1. Introduction {#sec1-ijms-20-00995}
===============

Bioactive peptides, usually containing 2--20 amino acid residues, are typically derived from the enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins \[[@B1-ijms-20-00995]\]. They are inactive within the sequence of proteins, but they can exert various physiological functions after release. Antioxidant peptides are one of the most important groups of bioactive peptides, which can prevent oxidative stress and they have notable contributions to human health \[[@B2-ijms-20-00995]\]. Antioxidant peptides have been isolated and purified from sources, such as cereals, milk, meat, and fish \[[@B3-ijms-20-00995]\]. The methods to assess the antioxidant capacities of peptides include the Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC), the ferric ion reducing antioxidant power (FRAP), the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical-scavenging capacity (DPPH), the oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), the total radical trapping antioxidant parameter (TRAP), etc. \[[@B4-ijms-20-00995]\]. However, it is impossible to test all of the peptides to find valid antioxidants, when considering the large number of theoretical possible peptides, i.e., 400 dipeptides, 8000 tripeptides, 160,000 tetrapeptides, etc.

The activities of peptides are determined by the amino acid compositions, sequences, and structures. Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR), which is a well-recognized tool for estimating chemical activities, has been widely applied for bioactive peptides prediction \[[@B5-ijms-20-00995]\]. The QSAR models have been successfully built on ACE-inhibitory peptides \[[@B6-ijms-20-00995]\], antimicrobial peptides \[[@B7-ijms-20-00995]\], antioxidant peptides \[[@B8-ijms-20-00995],[@B9-ijms-20-00995],[@B10-ijms-20-00995]\], antitumor peptides \[[@B11-ijms-20-00995]\], bitter peptides \[[@B12-ijms-20-00995]\], and etc. The QSAR study of antioxidant peptides mainly focused on di and tripeptides, because they can be absorbed intact from the intestinal lumen into the bloodstream and then produce biological effects at the tissue level \[[@B13-ijms-20-00995]\]. When compared to dipeptides, tripeptides were reported to exhibit higher levels of antioxidant activity \[[@B14-ijms-20-00995]\]. Besides, tripeptides had much larger structural diversity than dipeptides, which is a good property for developing multifunctional food additives \[[@B15-ijms-20-00995]\].

The prediction performances need to be further improved, although plenty of QSAR models have been built on antioxidant peptides. The relationship between peptide structure and antioxidant activity is still unclear. This may be due to the restriction of model building methods. Model population analysis (MPA) provides a new strategy of model building, which is to use multi-models instead of a single model to improve prediction ability and interpretability \[[@B16-ijms-20-00995],[@B17-ijms-20-00995]\]. Previous studies showed that, through the application of MPA strategy, the performance of regression models could be improved \[[@B6-ijms-20-00995],[@B18-ijms-20-00995]\].

In this study, we built QSAR models based on two antioxidant tripeptides datasets. The first dataset contains 214 artificially designed tripeptides and the second dataset contains 172 β-Lactoglobulin derived tripeptides, which represent designed or food originated tripeptides, respectively. 16 amino acid descriptors were used to construct sophisticated data for the comprehensive information of peptides. The MPA strategy was applied to extract useful information from the data and to optimize the models. The aim of this study is not to build a new set of descriptors, but to integrate different descriptors under the framework of MPA for better QSAR model performance on antioxidant tripeptides data. The improved method for QSAR modelling will help in discovering new antioxidant tripeptides for future drugs or food additives.

2. Results {#sec2-ijms-20-00995}
==========

2.1. FTC Dataset {#sec2dot1-ijms-20-00995}
----------------

The results of QSAR models on the FTC dataset are displayed in [Table 1](#ijms-20-00995-t001){ref-type="table"}. Before outlier elimination, the largest Q^2^ value of 0.4901 is obtained on the VSW descriptor. After outlier elimination, the HSEHPCSV descriptor showed the largest Q^2^ value of 0.6170 among the 16 amino acid descriptors. The integration of 16 descriptors gave rise to an improvement of the model performance (Q^2^ = 0.6818). Finally, the model prediction performance was further improved (Q^2^ = 0.7471) after variable selection while using the BOSS method.

In this study, an MPA-based outlier elimination procedure \[[@B19-ijms-20-00995]\] was carried out to remove outliers one by one ([Figure 1](#ijms-20-00995-f001){ref-type="fig"}). For the integrated data, samples of no. 181, 183, 182, 134, 151, 153, and 188 were removed in sequence. Finally, all of the samples were within the range according to the three-sigma rule after outlier removal ([Figure 1](#ijms-20-00995-f001){ref-type="fig"}H, dashed line).

[Figure 2](#ijms-20-00995-f002){ref-type="fig"} showed the selected variables by the BOSS method in 100 runs. The variables being selected more frequently reflect high variable importance. The top 11 variables (frequency\>75), in descending order, were as follows: C-VSW-5 = N-G-7 \> C-ST-3 \> M-ST-7 \> N-DPPS-8 \> C-HESH-2 \> N-FASGAI-5 \> M-G-6 \> N-VSW-3 \> C-VHSE-6 \>C-HSEHPCSV-9, which are marked on [Figure 2](#ijms-20-00995-f002){ref-type="fig"}. All the top 11 variables originated from the best preformed amino acid descriptors, i.e., HSEHPCSV, ST-scale, HESH, G-scale, FASGAI, and DPPS ([Table 1](#ijms-20-00995-t001){ref-type="table"}). It showed that the ultimate model has the merit of the best performed models that were constructed by single amino acid descriptors.

2.2. FRAP Dataset {#sec2dot2-ijms-20-00995}
-----------------

The results of QSAR models on FRAP dataset are displayed in [Table 2](#ijms-20-00995-t002){ref-type="table"}. Before logarithmic transformation of response vector Y, the largest Q^2^ value of 0.1408 is obtained on 5Z-scale descriptor. The low Q^2^ value indicated that the tripeptide structures and their antioxidant activities that were evaluated by FRAP assay did not share a linear relationship. After logarithmic transformation, the VHSE descriptor showed the largest Q^2^ value of 0.4878. Through integrating the 16 descriptors, the Q^2^ value was increased slightly to 0.4953. The prediction performance of the model was promoted after variable selection using the BOSS method (Q^2^ = 0.6088). It indicated that a linear relationship between the structures and the activities was built after the logarithmic transformation of Y and the MPA strategy was efficient in improving the model.

Similarly, an MPA-based outlier elimination procedure was carried out on the FRAP dataset. No outlying sample was detected, since all of the samples gather within the range according to the three-sigma rule ([Figure 3](#ijms-20-00995-f003){ref-type="fig"}A, dashed line). The important variables that were selected by BOSS are displayed in [Figure 3](#ijms-20-00995-f003){ref-type="fig"}B. The six most important variables (frequency \> 75) are C-Z5-5, M-Z5-5, N-VSW-9, N-VHSE-8, N-ST-3, and C-VSW-2, respectively. Most of the important variables originated from three well performed descriptors, i.e., VHSE, 5Z-scale, and ST-scale. However, there still some variables selected from the poorly performed descriptor, such as VSW. It suggested that descriptors with poor performance also contained useful information for model building.

3. Discussion {#sec3-ijms-20-00995}
=============

3.1. Comparison with the Reported Models {#sec3dot1-ijms-20-00995}
----------------------------------------

For the FTC dataset, our method showed higher prediction accuracy (Q^2^ = 0.7471), when compared to the previous report (Q^2^ = 0.6310) \[[@B20-ijms-20-00995]\]. Note that 41 sample were eliminated as outliers in the previous study, while only seven outliers were eliminated in this study. A much larger number of samples was used in our model, which is more representative. It showed that our method exhibited a model with higher prediction performance and the relatively larger applicability domain.

Similarly, for FRAP dataset, our method showed a higher prediction accuracy (Q^2^ = 0.6008) when compared to the previous report (Q^2^ = 0.5410) \[[@B21-ijms-20-00995]\]. It should be noted that, in the previous study, five samples with the highest activities and 14 inactive samples were removed, while in our study, only inactive samples were removed. Thus, our model showed improved prediction accuracy and enlarged applicability domain.

3.2. Relationship between Antioxidant Activities and Peptide Structures {#sec3dot2-ijms-20-00995}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Previous studies showed that the N-terminus and C-terminus amino acids are important in relating to antioxidant activities \[[@B20-ijms-20-00995]\]. Our results are in agreement with the previous findings that most of the important variables that were selected by BOSS originated from the N-terminus or C-terminus ([Figure 2](#ijms-20-00995-f002){ref-type="fig"} and [Figure 3](#ijms-20-00995-f003){ref-type="fig"}B). In addition, studies showed that tripeptides containing Cys (C), Trp (W), and Tyr (Y) residues exhibited strong antioxidant activities \[[@B8-ijms-20-00995],[@B10-ijms-20-00995]\]. Tripeptides YHY and LTC, for the two datasets, respectively, having the highest antioxidant activities is confirmed by our study.

On the FTC dataset, a linear relationship between antioxidant activities and peptide structures was constructed. However, on the FRAP dataset, the relationship was only built on the log-transformed activities and structure properties. It indicates that the antioxidant activity and peptide structures on the FRAP dataset exhibits a non-linear relationship. Data transformation is crucial before model building on this kind of data. The different performance of the two datasets may be attributed to the structure diversities of peptides. In the FTC dataset, tripeptides contain either the His or Tyr residue, which have similar structures, while the structure diversity in the FRAP dataset is much larger.

3.3. The Integration of Amino Acid Descriptors {#sec3dot3-ijms-20-00995}
----------------------------------------------

A number of amino acid descriptors have been developed and applied in the QSAR studies of bioactive peptides. Each descriptor has its merits and demerits. Our study shows that an optimal descriptor does not exist. Instead, all of the descriptors are data dependent, which means that each descriptor performs well on different datasets. It makes the researches difficult to select descriptors. By integrating different descriptors, each one can contribute particular information to the model and create a new possibility for further improvement of the model. Subsequently, the next question has become how to efficiently extract information from different descriptors and to get rid of the redundancy of the data? Model population analysis (MPA) may provide a solution for that. It uses multi-models instead of a single model for prediction. Each sub-model contains a random combination of different descriptors. Through statistical analysis of the sub-model outcomes, the informative variables from the descriptors are extracted and an optimized descriptor combination is obtained \[[@B22-ijms-20-00995]\]. Finally, the optimized model performs better than any of the single descriptor model, as it is shown in [Table 1](#ijms-20-00995-t001){ref-type="table"} and [Table 2](#ijms-20-00995-t002){ref-type="table"}. To summarize, the aim of this study is not to build a new set of descriptors, but to provide a general framework to integrate different descriptors. The framework can take in any newly developed descriptor and fit on different datasets. The more diverse the integrated descriptors are, the better performance the model can be.

4. Materials and Methods {#sec4-ijms-20-00995}
========================

4.1. Data Collection {#sec4dot1-ijms-20-00995}
--------------------

### 4.1.1. Ferric Thiocyanate (FTC) Dataset {#sec4dot1dot1-ijms-20-00995}

A dataset of 214 antioxidant tripeptides that contain either His or Tyr residue was obtained from the published literatures \[[@B20-ijms-20-00995],[@B23-ijms-20-00995]\]. All of the tripeptides were chemically synthesized using solid phase Fmoc Chemistry and their antioxidant activities were measured by the FTC method \[[@B23-ijms-20-00995]\]. Test samples (500 μg) in 0.5 mL of deionized water were mixed with linoleic acid emulsion (1.0 mL, 50 mM) and phosphate buffer (1.0 mL, 0.1 M) in glass test tubes (5 mL). The tubes were sealed with silicon rubber caps and then kept at 60 °C in the dark. 50 μL reaction mixtures were taken out at different intervals during incubation. The degree of oxidation was measured by sequentially adding ethanol (2.35 mL, 75%), ammonium thiocyanate (50 μL, 30%), and ferrous chloride (50 μL, 20 mM in 3.5% HCl). After the mixture had stood for 3 min, the absorbance of the solution was measured at 500 nm with a Jasco model Ubest 30 spectrophotometer (Tokyo, Japan). A control was performed containing the same contents with test sample but without the peptides. The number of days that was taken to attain the absorbance of 0.3 was defined as the induction period. The relative activities were calculated by dividing the induction period of test samples by that of the control ([Table 3](#ijms-20-00995-t003){ref-type="table"}). All of the experiments were carried out in triplicate and averaged.

### 4.1.2. Ferric-reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP) Dataset {#sec4dot1dot2-ijms-20-00995}

A dataset of 172 antioxidant tripeptides were derived from β-Lactoglobulin, where all possible tripeptides were collected based on its amino sequence \[[@B21-ijms-20-00995]\]. All of the tripeptides were chemically synthesized while using solid phase Fmoc Chemistry and their antioxidant activities were evaluated using the FRAP assay \[[@B24-ijms-20-00995]\]. Ten microliters of 100 mmol/mL tripeptide solution were incubated at 37 °C with 100 μL of FRAP reagent, containing 10 mmol/L of 2,4,6-tripyridyl-s-triazine and 20 mmol/L of FeCl~3~. The absorption values were read at a wavelength of 570 nm using a microplate reader (Model 680, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) after 10 min reaction. Aqueous Fe^2+^ solutions at concentrations that ranged from 10 to 1000 μmol/L were used to produce a calibration curve. The results were expressed as micromoles Fe^2+^ equivalents per mole of the sample based on the standard curve. All of the experiments were carried out in triplicate and then averaged. The activities were logarithmic transformed prior to modeling, where 14 inactive peptides (activity = 0) were removed ([Table 4](#ijms-20-00995-t004){ref-type="table"}). The measured activities before logarithmic transformation were displayed in [Table S1](#app1-ijms-20-00995){ref-type="app"}.

The two datasets are representative for artificially designed or food protein originated tripeptides, respectively. Both of the datasets have been used for building QSAR models before. Thus, it is suitable for model comparison.

4.2. Data Processing {#sec4dot2-ijms-20-00995}
--------------------

The tripeptide sequences were transformed into X-matrices using 16 amino acid descriptors, respectively, while the dependent variable Y-vectors represents the relative activities of peptides. These descriptors include Z-scale, 5Z-scale, DPPS, MS-WHIM, ISA-ECI, VHSE, FASGAI, VSW, T-scale, ST-scale, E-scale, V-scale, G-scale, HESH, and HSEHPCSV, as is shown in [Table 5](#ijms-20-00995-t005){ref-type="table"}. They are the most frequently used amino acid descriptors in the QSAR study of bioactive peptides. The peptide structure is characterized by describing amino acids within the sequence. For example, Z-scale descriptor, containing three parameters (Z1, Z2, and Z3), would generate nine variables (3 parameters × 3 amino acids) for tripeptides. To clearly label each variable, we used a unified rule to name them. The amino acid at the N-terminus was designated as N, the C-terminus amino acid was designated as C, and the middle amino acid was designated as M. Thus, the nine variables that were generated by Z-scale descriptor were labeled as N-Z-1, N-Z-2, N-Z-3, M-Z-1, M-Z-2, M-Z-3, C-Z-1, C-Z-2, and C-Z-3, respectively. The 16 descriptors were integrated to build an X-matrix, which contained 306 variables (V1-V306), with the correspondence, as follows: Z-scale (V1-V9), 5Z-scale (V10-V24), DPPS (V25-V54), MS-WHIM1 (V55-V63), MS-WHIM2 (V64-V72), ISA-ECI (V73-V78), VHSE (V79-V102), FASGAI (V103-V120), VSW (V121-V147), E-scale (V148-V162), T-scale (V163-V177), ST-scale (V178-V201), V-scale (V202-V210), G-scale (V211-V234), HESH (V235-V270), and HSEHPCSV (V271-V306), respectively.

4.3. QSAR Model Building {#sec4dot3-ijms-20-00995}
------------------------

Partial least squares (PLS) regression \[[@B40-ijms-20-00995]\] was used to build the connection between the peptide structure descriptions (variables, X-matrices) and the relative activities (responses, Y-vectors). It was implemented using MATLAB software (Version R2015a, the MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA). All of the variables were auto-scaled to unit variance and all of the responses were mean-centered prior to model building. The models were validated using cross-validation and the optimal number of PLS components were chosen based on a statistic, called Q^2^, which is the cross-validated R^2^, referring to the predictive ability of the model. R^2^ is the coefficient of determination, providing an estimate of the model fit.

MPA was applied to optimize the model through outlier elimination and variable selection. It is a framework for model building that utilizes multiple models instead of a single model to construct results \[[@B16-ijms-20-00995],[@B17-ijms-20-00995]\]. Generally, it worked, as follows: (1) firstly, a random resampling procedure was applied to obtain sub-datasets; (2) then, sub-models were built based on the sub-datasets; and, (3) finally, a statistical analysis was used to extract useful information from the outcome of sub-models. In the present study, MPA was utilized for outlier detection and variable selection.

The MPA-based outlier detection method \[[@B19-ijms-20-00995]\] was applied to remove the outlying samples from measured data. To begin with, 1000 sub-datasets were generated through random reselecting of 80% samples in sample space. Subsequently, for each sub-dataset, a PLS regression model was built and the prediction error for each sample was recorded. The mean of prediction errors was used as the basis for outlier detection and a three-sigma rule was applied to define the boundary, as it is reported previously \[[@B6-ijms-20-00995]\]. The bootstrapping soft shrinkage (BOSS) method \[[@B18-ijms-20-00995]\] was applied to select informative variables from the pool of descriptors. It is also based on the idea of MPA. Firstly, 1000 sub-datasets were obtained using bootstrap resampling in the variable space. Afterwards, 1000 PLS models were built based on the sub-datasets and the regression coefficients were extracted. In the next step, weighted bootstrap resampling was used to regenerate sub-datasets and to rebuild sub-model. The resampling procedure was repeated until all of the uninformative variables were eliminated.

5. Conclusions {#sec5-ijms-20-00995}
==============

In this study, we have constructed QSAR models on two datasets of antioxidant tripeptides, i.e., FTC dataset and FRAP dataset. After the integration of 16 amino acid descriptors and utilization of the MPA strategy for model building, the Q^2^ values were enlarged from 0.6170 to 0.7471 and from 0.4878 to 0.6088, respectively. The results show that the MPA framework is powerful in QSAR model building on antioxidant tripeptides data. The framework can also be applied to investigate the structure and activity relationships of other types of bioactive peptides and to integrate more different molecular descriptors.

The following are available online at <https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/20/4/995/s1>.

###### 

Click here for additional data file.

B.D. conceived and designed the study; H.L., T.T. and X.N. collected the data; H.L., J.C., G.Y. carried out the model building; F.Z., R.C., D.C., M.Z. and L.Y. analyzed the data; B.D. and H.L. wrote the paper.

This research was funded by the Nation K&D Program of China (2018YFD0500603), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 31790411 and 31872985), and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (Grant Nos. 2017A030310410) for supporting of the projects. The studies meet with the approval of the university's review board.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

BOSS

the bootstrapping soft shrinkage method

DPPH

2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical-scavenging capacity

FRAP

ferric-reducing antioxidant power

FTC

ferric thiocyanate

MPA

model population analysis

ORAC

oxygen radical absorbance capacity

PLS

partial least squares

QSAR

quantitative structure-activity relationships

TEAC

Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity

TRAP

total radical trapping antioxidant parameter

![The process of model population analysis (MPA)-based outlier elimination on the FTC dataset of integrated descriptors. The dashed line is defined as the boundary for outliers, which is mean ± 3× standard deviation of prediction errors. (**A**) No outlier was eliminated, (**B**) sample No. 181 was eliminated, (**C**) sample No. 183 was eliminated, (**D**) sample No. 182 was eliminated, (**E**) sample No. 134 was eliminated, (**F**) sample No. 151 was eliminated, (**G**) sample No. 153 was eliminated, and (**H**) sample No. 188 was eliminated and all of the outliers were removed.](ijms-20-00995-g001){#ijms-20-00995-f001}

![Frequency of variables selected by the bootstrapping soft shrinkage (BOSS) method on the FTC dataset in 100 runs. The higher frequency denotes higher variable importance. The top 11 variables with frequency larger than 75 were marked in the figure.](ijms-20-00995-g002){#ijms-20-00995-f002}

![The result of QSAR model building on the FRAP dataset. (**A**) The result of MPA-based outlier detection on the FRAP dataset of integrated descriptors. No outlier was detected. (**B**) Frequency of variables selected by the BOSS method on the FRAP dataset in 100 runs. The higher frequency denotes higher variable importance. The six top variables with frequency larger than 75 are marked in the figure.](ijms-20-00995-g003){#ijms-20-00995-f003}

ijms-20-00995-t001_Table 1

###### 

Comparisons among different quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) models on ferric thiocyanate (FTC) dataset ^a^.

  Descriptors              Before Outlier Elimination   After Outlier Elimination                                                                
  ------------------------ ---------------------------- --------------------------- ---- --------------------- ----------------- --------------- -----------------------------------
  HSEHPCSV                 0.3861                       0.5781                      4    **0.6170**            0.7338            20              183, 182, 181, 134
  ST-scale                 0.4268                       0.5733                      12   0.5993                0.6844            13              183, 182, 181, 134
  HESH                     0.4091                       0.5366                      2    0.5968                0.7047            10              183, 181, 182, 134, 129
  VSW                      **0.4901**                   0.5771                      3    0.5925                0.6768            5               181, 183, 182, 134, 151
  G-scale                  0.4516                       0.5527                      6    0.5843                0.6574            9               181, 183, 182, 134, 118
  FASGAI                   0.4814                       0.5457                      5    0.5544                0.6130            6               129, 181, 128
  DPPS                     0.4740                       0.5637                      7    0.5379                0.6278            8               181, 182, 183, 134
  E-scale                  0.4956                       0.5451                      4    0.5144                0.5582            4               181, 182, 183, 112
  5Z-scale                 0.3903                       0.4626                      12   0.3974                0.4653            9               181, 182, 183, 172
  VHSE                     0.4265                       0.5432                      12   0.3974                0.514             8               181, 182, 183, 172
  T-scale                  0.3280                       0.4215                      9    0.3728                0.4362            9               181, 182, 183
  V-scale                  0.3371                       0.3785                      5    0.3070                0.3458            6               181, 183, 182
  Z-scale                  0.2814                       0.3398                      4    0.2678                0.3415            4               181
  ISA-ECI                  0.1493                       0.1916                      6    0.1572                0.1836            6               183, 182, 181
  MS-WHTM1                 0.0736                       0.1488                      3    0.1036                0.1678            3               181, 183, 182
  MS-WHTM2                 0.0775                       0.1445                      3    0.0882                0.1617            3               181, 182, 183
  Integrated descriptors   0.4811                       0.5843                      3    0.6818                0.7964            8               181, 183, 182, 134, 151, 153, 188
  BOSS                                                                                   **0.7471** ± 0.0032   0.7931 ± 0.0062   9.72 ± 3.2199   

^a^ R^2^ is the coefficient of determination; Q^2^ is the cross-validated R^2^; optPC is optimal principal components for PLS regression model; the results of BOSS are shown in the form of mean value ± standard deviation in 100 runs; the top ranked Q^2^ scores were marked in bold.

ijms-20-00995-t002_Table 2

###### 

Comparisons among different QSAR models on FRAP dataset ^a^.

  Descriptors              Before Logarithmic Transformation   After Logarithmic Transformation                                                
  ------------------------ ----------------------------------- ---------------------------------- ---- --------------------- ----------------- -----------------
  VHSE                     0.0042                              0.2655                             3    **0.4878**            0.6122            6
  5Z-scale                 **0.1408**                          0.3177                             2    0.4809                0.5568            3
  DPPS                     0.0059                              0.2290                             3    0.4147                0.5463            4
  ST-scale                 0.0263                              0.3220                             8    0.3968                0.5410            9
  FASGAI                   0.0470                              0.2753                             2    0.3735                0.5006            4
  E-scale                  0.0560                              0.2521                             1    0.3714                0.4734            5
  HESH                     0.0444                              0.2818                             10   0.3668                0.5290            3
  HSEHPCSV                 0.0259                              0.2475                             7    0.3624                0.4952            3
  G-scale                  0.1066                              0.2334                             5    0.2836                0.3850            1
  VSW                      0.0130                              0.3071                             1    0.2382                0.4361            2
  MS-WHTM2                 0.0342                              0.0370                             3    0.1728                0.2594            3
  MS-WHTM1                 0.0452                              0.0329                             9    0.1207                0.1941            4
  T-scale                  0.0682                              0.0706                             2    0.0750                0.2129            10
  V-scale                  0.0293                              0.0748                             4    0.0699                0.1495            1
  Z-scale                  0.0052                              0.1445                             1    0.0301                0.1456            6
  ISA-ECI                  0.0242                              0.0141                             1    0.0071                0.0411            1
  Integrated descriptors   0.1069                              0.4212                             3    0.4953                0.6423            3
  BOSS                                                                                                 **0.6088** ± 0.0041   0.6655 ± 0.0094   3.5100 ± 2.5086

^a^ R^2^ is the coefficient of determination; Q^2^ is the cross-validated R^2^; optPC is optimal principal components for PLS regression model; the results of BOSS are shown in the form of mean value ± standard deviation in 100 runs, the top ranked Q^2^ scores were marked in bold.

ijms-20-00995-t003_Table 3

###### 

Sequences and antioxidant activities of tripeptides on ferric thiocyanate (FTC) dataset ^a^.

  No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity
  ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ----------
  1     LHA        3.918      37    PHA        5.793      73    RHA        5.205      109   DHH        0.9045     145   HHH        0.0635     181   YHY        9.886
  2     LHD        3.593      38    PHD        4.622      74    RHD        3.304      110   EHH        0.9045     146   HHK        0.0635     182   YKY        9.886
  3     LHE        6.136      39    PHE        6.152      75    RHE        5.096      111   HHH        0.0000     147   HHR        0.0635     183   YRY        9.886
  4     LHF        3.628      40    PHF        3.916      76    RHF        3.300      112   KHH        0.0000     148   HHA        0.0680     184   YAY        3.607
  5     LHG        6.697      41    PHG        5.197      77    RHG        5.725      113   AHH        2.020      149   HHI        0.0680     185   YIY        3.607
  6     LHH        4.836      42    PHH        6.051      78    RHH        3.296      114   IHH        2.020      150   HHL        0.0680     186   YLY        3.607
  7     LHI        6.531      43    PHI        4.916      79    RHI        4.806      115   FHH        1.803      151   HHF        3.612      187   YFY        2.233
  8     LHK        4.225      44    PHK        3.426      80    RHK        2.694      116   WHH        1.803      152   HHW        3.612      188   YWY        2.233
  9     LHL        5.920      45    PHL        5.311      81    RHL        3.501      117   YHH        1.803      153   HHY        3.612      189   YYY        2.233
  10    LHM        4.504      46    PHM        3.714      82    RHM        3.218      118   GHH        1.089      154   HHG        0.3170     190   YGY        3.366
  11    LHN        5.148      47    PHN        6.061      83    RHN        5.713      119   NHH        1.089      155   HHN        0.3170     191   YNY        3.366
  12    LHQ        4.136      48    PHQ        3.718      84    RHQ        3.108      120   QHH        1.089      156   HHQ        0.3170     192   YQY        3.366
  13    LHR        5.184      49    PHR        4.751      85    RHR        4.302      121   MHH        2.015      157   HHM        0.0817     193   YMY        1.780
  14    LHS        4.293      50    PHS        4.042      86    RHS        3.386      122   SHH        1.320      158   HHS        0.0862     194   YSY        3.447
  15    LHT        5.584      51    PHT        6.247      87    RHT        5.987      123   THH        1.320      159   HHT        0.0862     195   YTY        3.447
  16    LHV        3.481      52    PHV        3.335      88    RHV        3.206      124   CHH        0.9369     160   HHC        0.1277     196   YCY        3.087
  17    LHW        6.791      53    PHW        6.535      89    RHW        5.878      125   HDH        1.477      161   DYY        3.417      197   YYD        4.116
  18    LHY        4.203      54    PHY        4.227      90    RHY        3.378      126   HEH        1.477      162   EYY        3.417      198   YYE        4.116
  19    LWA        1.192      55    PWA        1.396      91    RWA        1.212      127   HHH        0.0441     163   HYY        2.257      199   YYH        5.303
  20    LWD        1.717      56    PWD        1.096      92    RWD        0.9091     128   HKH        0.0441     164   KYY        2.257      200   YYK        5.303
  21    LWE        1.717      57    PWE        1.096      93    RWE        1.091      129   HRH        0.0441     165   RYY        2.257      201   YYR        5.303
  22    LWF        1.414      58    PWF        0.9192     94    RWF        0.9091     130   HAH        0.9518     166   AYY        3.071      202   YYA        3.344
  23    LWG        1.313      59    PWG        2.687      95    RWG        1.717      131   HIH        0.9518     167   IYY        3.071      203   YYI        3.344
  24    LWH        3.212      60    PWH        1.184      96    RWH        1.091      132   HLH        0.9518     168   LYY        3.071      204   YYL        3.344
  25    LWI        1.111      61    PWI        1.396      97    RWI        1.232      133   HFH        2.026      169   FYY        1.911      205   YYF        4.050
  26    LWK        1.899      62    PWK        0.4066     98    RWK        0.6061     134   HWH        2.026      170   WYY        1.911      206   YYW        4.050
  27    LWL        0.6060     63    PWL        1.096      99    RWL        3.212      135   HYH        2.026      171   YYY        1.911      207   YYY        4.050
  28    LWM        1.394      64    PWM        0.7955     100   RWM        0.7273     136   HGH        0.8318     172   GYY        5.071      208   YYG        2.996
  29    LWN        1.313      65    PWN        2.104      101   RWN        2.404      137   HNH        0.8318     173   NYY        5.071      209   YYN        2.996
  30    LWQ        2.505      66    PWQ        1.202      102   RWQ        0.6061     138   HQH        0.8318     174   QYY        5.071      210   YYQ        2.996
  31    LWR        2.909      67    PWR        2.705      103   RWR        2.384      139   HMH        0.8734     175   MYY        1.991      211   YYM        2.103
  32    LWS        2.020      68    PWS        1.096      104   RWS        0.8081     140   HSH        0.7304     176   SYY        3.070      212   YYS        3.983
  33    LWT        2.020      69    PWT        2.598      105   RWT        3.818      141   HTH        0.7304     177   TYY        3.070      213   YYT        3.983
  34    LWV        1.616      70    PWV        1.008      106   RWV        0.6061     142   HCH        0.9747     178   CYY        0.4699     214   YYC        0.6369
  35    LWW        3.515      71    PWW        2.899      107   RWW        2.707      143   HHD        0.1877     179   YDY        3.047                       
  36    LWY        2.222      72    PWY        1.114      108   RWY        0.8081     144   HHE        0.1877     180   YEY        3.047      □     □          □

^a^ The data containing 214 antioxidant tripeptides was collected from the literature of Saito et al. \[[@B23-ijms-20-00995]\] and Li et al. \[[@B20-ijms-20-00995]\]. Antioxidant activities of tripeptides were measured by the FTC method and were relative values by adjusting the control to 1.0.

ijms-20-00995-t004_Table 4

###### 

Sequences and activities of tripeptides on ferric ion reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) dataset ^a^.

  No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity   No.   Sequence   Activity
  ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ---------- ----- ---------- ----------
  1     LTC        2.83       30    LPM        1.04       59    YKK        0.25       88    NGE        −0.30      117   ELK        −0.66      146   KIP        −1.15
  2     CQC        2.53       31    TDY        1.01       60    AQA        0.22       89    QSA        −0.33      118   PEQ        −0.66      147   LLD        −1.22
  3     GTW        2.52       32    QCH        1.00       61    LRV        0.20       90    DAQ        −0.34      119   IDA        −0.68      148   DLE        −1.22
  4     LFC        2.07       33    TWY        0.96       62    PTP        0.18       91    ENS        −0.34      120   LLA        −0.70      149   PEV        −1.22
  5     CLV        2.06       34    RVY        0.95       63    ALN        0.18       92    ENG        −0.37      121   ALA        −0.72      150   LKP        −1.40
  6     QKW        2.03       35    KWE        0.90       64    LEI        0.16       93    NSA        −0.37      122   GLD        −0.72      151   ALE        −1.52
  7     CME        1.99       36    CLL        0.89       65    LVR        0.13       94    EKT        −0.38      123   DIS        −0.72      152   TQL        −1.52
  8     YLL        1.91       37    LAM        0.85       66    HIR        0.12       95    EQS        −0.38      124   PEG        −0.72      153   LEE        −1.52
  9     QCL        1.69       38    YSL        0.81       67    KKI        0.11       96    AMA        −0.41      125   LDI        −0.74      154   LEK        −1.70
  10    LAC        1.69       39    MKG        0.80       68    SFN        0.07       97    KID        −0.41      126   AEP        −0.74      155   DAL        −2.00
  11    GEC        1.64       40    QTM        0.80       69    SLL        0.06       98    GAQ        −0.43      127   ALI        −0.77      156   EVD        −2.00
  12    EQC        1.52       41    LAL        0.76       70    PAV        0.04       99    PLR        −0.44      128   LDA        −0.77      157   VDD        −2.00
  13    FCM        1.51       42    QAL        0.73       71    RLS        0.04       100   ILL        −0.46      129   VFK        −0.77      158   DEA        −2.00
  14    CHI        1.45       43    MEN        0.73       72    AGT        0.04       101   VRT        −0.46      130   ALK        −0.77      159   ALT        \-
  15    ACQ        1.38       44    MKC        0.72       73    LLF        0.02       102   IAE        −0.49      131   AQK        −0.82      160   KGL        \-
  16    EEL        1.33       45    LSF        0.69       74    PMH        0.00       103   QSL        −0.49      132   IIA        −0.82      161   IQK        \-
  17    WEN        1.31       46    TCG        0.67       75    EEQ        −0.01      104   KTK        −0.51      133   LIV        −0.85      162   QKV        \-
  18    VYV        1.19       47    SLA        0.65       76    LVL        −0.02      105   ASD        −0.52      134   EGD        −0.85      163   GDL        \-
  19    MHI        1.16       48    TMK        0.64       77    QLE        −0.05      106   APL        −0.52      135   QKK        −0.85      164   EIL        \-
  20    CAQ        1.12       49    LDT        0.62       78    FDK        −0.07      107   AQS        −0.57      136   IPA        −0.85      165   KII        \-
  21    WYS        1.12       50    EKF        0.54       79    LLL        −0.08      108   ENK        −0.57      137   SDI        −0.89      166   NKV        \-
  22    KYL        1.08       51    VLV        0.53       80    SAP        −0.08      109   TPE        −0.59      138   VEE        −0.89      167   DTD        \-
  23    CGA        1.08       52    MAA        0.44       81    LLQ        −0.12      110   RTP        −0.59      139   DDE        −0.89      168   EPE        \-
  24    KKY        1.08       53    PTQ        0.44       82    NPT        −0.17      111   VLD        −0.62      140   KVL        −0.92      169   EAL        \-
  25    NEN        1.08       54    VAG        0.41       83    FNP        −0.20      112   IRL        −0.62      141   KFD        −0.92      170   DKA        \-
  26    ECA        1.07       55    ALP        0.37       84    LNE        −0.24      113   AAS        −0.64      142   IVT        −0.96      171   KAL        \-
  27    DYK        1.06       56    AVF        0.36       85    SAE        −0.26      114   LQK        −0.64      143   VTQ        −0.96      172   LKA        \-
  28    KCL        1.05       57    KVA        0.31       86    KPT        −0.28      115   FKI        −0.64      144   AEK        −0.96                       
  29    YVE        1.05       58    TQT        0.26       87    DIQ        −0.30      116   ISL        −0.66      145   TKI        −1.10      □     □          □

^a^ The data containing 172 antioxidant tripeptides was collected from the literature of Tian et al. \[[@B21-ijms-20-00995]\]. Antioxidant activities of tripeptides were measured by the FRAP assay and were logarithmic transformed. Fourteen inactive peptides were removed before model building.

ijms-20-00995-t005_Table 5

###### 

Parameters of 16 amino acid descriptors.

  Descriptor                          No. of Physicochemical Property   No. of Extracted Variable   Scope of Variable
  ----------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Z-scale \[[@B25-ijms-20-00995]\]    29                                3                           Electronic property, steric property and hydrophobic property
  5Z-scale \[[@B26-ijms-20-00995]\]   26                                5                           Electronic property, steric property and hydrophobic property
  DPPS \[[@B27-ijms-20-00995]\]       119                               10                          Electronic property, steric property, hydrophobic property and hydrogen bond
  MS-WHIM \[[@B28-ijms-20-00995]\]    36                                3                           Surface charge distribution, size and charge over shape dependence
  ISA-ECI \[[@B29-ijms-20-00995]\]    /                                 2                           Isotropic surface area and electronic charge index
  VHSE \[[@B30-ijms-20-00995]\]       50                                8                           Electronic property, steric property and hydrophobic property
  FASGAI \[[@B31-ijms-20-00995]\]     335                               6                           Hydrophobic property, alpha and turn property, bulky property, electronic property, compositional characteristics, local flexibility
  VSW \[[@B32-ijms-20-00995]\]        99                                9                           Molecular size, shape, symmetry and atom distribution
  T-scale \[[@B33-ijms-20-00995]\]    67                                5                           Topological property
  ST-scale \[[@B34-ijms-20-00995]\]   827                               8                           Molecular constitutional, topological, geometrical, hydrophobic, electronic and steric property
  E-scale \[[@B35-ijms-20-00995]\]    237                               5                           Hydrophobic property, size, preferences for amino acids to occur in α-helices, number of degenerate triplet codons and the frequency of occurrence of amino acid residues in β-strands
  V-scale \[[@B36-ijms-20-00995]\]    /                                 3                           Van Der Wall's volume, net charge index and hydrophobic parameter of side chains
  G-scale \[[@B37-ijms-20-00995]\]    457                               8                           Electronic property, steric property and hydrophobic property
  HESH \[[@B38-ijms-20-00995]\]       171                               12                          Electronic property, steric property, hydrophobic property and hydrogen bond
  HSEHPCSV \[[@B39-ijms-20-00995]\]   95                                12                          Hydrophobic, steric, electronic properties and hydrogen bond

[^1]: These authors contributed equally to this work.
