1 / 21

Treatment Process Modeling by QSAR Approach - Biodegradation

Sung Kyu (Andrew) Maeng. Treatment Process Modeling by QSAR Approach - Biodegradation. Contents. QSAR Introduction QSBR Introduction Results and discussion Current QSAR project in UNESCO-IHE. Introduction to the (Q)SAR concept.

jenaya
Télécharger la présentation

Treatment Process Modeling by QSAR Approach - Biodegradation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sung Kyu (Andrew) Maeng Treatment Process Modeling by QSAR Approach - Biodegradation

  2. Contents • QSAR Introduction • QSBR Introduction • Results and discussion • Current QSAR project in UNESCO-IHE

  3. Introduction to the (Q)SAR concept • Chemicals with similar molecular structures have similar effects in physical and biological systems → qualitative model (SAR) • The extent of an effect varies in a systematic way with variations in molecular structure → quantitative model (QSAR) Biodegradation index = 4.066-0.007MW-0.314H/C r = 0.866, r2 = 0.750, Sig. < 0.005, n= 156 Activity depends on chemical structure

  4. SAR vs QSAR • SAR is based on the “similarity” principle; • The principle is assumed, but in the reality it is not always true; - Similarity of structures - Similarity of descriptors • The authenticity depends on the type of the relationship between descriptors (numerical representation of chemicals) and activity; • The type of the relationship should be known (or derived)

  5. Three common things to this point: Both methods use numerical representation of chemical compounds; Both methods need to decide which representation to use; Both methods need to derive the relationship between numerical representation (descriptors, etc.) and activity. SAR vs. QSARhow could we say there is a difference ?

  6. QSAR in water treatment processes Results obtained from valid qualitative or quantitative structure-activity relationship models can provide the removal of PhACs in drinking water and the process selection for target compounds. Results of QSAR may be used instead of testing if results are derived from a QSAR model whose scientific validity has been established

  7. QSAR in water treatment processes • In principle, QSARs can be used to: - provide information for use in priority setting treatments for target compounds - guide the experimental design of a test or testing strategy - improve the evaluation of existing test data - provide mechanistic information (e.g. to support the grouping of chemicals into categories) - fill a data gap needed for classification

  8. OECD Principles for QSAR Validation • QSAR should be associated with the following information: - a defined endpoint - an unambiguous algorithm - appropriate measures of goodness-of-fit, robustness and predictivity - a mechanistic interpretation, if possible

  9. QSBR • Development of Quantitative Structure-Biodegradation Relationships (QSBRs) - QSBRs has been developed to predict the biodegradability of chemicals released to natural systems using their structure-activity relationships (SAR) - The development of QSBRs has been relatively slow compared with proliferation of QSARs because of the nature of the biodegradability endpoint - QSBR is very complex because 1. Chemical structure 2. Environmental conditions 3. Bioavailability of the chemical

  10. QSBR - Limitations often associated in developing QSBR 1. Only within cogeneric series of chemicals 2. The absence of standardised and uniform biodegradation databases - Recent years, a very intensive development of new and better qualitative and quantitative biodegradability models was observed - How many QSBR have been developed ? A literature search on QSBR was performed including literature published showed more than 84 models - However, only a few models provided an acceptable level of agreement between estimated and experimental data

  11. QSBR - All QSBR models until 1994 were reviewed by several researchers for their applicability 1. Group contribution method (OECD, PLS, BIOWIN, MultiCASE) 2. Chemometric methods (CART) 3. Expert system (BESS, CATABOL, TOPKAT) - According to the previous studies, the group contribution method seems to be the most applied and successful way of modeling biodegradation

  12. Group Contribution Method • OECD hierarchical model approach • Multivariable Partial Least Approach (PLS) model • BIOWIN • MultiCASE anaerobic program

  13. What Does the BIOWIN Model Do? • Provide estimates of biodegradability useful in chemical screening under aerobic condition (1,2,5,6) • Provide approximate time required to biodegrade in a stream (3,4) • Recently, BIOWIN was updated and now it can estimate anaerobic biodegradation potential (7) BIOWIN has 7 models (U.S. EPA, 2007)

  14. Materials and method • Finding Molecular Descriptors Sofrware Delft Chemtech, Dragon, Chem3D etc… • Selection of Molecular Descriptors 1. PCA (SPSS) 2. Genetic Algorithm-Variable Subset Selection (Mobydigs)

  15. Principal Component Analysis

  16. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) • Variables: MW, MV, log Kow, dipole, length, width, depth, equiv width, % HL surface, polar surface are • Assessment of the suitability of the data for PCA • - KMO > 0.6 (KMO = 0.6), Barlett’s Test of Sphericity < 0.05 (<0.005) • Determination of the number of factors by Kaise criterion, scree plot and Montecarlo parallel analysis

  17. Classification PhACs - PCA HL-neu HL-ion HP-neu HP-ion The two-component solution explained a total of 67% of the variance with Component 1 contributing 46% and Component2 contributing 21%; Component 1: SIZE and component 2: Hydrophobic/Hydrophilicity

  18. Biodegradation (Aerobic) • HP and HP-ionic compounds were not feasible to come up with equation because of collinearity problem in variables • (Violation in MLR assumptions)

  19. Innovative system for removal of micropollutants – RBF and NF membrane days RBF days - weeks weeks weeks - months months Membrane longer

  20. QSAR Models Decision Support Framework Organic micropollutants QSAR BIOWIN Physical/Chemical Treatment Biological treatment Kow KO3 ARR RBF /DUNE GAC Membrane AOP MW NF RO Cl2 O3 Process selection and comparative performance assessment

  21. Current QSAR project 2008 GIST QSAR Tools Analysis of PhACs LC-MS / AUTO SPE Selection of Target compounds Selection of Target compounds Physical-chemical characteristics Vs. Water treatments 2009 Selection of Water Treatments Selection of Water Treatments Selected water Treatments PhACs removal using selected water treatments by UNESCO-IHE PhACs removal using selected water treatments by GIST Classification, Database, Model development A decision support tool for PhACS removal for water utility 2010

More Related