windows, v 4.00; United States Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2009.
11. TOXTREE; European Central Bank: Frankfurt am Main, Germany; http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/qsar/home.php?CONTENU=/qsar/qsar-tools/ qsar-tools-toxtree.php.
12. (Q)SAR Application Toolbox. OASIS; Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry: Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2008; http://toolbox.oasis-lmc.org/.
13. Lozano, S.; Lescot, E.; Halm, M.-P.; Lepailleur, A.; Bureau, R.; Rault, S. Prediction of acute toxicity in fish by using QSAR methods and chemical modes of action J. Enzyme Inhib. Med. Chem. 2009, 25 (2) 195-203
14. EPAFHM: EPA Fathead Minnow Acute Toxicity; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC; http://www.epa.gov/ncct/dsstox/sdf-epafhm.html.
15. Auer, J.; Bajorath, J. Emerging Chemical Patterns: A New Methodology for Molecular Classification and Compound Selection J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 2006, 46 (6) 2502-2514
16. Discovering Emerging Graph Patterns from Chemicals. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Poezevara, G.; Cuissart, B.; Crémilleux, B., Eds.; Springer-Berlin: Heidelberg, Germany 2009; Vol. 5722, pp 45 - 55.
17. Faucon, J. C.; Bureau, R.; Faisant, J.; Briens, F.; Rault, S. Prediction of the fish acute toxicity from heterogeneous data coming from notification files Chemosphere 1999, 38 (14) 3261-3276
18. Faucon, J. C.; Bureau, R.; Faisant, J.; Briens, F.; Rault, S. Prediction of the Daphnia acute toxicity from heterogeneous data Chemosphere 2001, 44 (3) 407-422
19. Van Leeuwen, C. J.; Van Der Zandt, P. T. J.; Aldenberg, T.; Verhaar, H. J. M.; Hermens, J. L. M. The application of QSARs, extrapolation and equilibrium partitioning in aquatic effects assessment for narcotic pollutants Sci. Total Environ. 1991, 109-110, 681-690
20. Netzeva, T.; Pavan, M.; Worth, A. Review of data sources, QSARs and integrated testing strategies for aquatic toxicity. EUR 22943 EN. http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/QSAR/EUR-22943-EN.pdf.
21. Meylan, W. M.; Howard, P. H. Atom/fragment contribution method for estimating octanol-water partition coefficients J. Pharm. Sci. 1995, 84 (1) 83-92
22. Hahn, M. Receptor Surface Models. 1. Definition and Construction J. Med. Chem. 1995, 38 (12) 2080-2090
23. PipelinePilot; SciTegic, Inc: San Diego, CA; http://www.scitegic.com/.
24. IUCLID, International Uniform Chemical Information Database. http://iuclid.eu/.
25. ECB, European Chemicals Bureau. http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ documentation/ (accessed 2008).
26. Garey, M. R.; Johnson, D. S. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. Freeman, W. H., Ed. 1979.
27. Dong, G.; Li, J., Efficient mining of emerging patterns: Discovering Trends and differences. In KDD ?99: Proceedings of the fifth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, ACM Press: New York, 1999; pp 43 - 52.
28. Auer, J.; Bajorath, J. Distinguishing between bioactive and modeled compound conformations through mining of emerging chemical patterns J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 2008, 48 (9) 1747-53
29. Auer, J.; Bajorath, J. Simulation of sequential screening experiments using emerging chemical patterns Med. Chem. 2008, 4 (1) 80-90
30. MOE, Molecular Operating Environment. Chemical Computing Group Inc: Montreal, Canada, 2007.
31. Borgelt, C.; Berthold, M. R. Mining molecular fragments: finding relevant substructures of molecules Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining 2002, 51-58
32. Ting, R. M. H.; Bailey, J. Mining minimal contrast subgraph patterns Proceedings of the sixth SIAM international conference on data mining. 2006, 638-642
33. Hassan, M.; Bielawski, J. P.; Hempel, J. C.; Waldman, M. Optimization and visualization of molecular diversity of combinatorial libraries Mol. Divers 1996, 2, 1381-1991
34. PPDB Pesticide Properties Database; IUPAC: Research Triangle Park, NC; http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/iupac/.
35. Schultz, T. W.; Lin, D. T.; Arnold, L. M. QSARs for monosubstituted anilines eliciting the polar narcosis mechanism of action Sci. Total Environ. 1991, 109-110, 569-580
36. INCHEM; International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS): Geneva, Switzerland; http://www.inchem.org/.
37. 3,4-dichloroaniline. European Chemicals Bureau (ECB); ECB:; http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/IUCLID-DataSheets/95761.pdf.
38. Ramos, E. U.; Vaal, M. A.; Hermens, J. L. M. Interspecies sensitivity in the aquatic toxicity of aromatic amines Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2002, 11 (3-4) 149-158
39. Brack, W.; Rottler, H. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 1994, 1 (4) 223-228
40. Coumatetralyl. European Chemicals Bureau; ECB:; http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa. eu/documents/Biocides/ANNEX-I/ASSESSMENT-REPORTS/AnnexI-AR-5836-29-3-PT14-en. pdf.