Lone pair-π and π-π interactions play an important role in proton-coupled electron transfer reactions

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Volumn 129, Issue 19, 2007, Pages 6199-6203

  DiLabio, Gino A ^a   Johnson, Erin R ^b,c  

^a NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA   (Canada)

^b QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACIDS; CHEMICAL BONDS; MOLECULAR ORBITALS; PROTON TRANSFER; RNA; TOLUENE;

BENZYL; BIOCHEMICAL PROCESSES; HYDROGEN ATOM TRANSFER (HAT) REACTIONS; PROTON COUPLED ELECTRON TRANSFER (PCET);

ELECTRON TRANSITIONS;

CARBON; HYDROGEN; OXYGEN; PHENOL; RIBONUCLEOTIDE REDUCTASE; TOLUENE; TYROSINE;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL BOND; COMPLEX FORMATION; ELECTRON TRANSPORT; ENZYME CHEMISTRY; METHODOLOGY; PROTON TRANSPORT; REACTION ANALYSIS;

ELECTRON TRANSPORT; HYDROGEN BONDING; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTONS; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 34249088888     PISSN: 00027863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ja068090g     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Proshlyakov, D. A.; Pressler, M. A.; DeMaso, C.; Leykam, J. F.; DeWitt, D. L.; Babcock, G. T. Science 2000, 290, 1588-1591.
2. Roth, J. P.; Yoder, J. C.; Won, T.-J.; Mayer, J. M. Science 2001, 294, 2524-2526.
3. A recent review of PCET is given in: Mayer, J. M. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 2004, 55, 363-390.
4. Mayer, J. M.; Hrovat, D. A.; Thomas, J. L.; Borden, W. T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 11142-11147.
5. 6 have argued that a rigorous distinction between the two mechanisms is not possible because the proton and electron behave quantum mechanically.
6. Skone, J. H.; Soudackov, A. V.; Hammes-Shiffer, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 16655-16663.
7. DiLabio, G. A.; Ingold, K. U. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 6693-6699.
8. Symons, M. C. R. J. Chem. Soc. 1965, 2276-2277.
9. Fox, W. M.; Symons M. C. R. J. Chem. Soc. A 1966, 1503-1507.
10. For solution- or gas-phase processes. It is likely that some PCET reactions in an enzyme environment do not require the formation of a H-bond. See: Hatcher, E.; Soudackov, A. V.; Hammes-Schiffer, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 187-196.
11. Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648-5652.
12. Lee, C.; Yang, W.; Parr, R. G. Phys. Rev. B 1988, 37, 785-789.
13. Frisch, M. J.; et al. Gaussian 03, revision D.01; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, 2004.
14. Laidler, K. J. Chemical Kinetics, 3rd ed.; Harper and Row: New York, 1987.
15. Wigner, E. Z. Phys. Chem. 1941, 19, 203-216.
16. DiLabio, G. A. J. Phys. Chem. A 1999, 103, 11414-11424.
17. Werner, H.-J.; et al. MOLPRO, version 2002.1, a package of ab initio programs; 2002 (http://www.molpro.net).
18. Mulliken, R. S. J. Chem. Phys. 1955, 23, 1833-1840.
19. O'Boyle, N. M. GaussSum 2.0; 2006 (http://gaussum.sf.net).
20. 2 groups in the iminoxyl/oxime transition state associated with the reaction illustrated in Figure 1b are 0.05 (HOMO-2) and -0.15 (SOMO), with the negative value indicating an antibonding interaction.
21. For an overlap analysis for the water molecule, see: Levine, I. N. Quantum Chemistry, 4th ed.; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991.
22. Computational studies of the hydroperoxyl/phenol couple found the reaction to occur via a PCET process: Singh, N.; O'Malley, P. J.; Popelier, P. L. A. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2005, 7, 614-619.
23. Luzhkov, V. B. Chem. Phys. 2005, 314, 211-217.
24. • is a strong electron-withrdrawing group. See: Pratt, D. A.; DiLabio, G. A.; Mulder, P.; Ingold, K. U. Acc. Chem. Res. 2004, 37, 334-340.
25. a, despite the fact that the method was specifically parameterized for hydrogen atom transfer reactions. We attribute this large error to a poor description of the charge separation in the PCET transition state.
26. Lingwood, M.; Hammond, J. R.; Hrovat, D. A.; Mayer, J. M.; Borden, W. T. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2006, 2, 740-745.
27. Lynch, B. J.; Fast, P. L.; Harris, M.; Truhlar, D. G. J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 4811-4815.
28. Siegbahn, P. E. M.; Eriksson, L.; Himo, F.; Pavlov, M. J. Phvs. Chem. B 1998, 102, 10622-10629.
29. Stubbe, J.; Nocera, D. G.; Yee, C. S.; Chang, C. Y. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 2167-2201.
30. Seyedsayamdost, M. R.; Yee, C. S.; Reece, S. Y.; Nocera, D. G.; Stubbe, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 1562-1568.
31. Reece, S. Y.; Hodgkiss, J. M.; Stubbe, J.; Nocera, D. G. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2006, 361, 1351-1364.
32. Norland, P.; Reichard, P. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2006, 75, 681-706.
33. Camaioni, D. M.; Autrey, S. T.; Salinas, T. B.; Franz, J. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 2013-2022.
34. Law, K.; Schauer, M.; Bernstein, E. R. J. Chem. Phys. 1984, 81, 4871-4882.
35. Hill, J. G.; Platts, J. A.; Werner, H. J. Pyvs. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2006, 8, 4072-4078.
36. Sinnokrot, M. O.; Sherrill, C. D. J. Phys. Chem. A 2004 108 10200-10207.
37. Hobza, P.; Selzle, H. L.; Schlag, E. W. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 18790-18794.
38. 2 structure.
39. 2h structure.
40. Bally, T.; Borden, W. T. In Reviews in Computational Chemistry, Vol. 13; Lipkowitz, K. B., Boyd, D. B., Eds.; John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1999; pp 1-99.
41. 2 = 1.98 Å. These new parameter values were determined by minimizing the root-mean-square percent error in the binding energies of a test set of seven dispersion-bound hydrocarbon complexes (methane dimer, methane-ethylene, ethylene dimer, methane-benzene, and the parallel, T-shaped, and slipped-parallel conformations of the benzene dimer). This gave an optimum dihedral of ca. 40°, in good agreement with the MP2 results.
42. Johnson, E. R.; Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 2006, 124, 174104.