Comparing In Silico Fungi Toxicity Prediction with In Vitro Cytotoxicity Assay for Indoor Airborne Fungi
Source abstract
Abstract
Technological advancements have shifted human living and working environments from outdoor to indoor. Although indoor spaces offer protection from unfavorable weather conditions, they also present new health challenges. Stale, humid, and warm indoor air creates an ideal breeding ground for bacteria and fungi, leading to health issues such as asthma and bacterial infections. Although proper ventilation is crucial, a comprehensive inspection of local indoor air quality is necessary to prevent widespread diseases. In vitro experiments involving bacteria and fungi collected from indoor air yield accurate results but are time- and cost-intensive. In silico methods offer faster results and provide valuable insights for guiding further in vitro experiments. In this study, we conduct an in vitro cytotoxicity assay on 32 fungi species and compare its results with a memory-efficient in silico modeling method using parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) and ProtBERT. This study suggests a potential methodology for predicting the toxicity of indoor airborne fungi when their identities are known.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure · Plant Disease Management Techniques · Insects and Parasite Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning Laboratory, School of Computing, Gachon University, Seungnam 13306, Republic of Korea
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju 61452, Republic of Korea
Allergy Immunology Center, Korea University, Seoul 02708, Republic of Korea
Funding
Korea Environment Industry Technology Institute (KEITI) · Korea Ministry of Environment (MOE) · Chosun University
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. World Health Organization (2023, February 11). Household Air Pollution. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health?gclid=CjwKCAiAxreqBhAxEiwAfGfndH3VhED1dNR75_bIo6hEOggDPIgR8zHskVOAo9fITvo-TfUuZwd--xoCSlcQAvD_BwE.
2. Indoor air pollution and health: Bridging perspectives from developing and developed countries10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010602 ↗
3. Tran, V.V., Park, D., and Lee, Y.C. (2020). Indoor air pollution, related human diseases, and recent trends in the control and improvement of indoor air quality. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17.10.3390/ijerph17082927 ↗
4. Indoor air pollution and respiratory health10.1016/j.ccm.2020.08.014 ↗
5. MERS transmission and risk factors: A systematic review10.1186/s12889-018-5484-8 ↗
6. MERS coronavirus: Diagnostics, epidemiology and transmission10.1186/s12985-015-0439-5 ↗
7. SARS and MERS: Recent insights into emerging coronaviruses10.1038/nrmicro.2016.81 ↗
8. SARS-CoV-2: Virus dynamics and host response10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30235-8 ↗
9. Molecular architecture of the SARS-CoV-2 virus10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.018 ↗
10. COVID19: An announced pandemic10.1038/s41419-020-02995-9 ↗
11. Aspergillosis10.1056/NEJMra0808853 ↗
12. Aspergillosis: Epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment10.1016/j.idc.2021.03.008 ↗
13. Current epidemiology of Pneumocystis pneumonia10.3201/eid1010.030985 ↗
14. Pneumocystis pneumonia10.1056/NEJMra032588 ↗
15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2023, February 03). Impact of Fungal Diseases in the United States, Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/cdc-and-fungal/burden.html.
16. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, Ł., and Polosukhin, I. (2017, January 4–9). Attention is all you need. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA.
17. Devlin, J., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., and Toutanova, K. (2018). Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv.
18. Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., and Stoyanov, V. (2019). Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach. arXiv.
19. Sanh, V., Debut, L., Chaumond, J., and Wolf, T. (2019). DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: Smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter. arXiv.
20. Radford, A., Narasimhan, K., Salimans, T., and Sutskever, I. (2018). Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training, OpenAI.
21. OpenAI (2023). GPT-4 Technical Report. arXiv.
22. Chithrananda, S., Grand, G., and Ramsundar, B. (2020). ChemBERTa: Large-scale self-supervised pretraining for molecular property prediction. arXiv.
23. Fabian, B., Edlich, T., Gaspar, H., Segler, M., Meyers, J., Fiscato, M., and Ahmed, M. (2020). Molecular representation learning with language models and domain-relevant auxiliary tasks. arXiv.
24. SolvBERT for solvation free energy and solubility prediction: A demonstration of an NLP model for predicting the properties of molecular complexes10.1039/D2DD00107A ↗
25. The language of proteins: NLP, machine learning & protein sequences10.1016/j.csbj.2021.03.022 ↗
26. Prottrans: Toward understanding the language of life through self-supervised learning10.1109/TPAMI.2021.3095381 ↗
27. Elnaggar, A., Essam, H., Salah-Eldin, W., Moustafa, W., Elkerdawy, M., Rochereau, C., and Rost, B. (2023). Ankh☥: Optimized protein language model unlocks general-purpose modeling. bioRxiv.10.1101/2023.01.16.524265 ↗
28. Houlsby, N., Giurgiu, A., Jastrzebski, S., Morrone, B., De Laroussilhe, Q., Gesmundo, A., Attariyan, M., and Gelly, S. (2019, January 9–15). Parameter-efficient transfer learning for NLP. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, Long Beach, CA, USA.
29. Hu, E.J., Shen, Y., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., and Chen, W. (2021). Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. arXiv.
30. Ahn, S.Y., Kim, M., Bae, J.E., Bang, I.S., and Lee, S.W. (2022). Reliability of the In Silico Prediction Approachm to In Vitro Evaluation of Bacterial Toxicity. Sensors, 22.10.3390/s22176557 ↗
31. The UniProt Consortium (2021). UniProt: The universal protein knowledgebase in 2021. Nucleic Acids Res., 49, D480–D489.10.1093/nar/gkaa1100 ↗
32. The Gene Ontology (GO) database and informatics resource10.1093/nar/gkh036 ↗
33. Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., and Funtowicz, M. (2019). Huggingface’s transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. arXiv.10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.6 ↗