ArticleACS omega2025
A Comparative Evaluation of Machine Learning and Deep Graph Learning for Chemical Ecotoxicological Prediction.
Article in ACS omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- LMF-CP: An Interpretable Multimodal Late-Fusion Framework for Compound Carcinogenicity Prediction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regulating chemicals to protect the environment based on ecotoxicological assessments is a major challenge. However, experimental ecotoxicity tests are time-consuming and expensive, which underscores the need for accurate prediction methods. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive analysis on the application of machine learning and graph-based learning techniques for the ecotoxicological prediction of chemicals. A total of 161 models were constructed using a combination of three molecular representations (Morgan, MACCS, and Mol2vec), six machine learning algorithms (KNN, NB, RF, SVM, XGB, and DNN), and five graph neural networks (GAT, GCN, MPNN, Attentive FP, and FPGNN). In predicting the ecotoxicity of three aquatic taxonomic groups - fish, crustaceans, and algae - GCN achieved the best performance overall. In the same-species predictions, GCN models achieved the highest values of area under the ROC curve (AUC), ranging between 0.982 and 0.992. In cross-species predictions, GAT and GCN achieved the best and second-best performance, respectively. However, both models exhibited a reduction of approximately 17% in AUC values when predicting the fish group while being trained on the same chemical data for the crustaceans and algae groups. Interestingly, cross-species predictions for unseen chemicals are only better off by DNN with the MACCS fingerprint, yielding an AUC of 0.821. Our findings underscore the critical need to further advance computational prediction methods in order to accurately predict the ecotoxicity of chemicals across species. The ecotoxicology prediction web server for fish, algae, and crustaceans is accessible at https://app.cbbio.online/ecotoxicology/home.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.