Synthesis, structure determination, and spectroscopic/computational characterization of a series of Fe(II)-thiolate model complexes: Implications for Fe-S bonding in superoxide reductases

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Volumn 127, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1675-1689

  Fiedler, Adam T ^b   Halfen, Heather L ^a   Halfen, Jason A ^a   Brunold, Thomas C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN EAU CLAIRE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL BONDS; ELECTROCHEMISTRY; ELECTRONIC STRUCTURE; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION; SYNTHESIS (CHEMICAL); X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

AIR-SENSITIVE ORGANISMS; MAGNETIC CIRCULAR DICHROISM (MCD); SUPEROXIDE REDUCTASES (SOR);

IRON;

FERROUS ION; FERROUS SULFATE; OXIDOREDUCTASE; SUPEROXIDE;

ABSORPTION; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL BOND; CHEMICAL INTERACTION; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CIRCULAR DICHROISM; COVALENT BOND; ELECTROCHEMICAL ANALYSIS; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; ENZYME SYNTHESIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; SPECTROSCOPY; SYNTHESIS; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

BINDING SITES; BIOMIMETIC MATERIALS; CIRCULAR DICHROISM; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; ELECTROCHEMISTRY; FERROUS COMPOUNDS; LIGANDS; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; OXIDATION-REDUCTION; SULFHYDRYL COMPOUNDS; SUPEROXIDE DISMUTASE;

EID: 13644271306     PISSN: 00027863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ja046939s     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. (a) Valentine, J. S.; Wertz, D. L.; Lyons, T. J.; Liou, L.; Goto, J. J.; Gralla, E. B. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 1998, 2, 253-262.
2. (b) Fridovich, I. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1995, 64, 97-112.
3. (c) Miller, A. F. Comments Mol. Cell. Biophys. 1997, 9, 1-48.
4. Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Verhagen, M. F. J. M.; Cui, X.; Adams, M. W. W. Science 1999, 286, 306-309.
5. Jovanovic, T.; Ascenso, C.; Hazlett, K. R. O.; Sikkink, R.; Krebs, C.; Litwiller, R.; Benson, L. M.; Moura, I.; Moura, J. J. G.; Radolf, J. D.; Huynh, B. H.; Naylor, S.; Rusnak, F. J. Biol. Chem. 2000, 275, 28439-28448.
6. Yeh, A. P.; Hu, Y.; Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Adams, M. W. W.; Rees, D. C. Biochemistry 2000, 39, 2499-2508.
7. Coelho, A. V.; Matias, P.; Fulop, V.; Thompson, A.; Gonzalez, A.; Coronado, M. A. J. Biol. Inorg. Chem, 1997, 2, 680-689.
8. Clay, M. D.; Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Hagedoorn, P. L.; George, G. N.; Adams, M. W. W.; Johnson, M. K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 788-805.
9. Clay, M. D.; Cosper, C. A.; Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Adams, M. W. W.; Johnson, M. K. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 3796-3801.
10. Coulter, E. D.; Emerson, J. P.; Kurtz, D. M., Jr.; Cabelli, D. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 11555-11556.
11. Lombard, M.; Houee-Levin, C.; Touati, D.; Fontecave, M.; Niviere, V. Biochemistry 2001, 40, 5032-5040.
12. (a) Abreu, I. A.; Saraiva, L. M.; Soares, C. M.; Teixeira, M.; Cabelli, D. E. J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 276, 38995-39001.
13. (b) Niviere, V.; Lombard, M.; Fontecave, M.; Houee-Levin, C. FEBS Lett. 2001, 497, 171-173.
14. Mathe, C.; Mattioli, T. A.; Horner, O.; Lombard, M.; Latour, J.-M.; Fontecave, M.; Niviere, V. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 4966-4967.
15. Silaghi-Dumitrescu, R.; Silaghi-Dumitrescu, I.; Coulter, E. D.; Kurtz, D. M., Jr. Inorg. Chem. 2003, 42, 446-456.
16. Clay, M. D.; Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Noh, H. J.; Hagedoorn, P. L.; Adams, M. W. W.; Johnson, M. K. Biochemistry 2002, 41, 9833-9841.
17. Adams, M. W. W.; Jenney, F. E., Jr.; Clay, M. D.; Johnson, M. K. J. Biol. Inorg. Chem. 2002, 7, 647-652.
18. Kovacs, J. A. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 825-848.
19. Shearer, J.; Nehring, J.; Lovell, S.; Kaminsky, W.; Kovacs, J. A. Inorg. Chem. 2001, 40, 5483-5484.
20. Shearer, J.; Scarrow, R. C.; Kovacs, J. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 11709-11717.
21. Halfen, J. A.; Moore, H. L.; Fox, D. C. Inorg. Chem. 2002, 41, 3935-3943.
22. Dixon, N. E.; Lawrance, G. A.; Lay, P. A.; Sargeson, A. M.; Taube, H. Inorg. Synth. 1990, 28, 70-76.
23. Connelly, N. G.; Geiger, W. E. Chem. Rev. 1996, 96, 877-910.
24. Halfen, J. A.; Young, V. G., Jr. Chem. Commun. 2003, 2894-2895.
25. (a) TeXsan for Windows V 1.02; Molecular Structure Corporation, Inc.: The Woodlands, TX.
26. (b) SHELXTL V. 5.1 for Windows NT; Bruker AXS: Madison, WI.
27. Spek, A. L. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2003, 36, 7-13.
28. (a) Neese, F.; Solomon, E. I. Inorg. Chem. 1998, 37, 6568-6582.
29. (b) Neese, F.; Solomon, E. I. Inorg. Chem. 1999, 38, 1847-1865.
30. In all cases, the g-values were in the range 2.01-2.08, and variations in these values had only negligible effects on the quality of the resulting fits. Specifically, our analysis revealed that the overall shapes of the VTVH-MCD magnetization curves are determined principally by the ZFS parameters, not the g-values.
31. (a) Baerends, E. J.; Ellis, D. E.; Ros, P. Chem. Phys. 1973, 2, 41.
32. (b) Versluis, L.; Ziegler, T. J. Chem. Phys. 1988, 88, 322-328.
33. (c) te Velde, G.; Baerends, E. J. J. Comput. Phys. 1992, 99, 84-98.
34. (d) Guerra, C. F.; Snijders, J. G.; te Velde, G.; Baerends, E. J. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1998, 99, 391-403.
35. Vosko, S. H.; Wilk, L.; Nusair, M. Can. J. Phys. 1980, 58, 1200-1211.
36. Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1986, 84, 4524-4529.
37. Perdew, J. P. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 1986, 33, 8822-8824.
38. Neese, F. ORCA, version 2.2.; an ab initio, density functional, and semiempirical program package; Max-Plack Institut für Bioanorganische Chemie: Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany, 2001.
39. Schaefer, A.; Horn, H.; Ahlrichs, R. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 97, 2571.
40. Ahlrichs, R. Unpublished results.
41. (a) Eichkorn, K.; Treutler, O.; Ohm, H.; Haser, M.; Ahlrichs, R. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1995, 240, 283.
42. (b) Eichkorn, K.; Weigend, F.; Treutler, O.; Ahlrichs, R. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1997, 97, 119.
43. Perdew, J. P.; Wang, Y. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 1992, 45, 13244-13249.
44. (a) Laaksonen, L. J. Mol. Graphics 1992, 10, 33.
45. (b) Bergman, D. L.; Laaksonen, L.; Laaksonen, A. J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 1997, 15, 301.
46. (a) Ridley, J.; Zerner, M. C. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1973, 32, 111.
47. (b) Zerner, M. C.; Loew, G. H.; Kirchner, R. F.; Mueller-Westerhof, U. T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980, 102, 589.
48. Bacon, A. D.; Zerner, M. C. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1979, 53, 21.
49. Rohde, J.-U.; In, J. H.; Lim, M. H.; Brennessel, W. W.; Bukowski, M. R.; Stubna, A.; Munck, E.; Nam, W.; Que, L., Jr. Science 2003, 299, 1037-1039.
50. 4cyclam over the pyridyl-pendant diazacyclooctane ligand.
51. The geometric parameter τ is defined as τ = |(β - α)|/60, where α and β are the two trans basal angles in psuedo-square pyramidal geometry (see ref 41). In idealized square-planar geometries, α = β, but trigonal distortions result in α ≠ β.
52. Addison, A. W.; Rao, T. N.; Reedijk, J.; van Rijn, J.; Verschoor, G. C. J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. 1984, 1349-1356.
53. (a) Blakesley, D. W.; Payne, S. C.; Hagen, K. S. Inorg. Chem. 2000, 39, 1979-1989.
54. (b) Diebold, A.; Hagen, K. S. Inorg. Chem. 1998, 37, 215-223.
55. -1 (data not shown).
56. (a) Pavel, E. G.; Kitajima, N.; Solomon, E. I. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 3949-3962.
57. (b) Solomon, E. I.; Pavel, E. G.; Loeb, K. E.; Campochiaro, C. Coord. Chem. Rev. 1995, 144, 369-460.
58. Although the solid-state sample of 2 contains two crystallographically distinct complexes (cations I and II), the structural differences are too small to cause the appearance of two sets of bands that can be resolved in the MCD spectrum but may possibly lead to a general broadening of the bands.
59. Krzystek, J.; Zvyagin, S. A.; Ozarowski, A.; Fiedler, A. T.; Brunold, T. C.; Telser, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 2148-2155.
60. -1. However, in all instances, the ZFS parameters that provided the best fits of the low-energy VTVH-MCD data sets also provided excellent fits of the corresponding high-energy data sets.
61. McNaughton, R. L.; Tipton, A. A.; Rubie, N. D.; Conry, R. R.; Kirk, M. L. Inorg. Chem. 2000, 39, 5697-5706.
62. Davis, M. I.; Orville, A. M.; Neese, F.; Zaleski, J. M.; Lipscomb, J. D.; Solomon, E. I. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 602-614.
63. For these S = 2 complexes, spin polarization lowers the energies of the majority-spin (i.e., spin-up) Fe d orbitals relative to their minority-spin (i.e., spin-down) counterparts, resulting in substantial mixing of the former with ligand-based orbitals. The natures of the Fe-ligand bonding interactions are therefore inferred from the ligand- and Fe d-based spin-down MOs that are considerably less mixed than their spin-up counterparts.
64. 2-based orbitals.
65. x2-y2 orbitals.
66. 2 π*-acceptor orbitals.
67. For complex 2, the angles reported in the text are averaged over both crystallographically independent cations.
68. Note that for both complexes deviations of these angles from 90° give rise to somewhat mixed σ- and π-bonding interactions.
69. Solomon, E. I.; Szilagyi, R. K.; George, S. D.; Basumallick, L. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 419-458.
70. -1 to facilitate comparison with the experimental spectrum.
71. It is important to note that bands that are intense in the absorption spectrum are often weak in the MCD spectrum, and it is therefore not surprising that the relative intensities of bands 6 and 7 are dramatically different in the two spectra.
72. -1 (Figure 4).
73. -1. It is therefore apparent that, although DFT provides a qualitatively correct Fe d-orbital splitting pattern for 3, the experimental Fe d-orbital splitting pattern is, in fact, reminiscent of an "effective" electronic symmetry intermediate between trigonal bipyramidal and square pyramidal.
74. (a) Holm, R. H.; Solomon, E. I. Chem. Rev. 1996, 96, 2237-2237.
75. (b) Guckert, J. A.; Lowery, M. D.; Solomon, E. I. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 2817-2844.
76. red (see ref 4).
77. McNaughton, R. L.; Helton, M. E.; Cosper, C. A.; Enemark, J. H.; Kirk, M. L. Inorg. Chem. 2004, 43, 1625-1637.
78. Newton, M. D. Chem. Rev. 1991, 91, 767-792.