Jay R Winkler1, Harry B Gray. 1. Beckman Institute, California Institute of Technology , 1200 East California Boulevard, Pasadena, California 91125, United States.
Abstract
Electrons have so little mass that in less than a second they can tunnel through potential energy barriers that are several electron-volts high and several nanometers wide. Electron tunneling is a critical functional element in a broad spectrum of applications, ranging from semiconductor diodes to the photosynthetic and respiratory charge transport chains. Prior to the 1970s, chemists generally believed that reactants had to collide in order to effect a transformation. Experimental demonstrations that electrons can transfer between reactants separated by several nanometers led to a revision of the chemical reaction paradigm. Experimental investigations of electron exchange between redox partners separated by molecular bridges have elucidated many fundamental properties of these reactions, particularly the variation of rate constants with distance. Theoretical work has provided critical insights into the superexchange mechanism of electronic coupling between distant redox centers. Kinetics measurements have shown that electrons can tunnel about 2.5 nm through proteins on biologically relevant time scales. Longer-distance biological charge flow requires multiple electron tunneling steps through chains of redox cofactors. The range of phenomena that depends on long-range electron tunneling continues to expand, providing new challenges for both theory and experiment.
Electrons have so little mass that in less than a second they can tunnel through potential energy barriers that are several electron-volts high and several nanometers wide. Electron tunneling is a critical functional element in a broad spectrum of applications, ranging from semiconductor diodes to the photosynthetic and respiratory charge transport chains. Prior to the 1970s, chemists generally believed that reactants had to collide in order to effect a transformation. Experimental demonstrations that electrons can transfer between reactants separated by several nanometers led to a revision of the chemical reaction paradigm. Experimental investigations of electron exchange between redox partners separated by molecular bridges have elucidated many fundamental properties of these reactions, particularly the variation of rate constants with distance. Theoretical work has provided critical insights into the superexchange mechanism of electronic coupling between distant redox centers. Kinetics measurements have shown that electrons can tunnel about 2.5 nm through proteins on biologically relevant time scales. Longer-distance biological charge flow requires multiple electron tunneling steps through chains of redox cofactors. The range of phenomena that depends on long-range electron tunneling continues to expand, providing new challenges for both theory and experiment.
The propensity
of light particles
to tunnel through potential energy barriers was recognized early in
the development of quantum mechanics. At first the phenomenon was
exclusively the purview of physicists: in January 1928, Oppenheimer
invoked electron tunneling (although not by name) through a potential
barrier to explain electric-field-induced emission from atoms;[1] five months later, Fowler and Nordheim published
their landmark work describing field-induced electron emission from
cold metals;[2] in September 1928, Gurney
and Condon rationalized α-particle decay in terms of tunneling;[3] and two months later Gamow published a quantitative
tunneling model that closely reproduced the empirical Geiger–Nuttal
relationship between α-decay lifetime and particle energy.[4]Solid-state physicists discovered the importance
of tunneling in
the middle of the 20th century. Many of the new devices developed
by the rapidly expanding semiconductor electronics industry depended
on electrons tunneling through potential energy barriers. In 1934,
Clarence Zener formulated a theory of field-induced electron tunneling
between energy bands in solid dielectrics.[5] The semiconductor devices developed 15 years later at Bell laboratories
appeared to exhibit this phenomenon, leading William Shockley to name
them Zener diodes.[6] Later, Leo Esaki found
that thin, heavily doped p–n junctions exhibited
negative resistance in the low-voltage regime (tunnel diodes), a phenomenon
readily explained by quantum mechanical tunneling of electrons through
the junction.[7] Today the physics of semiconductors
is understood in great detail, owing to the vigorous interplay between
theory and experiment that has occurred over many years. And, in recent
years, the electronics industry has begun to move to the nanoscale
to take advantage of groundbreaking work in conducting polymers,[8−11] molecular wires,[12] and molecular electronic
devices.[13−16]
Chemistry
In the final third of the 20th century, chemists
began to explore
the role of electron tunneling in reactions between molecular species.
The semiclassical theory of electron-transfer (ET) (eq 1) reactions formulated by, inter alia, Marcus[17,18] and Levich and Dogonadze[19] provided a
theoretical underpinning for countless experimental investigations. The theory expresses the specific rate of
ET between two weakly interacting redox centers held at fixed distance
and orientation in terms of the standard free-energy change for the
reaction (ΔG°), a parameter describing
the extent of nuclear reorientation and reorganization accompanying
ET (λ), and the electronic coupling strength between reactants
and products at the transition-state nuclear configuration (HAB). The exponential factor reflects the probability
of forming the activated complex for the reaction; HAB2 describes the probability of electron tunneling
from donor to acceptor in the activated complex.The Gaussian
free-energy dependence of the specific rate is a unique
feature of homogeneous ET reactions; in favorable cases, rates are
observed to decrease as driving forces increase beyond λ (inverted
effect, Figure 1). The fact that energy-saving
charge-separation reactions in photosynthetic reaction centers are
faster than energy-wasting recombination processes has been rationalized
in terms of inverted effects.[20,21] Often, however, inverted
behavior is masked by the production of electronically excited products
so that rates tend to plateau at high driving forces. Marcus recognized
that chemiluminescent ET reactions are a manifestation of inverted
driving-force effects.[22] Rate-limiting
diffusion of reactants in bimolecular ET reactions further frustrated
the search for inverted behavior. The fluorescence quenching work
of Rehm and Weller is likely the best known example of this phenomenon.[23] Because of these obstacles, some of the earliest
observations of inverted driving-force effects were found in return
ET reactions in photogenerated geminate radical pairs,[24] as well as in bimolecular return reactions.[25] Ultimately, molecules with electron donors and
acceptors linked by covalent bonds were prepared, and ET kinetics
measurements produced several unequivocal demonstrations of inverted
behavior.[26,27] The theory leading to eq 1 treats nuclear motions classically. Quantum mechanical refinements
indicate that reorganization in high-frequency vibrational modes will
substantially attenuate the magnitude of the inverted effect (Figure 1).[28−32]
Figure 1
Theoretical
driving-force dependence of electron-transfer reactions
(T = 295 K). Classical treatment of nuclear rearrangements
(blue) based on λ = 0.8 eV.[18] The
intersecting parabolas represent reactant (red) and product (green)
potential energy surfaces along the reaction coordinate for normal
(left), optimized (middle), and inverted (right) driving forces. A
quantum mechanical treatment (cyan: one classical mode, λ =
0.5 eV; one quantum mode, λ = 0.3 eV; ℏω = 1500
cm–1) predicts damped inverted behavior.[32]
Theoretical
driving-force dependence of electron-transfer reactions
(T = 295 K). Classical treatment of nuclear rearrangements
(blue) based on λ = 0.8 eV.[18] The
intersecting parabolas represent reactant (red) and product (green)
potential energy surfaces along the reaction coordinate for normal
(left), optimized (middle), and inverted (right) driving forces. A
quantum mechanical treatment (cyan: one classical mode, λ =
0.5 eV; one quantum mode, λ = 0.3 eV; ℏω = 1500
cm–1) predicts damped inverted behavior.[32]A common approach to overcome the diffusion problem involved
immobilization
of electron donors and acceptors in rigid solvents. Reactions were
initiated pulse radiolytically[33] or photochemically,[34−39] and kinetics were interpreted in terms of random distributions of
redox partners.[40−42] Two parameters were extracted from the data: a rate
constant for ET at close contact (kET°); and an exponential distance
decay constant β (kET = kET° e–β() that describes the efficiency of long-range
coupling. In square-barrier tunneling models, β depends on the
height of the barrier and the effective electron mass.[43] Although square-barrier tunneling models accurately
predict the exponential distance dependence of long-range ET reactions,
they provide no insight into how the properties of the bridging medium
determine the coupling strength.Superexchange tunneling models
gained favor over geometric barrier
models because they describe long-range couplings in terms of the
electronic structure of the intervening medium. The theory of superexchange
interactions, formulated first by Kramers[44] and later by Anderson,[45] rationalized
interactions between magnetic centers separated by nonmagnetic ions.
Halpern and Orgel generalized the superexchange theory to describe
inner-sphere ET processes,[46] and McConnell
used perturbation theory to elaborate the model for electron donor–acceptor
molecules separated by an oligomeric bridge composed of j identical repeat units (Figure 2).[47] McConnell’s familiar result (eq 2) describes HAB in terms
of the energy gap between electron (or hole) states on the donor (or
acceptor) and electron (or hole) states of the bridging medium (Δε)
and the coupling strengths between the donor and the bridge hole or
electron states (hDb), the acceptor and
the bridge states (hbA), and adjacent
bridge states (hbb). The theory predicts that HAB will be an exponential function of j and, hence, that rates will be exponential functions of donor–acceptor
distance (r), in agreement with geometric barrier
models. Taking the length of a bridge element as δ, the empirical
distance decay constant can be defined in terms of superexchange parameters
(eq 3).
Figure 2
Orbital diagram representation of the
states mediating electron-transfer
superexchange coupling. The electron transfers from the orbital on
the left to an equivalent one on the right. Electronic coupling can
be mediated by excess electron (e– coupling) or hole states (h+ coupling)
on the intervening bridge.
Orbital diagram representation of the
states mediating electron-transfer
superexchange coupling. The electron transfers from the orbital on
the left to an equivalent one on the right. Electronic coupling can
be mediated by excess electron (e– coupling) or hole states (h+ coupling)
on the intervening bridge.Measurements of ET in rigid solvents arereadily interpreted
in
terms of superexchange coupling models. Following work by Ponce,[38] Wenger found that β depended on the properties
of the glass: 25% aqueous H2SO4, 16.0(5) nm–1; 2-methyl-tetrahydrofuran (2-MTHF), 16.2(5) nm–1; toluene, 12.3(5) nm–1 (Figure 3).[39] The coupling efficiencies
indicate that electron tunneling through 2.5 nm of toluene is several
thousand times faster than tunneling across the same distance in 2-MTHF
or 25% aqueous H2SO4. The smaller energy gaps
(Δε) to electron or hole states of toluene, compared to
the analogous gaps for 2-MTHF or 25% H2SO4,
likely account for the variation in β values. The decay constant
for tunneling through an oligoxylene bridged donor–acceptor
pair was found to be 7.6(5) nm–1;[39] tunneling across 2.5 nm of this bridge would be over 10 000
times faster than tunneling through toluene. The likely explanation
for this difference is that the coupling mediated by the C–C
bond between xylene rings (hbb) is substantially
greater than that associated with van der Waals contacts
between toluene molecules in the solvent glass.
Figure 3
Distance dependence of
rate constants for electron tunneling through
solvent glasses (2-MTHF, blue; 25% aqueous H2SO4, cyan; toluene, green) and across oligoxylene bridges (red).[38,39]
Distance dependence of
rate constants for electron tunneling through
solvent glasses (2-MTHF, blue; 25% aqueous H2SO4, cyan; toluene, green) and across oligoxylene bridges (red).[38,39]The appealing simplicity of eqs 2 and 3 conceals some quantitative
difficulties with the
one-electron nearest-neighbor superexchange model. Several studies
of ET across saturated alkane bridges,[26,48−50] particularly in self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of normal alkanes
on gold electrodes, have produced β values of ∼10 nm–1 (Figure 4).[51−53] Taking δ
= 0.154 nm leads to the estimate hbb/Δε
≈ 0.5, a value that barely fulfills McConnell’s perturbation
theory requirements (i.e., |hbb|/Δε
≪ 1). Direct measurements of hbb and Δε are not feasible, but spectroscopic data can
provide insights into their relative magnitudes. Estimates of energy
gaps to hole states arerelatively straightforward. The gas-phase
ionization energies of saturated alkanes decrease as the number of
carbon atoms increases: C2H6, IE(adiabatic)
= 11.52 eV; C11H24, 9.65 eV (Figure 5).[54,55] This progression is consistent
with modest delocalization of σ-bonding electrons as the carbon
backbone lengthens. The ferricenium/ferrocene (Fc+/Fc)
redox couple was used in much of the alkane SAM work, and valence
photoelectron spectra have been measured for this archetypal organometallic
compound. The vertical ionization energy of Fc is 6.88 eV,[56] but this is not the quantity of interest. Since
the electronic coupling matrix element in eq 1 corresponds to the transition-state nuclear configuration, the adiabatic
ionization energy (∼6.65 eV)[56] is
more appropriate (Supporting Information). Consequently, the gas-phase energy gaps for Fc+/Fc
hole tunneling across alkane spacers (n-CH2, j = 5–11) range from 3.6 to 2.9 eV.
Figure 4
Distance dependence of
Arrhenius prefactors for electron-transfer
reactions between a Au electrode and redox couples attached to the
termini of oligomethylene (directly linked Fc, ●; ester-linked
Fc, ○; Ru(pyridine)(NH3)52+, ▽) and oligovinylene (×) spacers. For distances >12
Å (1.2 nm), oligomethylene rates are described by an exponential
distance decay of 10.6 nm–1 (solid line). The dotted
line shows the prefactor expected for reactions limited by solvent
dynamics. Reprinted with permission from ref (51). Copyright 2003 American
Chemical Society.
Figure 5
Gas-phase vertical (○)
and adiabatic (●) ionization
energies for normal saturated hydrocarbons.[54,55] The dashed line corresponds to the adiabatic ionization energy of
ferrocene.[56]
Distance dependence of
Arrhenius prefactors for electron-transfer
reactions between a Au electrode and redox couples attached to the
termini of oligomethylene (directly linked Fc, ●; ester-linked
Fc, ○; Ru(pyridine)(NH3)52+, ▽) and oligovinylene (×) spacers. For distances >12
Å (1.2 nm), oligomethylene rates are described by an exponential
distance decay of 10.6 nm–1 (solid line). The dotted
line shows the prefactor expected for reactions limited by solvent
dynamics. Reprinted with permission from ref (51). Copyright 2003 American
Chemical Society.Gas-phase vertical (○)
and adiabatic (●) ionization
energies for normal saturated hydrocarbons.[54,55] The dashed line corresponds to the adiabatic ionization energy of
ferrocene.[56]In condensed phases, the energy gaps are likely to shift
somewhat,
owing to polarization of the surrounding medium. Photoconductivity
measurements indicate that ionization thresholds of saturated hydrocarbons
decrease by about 1.5 eV upon moving from gas to liquid phases.[57] The binding energy of the tunneling electron
for the ferricenium/ferroceneredox couple (E°
= 0.4 V vs NHE)[58] is near 4.9 eV, suggesting
that Δε is in the range of 3.9–3.1 eV for condensed-phase,
normal alkane bridges.Estimation of energy gaps for electron
tunneling is more problematic.
A naïve approach involves estimation of the LUMO energy
of a molecular bridge on the basis of its absorption and ionization
spectra. The onset of far-UV absorption in gaseous and liquid normal
alkanes (n-CH2, j = 5–14) is near 8 eV.[59−63] The maxima found in liquids between 8.45 and 8.18 eV, and the shoulders
near 7.7 eV, have been assigned to electronic excitations of σ-bonding
electrons into Rydberg-type orbitals (3p and 3s, respectively).[63] Taking 7.7 eV for the HOMO–LUMO energy
gap, along with the gas-phase ionization energies of saturated alkanes,
places LUMO energies 2.6–1.9 eV below the vacuum level.The diabatic states that would mediate coupling for ET, however,
do not correlate directly with those observed in valence-shell or
Rydberg absorption spectra. The appropriate states for electron tunneling
are anion states of the bridging molecule.[64] In an m-electron molecule, the electron promoted
to the LUMO in a valence-shell excited state sees an effective potential
produced by m – 1 electrons. The
effective potential seen by the excess electron in an anion created
from an m-electron parent, however, is produced by m electrons. The consequence is that the extra electrons
in anions are very weakly bound, or not even bound at all. Indeed,
negative electron affinities are extracted from resonances in electron
transmission spectra (ETS) of many organic molecules.[65,66] Only very broad (∼4–5 eV) ETSresonances, indicative
of extremely short-lived anion states, have been detected in the 7–9
eV range for saturated alkanes.[67] States
so far above the vacuum level seem unlikely to assist long-range electronic
coupling between donors and acceptors separated by alkane spacers.Ab initio calculations of gas-phase electronic
couplings across saturated alkane spacers provide interesting comparisons
to the experimental quantities.[68−70] In a Natural Bond Orbital (NBO)
basis,[71,72] intrabridge coupling elements (hbb) between C–C σ-bonding orbitals in trans-n-alkane spacers are estimated to
be ∼2.7 eV.[68,69] The energy gaps depend on the
redox partner chosen for the calculations. For alkane-bridged methylene
cation and anion radicals ([H2C-(CH2)-CH2]±), Δε
values of ∼8 eV emerged from the calculations for both hole
tunneling in the cations and electron tunneling in the anions.[68,69] Experimental data suggest a somewhat smaller gap for hole tunneling:
the vertical ionization energy of the ethyl radical (H3C–CH2•) is 8.1 eV; its electron
affinity is −0.26 eV.[73−75] Substituting the theoretical
values in eq 3 would suggest β ≈
14 nm–1, but the full calculation gave β ≈
5–7 nm–1 for transfer in [H2C-(CH2)-CH2]+.[69] Clearly, the McConnell model does
not capture all contributions to the coupling matrix element; a principal
source of the discrepancy lies in the inclusion of only nearest-neighbor
interactions. Ratner demonstrated that the McConnell model could be
generalized to give HAB as a sum of the
contributions from all pathways.[76] Since
the coupling is a signed quantity, this extended McConnell model admitted
the possibility of constructive and destructive interference from
competing coupling routes. Ab initio calculations
of coupling along trans-n-alkane
spacers revealed that non-nearest-neighbor coupling pathways make
substantial constructive contributions to the total coupling between
donors and acceptors.[68−70] Moreover, pathways involving antibonding orbitals
of the alkane contributed to the calculated couplings for the cations; HAB was neither exclusively hole nor electron
mediated. These studies indicated that although nearest-neighbor McConnell
pathways did not lead to accurate estimates of long-range couplings,
more coarsely grained effective pathways based on larger repeat units
could be represented by a McConnell-type model.[69]The energy gaps to hole and electron states of saturated
alkane
bridges are extremely large for most conventional redox reagents.
The same cannot be said for many unsaturated hydrocarbon bridges.
Moreover, the decrease in energy gap with increasing bridge length
complicates analyses of distance dependences. When the energy gaps
become small, incoherent hopping through real redox intermediates
begins to compete with coherent single-step long-range tunneling.[77−79] Wasielewski and co-workers demonstrated that ET across oligo-p-phenylenevinylene bridges (βobsd = 0.4
nm–1) is a case in point.[77,78] Analysis of the temperature dependences of these kinetics suggested
that hopping is gated by torsional motions involving the donor and
the bridge. A similarly shallow distance dependence (βobsd = 0.6 nm–1) was reported for tunneling from a
gold electrode to the Fc+/Fc couple across SAMs composed
of oligo-p-phenylenevinylene bridges. In this instance,
estimated energy gaps (>1 eV) are larger than observed activation
energies (∼0.2 eV), and incoherent hopping was ruled out.[53] Instead, the weak distance dependence was attributed
to dynamically limited, adiabatic ET. It is apparent that the empirical
β values for ET across oligo-p-phenylenevinylene
bridges in both the small and large energy gap regimes are too small
to be consistent with superexchange-mediated tunneling. The surprising
finding is that two different mechanisms appear to be responsible
for virtually distance-independent transport across this bridge.
Biology
Understanding electron transfer in biological systems has challenged
chemists for over half a century. Szent-Györgyi, in attempting
to rationalize electron transport in respiratory chains, suggested
that electrons move among enzymes in energy bands, analogous to transport
in semiconductors.[80] This proposal met
considerable opposition,[81−83] although no suitable alternative
appeared for more than 25 years. In 1966, DeVault and Chance reported
that rates of cytochrome oxidation in flash-irradiated suspensions
of photosynthetic bacteria reached a limiting value (τ ≈
2 ms) as the temperature decreased below 100 K; they suggested that
quantum mechanical tunneling was the explanation.[84] Without structural information and a precise understanding
of the ET reaction, little more could be concluded. Eight years later,
Hopfield developed a thermally activated tunneling model to describe
the DeVault and Chance data.[85] He postulated
a 2 eV barrier height, leading to a 14.4 nm–1 distance
decay constant and a predicted 0.8 nm tunneling distance.Definitive
evidence for long-range electron tunneling through proteins
emerged in 1982 from our work on cytochrome c modified
with a RuIII(NH3)5 moiety coordinated
to His33 on the protein surface (Ru(His33)-Fe-cyt c).[86] In a kinetics study, flash photochemical
electron injection generated transient RuII(His33)-FeIII-cyt c that relaxed to the RuIII–FeII thermodynamic product with a time constant
of 30 ms (−ΔG° = 0.2 eV). Structural
models placed the ET distance at 1.8 nm; tunneling was the only plausible
explanation. Irrefutable evidence of long-range tunneling was provided
by measurements of intramolecular ET reactions in protein crystals.[87−89] The advent of site-directed mutagenesis and several experimental
refinements developed over the ensuing years ultimately produced an
experimentally validated timetable for long-range electron tunneling
through proteins (Figure 6).[90−92] We have measured
the kinetics of high-driving-force ET in more than 30 Ru-labeled proteins:
donor–acceptor distances vary from 1.2 to 2.6 nm, and specific
rates span 7 orders of magnitude (109 to 102 s–1). Driving-force-optimized rate constants are
dispersed around an exponential distance decay of 11 nm–1, but the substantial scatter reflects important features of the
protein medium.[90−94]
Figure 6
Distance
dependence of driving-force-optimized ET rate constants
for Ru-modified proteins: azurin (blue), cytochrome c (red), myoglobin (magenta), cytochrome b562 (green), and high-potential iron protein (cyan).[90]
Distance
dependence of driving-force-optimized ET rate constants
for Ru-modified proteins: azurin (blue), cytochrome c (red), myoglobin (magenta), cytochrome b562 (green), and high-potential iron protein (cyan).[90]A comparison between the distance
dependence of ET through n-alkane spacers embedded
in SAMs and that of Ru-proteins
is illuminating. Arrhenius prefactors (roughly equivalent to driving-force-optimized
homogeneous rate constants) for 10 ET rate measurements across n-alkanes in SAMs vary over 6 orders of magnitude (109 to 103 s–1) in the 1.2–2.5
nm distance range, with a nearly perfect exponential distance dependence
(β = 10.6 nm–1).[53] The standard deviation for SAM data is less than a factor of 2 (1.8),
whereas that for the Ru-protein data is a factor of 8. Clearly, the n-alkane spacers embedded in SAMs are extremely well-ordered
structures that create a uniform barrier to long-range tunneling.
Within the Ru-protein data set are examples where rate constants differ
by a factor of 103 at the same donor–acceptor distance,
and virtually identical rates are found for distances differing by
0.5 nm.[90−92] The inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the protein
data is that folded polypeptide matrices do not create a uniform barrier
to electron tunneling. This conclusion is entirely consistent with
investigations of electron tunneling through solvent glasses. Long-range
coupling efficiencies are sensitive functions of the chemical composition
of the glass (βtoluene < βH ≈ β2-MTHF), and
covalent linkages are superior to van der Waals contacts
(βoligoxylene < βtoluene).[39]The side chains of the 20 amino acids
have widely varying molecular
and electronic structures, and polypeptide folds create a heterogeneous
array of bonded and nonbonded contacts between electron donors and
acceptors. When redox partners are oriented along an extended polypeptide,
as they are in a β-sheet protein, Ru-azurin, ET rates exhibit
a simple exponential distance dependence.[90−92] However, donor–acceptor
couplings mediated by side-chain atoms, hydrogen bonds, and van der Waals
contacts will not depend solely on the separation distance; the structure
and composition of the intervening medium will play a defining role.
Understanding the long-range coupling in a protein, then, is a challenging
quantum chemical problem involving a very small energy splitting between
reactant and product states (HAB <
10 cm–1) composed of hundreds or thousands of atoms,
with multiple coupling modes, interferences, conformational dynamics,
and potential breakdown of the Born–Oppenheimer and Condon
approximations.[95−105] Nevertheless, ab initio electronic structure methods
combined with molecular dynamics simulations have produced impressive
strides in calculations of absolute ET rates in Ru-modified azurins.[99,106] A great deal of fundamental information is subsumed in the calculation
of protein ET rates. A decomposition of the calculated rates into
contributions from electron and hole tunneling, and identification
of the pathways contributing to the overall coupling, would be especially
illuminating.[13,107]Two general principles
that emerge from studies of ET in glasses
can provide insights into the factors that control long-range biological
ET reactions: aromatics are better than alkanes, and covalent bonds
are superior to van der Waals contacts. As efficient long-range
ET in DNA (β < 10 nm–1) is facilitated
by the high concentration of aromatic bases stacked in the double
helix,[108−110] we anticipate that aromatic amino acids
will provide smaller tunneling energy gaps than aliphatic residues
in proteins. In support of this view, the ionization energies of aliphatic
amino acids (∼9.6 eV) are greater than those of aromatic amino
acids (Phe, 9.4(1) eV; Tyr, 8.5(1); Trp, 7.8(1)).[111−113] Vertical electron attachment energies of Phe (0.87 eV) and Trp (0.68
eV) are about 1 eV less than those of Ala and Gly (1.80 and 1.93 eV,
respectively).[114] Assessing the biological
implications of the second principle is a difficult prospect, because
it requires knowledge of individual protein structures and, in the
case of interprotein ET, encounter-complex structures.With
the ready accessibility of protein-sequence databases, it
is possible to investigate whether biological ET reactions exploit
the presumed greater coupling efficiency of aromatic amino acids.
The four aromatic amino acids are among the least frequently occurring
residues in the UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot protein sequence database[115] (Phe, 3.90% of all residues, rank = 14; Tyr,
3.00%, 16; His, 2.36%, 18; Trp, 1.13%, 20) and have long been believed
to stabilize folded structures, with additional roles in protein–protein
recognition and ligand binding.[116−119] Histidine has additional functional
importance, owing to its basicity and preference for metal binding
and, for the purposes of the subsequent discussion, is not included
in the aromatic class. The average amino-acid frequencies of occurrence
in proteins from the six enzyme classes (oxidoreductases, 37,408 sequences;
transferases, 89,489; hydrolases, 61,743; lyases, 23,052; isomerases,
14,067; ligases, 30,513) defined by the Enzyme Data Bank of the Swiss
Institute of Bioinformatics are illustrated in Figure 7. The striking feature in this comparison is that only among
the oxidoreductases do aromatic residues appear more frequently than
the database average. With the exception of Tyr in the ligases, aromatic
amino acids occur substantially less frequently than database averages
in the other five enzyme classes. Analyses of transmembrane protein
structures reveal that aromatic amino acids are found preferentially
in membrane interface regions; this trend is believed to enhance stability.[120−122] Separate comparisons of amino acid frequencies in transmembrane
and soluble proteins still exhibit higher frequencies of aromatics
among the oxidoreductases, although the remaining five enzyme classes
show some interesting variations (see Supporting
Information). An obvious explanation for the higher frequencies
of aromatic amino acids in oxidoreductases is their superior capability
to mediate long-range ET. Testing this hypothesis is a challenging
prospect—folded polypeptide structures will not tolerate wholesale
exchange of aromatic and aliphatic residues. Analyses of the structures
and ET properties of proteins with particularly high and low aromatic
frequencies might provide some insight into this question. The cytochromes
P450 are a case in point (Figure 8): the average
Phe occurrence frequency in the P450 family is 45% greater than in
the database as a whole; Trp frequencies are higher by 22%. Enhanced
superexchange coupling between redox partners and the heme is one
rationale for the prevalence of aromatics in this enzyme family.
Figure 7
Amino
acid occurrence frequencies in the primary sequences of six
enzyme classes (oxidoreductases, 37,408 sequences; transferases, 89,489;
hydrolases, 61,743; lyases, 23,052; isomerases, 14,067; ligases, 30,513)
relative to the average frequencies in the Enzyme Data Bank of the
Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics.[115] All
bar graphs have identical vertical axis limits (±0.1).
Figure 8
Amino acid occurrence frequencies in the primary
sequences of the
cytochrome P450 family of enzymes (975 sequences) relative to the
average frequencies in the Enzyme Data Bank of the Swiss Institute
of Bioinformatics.[115]
Amino
acid occurrence frequencies in the primary sequences of six
enzyme classes (oxidoreductases, 37,408 sequences; transferases, 89,489;
hydrolases, 61,743; lyases, 23,052; isomerases, 14,067; ligases, 30,513)
relative to the average frequencies in the Enzyme Data Bank of the
Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics.[115] All
bar graphs have identical vertical axis limits (±0.1).Amino acid occurrence frequencies in the primary
sequences of the
cytochrome P450 family of enzymes (975 sequences) relative to the
average frequencies in the Enzyme Data Bank of the Swiss Institute
of Bioinformatics.[115]The exigencies of biological function typically require that
electrons
be transferred in milliseconds over distances of 5 nm or more, yet
it is clear from Figure 6 that single-step
ET reactions across more than 2.5 nm cannot keep up with this pace.
The solution to the problem is multistep tunneling (hopping): redox
centers spaced at ∼1.5 nm intervals with formal potentials
near those of the terminal donors and acceptors.[94,123,124] Indeed, it is likely that the
2 μs cytochrome oxidation in Chromatium vinosum studied by DeVault and Chance in 1966, and analyzed theoretically
by Hopfield in 1974, was a two-step tunneling reaction.[125] The structure of the photosynthetic reaction
center in Chromatium has not been determined, but
the Blastochloris viridis (formerly Rhodopseudomonas
viridis) enzyme has an analogous string of four cytochromes[126,127] [c554, E°(FeIII/II) = −0.07 V vs NHE; c556, E° = 0.32(1) V; c552, E° = 0.02(1) V; c559, E° = 0.38(1) V] that deliver electrons to
the oxidized bacteriochlorophyll special pair [P+, E°(P+/0) = 0.5 V].[125,128,129] The kinetics of P+ reduction in two-electron-reduced (FeII-c556, FeII-c559) B. viridisreaction centers are biphasic: a 200 ns phase
has been assigned to FeII-c559 → P+ ET, and a 2 μs process is attributed
to FeII-c556 → FeIII-c559 ET.[125,130] The Fe–Fe distance between c556 and c559 is 2.78 nm (PDB 2I5N),[131] too far for a 2-μs single-step ET reaction. Cytochrome c552 lies between c556 and c559, with Fe–Fe distances
of 1.65 (c556–c552) and 1.39 nm (c552–c559). EPR measurements indicate that the FeIII hemes in c554, c556, and c552 are strongly
coupled. Owing to electrostatic interactions among the cytochromes,
it is difficult to determine precisely the driving forces for FeII-c556 → FeIII-c552 and FeII-c552 → FeIII-c559 ET reactions, but, on the basis of formal potentials extracted from
redox titrations, it is likely that the two-step transfer from FeII-c556 to FeIII-c559 involves an endergonic first step and a
spontaneous second step.[128,129] Redox chains that
facilitate charge separation across biological membranes have been
identified in several components of the photosynthetic and respiratory
machinery.[94,128,132]Multistep biological electron tunneling need not always depend
on redox-active metallo-cofactors. Perhaps the best-known example
is the Class I ribonucleotide reductase in which a hole resides on
a stable Tyr122 radical in the resting state of the Escherichia
coli enzyme.[133−142] A chain of Tyr and Trpresidues is believed to mediate ET from an
active-site Cys439residue to Tyr122• over a distance
of more than 3.5 nm. Multistep ET reactions via Trp and Tyr have been
identified in several other natural systems: photosystem II,[143−146] DNA photolyase,[147−155] MauG,[156−159] and the cytochrome c/cytochrome c peroxidase pair.[160,161]The natural hopping systems
arenot as amenable to systematic variations
as are sensitizer-modifed proteins. We examined the fundamental principles
of multistep tunneling in a Re-modified azurin mutant engineered to
have a Trp directly between Re and Cu centers separated by 1.9 nm.
CuI oxidation by electronically excited ReI was
accelerated by a factor of more than 100 in this mutant; replacement
of Trp by Tyr or Phe inhibited CuI oxidation.[162] Hopping maps based on semiclassical ET theory
have been used to identify potential locations for redox intermediates
(Int) in Ru-modified azurins.[163] The greatest
hopping advantage is predicted for azurins in which the Int-RuIII distance is up to 0.5 nm shorter than that for Int-CuI. The hopping advantage increases as systems orient nearer
a “straight line” between the donor and acceptor, a
consequence of minimizing intermediate tunneling distances. The smallest
predicted hopping advantage occurs when the Ru–Cu distance
is less than 2 nm. Analyses of ET kinetics measurements in three CuI-Int-RuIII azurins (Int = nitrotyrosinate) revealed
that hopping via NO2-TyrO• accelerates
CuI oxidation by factors of ∼10–50, results
that are fully consistent with the predictions of semiclassical theory.[163]Generation of oxidized Trp and Tyr radicalsrequires high-potential
oxidants (E° > 1 V vs NHE), so that they
are
likely to participate only in a relatively small subset of enzymatic
transformations. The enzymatic reactions in which oxygen serves as
an electron acceptor typically involve high-potential intermediates.
Examination of the amino-acid occurrence frequencies in O2- and H2O2-reactive oxidoreductases (7149 sequences)
reveals that Trp and Tyr are found much more often than the database
average (Figure 9; see Supporting Information for additional comparisons). The involvement
of Trp and Tyr radicals in ET reactions is one explanation for the
prevalence of these residues in this class of enzymes. We speculate
that, in addition to participation in on-pathway ET chains, Trp and
Tyr radicals also might play protective roles in O2-reactive
oxidoreductases. If these enzymes do not operate with high fidelity
or if xenobiotics inhibit natural function, the high-potential intermediates
generated during turnover can produce reactive species that damage
and inactivate enzymes.[164−166] Appropriately placed Tyr and/or
Trpresidues could prevent this damage by reducing the intermediates
and directing the oxidizing hole to less harmful sites or out of the
protein altogether. Devising methods to identify and detect protective
biochemical mechanisms of this sort is an ongoing research challenge
in biological ET.[167]
Figure 9
Amino acid occurrence
frequencies in the primary sequences of O2- and H2O2-reactive oxidoreductases
(7149 sequences) relative to the average frequencies in the Enzyme
Data Bank of the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics.[115]
Amino acid occurrence
frequencies in the primary sequences of O2- and H2O2-reactive oxidoreductases
(7149 sequences) relative to the average frequencies in the Enzyme
Data Bank of the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics.[115]
How Far Can They Go?
Tremendous
advances in theory and experiment during the past half-century
have produced a rigorous foundation for understanding long-range electron
transfers in chemistry and biology. Yet, many fundamental problems
remain to be solved. Superexchange is generally agreed to be the dominant,
but not exclusive, coupling mechanism for long-range ET, although
the mediating states and energy gaps are rarely identified,[13,107,168] nor are they correlated with
the spectroscopic and thermodynamic properties of the bridging medium.
Indeed, the uncertainty about energy gaps often leads to confusion
about competition between coherent tunneling and incoherent hopping.Empirical studies of long-range electron transport continue to
challenge the current paradigm. A particularly interesting example
is provided by bacterial nanowires. Groups of microbes are known that
transfer electrons to extracellular FeIII oxides.[169] Many of these bacteria contact the oxides via
micrometer-long hairlike appendages known as pili. Some pili are coated
with multiheme c-type cytochromes that have been
suggested to serve as hopping intermediates in micrometer-distance
electron-transport processes.[170] Alternative
interpretations, however, suggest that the pilus itself has metal-like
conductive properties in the absence of the cytochromes.[171] Beratan and co-workers have pointed out that
superexchange tunneling theories impose severe constraints on these
hyper-long-range ET processes.[172] New insights
into the ET properties of pili continue to emerge, but it remains
to be clearly determined how this remarkable transport of electrons
is accomplished.
Authors: Nikhil S Malvankar; Madeline Vargas; Kelly P Nevin; Ashley E Franks; Ching Leang; Byoung-Chan Kim; Kengo Inoue; Tünde Mester; Sean F Covalla; Jessica P Johnson; Vincent M Rotello; Mark T Tuominen; Derek R Lovley Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2011-08-07 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: John F Smalley; Harry O Finklea; Christopher E D Chidsey; Matthew R Linford; Stephen E Creager; John P Ferraris; Keli Chalfant; Thomas Zawodzinsk; Stephen W Feldberg; Marshall D Newton Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2003-02-19 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Herbert L Axelrod; Edward C Abresch; Melvin Y Okamura; Andrew P Yeh; Douglas C Rees; George Feher Journal: J Mol Biol Date: 2002-05-31 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Nicholas F Polizzi; Agostino Migliore; Michael J Therien; David N Beratan Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jessica Spradlin; Diana Lee; Sruthi Mahadevan; Mavish Mahomed; Lawrence Tang; Quan Lam; Alexander Colbert; Oliver S Shafaat; David Goodin; Marco Kloos; Mallory Kato; Lionel E Cheruzel Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2016-09-14
Authors: Eric Block; Seogjoo Jang; Hiroaki Matsunami; Sivakumar Sekharan; Bérénice Dethier; Mehmed Z Ertem; Sivaji Gundala; Yi Pan; Shengju Li; Zhen Li; Stephene N Lodge; Mehmet Ozbil; Huihong Jiang; Sonia F Penalba; Victor S Batista; Hanyi Zhuang Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Patrick Frank; Robert K Szilagyi; Volker Gramlich; Hua-Fen Hsu; Britt Hedman; Keith O Hodgson Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: Elizabeth O'Brien; Marilyn E Holt; Matthew K Thompson; Lauren E Salay; Aaron C Ehlinger; Walter J Chazin; Jacqueline K Barton Journal: Science Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 47.728