Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35211724›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2022

cropCSM: designing safe and potent herbicides with graph-based signatures.

Douglas E V Pires, Keith A Stubbs, Joshua S Mylne, David B Ascher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Simplicity within biological complexity.Bioinformatics advances · 2025
    Article
  3. Evaluation of Fifteen 5,6-Dihydrotetrazolo[1,5-Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Engineering G protein-coupled receptors for stabilization.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. kinCSM: Using graph-based signatures to predict small molecule CDK2 inhibitors.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Douglas E V PiresSchool of Computing and Information Systems at the University of Melbourne.ORCID 0000-0002-3004-2119
Keith A StubbsSchool of Molecular Sciences at the University of Western Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6899-402X
Joshua S MylneCurtin University and Deputy Director of the Centre for Crop and Disease Management.
David B AscherUniversity of Queensland, and head of Computational Biology and Clinical Informatics at the Baker Institute and Systems.ORCID 0000-0003-2948-2413

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Herbicides have revolutionised weed management, increased crop yields and improved profitability allowing for an increase in worldwide food security. Their widespread use, however, has also led to a rise in resistance and concerns about their environmental impact. Despite the need for potent and safe herbicidal molecules, no herbicide with a new mode of action has reached the market in 30 years. Although development of computational approaches has proven invaluable to guide rational drug discovery pipelines, leading to higher hit rates and lower attrition due to poor toxicity, little has been done in contrast for herbicide design. To fill this gap, we have developed cropCSM, a computational platform to help identify new, potent, nontoxic and environmentally safe herbicides. By using a knowledge-based approach, we identified physicochemical properties and substructures enriched in safe herbicides. By representing the small molecules as a graph, we leveraged these insights to guide the development of predictive models trained and tested on the largest collected data set of molecules with experimentally characterised herbicidal profiles to date (over 4500 compounds). In addition, we developed six new environmental and human toxicity predictors, spanning five different species to assist in molecule prioritisation. cropCSM was able to correctly identify 97% of herbicides currently available commercially, while predicting toxicity profiles with accuracies of up to 92%. We believe cropCSM will be an essential tool for the enrichment of screening libraries and to guide the development of potent and safe herbicides. We have made the method freely available through a user-friendly webserver at http://biosig.unimelb.edu.au/crop_csm.

Indexed as

HerbicidesDrug DiscoveryHumansHerbicidesgraph-based signaturesherbicidesmachine learningtoxicity

Identifiers

PMID35211724
PMCPMC9155605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.