Linear and Nonlinear Structure-Retention Relationship Analysis of Different Classes of Pesticides Isolated From Groundwater

References

• Mazzatorta, P.; Smiesko, M.; Lo Piparo, E.; Benfenati, E. QSAR Model for Predicting Pesticide Aquatic Toxicity. J. Chem. Inform. Model. 2005, 45, 1767–1774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kass, D. E.; Thier, A. L.; Leighton, J.; Cone, J. E.; Jeffery, N. L. Developing a Comprehensive Pesticide Health Effects Tracking System for an Urban Setting: New York City’s Approach. Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112, 1419–1423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starks, S. E.; Hoppin, J. A.; Kamel, F.; Lynch, C. F.; Jones, M. P.; Alavanja, M. C.; Sandler, D. P.; Gerr, F. Peripheral Nervous System Function and Organophosphate Pesticide Use Among Licensed Pesticide Applicators in the Agricultural Health Study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2012, 120, 515–520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akiyoshin, S.; Sai, G.; Yamauchi, K. Species-dependent Effects of the Phenolic Herbicide Ioxynil with Potential Thyroid Hormone Disrupting Activity: Modulation of Its Cellular Uptake and Activity by Interaction with Serum Thyroid Hormone-binding Proteins. J. Environ. Sci. 2012, 24, 949–955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fantke, P.; Wieland, P.; Juraske, R.; Shaddick, G.; SevignéItoizItoiz, E.; Friedrich, R.; Jolliet, O. Parameterization Models for Pesticide Exposure via Crop Consumption. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 12864–12872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, N. B.; Srilakshmi, K. R.; Parvathinathan, G. Comparison of models of simazine transport and fate in the subsurface environment in a citrus farm. J. Environ. Manage. 2008, 86, 27–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajski, Ł.; del Mar Gómez-Ramos, M.; Fernández-Alba, A. R. Large Pesticide Multiresidue Screening Method by Liquid Chromatography - Orbitrap Mass Spectrometry in Full Scan Mode Applied to Fruit and Vegetables. J. Chromatogr. A 2014, 1360, 119–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyka, A.; Miszczyk, M. Chromatographic Evaluation of the Lipophilic Properties of Selected Pesticides. Chromatographia 2005, 61, 37–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostecka, M.; Niewiadomy, A.; Czeczko, R. Evaluation of N-substituted 2,4-Dihydroxyphenylthioamide Fungicide Lipophilicity Using the Chromatographic Techniques HPLC and HPTLC. Chromatographia 2005, 62, 121–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovačević, S. Z.; Jevrić, L. R.; Podunavac Kuzmanović, S. O.; Lončar, E. S. Chemometric Estimation of the RP TLC Retention Behavior of Some Estrane Derivatives by Using Multivariate Regression Methods. Central Eur. J. Chem. 2013, 11, 2031–2039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuzimski, T.; Sztanke, K. Retention Data for Some Carbonyl Derivatives of Imidazo[2,1-c][1,2,4]triazine in Reversed-phase Systems in TLC and HPLC and Their Use for Determination of Lipophilicity. Part 1. Lipophilicity of 8-Aryl-3-phenyl-6,7-dihydro-4H-imidazo[2,1-c][1,2,4]triazin-4-ones. J. Planar Chromatogr. 2005, 18, 274–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovačević, S. Z.; Podunavac Kuzmanović, S. O.; Jevrić, L. R.; Lončar, E. S. Assessment of Chromatographic Lipophilicity of Some Anhydro-D-aldose Derivatives on Different Stationary Phases by QSRR Approach. J. Liquid Chromatogr. Rel. Technol. 2015, 38 (4), 492–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasal, A.; Siluk, D.; Kaliszan, R. Chromatographic Retention Parameters in Medicinal Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology. Curr. Med. Chem. 2003, 10, 381–426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heberger, K. Quantitative Structure-(chromatographic) Retention Relationships. J. Chromatogr. A 2007, 1158, 273–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaliszan, R. Quantitative Structure-retention Relationships. Anal. Chem. 1992, 64, 619–631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovačević, S. Z.; Jevrić, L. R.; Podunavac Kuzmanović, S. O.; Kalajdžija, N. D.; Lončar, E. S. Quantitative Structure-retention Relationship Analysis of Some Xylofuranose Derivatives by Linear Multivariate Method. Acta Chim. Slov. 2013, 60, 420–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jevrić, L. R.; Podunavac Kuzmanović, S. O.; Švarc-Gajić, J. V.; Tepić, A. N.; Kovačević, S. Z.; Kalajdžija, N. D. QSRR Modeling of Retention Behavior of Some s-Triazine Derivatives. Acta Chim. Slov. 2013, 60, 732–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khodadoust, S.; Armand, N.; Masoudi, S.; & Ghorbanzadeh, M. A QSRR Study of Liquid Chromatography Retention Time of Pesticides Using Linear and Nonlinear Chemometric Models. J. Chromatogr. Sep. Techn. 2012, 3, 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Khodadoust, S. Application of Artificial Neural Network for Prediction of Retention Time for Some Pesticides in Liquid Chromatography. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2012, 5, 2001–2008.
   Google Scholar
• Vandecasteele, K.; Gaus, I.; Debreuck, W.; Walraevens, K. Identification and Quantification of 77 Pesticides in Groundwater Using Solid Phase Coupled to Liquid–Liquid Microextraction and Reversed-phase Liquid Chromatography. Anal. Chem. 2000, 72, 3039–3101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetko, I. V.; Gasteiger, J.; Todeschini, R.; Mauri, A.; Livingstone, D.; Ertl, P.; Palyulin, V. A.; Radchenko, E. V.; Zefirov, N. S.; Makarenko, A. S.; Tanchuk, V. Y.; Prokopenko, V. V. Virtual Computational Chemistry Laboratory - Design and Description. J. Comp.-Aided Mol. Des. 2005, 19, 453–463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MarvinSketch 14.9.15.0, ChemAxon Ltd. http://www.chemaxon.com/
   Google Scholar
• Simulation Plus ADMET predictor 6.5, Simulations Plus, Inc. http://www.simulations-plus.com/
   Google Scholar
• Topliss, J. G.; Costello, R. J. Chance Correlation in Structure-activity Studies Using Multiple Regression Analysis. J. Med. Chem. 1972, 15, 1066–1068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, R. M. A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors. Qual. Quan. 2007, 41, 673–690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, J. N.; Miller, J. C. Statistics and Chemometrics for Analytical Chemistry, 6th ed. Pearson Education Limited: Harlow, UK, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Kovačević, S. Z.; Podunavac Kuzmanović, S. O.; Jevrić, L. R.; Djurendić, E. A.; Ajduković, J. J. Non-linear Assessment of Anticancer Activity of 17-Picolyl and 17-Picolinylidene Androstane Derivatives – Chemometric Guidelines for Further Syntheses. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 62, 258–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadzuric, S. B.; Podunavac Kuzmanovic, S. O.; Jokic, A. I.; Vranes, M. B.; Ajdukovic, N.; Kovacevic, S. Z. Chemometric Estimation of Post-mortem Interval Based on Na+ and K+ Concentrations from Human Vitreous Humour by Linear Least Squares and Artificial Neural Networks Modeling. Australian J. Forensic Sci. 2014, 46, 166–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priddy, K. L.; Keller, P. E. Artificial Neural Networks – An Introduction; SPIE: New York, NY, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Jayalakshmi, T.; Santhakumaran, A. Statistical Normalization and Back Propagation for Classification. Int. J. Comp. Theory Eng. 2011, 3, 89–93.
   Google Scholar
• Shojaeefard, M. H.; Akbari, M.; Tahani, M.; Farhani, F. Sensitivity Analysis of the Artificial Neural Network Outputs in Friction Stir Lap Joining of Aluminium to Brass. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2013, 2013, 1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehmod, T.; Hovde Liland, K.; Snipen, L.; Sæbø, S. A Review of Variable Selection Methods in Partial Least Squares Regression. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2012, 118, 62–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Héberger, K. Sum of Ranking Differences Compares Methods or Models Fairly. TrAC-Trends Anal. Chem. 2010, 29, 101–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Héberger, K.; Kollár-Hunek, K. Sum of Ranking Differences for Method Discrimination and Its Validation: Comparison of Ranks with Random Numbers. J. Chemom. 2011, 25, 151–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollár-Hunek, K.; Héberger, K. Method and Model Comparison by Sum of Ranking Differences in Cases of Repeated Observations (Ties). Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2013, 127, 139–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vračko, M.; Minovski, N.; Héberger, K. Ranking of QSAR Models to Predict Minimal Inhibitory Concentrations toward Mycobacterium Tuberculosis for a Set of Fluoroquinolones. Acta Chim. Slov. 2010, 57, 586–590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Héberger, K.; Škrbić, B. Ranking and Similarity for Quantitative Structure-retention Relationship Models in Predicting Lee Retention Indices for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Anal. Chim. Acta 2012, 716, 92–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Héberger, K.; Kolarević, S.; Kračun-Kolarević, M.; Sunjog, K.; Gačić, Z.; Kljajić, Z.; Mitrić, M.; Vuković-Gačić, B. Evaluation of Single-cell Gel Electrophoresis Data: Combination of Variance Analysis with Sum of Ranking Differences. Mutat. Res., Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2014, 771, 15–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hintze, J. NCSS 8; NCSS, LLC: Kaysville, UT, 2012. http://www.ncss.com/
   Google Scholar
• Statistica version 10; StatSoft, Inc.: Tulsa, OK, 2011. http://www.statsoft.com/
   Google Scholar
• Microsoft. Microsoft Excel. Microsoft: Redmond, Washington, 2003. Computer Software. http://www.microsoft.com/
   Google Scholar