On the information content of 2D and 3D descriptors for QSAR

34Citations
Citations of this article
56Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

To gain better understanding on the information content of two-dimensional (2D) vs. three-dimensional (3D) descriptor systems, we analyzed principal component analysis scores derived from 87 2D descriptors and 798 3D (ALMOND) variables on a set of 5998 compounds of medicinal chemistry interest. The information overlap between ALMOND and 2D-based descriptors, as modeled by the fraction of explained variance (r2) and by seven-groups cross-validation (q2) in a two PLS components model was 40%. Individual component analysis indicates that the first and second principal components from the 2D-descriptors are related to the first and third dimensions from the ALMOND PCA model. The first ALMOND component is explained (61%) by size-related descriptors, whereas the third component is marginally explained (25%) by hydrophobicity-related descriptors. Surprisingly, 2D-based hydrogen-bonding descriptors did not contribute significantly in this analysis. These results do not a priori justify the choice of one methodology over the other, when performing QSAR studies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Oprea, T. I. (2002). On the information content of 2D and 3D descriptors for QSAR. In Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society (Vol. 13, pp. 811–815). Sociedade Brasileira de Quimica. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-50532002000600013

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free