Skip to main content

Table 4 Predicted log Kow values for test and reference compounds

From: A comparison of log Kow (n-octanol–water partition coefficient) values for non-ionic, anionic, cationic and amphoteric surfactants determined using predictions and experimental methods

Class

Surfactant

#

QSPR predictive methods

KOWWIN

CLOGP

Molinspiration

H&L

ALOGP

ACD Labs

Crippen Frag.

Viswanadhan’s Frag.

Broto

SPARC

Non-ionic

C8EO4

1

1.71

2.43

2.42

2.77

2.27

1.85

2.02

1.87

2.51

3.50

C12EO4

2

3.67

4.55

4.40

4.93

4.10

3.97

3.68

3.45

4.33

5.50

C12EO8

3

2.57

3.84

3.62

4.53

3.57

2.54

3.06

2.79

4.00

6.45

Anionic

C12AS

4a

1.69

4.52

1.78

1.60

2.17

(h)

(e)

(e)

(h)

(c)

4b

2.42

4.52 (a)

1.78 (a)

1.60 (a)

2.17 (a)

5.40

(e)

(e)

3.46 (a)

(c)

C12E4S

5a

0.59

4.15

1.06

2.27

1.64

(h)

(e)

(e)

(h)

(c)

5b

1.32

4.15 (a)

1.06 (a)

2.27 (a)

1.64 (a)

4.33

(e)

(e)

3.13 (a)

(c)

C11COONa

6a

1.19

1.10

2.32

1.10

3.10

(h)

(e)

(e)

(h)

(c)

6b

5.00

1.10 (a)

2.32 (a)

1.10 (a)

3.10 (a)

5.03

(e)

(e)

4.49 (a)

(c)

6c

5.00

5.1

5.04

5.18

4.57

5.03

4.1

4.03

4.49

4.95

Cationic

C12TMAC

7a

1.22

0.56

1.84

2.14

1.27

(h)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

7b

3.22

0.56 (a)

1.84 (a)

2.14 (a)

3.94

0.67

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

C16TMAC

8a

3.18

2.68

3.87

4.30

3.09

(h)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

8b

5.18

2.68 (a)

3.87 (a)

4.30 (a)

5.77

2.40

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

C18BAC (f)

9a

5.87

6.36

6.47

5.77

5.59

(h)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

9b

7.87

6.36 (a)

6.47 (a)

5.77 (a)

8.26

4.28

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

Amphoteric

C12–16ADB

10a

2.47 (0.5) (g)

− 2.55

− 1.62

(b)

1.95

0.31

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

10b

0.47

3.60

(d)

(b)

(d)

(d)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

10c

3.46 (1.46) (g)

− 1.50

0.61

(b)

2.86

1.17

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

10d

1.46

4.66

(d)

(b)

(d)

(d)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

10e

4.44 (2.4) (g)

− 0.44

0.40

(b)

3.78

2.04

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

10f

2.44

5.72

(d)

(b)

(d)

(d)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

C12AAPB

11a

2.69 (1.31) (g)

− 2.30

− 2.25

(b)

1.00

0.32

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

11b

0.69

2.82

(d)

(b)

(d)

(d)

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

C12DAO

12

4.67

3.2

3.27

(b)

4.50

3.27

(e)

(e)

(e)

(c)

Neutral

ATR

13

2.82

2.70

2.55

 

2.53

2.63

1.95

2.06

(e)

 

Ionised

PCP

14

4.74

4.71

4.82

 

4.91

4.78

4.44

4.35

4.57

 
  1. (a) Inclusion of the counter ion in SMILES is of no consequence as the software programme generates the same answer with and without the counter ion
  2. (b) The software programme cannot calculate a predicted value due to the N+ fragment value
  3. (c) The software programme cannot process charged compounds
  4. (d) Software cannot calculate value if + sign is not attached to the N atom
  5. (e) The software programme cannot calculate a predicted value due to a missing fragment value
  6. (f) The predicted values are calculated for pure C18BAC
  7. (g) The predicted values in brackets have been corrected by subtracting a value for Na+
  8. (h) The software programme cannot calculate a predicted value due to inclusion of the counter ion