Abstract:The peptide quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR), also known as the quantitative sequence–activity model (QSAM), has attracted much attention in the bio- and chemoinformatics communities and is a well developed computational peptidology strategy to statistically correlate the sequence/structure and activity/property relationships of functional peptides. Amino acid descriptors (AADs) are one of the most widely used methods to characterize peptide structures by decomposing the peptide into its residue building blocks and sequentially parametrizing each building block with a vector of amino acid principal properties. Considering that various AADs have been proposed over the past decades and new AADs are still emerging today, we herein query the following: is it necessary to develop so many AADs and do we need to continuously develop more new AADs? In this study, we exhaustively collect 80 published AADs and comprehensively evaluate their modeling performance (including fitting ability, internal stability, and predictive power) on 8 QSAR-oriented peptide sample sets (QPSs) by employing 2 sophisticated machine learning methods (MLMs), totally building and systematically comparing 1280 (80 AADs × 8 QPSs × 2 MLMs) peptide QSAR models. The following is revealed: (i) None of the AADs can work best on all or most peptide sets; an AAD usually performs well for some peptides but badly for others. (ii) Modeling performance is primarily determined by the peptide samples and then the MLMs used, while AADs have only a moderate influence on the performance. (iii) There is no essential difference between the modeling performances of different AAD types (physiochemical, topological, 3D-structural, etc.). (iv) Two random descriptors, which are separately generated randomly in standard normal distribution N(0, 1) and uniform distribution U(−1, +1), do not perform significantly worse than these carefully developed AADs. (v) A secondary descriptor, which carries major information involved in the 80 (primary) AADs, does not perform significantly better than these AADs. Overall, we conclude that since there are various AADs available to date and they already cover numerous amino acid properties, further development of new AADs is not an essential choice to improve peptide QSAR modeling; the traditional AAD methodology is believed to have almost reached the theoretical limit nowadays. In addition, the AADs are more likely to be a vector symbol but not informative data; they are utilized to mark and distinguish the 20 amino acids but do not really bring much original property information to these amino acids.The Supporting Information is available free of charge at <a class="ext-link" href="/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01370?goto=supporting-info">https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01370</a>.(Figure S1) Systematic histogram of QSAR metrics. (Figure S2) Systematic histogram of the mean ± s.e. values of QSAR metrics. (Figure S3) Systematic pairwise Euclidean distance between the mean values of QSAR metrics. (Table S1) Full list of 80 AADs. (Tables S2–S9) Full list of 8 QSAR-oriented peptide sample sets (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01370/suppl_file/ci0c01370_si_001.pdf">PDF</a>)This article has not yet been cited by other publications.

Comparison on the QSAR Research Methods of Bioactivity Polypeptides

Research Advance of the Application of Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship(QSAR) in Food Science

Research on Modeling Method of Quantitative Structure-activity Relationship for Peptides

QSAR Studies of Antimicrobial Α, Β-Polypeptides

Structural Parameter Characterization and Bioactivity Simulation Based on Peptide Sequence

Quantitative Sequence-Activity Model (qsam): Applying Qsar Strategy to Model and Predict Bioactivity and Function of Peptides, Proteins and Nucleic Acids

QSAR Study on Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Oligopeptides Based on a Novel Set of Sequence Information Descriptors

Biomacromolecular Quantitative Structure–activity Relationship (bioqsar): a Proof-of-concept Study on the Modeling, Prediction and Interpretation of Protein–protein Binding Affinity

Application of quantitative structure-activity relationship to food-derived peptides: Methods, situations, challenges and prospects

Activity Identification and Structure Analysis of the Analogs of Prothoracicostatic Peptide of the Silkworm, Bombyx Mori

Research progress and application of some QSAR modeling approach in chemistry

QSAR Study on Insect Neuropeptide Potencies Based on a Novel Set of Parameters of Amino Acids by Using OSC-PLS Method

QSAR Study on ACE Inhibitors by Using OSC‐PLS Algorithm

Predicting the Activity of Peptides Based on Amino Acid Information

New Descriptors of Amino Acids and Their Application to Peptide QSAR Study

Systematic Comparison and Comprehensive Evaluation of 80 Amino Acid Descriptors in Peptide QSAR Modeling

3D-QSAR Studies on AChE Inhibitory Activities of 2-Phenoxy-indan-1-one Derivatives

QSAR Modeling of Peptide Biological Activity by Coupling Support Vector Machine with Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm and Genetic Algorithm.

Theoretical Modeling and Systemic Analysis of Various Active Dipeptides and Analogues with 3D-QSAR Methods

QSAR as applied in modeling and predicting binding affinities between the human amphiphysin-I SH3 domains and its peptides ligands

Piecewise Hypersphere Modeling by Particle Swarm Optimization in QSAR Studies of Bioactivities of Chemical Compounds.