Using support vector regression coupled with the genetic algorithm for predicting acute toxicity to the fathead minnow

SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research

Volumn 21, Issue 5-6, 2010, Pages 559-570

  Wang, Y ^a   Zheng, M ^a   Xiao, J ^a   Lu, Y ^a   Wang, F ^a   Lu, J ^a   Luo, X ^a   Zhu, W ^a   Jiang, H ^a,b   Chen, K ^a  

^a SHANGHAI INSTITUTE OF MATERIA MEDICA   (China)

^b EAST CHINA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

Fathead minnow; Genetic algorithm; Quantitative structure activity relationship; Support vector regression; Toxicity prediction

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; FORECASTING; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MOLECULAR GRAPHICS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TOXICITY;

ACUTE TOXICITY; ADVERSE EFFECT; FATHEAD MINNOW; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HUMAN HEALTH; MODEL-BASED OPC; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP MODELING; SUPPORT VECTOR REGRESSIONS; TOXICITY PREDICTIONS;

GENETIC ALGORITHMS;

PIMEPHALES PROMELAS;

EID: 77956396770     PISSN: 1062936X     EISSN: 1029046X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1062936X.2010.502300     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. T. Höfer, I. Gerner, U. Gundert-Remy, M. Liebsch, A. Schulte, H. Spielmann, R. Vogel, and K. Wettig, Animal testing and alternative approaches for the human health risk assessment under the proposed new European chemicals regulation, Arch. Toxicol. 78 (2004), pp. 549-564.
2. D.R.J. Moore, R.L. Breton, and D.B. MacDonald, A comparison of model performance for six quantitative structure-activity relationship packages that predict acute toxicity to fish, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 22 (2003), pp. 1799-1809.
3. E. Papa, F. Villa, and P. Gramatica, Statistically validated QSARs, based on theoretical descriptors, for modeling aquatic toxicity of organic chemicals in Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow), J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45 (2005), pp. 1256-1266.
4. T.I. Netzeva, M. Pavan, and A.P. Worth, Review of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships for acute aquatic toxicity, QSAR Comb. Sci. 27 (2008), pp. 77-90.
5. M.T.D. Cronin, J.D. Walker, J.S. Jaworska, M.H.I. Comber, C.D. Watts, and A.P. Worth, Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict ecologic effects and environmental fate of chemical substances, Environ. Health Perspect. 111 (2003), pp. 1376-1390.
6. G.T. Ankley and D.L. Villeneuve, The fathead minnow in aquatic toxicology: Past, present and future, Aquat. Toxicol. 78 (2006), pp. 91-102.
7. M. Smiesko and E. Benfenati, Predictive models for aquatic toxicity of aldehydes designed for various model chemistries, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 976-984.
8. M. Smieško and E. Benfenati, Thermodynamic descriptors derived from density functional theory calculations in prediction of aquatic toxicity, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45 (2005), pp. 379-385.
9. A.A. Toropov and E. Benfenati, QSAR modelling of aldehyde toxicity by means of optimisation of correlation weights of nearest neighbouring codes, J. Mol. Struct. THEOCHEM 676 (2004), pp. 165-169.
10. S.A. Kulkarni, D.V. Raje, and T. Chakrabarti, Quantitative structure-activity relationships based on functional and structural characteristics of organic compounds, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 12 (2001), pp. 565-591.
11. T. Öberg, A QSAR for baseline toxicity: Validation, domain of application, and prediction, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 17 (2004), pp. 1630-1637.
12. H. Yuan, Y.Y. Wang, and Y.Y. Cheng, Mode of action-based local QSAR modeling for the prediction of acute toxicity in the fathead minnow, J. Mol. Graph. 26 (2007), pp. 327-335.
13. Y.H. Zhao, M.T.D. Cronin, and J.C. Dearden, Quantitative structure-activity relationships of chemicals acting by non-polar narcosis-theoretical considerations, Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 17 (1998), pp. 131-138.
14. J.C. Dearden, M.T.D. Cronin, Y.H. Zhao, and O.A. Raevsky, QSAR studies of compounds acting by polar and nonpolar narcosis: An examination of the role of polarisability and hydrogen bonding, Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 19 (2000), pp. 3-9.
15. A. Maunz and C. Helma, Prediction of chemical toxicity with local support vector regression and activity-specific kernels, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 19 (2008), pp. 413-431.
16. A. Colombo, E. Benfenati, M. Karelson, and U. Maran, The proposal of architecture for chemical splitting to optimize QSAR models for aquatic toxicity, Chemosphere 72 (2008), pp. 772-780.
17. M. Pavan, T.I. Netzeva, and A.P. Worth, Validation of a QSAR model for acute toxicity, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 17 (2006), pp. 147-171.
18. L. He and P.C. Jurs, Assessing the reliability of a QSAR model's predictions, J. Mol. Graph. 23 (2005), pp. 503-523.
19. S. Kumar, M. Kumar, R. Stoll, and U. Kragl, Handling uncertainties in toxicity modelling using a fuzzy filter, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 18 (2007), pp. 645-662.
20. U. Maran, S. Sild, P. Mazzatorta, M. Casalegno, E. Benfenati, and M. Romberg, Grid computing for the estimation of toxicity: Acute toxicity on fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), in Distributed, High-Performance and Grid Computing in Computational Biology, W. Dubitzky, A. Schuster, P.M.A. Sloot, M. Schroeder, and M. Romberg, eds., Springer, Berlin, 2007, pp. 60-74.
21. M. Hewitt, M.T.D. Cronin, J.C. Madden, P.H. Rowe, C. Johnson, A. Obi, and S.J. Enoch, Consensus QSAR models: Do the benefits outweigh the complexity?, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47 (2007), pp. 1460-1468.
22. A. Amini, S.H. Muggleton, H. Lodhi, and M.J.E. Sternberg, A novel logic-based approach for quantitative toxicology prediction, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47 (2007), pp. 998-1006.
23. M. Casalegno, E. Benfenati, and G. Sello, An automated group contribution method in predicting aquatic toxicity: The diatomic fragment approach, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 18 (2005), pp. 740-746.
24. T.I. Netzeva, A.O. Aptula, E. Benfenati, M.T.D. Cronin, G. Gini, I. Lessigiarska, U. Maran, M. Vračko, and G. Schüürmann, Description of the electronic structure of organic chemicals using semiempirical and ab initio methods for development of toxicological QSARs, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45 (2005), pp. 106-114.
25. G. Gini, M.V. Craciun, C. König, and E. Benfenati, Combining unsupervised and supervised artificial neural networks to predict aquatic toxicity, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 1897-1902.
26. P. Mazzatorta, M. Vracčko, A. Jezierska, and E. Benfenati, Modeling toxicity by using supervised Kohonen neural networks, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43 (2003), pp. 485-492.
27. S.P. Niculescu, A. Atkinson, G. Hammond, and M. Lewis, Using fragment chemistry data mining and probabilistic neural networks in screening chemicals for acute toxicity to the fathead minnow, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 15 (2004), pp. 293-309.
28. B. Schölkopf and A.J. Smola, Learning with Kernels, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2002.
29. R. Burbidge, M. Trotter, B. Buxton, and S. Holden, Drug design by machine learning: Support vector machines for pharmaceutical data analysis, Comput. Chem. 26 (2001), pp. 5-14.
30. H. Zhang, Q.Y. Chen, M.L. Xiang, C.Y. Ma, Q. Huang, and S.Y. Yang, In silico prediction of mitochondrial toxicity by using GA-CG-SVM approach, Toxicol. Vitro 23 (2009), pp. 134-140.
31. S. Feiwei, C. Liuliang, and Y. Miaobin, Support vector machine with genetic algorithm for forecasting of key-gas ratios in oil-immersed transformer, Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (2009), pp. 6326-6331.
32. Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity (DSSTox) Public Database Network; available from http://www.epa.gov/ncct/dsstox/sdf_epafhm.html
33. C.L. Russom, S.P. Bradbury, S.J. Broderius, D.E. Hammermeister, and R.A. Drummond, Predicting modes of toxic action from chemical structure: Acute toxicity in the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 16 (1997), pp. 948-967.
34. AMPAC, Semichem, Inc., Shawnee, KS 66216.
35. COmprehensive DEscriptors for Structural and Statistical Analysis (CODESSA), Semichem, Inc., Shawnee, KS 66216.
36. Accelrys Discovery Studio, Accelrys Software Inc., San Diego, CA 92121.
37. R.W. Kennard and L.A. Stone, Computer aided design of experiments, Technometrics 11 (1969), pp. 137-148.
38. W. Wu, B. Walczak, D.L. Massart, S. Heuerding, F. Erni, I.R. Last, and K.A. Prebble, Artificial neural networks in classification of NIR spectral data: Design of the training set, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 33 (1996), pp. 35-46.
39. D.L.M.M. Daszykowski and B. Walczak, Representative subset selection, Anal. Chim. Acta 468 (2002), pp. 91-103.
40. C.C. Chang and C.J. Lin, LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines, 2001; software available at http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm
41. V. Vapnik, The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory, Springer, New York, 1995.
42. V.N. Vapnik, Statistical Learning Theory, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1998.
43. A.R. Katritzky, V.S. Lobanov, and M. Karelson, CODESSA Reference Manual, Version 2.0, Semichem and the University of Florida, Shawnee, 1995-1997.
44. H.J.M. Verhaar, C.J. van Leeuwen, and J.L.M. Hermens, Classifying environmental pollutants. 1: Structure-activity relationships for prediction of aquatic toxicity, Chemosphere 25 (1992), pp. 471-491.
45. H. Könemann, Quantitative structure-activity relationships in fish toxicity studies. Part I: tionship for 50 industrial pollutants, Toxicology 19 (1981), pp. 209-221.
46. G.D. Veith, D.J. Call, and L.T. Brooke, Structure-toxicity relationships for the fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas: Narcotic industrial chemicals, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40 (1983), pp. 743-748.
47. J.L.M. Hermens, Electrophiles and acute toxicity to fish, Environ. Health Perspect. 87 (1990), pp. 219-225.
48. G.M. Maggiora, On outliers and activity cliffs-why QSAR often disappoints, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 46 (2006), p. 1535.