Advances in Biological Chemistry, 2011, 1, 1-5 ABC
doi:10.4236/abc.2011.11001 Published Online May 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/abc/).
Published Online May 2011 in SciRes. http://www.sc i rp.org/journal/abc
Entropy Approach to the Study of Biological Activity of
Chemi cal Compounds: The Other Side of Radioprotectors
Vladimir K. Mukhomorov
Agrophysical Institute, Sankt-Petersburg, 195220, Russia.
Email: vmukhomorov@mail.ru
Received 20 March 2011; revised 20 April 2011; accepted 27 Apr il 2011.
ABSTRACT
An attempt made to construct a model of relation-
ship of the radioprotective and carcinogenic prop-
erties of biologically active compounds with their
electron and information factors. We discovered a
simple quantitative structure activity relation-
ships between the radioprotective effectiveness of
chemicals and t heir molecular structure. It is e stab-
lished that carcinogenic properties of chemical
compounds and effective radioprotectors are over-
lapping with each other. Within the framework of
an information approach a systemic factor is pro-
posed for distinguish highly radio protective agents
among a series of drug. It was shown that the cor-
relation obtained relating the structure of the com-
pounds of the ra dio protectiv e effect may be applie d
to studies of the mechanism of action of the prepa-
rations and for the purposeful synthesis of new
che mica ls.
Keywords: Radioprotector, Carcinogen, Information
Function, Quasi-valence number
1. INTRODUCTION
Actual problem of modern chemistry of biologically
active substances is the problem of creation of chemical
compounds, effective such as antiradiation drugs. The
basic requirements to these compounds are small doses,
low toxicit y and absence of collateral action. Presence of
collateral negative effects essentially restricts practical
applicability of radioprotectors. Purpose of this work to
pay attention to possible linkage o f chemical co mpounds
bioactivity (for example, radioprotective action and car-
cinogenic activity) with their information properties and
electron structure. Quantitative characteristics of this
linkage are resulted.
Most rational methods are statistical ones at the deci-
sion of the problems linked with studying of action of set
of factors on an organism. As the effect of interaction of
preparations with biosystem depends on many condi-
tions, it has t he li ke li ho o d nat ur e . Ther e for e at t he a nal y-
sis of linkage between molecular structure of a chemical
compound and its biological action it is more preferable
to use prob abilistic, statistical models. T he mathematica l
model cannot be used if the model is filled by a great
number of insignificant characters. At the same time it is
impossible to compensate the model lacks anything if
the main link of the model is missed. Unde r condition o f
the highest possible simplification of a mathematical
model the adequate model should reproduce studied
properties of chemical compounds as much as possible
close. Identification of the linkage between a chemical
structure and biological action of chemical compounds
not only allows to spend purposeful search of new
chemical compounds but also promotes decode of the
mechanism of their action. It creates a preconditions for
development of main principles of creation of new effec-
tive prepar a tions.
2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Usually researchers use the experimental or physi-
cal-chemical information for revealing of linkage of bi-
ological acti vity with c hemica l structure o f a prep aration
[1]. We use the ap p ro a ch is base d on knowle d ge o nl y the
structural molecular formula of a preparation. Moreover
the conclusion [2] is taken into account about impor-
tance of initial molecular structure of chemical com-
pounds.
In this work the method is offered for revealing lin-
kage between radio protective and carcinogenic proper-
ties of preparations with their molecular structure. The
method uses the fac torial attributes i.e. the mean qua si
valence number [3] of a molecule
jj
j
ZnZ N=
and
Shannon-Wiener information function [4]. Here nj is
number of atoms j with number of valence electrons Zj
(i.e. electrons on an outer shell of atom). Summation is
carried out on all atoms in a molecule. N is the total
V. K . Mukhomorov / Advances in Biolo gi cal Chemistry 1 (2011) 1-5
C op yright © 2011 SciRes. ABC
2
number of atoms. In Table 1 two groups of active and
inactive chemical compounds are resulted. The first
group contain preparations with the expressed radio pro-
tective activity (survival rate of 50%; these preparations
are denoted by the sign +). Preparations fro m the seco nd
group do not have property radio protective action even
in very large doses (sign ). Parameter
Z
statistically
authentically separates the compounds having property
radioprotective effect from compounds, not having ra-
dioprotective action. For preparations (Table 1) with
expressed activity in a small dose (
1<
mM/kg) parame-
ter
30ZZ .≤=
. Here
Z
is an average value rou nd
Table 1. The information and electronic factors of chemical compounds and their radio protective and carcenogeni c activity.
Compound Dose,
mM/kg
[7, 12]
Radio-
protec-
tion
[7, 12]
Z H, bit Compound Gross - formula
noge-
nicity
Z H, bit
H2N(CH2)4CH(NH)2CH 2SH
H2NCH2CH 2NHCH2CH2SH
(CH2)3CNHCSNHCH2CH 2OH
CH=CCH2NHCH2CH2SH
(CH2)2CH(C H2)5NH(CH2)S2O3H
CH3(CH2)5NH(CH2)2S2O3H
H2C=C(CH3)CH2SC(= NH)NH2
CH3NH(CH2)3NHCH2CH2SPO3H2
H2N(CH2)5NCH2CH 2SPO3H2
H2NCH2C(C H2)2CH 2CH2SPO3H2
CH2=C(NH2)CH2CH 2SH
H2N(CH2)3CH(NH2)CH2SPO3H2
Cyclo-C6H11NHP(O)(OH)S H
H2N(CH2)3NHCH2CH 2SPO3H2
H2NCH2CH(CH3)CH2NHCH2CH 2SPO3H2
H2NCH2CH 2CH(C H2)NHCH2CH2SPO3H2
L(+)=H2N(CH2)4CH(NH2)CH2SPO3H2
H2N(=NH)CH2SSC H2C(=NH)NH2
H2NCH2CH 2CH2NHCH2CH2SPO3H2
H2NC(=NH)NH(CH2)3NH(CH2)3SPO3H2
H2NC(=NH)CH2SH
H2N(CH2)3NHCH2CH(OH)C H2SPO3H2
CH3CONHCH2SS(C H2)4SO2H
H2NCH2CH 2SS CH2CONH2
L(-)=H2NCH2CH2CH(NH2)CH2SPO3H2
H2C(=NH)NH(CH2)3NHCH2CH2SPO3H2
HO2S(CH2)4-SSS-(CH2)4SO2H
H2O3PS(CH2)2NH(CH2)3NH(CH2)2SPO3H2
H
2
NCH
2
CH
2
SSCH
2
COOH
0.34
0.56
0.71
0.10
0.07
0.29
0.31
0.31
0.62
0.62
0.15
0.21
0.19
0.32
0.44
0,66
0.14
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.13
0.82
0.17
0.60
0.63
0.10
0.06
0.35
0.30
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
2.24
2.27
2.44
2.50
2.55
2.56
2.56
2.61
2.61
2.61
2.40
2.61
2.64
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.70
2.74
2.74
2.73
2.77
2.81
2.84
2.83
2.81
2.97
2.97
3.00
1.40
1.41
1.59
1.78
1.60
1.63
1.56
1.80
1,80
1.80
1,52
1,80
1,82
1,85
1,85
1,85
1,85
1,76
1,90
1,90
1,69
1,89
1,79
1,87
1,97
1,95
1,72
1,96
1,92
Tetramethyl lead
Tetraethyl lead
Vinyl chloride
1,2-Diethylhydrazine
1,1’-Dimethylhydrazine
Bis-(chlorinemethyl) et her
Hydrazine
Aldrin
N-Nitrodiethylethylamine
Aromit
Be nzene
Dichlorobenzene
Auramine
3,3’-Dirothylbenzidine
4,4’-Methyle ned ia niline
Chrysoidin
Benzidine
Naphthylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
3,3’-M ethoxybenz idine
Urethane
Benzanthren
Chlorobenzylat
Yellow OB
Diacetylaminoazotoluene
Sudan II
Safrole
Ethylenethiourea
Aminoazobenzene
Pb(CH3)4
Pb(C2H5)4
C2H5Cl
C4H12N2
C2H8N2
C2H5ClO
N2H4
C12H8Cl5
C4H10N2O
C12H23ClO4S
C6H6
C6H4Cl2
C17H21N3
C14H16N2
C13H14N2
C12H13N4Cl
C12H12N2
C10H9N
C2H6N2O
C14H16N2O2
C3H7NO2
C18H12
C16H14Cl2O3
C17H15N2
C18H19N3O2
C18H16N2O
C10H10O2
C3H6N2S
C
12
H
11
N
3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
1,88
1,93
2,00
2,17
2,20
2,20
2,33
2,38
2,47
2,49
2,50
2,50
2,54
2,56
2,67
2,69
2,69
2,70
2,73
2,76
2,77
2,80
2,80
2,80
2,81
2,81
2,82
2,83
2,85
1,01
1,05
1,30
1,22
1,65
1,66
0,92
1,53
1,55
1,64
1,46
1,46
1,30
1,27
1,29
1,32
1,32
1,23
1,60
1,52
1,67
0,97
1,58
1,33
1,52
1,40
1,35
1,73
1,40
CH2S(CH2)3NHC(=N H)CH2S2O3H
H2NC(=NH)NHCH2CH2SPO3H2
CH2CH(NH2)CO S H
CH3CH 2OCOCH2NHCSSCH2CH 2
H2C=CHCH2NHC(O)SCH2COOHCH2CH2
HO(CH2)2CH2NHCH2CH2S2O3H
4-(2- Mercaptooxazolyl)- erythrite
H2NCH2CH 2SC(O)CH2
CH2CH 2SC(S)NHCH2COOH
HO2CCH2NHCONHCH2CH2SH
Thionitynamides
CH3SC(O )CH2CH 2NHCONHCH2CH2SC(O )SCH3
HOCH2(CHOH)2CH2NHCH2CH2S2O3H
HOCH2CHOHCH2NHCH2CH2S2O3H
2-carboxy pyrrolidine-1-dithiocarba mic acid
BrC6H4O(C H2)4NHCH2CH2S2O3H
CH3OCOCH2CH 2SO2CH 2CH(N H2)COOH
H2NC(=NH)SCH2CH 2CH 2SO3H
[H2NC(=NH)HCH(COOH)CH3]2-
N-oxide 4-mercaptodihydro pyridine
H2NCH2C HOHCH2S2O3H
H2NCH2CH(CH2OH)S2O3H
CH3C(=NH)SC H2CH2CH2S2O3H
2-furyl-CH 2NHC(=NH)CH2S2O3H
H2NCONHCH2CH 2S2O3H
γ-(S-purine) thiaprop yls ulfacid
CF3CF 3CH 2OCOCH2CH2NH(CH2)2S2O3H
(NC)2C=C(SH)2
1,2,5 – thiadia zole -3- carboxylic acid
1,2,5– thiadiazole-3,4- carboxylic acid
0.19
0.25
11.4
5.07
4.93
3.72
8.97
3.91
5.59
5.62
4.71
12.3
3.07
7.60
5.24
2.13
3.18
10.1
3.09
7.87
5.35
4.81
5.08
4.00
5.00
4.42
3.00
3.94
7.69
4.60
+
+
3.00
3.14
2.77
2.80
2.85
2.96
3.04
3.00
3.05
3.05
3.07
3.06
3.07
3.08
3.10
3.11
3.14
3.14
3.17
3.23
3.26
3.26
3.08
3.36
3.47
3.41
3.82
4.00
4.46
4.20
1.93
2.06
1.82
1.77
1.75
1.86
1.82
2.00
1.92
1.93
1.85
1.96
1.88
2.34
1.92
1.88
1.83
2.02
2.02
1.92
1.97
1.97
1.89
2.05
2.10
2.09
2.27
1.92
2.25
2.16
Propylthiouracil
Orange SS
Sudan ora nge RR
Acetamide
Dibenzopyrene
4-Hydroxyazobenz ene
Citrus red №2
Cicazin
Methylazoxymethanol
Methylmethanesulfonate
Adenosine
Salicylic acid
Kvintocen
Piperonyl
Orange I
Dimethylsulfonate
Alizarin
2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine
Crimson
Bl ue E vans’s
2-(2-furyl)-3-(5-nitrofuryl) acryla mide
6-Mercaptourine
Yellow FCF
Amaranth
Alizarin orange
Xanthine
1-[(Nitrofurfurylydin)-aminohydantoin
5-Nitro-2-furamidoxyn
Alloxantin
Alloxan
C7H10N2OS
C17H14N2O
C15H14N4
C2H5NO
C24H14
C12H10N2O
C18H16N2O3
C8H16N2O7
C4H8N2O3
C2H6O3S
C10H13N5O4
C7H6O3
C6Cl5NO2
C8H6O3
C16H11N2NaO4
C2H6O4S
C14H8O4
C6H6N4O4
C20H12N2Na4O7S2
C34H26N6Na4O14S4
C11H8N2O5
C5H4N4S
C16H10N2Na2O7S2
C20H11O11Na3N2S3
C14H7NO6
C5H4N4O2
C5H5N3O4
C5H5N3O4
C4H2N4O8
C
4
H
2
N
2
O
4
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
2.86
2.88
2.88
2.89
2.90
2.94
2.97
3.03
3.06
3.17
3.20
3.26
3.28
3.29
3.31
3.38
3.38
3.50
3.51
3.51
3.54
3.57
3.59
3.71
3.71
3.73
3.83
3.76
4.33
4.33
1.78
1.42
1.40
1.66
0.95
1.51
1.55
1.72
1.81
1.73
1.85
1.51
1.73
1.46
1.93
1.74
1.42
1.97
2.13
2.14
1.79
1.84
2.14
2.16
1.72
1.93
1.95
1.97
1.92
1.92
V. K . Mukhomorov / Advances in Biolo gi cal Chemistry 1 (2011) 1-5
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. ABC
3
the sample of observations (the threshold value). At the
same time the parameter
ZZ>
for the compounds
without expressed protective action.
Let’s determine the factor of association Φ [5] be-
tween radioprotective efficiency and value of the para-
meter Z . We use the statistical method of co mparison of
qualitative factors:
11 2221 21
11 2221 21
0 98
qq qq.
qq qq
Φ= =
(1)
Here q11is a quantity of the effective compounds
having
ZZ
; q12 is a number of effective chemical
compounds with
ZZ>
; q21 is the number of non ef-
fective chemical co mpounds for which
ZZ
. Using (1)
the asymptotic standard error of factor association is equal:
( )
( )
( )
21112 22 21
0511 1 11002ASE.q qqq.Φ =−Φ⋅+++=
;
2
χ
crit erion gi ve s [5 ] :
9.38
2=
χ
84.3
2)( 1;05.0
=
cr
χ
.
Hence, chemical compounds with
ZZ
and
ZZ>
belong di fferent subset o f set Z.
We carry out an additional check of a conjugation,
using a graphic method of the median lines. As a result
we obtain: q11 = q22 = 27 and q12 = q21 = 3. Using
standard tables of bidimensional normal distribution
we fi nd, t hat q11 = q22 > q(cr) = 20 and q12 = q21 < q(cr)
= 10. Let’s check up, whether distinction between
mean values for active chemical compounds is statis-
tically significantly different (
1
Z
= 2.7, S1 = 0.2, N1 =
32) and non bioactivity chemical compounds (
2
Z
=
3.25, S2= 0.4, N2 = 28). S1 and S2 are standard devia-
tions. Lets define by means of Fisher distributions the
distinction between dispersions
22
21
/FSS= =
4.0 >
()
27,31;0.05 1.9
cr
F=
. Hence, variances one may assume the
various. T herefore for comparison of mean values it is
possible to use approximate T criter ion:
( )()
10 0520 05
12 12
31 27
0 550 17
..
vt vt
ZZ. T.
vv
+
− =>==
+
(2)
Here
2
1 11
v SN=
,
2
2 22
v SN=
. The fractile of mag-
nitude t = 2.04 which corresponds two degrees of
freedom. Inequality (2) will mark that distinction be-
tween means 1
Z
and
2
Z
are statistically significant.
Hence, active chemical co mpounds are grouped nearb y
1
Z
, and i nacti ve o nes ne ar b y
2
Z
.
The suggested method o f selectio n o f prepar ation s is
most effective for medicines which find out protective
action at small doses (
mM/kg) and are inactive
even at very large doses (
mM/kg). Nevertheless,
some chemical preparations (Ta b l e 1 ) having
ZZ<
,
do not possess expected activity. It is possible to ex-
plain it various mechanisms of limitation of potential
activity. One of possible mechanisms is discussed in
work [6]. Here it is shown that only proper hydro-
phobic property of the preparations probably maxi-
mum re flec t o f t heir bio lo gic a l ac ti vit y.
Let’s consider one of possible limiting mechanisms of
radioprotective activity. Suppose we have the homologous
series of chemical compounds CH3(CH2)mNHCH2CH2
SSO3H, where m = 0, 1, ···, 17. As is known [7] these
molecules have no effective radioprotective activity for
m = 0 5 and for m = 13 17. N-substituted
S-2-aminoethylthiosulfates are effective radioprotectors
for m = 6 12, however. Toxic properties of these mo-
lecules change at the same time. Only certain hydro-
phobic properties (P) molecules contribute to show
ability of biological activit y. Typically, this relationship
has a parabolic dependence : A = a0 + a1π + a2 π2. Here
A is a bioactivity, π = log(P). Hydrophobicity of the
homologous series was determined by method of addi-
tive increments [8]. The contribution of each group CH2
was assumed to be π(CH2) = 0.52.
Figure 1 shows the variation of drug toxicity (LD50)
and radioprotection action (A, %) of chemical
compounds series of CH3(C H2)mNHCH2CH2SSO3H de-
pending on their hydrophobic properties. Relationship
hydrophobicity π with toxicity (LD50, mM/kg) can be
described by the regression equation which is close to a
parabolic dependence
( )
22
501111
LD expdab c

=+− π−

(3)
a1 = 34.8 ± 0.84, b1 = 5.96 ± 0.05 , c1 = 0 .78 ± 0.02,
d1 = 1.05 ± 0.28, number of molecules m = 18,
R2 = 0.94, F = 12.0 >
()
1,17;0.05
cr
F
= 4.54.
246810
0
50
100
Hydrophobicit y
Bioactivity
Figure 1. The bioactivity dependence of N-substituted S-2-
aminoethylthiosulfates on hydrophobic properties. ─── radio-
protective activity (Eq.4)), - - - - toxic activity (Eq.3).
The Eq.3 describes correctly the dependence of bio-
logical activity of hydrophobic molecules to large and
small values of π. The similar equation was obta ined for
the linkage of radioprotective activity (A, %) with hy-
drophobic properties of the homologous series of mole-
cules:
V. K . Mukhomorov / Advances in Biolo gi cal Chemistry 1 (2011) 1-5
C op yright © 2011 SciRes. ABC
4
( )
22
222 2
expAd abc

=+− π−

(4)
a2 = 69 .0 ± 1. 55, b2 = 5.50 ± 0.08, c2 = –1.40 ± 0.06, d2 =
6.90 ± 0.35, number of molecules m = 18, R2 = 0.85, F =
9.2 > ()
1,17;0.05
cr
F = 4.54.
Toxicity of the molecules has maximum in the range
of π = 5 7 (m = 10 14) (Figu re 1). Maxi mum of ra-
diopr otective activity (A) is in this range of m.
Hence, molecules for m > 14 and m < 5 (thus, for
example, m = 15, Z = 2.44 <
_
Z
= 3.0) are likely to be
potential radioprotectors. However, both toxic and radi-
oprotective effect is limited by the hydrophobic proper-
ties of molecules.
The further research of linkage the structure of the
chemical preparations that presented in the Table 1 has
shown that electronic parameter Z is associated with
information function (entropy) of Shannon-Wiener
[9,10]: 2
log
ii
i
H pp
= −
; here Nnp ii /= at what
10 ≤≤ i
p
, and
1
i
i
p=
. Entropy function H r epre-
sents the integral characteristic of the object describi ng a
measure of a molecular structure diversity.
i
n
is a
number of atoms of kind i; N is a number of atoms in
molecule.
In this work is used Kolmogorov’s combinatory ap-
proach [9] for information function definition. The
quantity o f the infor mation in a mo lecule is turned out
onl y fu nc t ion o f n u mbe r o f fi ni te e l e me nt s o f a t o ms set.
Information measures are an integral index and are
defined for the whole sets of events. It does not con-
tradict representations about complex character of ra-
dioprotective action of radio protectors [10]. From
Ta b l e 1 follows that mean value of information func-
tion for radioprotectors equals to
1
1 79H.=
bit (S1 =
0.16). Whereas for the chemical preparations which
are not po ssessin g protec tive activi ty this func tion it is
equal
2
1 97H.=
bit (S2 = 0.15). Using t-criterion is
easy for checking up, whether distinction of means
information functions is statistically significant for
1
H
and
2
H
. Using t-criterion we can examine the
statisticall y difference for mean values of the informa-
tion functions
1
H
and
2
H
. Significant difference for
mean values of the information functions
1
H
and
2
H
Let’s preliminary define distinction between disper-
sio n s
2
1
S
and
2
2
S
by means of Fisher’s criterion:
( )
( )
31290 05
2
1 2,;
114 18
.
cr
F SS.F.= =<=
, that is distinction
in dispersions is statistically insignificant. Therefore
we can appl y t-c r ite r ion:
()()
{
( )
}
22
120 051122
1
12
0 1811
20 08
.
HH.tNS NS
NN N.

−= >⋅− +−

⋅+− =


(5)
Inequality (5) confirms the statistical significance of
distinction for averages values
1
H
and
2
H
. Thus,
character H as well as fa ctor Z allo w to separa te effec-
tive radio protectors from the preparations which are
not hav i ng e ffecti ve a ntir ad ia tio n ac tio n s.
We will verify the statistical significance of the
stated hypothesis, using a statistical method of com-
parison of qualitative characters: Φ = 0.77 ± 0.07,
2
()
;
20 051
35 6χ384
cr
.
..
χ
=≥=
. Thus, statistical criteria χ2
con firm t he exi stence of the linka ge bet ween c haracter
H and biological activity of chemical preparations.
Using methods of the statistical analysis it is possible
to show that entropy is coupled with parameter Z, and
the statistics will be followin g: the statistical sampli n g
is N = 60, the factor of linear correlation is R2 = 0.85
2
()
59;0 05
0 22
cr .
R.>=
, Fish er’s criterion is
8.99=F
0.4
)( 05.0;58,1
=
cr
F
.
These inequalities confirm the statistical significance
of linkages between t he character s Z and H.
At the same time use of molecular characters Z and
H for separating the carcinogenic preparations from
non carcinogenic ones (in the Table 1 are noted by
signs + and , accordingly) also leads to statistically
authentic results. Really, for most of carcinogens (Ta-
ble 1) the character
ZZ
. For not carcinogens:
ZZ
>. We have for information functions the follow-
ing inequalities: и
HH
>
, accordingly. Here
H
=
1.6 bit is the mean value of information function for
chemical carcinogens. Distinction of mean values of
information function for the chemical preparations
possessing carcinogen activity
1
H
= 1.41 bit and not
posse ssi ng one s tha t 2
H= 1.86 bit, even more, than in
case of radio protectors. Hence, using t-criterion we
obtain that chemical preparations for which H
H
and
HH
>
belo ng to different sets, and the t hreshold
factor
H
is statis ticall y sign ifican t.
Thus regions of the characters Z and H are overlap-
ping with each other that obtained from different prin-
ciples for carcinogenic chemical compounds and for
effective radioprotectors. Hence, chemical prepara-
tions which are radioprotectors, can be carcinogen
dangerous.
3. CONCLUSIO NS
We have formulated two classification principles
which obtained as a result of the statistical analysis of
the experimental data using two kinds of biological
activity. Hypothesis are verified by means of its test
for chemical compounds which have not included in an
initial series of the preparations. There are chemicals
which have been examined both for radioprotective
efficacy [10,11], and for carcinogenicity [12]. Dithia-
V. K . Mukhomorov / Advances in Biolo gi cal Chemistry 1 (2011) 1-5
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. ABC
5
carbamate (Z = 2.86, H = 1.95 bit) turne d o ut an e ffec-
tive radio protector which gives full antiradiation pro-
tection at lethal doses of an irradiation and simulta-
neously this compound is carcinogen. Furthermore we
have b e e n i n ve st i g at ed t hioure a ( Z = 3.0, H = 1.72 bit),
thi ur a m ( Z = 2.91, H = 1.73 bit), reserpine (Z = 2.78, H
= 1.51 bit). Really, both electronic, and the informa-
tion signs characterizing the chemical compounds, are
covered bet ween t wo bioa ctivitie s.
There is a simple quantitative structure activity
relationship between radioprotective effectiveness and
carcinogenic properties of the chemical compounds.
Ability of the parameters H and Z to separate poten-
tially antiradiation drug and carcinogenic preparations
from inactive chemical compounds clear the way to
synthesis of new effective and safety drugs. We should
know for this purpose only molecular structure of a
chemical compound. As has shown the analysis, the
offered method of selection of preparations is most
effective for chemical compounds that possess protect-
tive ac tio n for sma ll dose o f c hemi ca ls .
REFERENCES
[1] Mukhomorov, V.K. (1984) Intermolecu l ar interactions
and biological activity of chlorine-containing molecules.
Khimiko-Farmacevticheskii Zhurnal, Moscow, 18, 17-25.
[2] Mukhomorov, V.K. (1987) Statistical aspects of linkage
of radioprotective action of derivatives mercaptoethyla-
mine and its analogues with their electronic parameters.
Khimiko-Farmacevticheskii Zhurnal, 21, 1210-1215.
[3] Bonchev, D. and Trinajstič, N. (1977) Information theory,
distace matrix, and molecular branching. Journal of
Chemical Ph ysics, 2, 392-397.
[4] Veljkovič, V., Lalovič, D. (1973) Gen eral model pseudo-
potential for positive ions. Physical Letters A, 45, 59-62.
[5] Főrster, E. and Rőnz, B. (1979) Methoden der Korrela-
tions un d Re g r e s s ions a na l yse . Verlag Die Wirtshaft.
[6] Mukhomorov, V.K. (1988) Entropy function and radio-
protective efficacy of N-substituted S-2-aminoethylthio sul-
fates. Radiobiology, 28, 407-411.
[7] Sweeney T.R. (1979) Survey of compounds from the
antiradiation drug development programm. Washington.
[8] Leo, A. Hansh, C. and Etkins, D. (1971) Partition coeffi-
cients and thei r uses . Chemical Review. 71, 525-674.
[9] Qu ast ler, H. (1953) The alphabet of the information.
Information Theory in Biology. H. Quasler Ed., Perga-
mon Press, London - New York Paris - Los Angeles, 46,
3-35.
[10] Alexeyev, V.L. an d Levich, A.P. (1997) A search for
maximum species abundances in ecological communities
under conditional diversity optimization. Bulletin of Ma-
themati Biology. 59, 649-677.
[11] Kolmogorov, A.N. (1987) Theory of information and
theory of algorithms. Nauka, Moscow, (in Russian).
[12] Romantzev, E.F. (1968) Radiation and chemical protec-
tion. Nauka, Moscow, 1968 (in Russian).
[13] Turusov, V.S. (1964) Cancerogenic substances. Hand-
book. Nauka, Moscow, (in Russian).