Environmental toxicological fate prediction of diverse organic chemicals based on steady-state compartmental chemical mass ratio using quantitative structure-fate relationship (QSFR) models

Chemosphere

Volumn 92, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 600-607

  Pramanik, Subrata ^a   Roy, Kunal ^a  

^a JADAVPUR UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

Chemometric tools; Mass ratio; QSAR; QSFR; QSPR; Toxicological fate assessment

Indexed keywords

AIR POLLUTION; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; DEGRADATION; ECOSYSTEMS; FORECASTING; INDICATORS (CHEMICAL); INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS; LEAST SQUARES APPROXIMATIONS; LINEAR REGRESSION;

CHEMOMETRIC TOOLS; MASS RATIO; QSAR; QSFR; QSPR; TOXICOLOGICAL FATE ASSESSMENT;

ORGANIC CHEMICALS;

ORGANIC COMPOUND;

CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); EMISSION; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; LEAST SQUARES METHOD; POLLUTANT TRANSPORT; POLLUTION MONITORING; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TOXICOLOGY;

AIR; AIR POLLUTION; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; DEGRADATION; DIFFUSION; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; MODEL; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; PARTITION COEFFICIENT; PREDICTION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE FATE RELATIONSHIP; STEADY STATE; THERMODYNAMICS; WATER POLLUTION;

EID: 84878111322     PISSN: 00456535     EISSN: 18791298     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.03.065     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ahrens A., Traas T.P. Environmental exposure scenarios: development, challenges and possible solutions. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2007, 17:S7-S15.
2. Armitage J.M., Cousins I.T., Hauck M., Harbers J.V., Huijbregts M.A. Empirical evaluation of spatial and non-spatial European-scale multimedia fate models: results and implications for chemical risk assessment. J. Environ. Monit. 2007, 9(6):572-581.
3. Boxall A.B. The environmental side effects of medication. EMBO Rep. 2004, 5:1110-1116.
4. Bridges J. Human health and environmental risk assessment: the need for a more harmonised and integrated approach. Chemosphere 2003, 52:1347-1351.
5. Bridges J. REACH epilogue. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2007, 17:S101-S104.
6. Bruggemann R., Restrepo G., Voigt K. Structure-fate relationships of organic chemicals derived from the software. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46:894-902.
7. Bruggemann R., Welzl G., Voigt K. Order theoretical tools for the evaluation of complex regional pollution patterns. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43:1771-1779.
8. Cerius 2 Version 4.10 is a Product of Accelrys Inc., San Diego, CA.
9. Cronin M.T., Jaworska J.S., Walker J.D., Comber M.H., Watts C.D., Worth A.P. Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict health effects of chemical substances. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111(10):1391-1401.
10. Darlington R.B. Regression and Linear Models 1990, McGrawHill, New York.
11. Dougherty E.R., Barrera J., Brun M., Kim S., Cesar R.M., Chen Y., Bittner M., Trent J.M. Inference from clustering with application to gene-expression microarrays. J. Comput. Biol. 2002, 9:105-126.
12. Eriksson, L., Johansson, E., Kettaneh-Wold, N., Wold, S. (2001). Multi-and Megavariate Data Analysis: Principles and Applications, second ed., Umetrics Academy, Umetrics, Umea, pp. 1-533.
13. Eriksson L., Johansson E., Lindgren F., Sjostrom M., Wold S. Megavariate analysis of hierarchical QSAR data. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2002, 16(10):711-726.
14. Everitt B., Landau S., Leese M. Cluster Analysis 2001, Arnold, London. fourth ed.
15. Fernandez A., Lombardo A., Rallo R., Roncaglioni A., Giralt F., Benfenati E. Quantitative consensus of bioaccumulation models for integrated testing strategies. Environ. Int. 2012, 45:51-58.
16. Goodarzi M., Dejaegher B., Heyden Y.V. Feature selection methods in QSAR studies. J AOAC Int. 2012, 95(3):636-651. (Abstract).
17. Hansson S.O., Ruden C. Priority setting in the REACH system. Toxicol. Sci. 2006, 90(2):304-308.
18. Hartung T. Toxicology for the twenty-first century. Nature 2009, 460(7252):208-212.
19. Hollander A., Sauter F., Hollander H.D., Huijbregts M., Ragas A., van de Meent D. Spatial variance in multimedia mass balance models: comparison of LOTOS-EUROS and SimpleBox for PCB-153. Chemosphere 2007, 68(7):1318-1326.
20. Johnson A.R., Wichern W.D. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis 2005, Pearson, Delhi, pp. 668-730. fifth ed.
21. Jorgensen W.L. Drug discovery: pulled from a protein's embrace. Nature 2010, 466(7302):42-43.
22. Kar S., Roy K. Predictive toxicology using QSAR: a perspective. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2010, 87:1-61.
23. Kardaetz S., Strube T., Bruggemann R., Nutzmann G. Ecological scenarios analyzed and evaluated by a shallow lake model. J. Environ. Manage. 2008, 88:120-135.
24. Kavlock R.J., Ankley G., Blancato J., Breen M., Conolly R., Dix D., Houck K., Hubal E., Judson R., Rabinowitz J., Richard A., Setzer R.W., Shah I., Villeneuve D., Weber E. Computational toxicology - a state of the science mini review. Toxicol. Sci. 2008, 103:14-27.
25. Kubinyi H., Hamprecht F.A., Mietzner T. Three-dimensional quantitative similarity-activity relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL similarity matrices. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41:2553-2564.
26. Martinez I., Grifoll J., Giralt F., Rallo R. Multimedia environmental chemical partitioning from molecular information. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 409:412-422.
27. MarvinSketch 5.10.0. 1998-2012, ChemAxon Ltd. .
28. MINITAB is a Statistical Software of Minitab Inc., USA. .
29. Mitra I., Saha A., Roy K. Exploring quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) studies of antioxidant phenolic compounds obtained from traditional Chinese medicinal plants. Mol. Simul. 2010, 36:1067-1079.
30. Nel A.E., Madler L., Velegol D., Xia T., Hoek E.M., Somasundaran P., Klaessig F., Castranova V., Thompson M. Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-bio interface. Nat. Mater. 2009, 8(7):543-557.
31. Rogers D., Hopfinger A.J. Application of genetic function approximation to quantitative structure activity relationships and quantitative structure property relationships. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34:854-866.
32. Roy K., Chakraborty P., Mitra I., Ojha P.K., Kar S., Das R.N. Some case studies on application of "rm2" metrics for judging quality of QSAR predictions: Emphasis on scaling of response data. J. Comput. Chem. 2013, 34:1071-1082.
33. Roy K., Mitra I., Kar S., Ojha P.K., Das R.N., Kabir H. Comparative studies on some metrics for external validation of QSPR models. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52:396-408.
34. Roy P.P., Leonard J.T., Roy K. Exploring the impact of the size of training sets for the development of predictive QSAR models. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2008, 90:31-42.
35. Rusyn I., Sedykh A., Low Y., Guyton K.Z., Tropsha A. Predictive modeling of chemical hazard by integrating numerical descriptors of chemical structures and short-term toxicity assay data. Toxicol. Sci. 2012, 127(1):1-9.
36. Scherb H., Voigt K. Adverse genetic effects induced by chemical or physical environmental pollution. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2011, 18:695-696.
37. Schuurmann G., Ebert R.U., Chen J., Wang B., Kuhne R. External validation and prediction employing the predictive squared correlation coefficient s test set activity mean vs training set activity mean. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48(11):2140-2145.
38. SPSS is a Statistical Software of SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, .
39. STATISTICA is a Statistical Software of STATSOFT Inc., USA. .
40. UMETRICS SIMCA-P 10.0., <, Umea, Sweden, 2002. http://www.umetrics.com>.
41. van de Meent D., 1993. SIMPLEBOX: A Generic Multimedia Fate Evaluation Model. Bilthoven, The Netherlands: RIVM.
42. Wold S. PLS for multivariate linear modelling. Chemometric Methods in Molecular Design 1995, 195-218. VCH, Weinheim, Germany. H. van de Waterbeemd (Ed.).