What is the ecotoxicity of a given chemical for a given aquatic species? Predicting interactions between species and chemicals using recommender system techniques

References

• C. van Leeuwen and T. Vermeire, Risk Assessment of Chemicals: An Introduction, Vol. 94, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2007. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6102-8.
   Google Scholar
• P.C. Thomas, P. Bicherel, and F.J. Bauer, How in silico and QSAR approaches can increase confidence in environmental hazard and risk assessment, Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. 15 (2019), pp. 40–50. doi:10.1002/ieam.4108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.T. Wright, K. Fay, A. Kennedy, K. Mayo-Bean, M. Moran-Bruce, W. Meylan, P. Ranslow, M. Lock, J.V. Nabholz, J. Von Runnen, C.L. M, and J. Tunkel, ECOlogical Structure-Activity Relationship Model (ECOSAR) Class Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S., 2022.
   Google Scholar
• G. Idakwo, J. Luttrell, M. Chen, H. Hong, Z. Zhou, P. Gong, and C. Zhang, A review on machine learning methods for in silico toxicity prediction, J. Environ. Sci. Health C 36 (2018), pp. 169–191. doi:10.1080/10590501.2018.1537118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. Tang, J. Chen, Z. Wang, H. Xie, and H. Hong, Deep learning for predicting toxicity of chemicals: A mini review, J. Environ. Sci. Health C 36 (2018), pp. 252–271. doi:10.1080/10590501.2018.1537563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A.O. Basile, A. Yahi, and N.P. Tatonetti, Artificial intelligence for drug toxicity and safety, Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 40 (2019), pp. 624–635. doi:10.1016/j.tips.2019.07.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H.L. Ciallella and H. Zhu, Advancing computational toxicology in the big data era by artificial intelligence: Data-driven and mechanism-driven modeling for chemical toxicity, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 32 (2019), pp. 536–547. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Z. Lin and W.C. Chou, Machine learning and artificial intelligence in toxicological sciences, Toxicol. Sci. 189 (2022), pp. 7–19. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfac075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N.C. Kleinstreuer, A. Karmaus, K. Mansouri, D.G. Allen, J.M. Fitzpatrick, and G. Patlewicz, Predictive models for acute oral systemic toxicity: A workshop to bridge the gap from research to regulation, Comput. Toxicol. 8 (2018), pp. 21–24. doi:10.1016/j.comtox.2018.08.002.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• R. Huang, M. Xia, D.-T. Nguyen, T. Zhao, S. Sakamuru, J. Zhao, S.A. Shahane, A. Rossoshek, and A. Simeonov, Tox21 challenge to build predictive models of nuclear receptor and stress response pathways as mediated by exposure to environmental chemicals and drugs, Front. Environ. Sci. 3 (2016). doi:10.3389/fenvs.2015.00085.
   Google Scholar
• A. Mayr, G. Klambauer, T. Unterthiner, and S. Hochreiter, DeepTox: Toxicity prediction using deep learning, Front. Environ. Sci. 3 (2016). doi:10.3389/fenvs.2015.00080.
   Google Scholar
• Y. Xu, J. Pei, and L. Lai, Deep learning based regression and multiclass models for acute oral toxicity prediction with automatic chemical feature extraction, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 57 (2017), pp. 2672–2685. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Sosnin, D. Karlov, I.V. Tetko, and M.V. Fedorov, Comparative study of multitask toxicity modeling on a broad chemical space, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 59 (2019), pp. 1062–1072. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Karim, V. Riahi, A. Mishra, M.A.H. Newton, A. Dehzangi, T. Balle, and A. Sattar, Quantitative toxicity prediction via meta ensembling of multitask deep learning models, ACS Omega 6 (2021), pp. 12306–12317. doi:10.1021/acsomega.1c01247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Jain, V.B. Siramshetty, V.M. Alves, E.N. Muratov, N. Kleinstreuer, A. Tropsha, M.C. Nicklaus, A. Simeonov, and A.V. Zakharov, Large-scale modeling of multispecies acute toxicity end points using consensus of multitask deep learning methods, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 61 (2021), pp. 653–663. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G.E. Dahl, N. Jaitly, and R. Salakhutdinov, Multi-task neural networks for qsar predictions, ArXiv preprint ArXiv:1406.1231 2014.
   Google Scholar
• K. Wu and G.W. Wei, Quantitative toxicity prediction using topology based multitask deep neural networks, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 58 (2018), pp. 520–531. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Gupta, N. Basant, and K.P. Singh, Predicting aquatic toxicities of benzene derivatives in multiple test species using local, global and interspecies QSTR modeling approaches, RSC Adv. 5 (2015), pp. 71153–71163. doi:10.1039/C5RA12825K.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Sun, C. Zhang, Y. Chen, X. Li, S. Zhuang, W. Li, G. Liu, P.W. Lee, and Y. Tang, In silico prediction of chemical aquatic toxicity with chemical category approaches and substructural alerts, Toxicol. Res. 4 (2015), pp. 452–463. doi:10.1039/C4TX00174E.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Basant, S. Gupta, and K.P. Singh, Modeling the toxicity of chemical pesticides in multiple test species using local and global QSTR approaches, Toxicol. Res. 5 (2016), pp. 340–353. doi:10.1039/C5TX00321K.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• F. Li, D. Fan, H. Wang, H. Yang, W. Li, Y. Tang, and G. Liu, In silico prediction of pesticide aquatic toxicity with chemical category approaches, Toxicol. Res. 6 (2017), pp. 831–842. doi:10.1039/C7TX00144D.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B.A. Tuulaikhuu, H. Guasch, and E. Garcia-Berthou, Examining predictors of chemical toxicity in freshwater fish using the random forest technique, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 24 (2017), pp. 10172–10181. doi:10.1007/s11356-017-8667-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T.Y. Sheffield and R.S. Judson, Ensemble QSAR modeling to predict multispecies fish toxicity lethal concentrations and points of departure, Environ. Sci. Technol. 53 (2019), pp. 12793–12802. doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b03957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• X. Yu and Q. Zeng, Random forest algorithm-based classification model of pesticide aquatic toxicity to fishes, Aquat. Toxicol. 251 (2022), pp. 106265. doi:10.1016/j.aquatox.2022.106265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Wu, S. D’Ambrosi, L. Ammann, J. Stadnicka-Michalak, K. Schirmer, and M. Baity-Jesi, Predicting chemical hazard across taxa through machine learning, Environ. Int. 163 (2022), pp. 107184. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2022.107184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Caruana, Multitask learning, Mach. Learn. 28 (1997), pp. 41–75. doi:10.1023/A:1007379606734.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Weiss, T.M. Khoshgoftaar, and D. Wang, A survey of transfer learning, J. Big Data 3 (2016). doi:10.1186/s40537-016-0043-6.
   Google Scholar
• J. Jiang, R. Wang, M. Wang, K. Gao, D.D. Nguyen, and G.W. Wei, Boosting tree-assisted multitask deep learning for small scientific datasets, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 60 (2020), pp. 1235–1244. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Spurgeon, E. Lahive, A. Robinson, S. Short, and P. Kille, Species sensitivity to toxic substances: Evolution, ecology and applications, Front. Environ. Sci. 8 (2020). doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.588380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.H. Park, H.K. Kim, I.Y. Choi, and J.K. Kim, A literature review and classification of recommender systems research, Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (2012), pp. 10059–10072. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Lu, D. Wu, M. Mao, W. Wang, and G. Zhang, Recommender system application developments: A survey, Dec. Supp. Syst 74 (2015), pp. 12–32. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.03.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.B. Schafer, D. Frankowski, J. Herlocker, and S. Sen, Collaborative filtering recommender systems, in The Adaptive Web: Methods and Strategies of Web Personalization, P. Brusilovsky, A. Kobsa, and W. Nejdl, eds., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007, pp. 291–324. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72079-9_9.
   Google Scholar
• M.J. Pazzani and D. Billsus, Content-based recommendation systems, in The Adaptive Web: Methods and Strategies of Web Personalization, P. Brusilovsky, A. Kobsa, and W. Nejdl, eds., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007, pp. 325–341. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72079-9_10.
   Google Scholar
• Y. Koren, R. Bell, and C. Volinsky, Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems, Computer 42 (2009), pp. 30–37. doi:10.1109/MC.2009.263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Rendle, L. Zhang, and Y. Koren, On the difficulty of evaluating baselines: A study on recommender systems, Arxiv preprint ArXiv:1905.01395 2019.
   Google Scholar
• J. Basilico and T. Hofmann, Unifying collaborative and content-based filtering, Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learning. doi:10.1145/1015330.1015394.
   Google Scholar
• T. Pahikkala, A. Airola, S. Pietila, S. Shakyawar, A. Szwajda, J. Tang, and T. Aittokallio, Toward more realistic drug-target interaction predictions, Brief. Bioinf. 16 (2015), pp. 325–337. doi:10.1093/bib/bbu010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Chen, X. Liu, S. Jin, J. Lin, and J. Liu, Machine learning for drug-target interaction prediction, Molecules 23 (2018), pp. 2208. doi:10.3390/molecules23092208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Bagherian, E. Sabeti, K. Wang, M.A. Sartor, Z. Nikolovska-Coleska, and K. Najarian, Machine learning approaches and databases for prediction of drug-target interaction: A survey paper, Brief. Bioinf. 22 (2021), pp. 247–269. doi:10.1093/bib/bbz157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Wen, Z. Zhang, S. Niu, H. Sha, R. Yang, Y. Yun, and H. Lu, Deep-learning-baseddrug-target interaction prediction, J. Proteome Res. 16 (2017), pp. 1401–1409. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G.J.P. van Westen, J.K. Wegner, A.P. Ijzerman, H.W.T. van Vlijmen, and A. Bender, Proteochemometric modeling as a tool to design selective compounds and for extrapolating to novel targets, MedChemComm 2 (2011), pp. 16–30. doi:10.1039/C0MD00165A.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Erhan, J. L’Heureux P, S.Y. Yue, and Y. Bengio, Collaborative filtering on a family of biological targets, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 46 (2006), pp. 626–635. doi:10.1021/ci050367t.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Gao, D. Che, V.W. Zheng, R. Zhu, and Q. Liu, Integrated QSAR study for inhibitors of hedgehog signal pathway against multiple cell lines: A collaborative filtering method, BMC Bioinf. 13 (2012), pp. 186. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-13-186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Ammad-Ud-Din, E. Georgii, M. Gonen, T. Laitinen, O. Kallioniemi, K. Wennerberg, A. Poso, and S. Kaski, Integrative and personalized QSAR analysis in cancer by kernelized Bayesian matrix factorization, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 54 (2014), pp. 2347–2359. doi:10.1021/ci500152b.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.-S. Huang, K.-H. Jo, and X.-L. Zhang (eds.), Using Hybrid Similarity-Based Collaborative Filtering Method for Compound Activity Prediction, Springer International Publishing, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• J.H. Olker, C.M. Elonen, A. Pilli, A. Anderson, B. Kinziger, S. Erickson, M. Skopinski, A. Pomplun, C.A. LaLone, C.L. Russom, and D. Hoff, The ECOTOXicology knowledgebase: A curated database of ecologically relevant toxicity tests to support environmental research and risk assessment, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 41 (2022), pp. 1520–1539. doi:10.1002/etc.5324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E.s.N.C.f.C. Toxicology, Chemistry Dashboard Data: DSSTox QSAR Ready File, The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S., 2018.
   Google Scholar
• K. Mansouri, C.M. Grulke, R.S. Judson, and A.J. Williams, OPERA models for predicting physicochemical properties and environmental fate endpoints, J. Cheminform. 10 (2018), pp. 10. doi:10.1186/s13321-018-0263-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Landrum, P. Tosco, and B. Kelley, Ric, sriniker, gedeck, R. Vianello, D. Cosgrove, N. Schneider, E. Kawashima, N. Dan, A. Dalke, G. Jones, B. Cole, M. Swain, S. Turk, A. Savelyev, A. Vaucher, M. Wójcikowski, I. Take, D. Probst, K. Ujihara, V.F. Scalfani, G. Godin, A. Pahl, F. Berenger, J.L. Varjo, and D. Gavid, rdkit, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• G.L. Hickey, P.S. Craig, R. Luttik, and D. de Zwart, On the quantification of intertest variability in ecotoxicity data with application to species sensitivity distributions, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 31 (2012), pp. 1903–1910. doi:10.1002/etc.1891.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Varoquaux, L. Buitinck, G. Louppe, O. Grisel, F. Pedregosa, and A. Mueller, Scikit-learn, GetMobile: Mobile Comput. Comm. 19 (2015), pp. 29–33. doi:10.1145/2786984.2786995.
   Google Scholar
• Y. Juan, Y. Zhuang, W.-S. Chin, and C.-J. Lin, Field-aware factorization machines for CTR prediction, Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems Association for Computing Machinery, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• L. Breiman, Random forests, Mach. Learn. 45 (2001), pp. 5–32. doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.H. Friedman, Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine, Ann. Stat. 29 (2001). doi:10.1214/aos/1013203451.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. Chen, T. He, and M. Benesty, Xgboost: Extreme gradient boosting. R package version 0.4-2, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• C. Williams and M. Seeger, Using the Nyström method to speed up kernel machines, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• R.E. Fan, K.-W. Chang, C.-J. Hsieh, X.-R. Wang, and C.-J. Lin, LIBLINEAR: A library for large linear classification, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 9 (2008), pp. 1871–1874.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.-C. Chang and C.-J. Lin, Libsvm: A library for support vector machines, ACM Trans. Intell. Syst.Technol. 2 (2011), pp. 1–27. doi:10.1145/1961189.1961199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. Samek, G. Montavon, S. Lapuschkin, C.J. Anders, and K.-R. Muller, Explaining deep neural networks and beyond: A review of methods and applications, Proceed. IEEE 109 (2021), pp. 247–278. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2021.3060483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G.E. Dahl, T.N. Sainath, and G.E. Hinton, Improving deep neural networks for LVCSR using rectified linear units and dropout, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, IEEGeorge, IEEE, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• J. Hemmerich and G.F. Ecker, In silico toxicology: From structure-activity relationships towards deep learning and adverse outcome pathways, Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 10 (2020), pp. e1475. doi:10.1002/wcms.1475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Suvannang, L. Preeyanon, A.A. Malik, N. Schaduangrat, W. Shoombuatong, A. Worachartcheewan, T. Tantimongcolwat, and C. Nantasenamat, Probing the origin of estrogen receptor alpha inhibition via large-scale QSAR study, RSC Adv. 8 (2018), pp. 11344–11356. doi:10.1039/C7RA10979B.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O.F.E.C.-o.a.D. (OECD), The report from the expert group on (quantitative) structure-activity relationships [(q)sars] on the principles for the validation of (Q)sars, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• P.N.H. Wassenaar, E.M.J. Verbruggen, E. Cieraad, W. Peijnenburg, and M.G. Vijver, Variability in fish bioconcentration factors: Influences of study design and consequences for regulation, Chemosphere 239 (2020), pp. 124731. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124731.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H.M. Braakhuis, P.T. Theunissen, W. Slob, E. Rorije, and A.H. Piersma, Testing developmental toxicity in a second species: Are the differences due to species or replication error? Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 107 (2019), pp. 104410. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.104410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H.J. Klimisch, M. Andreae, and U. Tillmann, A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 25 (1997), pp. 1–5. doi:10.1006/rtph.1996.1076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.T. Moermond, R. Kase, M. Korkaric, and M. Agerstrand, CRED: Criteria for reporting and evaluating ecotoxicity data, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35 (2016), pp. 1297–1309. doi:10.1002/etc.3259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar