Effectiveness of molecular fingerprints for exploring the chemical space of natural products
Journal of Cheminformatics, ISSN: 1758-2946, Vol: 16, Issue: 1, Page: 35
2024
- 9Citations
- 73Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef6
- Captures73
- Readers73
- 73
Article Description
Natural products are a diverse class of compounds with promising biological properties, such as high potency and excellent selectivity. However, they have different structural motifs than typical drug-like compounds, e.g., a wider range of molecular weight, multiple stereocenters and higher fraction of sp-hybridized carbons. This makes the encoding of natural products via molecular fingerprints difficult, thus restricting their use in cheminformatics studies. To tackle this issue, we explored over 30 years of research to systematically evaluate which molecular fingerprint provides the best performance on the natural product chemical space. We considered 20 molecular fingerprints from four different sources, which we then benchmarked on over 100,000 unique natural products from the COCONUT (COlleCtion of Open Natural prodUcTs) and CMNPD (Comprehensive Marine Natural Products Database) databases. Our analysis focused on the correlation between different fingerprints and their classification performance on 12 bioactivity prediction datasets. Our results show that different encodings can provide fundamentally different views of the natural product chemical space, leading to substantial differences in pairwise similarity and performance. While Extended Connectivity Fingerprints are the de-facto option to encoding drug-like compounds, other fingerprints resulted to match or outperform them for bioactivity prediction of natural products. These results highlight the need to evaluate multiple fingerprinting algorithms for optimal performance and suggest new areas of research. Finally, we provide an open-source Python package for computing all molecular fingerprints considered in the study, as well as data and scripts necessary to reproduce the results, at https://github.com/dahvida/NP_Fingerprints.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know