Stereoelectronic properties and activity of some imidazolinone herbicides: A computational approach

Journal of Molecular Structure: THEOCHEM

Volumn 640, Issue 1-3, 2003, Pages 191-200

  Galeazzi, R ^a   Marucchini, C ^b   Orena, M ^a   Zadra, C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÀ POLITECNICA DELLE MARCHE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Computational investigation; Imidazolinone herbcides; Receptor Surface Model; Stereoelctronic properties

Indexed keywords

ACETOLACTATE SYNTHASE; HERBICIDE; IMIDAZOLINE;

ARTICLE; ATOM; CALCULATION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DENSITY; ELECTRONICS; ENERGY; HERBICIDAL ACTIVITY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; QUANTUM CHEMISTRY; STEREOCHEMISTRY;

EID: 0842306250     PISSN: 01661280     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.theochem.2003.08.134     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Galeazzi R., Marucchini C., Orena M., Zadra C. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 10:2002;1019-1025.
2. Shaner D.L., O'Connor S.L. The imidazolinone herbicides. 1991;CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp. 71-77.
3. Shaner D.L., Anderson P.C., Stidham M.A. Plant Physiol. 76:1984;545.
4. Stidham M.A., Shaner D.L. Pestic. Sci. 29:1990;335.
5. Since in vivo the estereal functionality is immediately cleaved to the corresponding carboxylate, the calculations concern the carboxylic acid.
6. Subramanian M.V., Loney V.L. Gallant. Plant Physiol. 96:1991;310.
7. Ladner D.W. Pestic. Sci. 29:1990;317. and references therein.
8. Hattori J., Brown D., Mourad G., Labbe H., Ouellet T., Sunhoara G., Rutledge R., King J., Miki B. Mol. Gen. Genetics. 246:1995;419.
9. Karelson M., Lobanov V.S., Katritsky A.R. Chem. Rev. 96:1996;1027.
10. Franke R. Theoretical Drug Design Methods. 1984;Elsevier, Amsterdam. p. 115.
11. Zhou Z., Parr R.G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112:1990;5720.
12. Osmialowski K., Halkiewicz J., Radecki A., Kaliszan R. J. Chromatogr. 346:1985;53.
13. Nakayama A., Hagiwara K., Hashimoto S., Shimoda S. Quant. Struct. Act. Relat. 12:1993;251.
14. Chang G., Guida W.C., Still W.C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 111:1989;4379.
15. We choosed as descriptors HOMO-LUMO energy gap, their topology, the frontier electron density (directly related to the measure of proton affinity), the heat of formation, the reactivity index, partial charges and MEPs because these are the most significant quantum chemistry descriptors to understanding the mechanism of binding with the enzyme, as it was already proved in studies of both other classes of ALS herbicides and other bioactive compounds. For significant examples, see: López-Romero E., Evrard G., Durant F., Sevrin M., George P. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 6:1998;1745.
16. Werbovets K.A., Bhattacharjee K.A., Brendle J.J., Scovill J.P. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 8:2000;1741. The heat of formation can be considered instead of total energy since the conformational analysis was carried out by using a semiempirical method since we could not use ab initio methods in order to calculate these properties. Eventually, the molecular volume and surface are still important, but especially in helping to choose the most active conformers of a compound and will be considered in a further study aimed to develop a receptor model of this class of herbicide.
17. Dewar M.J.S., Zoebish E.G., Healy E.F., Steward J.J.P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 107:1985;3902.
18. HyperChem™ Software package releases 4.6 (SGI-IRIX version) and 5.02; Hypercube, Inc., Gainesville, Florida.
19. Mohamadi F., Richards N.G.J., Guida W.C., Liskamp R., Lipton M., Caulfield C., Chang G., Hendrickson T., Still W.C. J. Comput. Chem. 11:1990;440.
20. Cerius Software package release 4.0; Accelrys, San Diego, CA, USA.
21. Streibig J.C., Rudemo M., Jensen J.E. Streibig J.C., Kudsk P. Jensen, Dose-response curves and statistical models in Herbicide bioassays. 1993;29-55 CRC Press, Boca Raton.
22. Dewar M.J.S., Dieter K.M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 108:1986;8075.
23. Mulliken R. J. Chem. Phys. 25:1955;1833.
24. Fukui K. Theory of Orientation and Stereoselection. 1975;Springer, New York. pp. 34-39.
25. Fleming I. Frontier Orbitals and Organic Chemical Reactions. 1976;Wiley, New York.
26. Pearson R.G. J. Org. Chem. 54:1989;1423.
27. Burdett J.K., Coddens B.A. Inorg. Chem. 27:1988;3259.
28. Faust W.L. Science. 245:1989;37.
29. Muetterties E.L., Beier B.F. Bull. Soc. Chim. Belg. 84:1975;397.
30. Tuppurainen K., Lotjonen S., Laatikainen R., Vartiainen T., Maran U., Strandberg M., Tamm T. Mutat. Res. 247:1991;97.
31. LUMO=-0.87 eV values.
32. Prabhakhar Y.S. Drug Des. Deliv. 7:1991;227.
33. Naray-Szabo G., Ferenczy G.G. Chem. Rev. 95:1995;829.
34. Bonaccorsi R., Scrocco E., Tomasi J. J. Chem. Phys. 52:1970;5270.
35. Politzer P., Thrular D.G. Chemical Applications of Atomic and Molecular Electrostatic Potential. 1981;Plenum, New York.
36. Scrocco E., Tomasi J. Adv. Quantum Chem. 11:1978;15.
37. Murray J.S., Politzer P. J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 180:1988;161.
38. Murray J.S., Politzer P. J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 187:1989;95.
39. Kikuki O. J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 138:1986;121.
40. Murray J.S., Politzer P. Theor. Chim. Acta. 72:1987;507.
41. Murray J.S., Evans P., Politzer P. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 37:1990;271.
42. Pepe G., Siri D., Reboul J.P. J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 256:1992;175.
43. Guha S.W., Majumdar D., Bhattacharjee A.K. J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 256:1992;61.
44. Sheridan R.P., Allen L.C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103:1981;1544.
45. Naray-Szabo G. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 22:1982;575.
46. Naray-Szabo G. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 23:1983;723.
47. Brasseur J.L., Dive G., Dehareng D., Ghuysen J.M. J. Theor. Biol. 145:1990;183.
48. Naray-Szabo G. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 16:1979;265.
49. A receptor surface model is a hypothetical model which characterize the putative site of a receptor, based on the construction of surfaces representing both spatial and electrostatic properties of the receptor active site. It is visually intuitive and can be further refined when other activity data are available Hahn M. J. Med. Chem. 38:1995;2080.
50. Hahn M. J. Med. Chem. 38:1995;2091.