Essential and desirable characteristics of ecotoxicity quantitative structure–activity relationships

Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) developed and applied in the prediction of ecotoxic potencies far out number those in other areas, such as health effects. There are yet to be any formal guidelines for the development of ecotoxicological QSARs. Despite this, the depth and breadth of our knowledge of QSARs as they apply to ecotoxicology, especially short-term aquatic toxicity, allow for the formulation of characteristics that appear to be essential and/or desirable for high-quality QSARs. The three components of a QSAR are the biological activity, the property/structural descriptors, and the statistical methodology. Problems may arise from all three components and may be compounded by interactions between them. In an effort to minimize any tribulations associated with development and application of ecotoxic QSARs, a number of essential or desirable characteristics have been identified. Ecotoxicological data used in formulating the QSAR must be reliable, of high quality, and reflect a well-defined and continuous endpoint; this dataset should be diverse both in terms of potency and chemical structure (i.e., property). Descriptors used in formulating the QSAR should be of high quality, reproducible, of a number and type consistent with the endpoint being modeled, and when possible allow for a mechanistic interpretation of the QSAR. The statistical process used in formulating a QSAR should be as rigorous as possible, appropriate for the endpoint being modeled, and allow for the development of as easily interpretable (i.e., transparent) QSARs as possible. The resultant QSAR should be validated, only used within the descriptor space and chemical domain of the model, and relied on in relation to the total weight of evidence; precision of the QSAR and expectations from its application need to be related to the error in the original ecotoxicological and descriptor measurements. Finally, development of QSARs should be through the interaction of a group of multidisciplinary experts.

[1]  E Benfenati,et al.  Factors Influencing Predictive Models for Toxicology , 2001, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[2]  T W Schultz,et al.  Parametrization of electrophilicity for the prediction of the toxicity of aromatic compounds. , 2001, Chemical research in toxicology.

[3]  T W Schultz,et al.  Reproducibility of toxicity across mode of toxic action in the Tetrahymena population growth impairment assay. , 2001, Aquatic toxicology.

[4]  Milon Tichy,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships for unsaturated alcohols to Tetrahymena pyriformis: C5 and C6 analogs and primary propargylic alcohols , 1993, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[5]  T W Schultz,et al.  Aquatic Toxicities of Halogenated Benzoic Acids to Tetrahymena pyriformis , 1999, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[6]  T. Schultz,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships of selected nitrogenous heterocyclic compounds II. Dinitrogen molecules , 1982, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[7]  Gilman D. Veith,et al.  Structure–Toxicity Relationships for the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales promelas: Narcotic Industrial Chemicals , 1983 .

[8]  S. Morgan,et al.  Outlier detection in multivariate analytical chemical data. , 1998, Analytical chemistry.

[9]  L. Hall,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships of selected nitrogenous heterocyclic compounds. III. Relations using molecular connectivity , 1982, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[10]  T W Schultz,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships for aminoalkanols: a comparison with alkanols and alkanamines. , 1998, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[11]  John D. Walker,et al.  Structure Activity Relationships For Predicting Ecological Effects Of Chemicals , 2002 .

[12]  J. Dearden,et al.  Partitioning and lipophilicity in quantitative structure-activity relationships. , 1985, Environmental health perspectives.

[13]  T. W. Schultz,et al.  Structure-Toxicity Relationships for Aliphatic Compounds Encompassing a Variety of Mechanisms of Toxic Action to Vibrio fischeri , 2000, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[14]  David J. Livingstone,et al.  The Characterization of Chemical Structures Using Molecular Properties. A Survey , 2000, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[15]  R L Lipnick,et al.  The toxicity of acetylenic alcohols to the fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas: narcosis and proelectrophile activation. , 1989, Xenobiotica; the fate of foreign compounds in biological systems.

[16]  Ovanes Mekenyan,et al.  Quantum‐chemical Descriptors for Estimating the Acute Toxicity of Substituted Benzenes to the Guppy (Poecilia reticulata) and Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) , 1996 .

[17]  Subhash C. Basak,et al.  Prediction of Mutagenicity of Aromatic and Heteroaromatic Amines from Structure: A Hierarchical QSAR Approach , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[18]  M. Cronin,et al.  Validation of Vibrio fisheri acute toxicity data: mechanism of action-based QSARs for non-polar narcotics and polar narcotic phenols. , 1997, The Science of the total environment.

[19]  Gerald J. Niemi,et al.  Use of respiratory‐cardiovascular responses of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) in identifying acute toxicity syndromes in fish: Part 3. Polar narcotics , 1989 .

[20]  I. W Nowell,et al.  Molecular Connectivity in Structure-Activity Analysis , 1986 .

[21]  David J. Livingstone,et al.  Data Analysis for Chemists: Applications to QSAR and Chemical Product Design , 1996 .

[22]  Ovanes Mekenyan,et al.  Quantum‐chemical Descriptors for Estimating the Acute Toxicity of Electrophiles to the Fathed minnow (Pimephales promelas): An Analysis Based on Molecular Mechanisms , 1996 .

[23]  Mark T D Cronin,et al.  Comparative assessment of methods to develop QSARs for the prediction of the toxicity of phenols to Tetrahymena pyriformis. , 2002, Chemosphere.

[24]  E Novellino,et al.  Toward a quantitative comparative toxicology of organic compounds. , 1989, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[25]  E Uriarte,et al.  Quantitative Structure–Toxicity Relationships Using Tops-Mode. 1. Nitrobenzene Toxicity to Tetrahymena Pyriformis , 2001, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[26]  S D Dimitrov,et al.  Interspecies Modeling of Narcotics Toxicity to Aquatic Animals , 2000, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[27]  J B Houston,et al.  The Integrated Use of Alternative Methods in Toxicological Risk Evaluation , 1999, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[28]  Ş. Niculescu,et al.  Using probabilistic neural networks to model the toxicity of chemicals to the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas): a study based on 865 compounds. , 1999, Chemosphere.

[29]  F. Burden,et al.  A quantitative structure--activity relationships model for the acute toxicity of substituted benzenes to Tetrahymena pyriformis using Bayesian-regularized neural networks. , 2000, Chemical research in toxicology.

[30]  J. Topliss,et al.  Chance correlations in structure-activity studies using multiple regression analysis , 1972 .

[31]  M. Crane,et al.  Forecasting the environmental fate and effects of chemicals , 2001 .

[32]  T W Schultz,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships for benzenes evaluated with Tetrahymena pyriformis. , 1999, Chemical research in toxicology.

[33]  Gilman D. Veith,et al.  Structure‐Toxicity Relationships for α, β‐Unsaturated Alcohols in Fish , 1993 .

[34]  T. Schultz,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships for selected weak acid respiratory uncouplers , 1990 .

[35]  M. C. Newman,et al.  The practice of structure activity relationships (SAR) in toxicology. , 2000, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[36]  T W Schultz,et al.  Development of quantitative structure-activity relationships for the toxicity of aromatic compounds to Tetrahymena pyriformis: comparative assessment of the methodologies. , 2001, Chemical research in toxicology.

[37]  C. Russom,et al.  QSAR modelling of the ERL-D fathead minnow acute toxicity database. , 1991, Xenobiotica; the fate of foreign compounds in biological systems.

[38]  P. Khadikar,et al.  QSAR prediction of toxicity of nitrobenzenes. , 2001, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[39]  John C. Dearden,et al.  A NOTE OF CAUTION TO USERS OF ECOSAR , 1999 .

[40]  Structure-Activity Relationships for Para-Substituted Phenols , 1987 .

[41]  Roger L Breton,et al.  A comparison of model performance for six quantitative structure‐activity relationship packages that predict acute toxicity to fish , 2003, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[42]  C. Russom,et al.  Predicting modes of toxic action from chemical structure: Acute toxicity in the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) , 1997 .

[43]  T W Schultz,et al.  Modeling the Toxicity of Chemicals to Tetrahymena pyriformis Using Molecular Fragment Descriptors and Probabilistic Neural Networks , 2000, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[44]  T. W. Schultz,et al.  TETRATOX: TETRAHYMENA PYRIFORMIS POPULATION GROWTH IMPAIRMENT ENDPOINTA SURROGATE FOR FISH LETHALITY , 1997 .

[45]  John D. Walker,et al.  Quantitative structure–activity relationships (QSARs) in toxicology: a historical perspective , 2003 .

[46]  G. Veith,et al.  Rules for distinguishing toxicants that cause type I and type II narcosis syndromes. , 1990, Environmental health perspectives.

[47]  T. Wayne Schultz,et al.  Structure-toxicity relationships for nonpolar narcotics: A comparison of data from the tetrahymena, photobacterium and pimephales systems , 1990, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[48]  Igor V. Tetko,et al.  Data modelling with neural networks: Advantages and limitations , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..