Heme-carbonyl complexes are widely exploited for the insight they provide into the structural basis of function in heme-based proteins, by revealing the nature of their bonded and nonbonded interactions with the protein. This report presents two novel results which clearly establish a FeCO vibrational signature for crystallographically verified pentacoordination. First, anisotropy in the NRVS density of states for ν(Fe-C) and δ(FeCO) in oriented single crystals of [Fe(OEP)(CO)] clearly reveals that the Fe-C stretch occurs at higher frequency than the FeCO bend and considerably higher than any previously reported heme carbonyl. Second, DFT calculations on a series of heme carbonyls reveal that the frequency crossover occurs near the weak trans O atom donor, furan. As ν(Fe-C) occurs at lower frequencies than δ(FeCO) in all heme protein carbonyls reported to date, the results reported herein suggest that they are all hexacoordinate.
Heme-carbonyl complexes are widely exploited for the insight they provide into the structural basis of function in heme-based proteins, by revealing the nature of their bonded and nonbonded interactions with the protein. This report presents two novel results which clearly establish a FeCO vibrational signature for crystallographically verified pentacoordination. First, anisotropy in the NRVS density of states for ν(Fe-C) and δ(FeCO) in oriented single crystals of [Fe(OEP)(CO)] clearly reveals that the Fe-C stretch occurs at higher frequency than the FeCO bend and considerably higher than any previously reported heme carbonyl. Second, DFT calculations on a series of heme carbonyls reveal that the frequency crossover occurs near the weak trans O atom donor, furan. As ν(Fe-C) occurs at lower frequencies than δ(FeCO) in all heme protein carbonyls reported to date, the results reported herein suggest that they are all hexacoordinate.
Carbon monoxide (CO) is an important
molecule in biology. In addition to its well-known toxicity, it serves
roles with survival value, including cardiovascular[1] and circadian[2] signaling in
humans. Additionally, it is the target of several two-component bacterial
signaling systems wherein changes in its partial pressure elicit changes
in gene transcription.[3] As a research tool,
heme-carbonyl complexes are widely exploited for the insight they
provide into the structural basis of function in heme-based proteins.[4−7] Their FeCO vibrational signatures constitute a sensitive probe of
the ligand trans to CO, FeCO bonding, and electrostatic
landscape of the distal pockets of heme proteins. Herein we present
a novel vibrational signature for the pentacoordinate (5-c) [Fe(OEP)(CO)],
along with computational evidence that it is generally diagnostic
for pentacoordination.The fundamental basis for FeCO vibrational
trends is important
insofar as their sensitivities to protein and enzyme environments
reveal correlations between structure, bonding, and function. However,
as the breadth of recognized heme protein functions grows, pursuit
of their structural bases through carbonyl spectroscopy will depend
increasingly on a firm understanding of their bonding, consistent
with both theory and experiment. We have explored the intrinsic relationships
between L–Fe–CO bonding and the vibrational signature
of the FeCO moiety through complementary experimental and theoretical
approaches. This report presents two novel results relevant to structure
and bonding in heme carbonyls.Experimental and calculated NRVS vibrational
density of states
(VDOS) for the Fe atom in [Fe(OEP)(CO)] and [Fe(OEP)(1-MeIm)(CO)]
versus wavenumber shift. (A) Experimental VDOS derived from NRVS measurements
on single crystal [Fe(OEP)(CO)]. These measurements yield the directional
contributions to the Fe VDOS of a polycrystalline powder (gray error
bars with black trace). (B) Calculated VDOS for parallel (red), perpendicular
(blue), and powder (black). (C) Experimentally derived VDOS for powdered
[Fe(OEP)(1-MeIm)(CO)]. (D) Oriented VDOS predicted from DFT calculations,
revealing the νFe–C frequency below that of
δFeCO.First, vibrational spectra were recorded by nuclear resonance
vibrational
spectroscopy (NRVS) from a single crystal of [Fe(OEP)(CO)] oriented
with the porphyrin planes either parallel or perpendicular to the
propagation direction of the X-ray beam.[8,9] Thus, based
on orientation, bands arising from modes in which the iron atom has
in-plane and out-of-plane momentum can be unambiguously assigned.
The experimental VDOS are shown in Figure 1A. Iron-CO vibrations dominate the Fe VDOS determined for heme carbonyls
above 400 cm–1 with bands at 505 and 573 cm–1, within the frequency range where νFe–C and δFeCO bands occur. Figure 1A shows that the 573 cm–1 band is only present
in the spectrum recorded with the porphyrin planes oriented perpendicular
(blue) to the X-ray beam. Iron motion perpendicular to the porphyrin
plane clearly identifies νFe–C at a frequency
higher than the δFeCO modes, for which Fe moves parallel
to the plane. In-plane signal for the 505 cm–1 band
(red) indicates iron momentum parallel to the porphyrin plane, providing
for its unambiguous assignment to the FeCO bending modes, δFeCO. Good agreement with the computed VDOS in Figure 1B confirms the character of the observed vibrational
contributions in Figure 1A. These data establish
a unique vibrational signature for the 5-c heme carbonyl and constitute
the first experimental verification that νFe–C occurs at higher energy than δFeCO in 5-c heme
carbonyls. An analogous frequency inversion takes place between five-
and six-coordinate heme nitrosyls.[10] Hence,
the 573 cm–1 frequency establishes a new upper limit
for the range of νFe–C modes in heme carbonyls.
Figure 1C shows the NRVS spectrum recorded
from a polycrystalline powder of [Fe(OEP)(1-MeIm)(CO)] with the computed
parallel and perpendicular spectra being shown in Figure 1D. In contrast to the [Fe(OEP)(CO)] spectra, the
Fe VDOS determined from NRVS measurements on the powder in conjunction
with their predicted directional contributions reveal the νFe–C frequency to be significantly lower than the δFeCO frequency, as observed for other hexacoordinate (6-c)
heme carbonyls.[9,11] Thus, the assignments for the
hexacoordinate complex have the ordinary frequency ordering wherein
the stretch occurs lower than the bend. The DFT-basis for these assignments
is confirmed by those for [Fe(TPP)(1-MeIm)(CO)], which were based
on NRVS measurements on oriented single crystals.[9]
Figure 1
Experimental and calculated NRVS vibrational
density of states
(VDOS) for the Fe atom in [Fe(OEP)(CO)] and [Fe(OEP)(1-MeIm)(CO)]
versus wavenumber shift. (A) Experimental VDOS derived from NRVS measurements
on single crystal [Fe(OEP)(CO)]. These measurements yield the directional
contributions to the Fe VDOS of a polycrystalline powder (gray error
bars with black trace). (B) Calculated VDOS for parallel (red), perpendicular
(blue), and powder (black). (C) Experimentally derived VDOS for powdered
[Fe(OEP)(1-MeIm)(CO)]. (D) Oriented VDOS predicted from DFT calculations,
revealing the νFe–C frequency below that of
δFeCO.
As the HOMOs of heme carbonyls are π bonding
with respect
to Fe–C and π antibonding with respect to C–O,
polarizing influences on π-e– density strengthens and weakens the Fe–C and C–O π
bonds, respectively, or vice versa. Thus, a plot of RFe–C vs RC–O has a negative slope.[12] As frequency differences for νFe–C and νC–O of different carbonyls report differences
in their Fe–C and C–O bond strengths, a plot of νFe–C vs νC–O reveals them to
be inversely correlated as well.[4,5] Heme carbonyls having
the same or similar trans ligands fall on the same
line. The observation of multiple lines has been rationalized in terms
of a trans effect. These relationships are illustrated
in the inset of Figure 2. The lowest and middle
lines correlate 6-cheme carbonyls having proximal imidazolate (Im–) or thiolate (RS–) ligands and imidazole
(ImH) ligands, respectively. The highest line has been attributed
to 5-c heme carbonyls.[13] Location toward
the left end of a line indicates strong distal H-bond donation to
CO or positive electrostatic potential. Locations toward the right
are typical of weak or no H-bond donation. Structural and vibrational
data are sparse for 5-c heme carbonyls. In the reported systems, νFe–C frequencies lie ∼25 cm–1 higher than those for 6-c complexes; νC–O falls in the same range. No band clearly assignable to δFeCO has been reported for a 5-cCO adduct. A number of heme
carbonyls in proteins[21−23] and in weakly or noncoordinating solvents[4,13] have been shown to fall along the highest backbonding correlation
line and concluded to be 5-c.
Figure 2
Backbonding correlation plot showing the
position of [Fe(OEP)(CO)]
(solid red star, νCO from FTIR)[15] with its uniquely high experimental νFe–C frequency, which along with 2-F-furan, Ne and Ar (open red stars),
lies well above the correlation lines shown in the inset backbonding
scheme. The open round (green, anionic), square (magenta, neutral),
and triangular (blue, trans-O-bound) points were
taken from ref (9).
The diamond (violet, trans-Tyr) points are Tyr-liganded
proteins.[7,18] The νFe–C and νC–O frequencies for the trans-ligands
next to the open star-shaped points were calculated via DFT [B3LYP/6-311G(d,p)][19] in this study. Frequencies were scaled to those
of [Fe(OEP)(CO)]. Table S3 lists unscaled
νFe–C and δFeCO. Scaling
factors given in text.
Figure 2 shows the extraordinarily high
position of [Fe(OEP)(CO)] on the backbonding correlation plot relative
to reported and calculated (this study, open stars) complexes, including
some synthetic heme carbonyls (blue) assigned earlier as 5-c.[4,13] It has been suggested that elevated νFe–C frequencies can be caused by steric compression of the FeCO triatomic
unit.[14] Neither of the two reported [Fe(OEP)(CO)]
crystal structures show nearest-neighbor interactions that could compress
the FeCO bond.[15] The high δFe–C frequency in 6-cheme carbonyls has been attributed to diminished
pseudo-Jahn–Teller instability along the e symmetry displacement because of an increased energy gap between a1 and e orbitals caused by
σ* interaction between the iron d orbital and the σ orbital from the trans axial ligand.[16,17]Backbonding correlation plot showing the
position of [Fe(OEP)(CO)]
(solid red star, νCO from FTIR)[15] with its uniquely high experimental νFe–C frequency, which along with 2-F-furan, Ne and Ar (open red stars),
lies well above the correlation lines shown in the inset backbonding
scheme. The open round (green, anionic), square (magenta, neutral),
and triangular (blue, trans-O-bound) points were
taken from ref (9).
The diamond (violet, trans-Tyr) points are Tyr-liganded
proteins.[7,18] The νFe–C and νC–O frequencies for the trans-ligands
next to the open star-shaped points were calculated via DFT [B3LYP/6-311G(d,p)][19] in this study. Frequencies were scaled to those
of [Fe(OEP)(CO)]. Table S3 lists unscaled
νFe–C and δFeCO. Scaling
factors given in text.Many investigations have established the negative slopes
shown
in Figure 2. These π-backbonding correlation
lines are offset along the νFe–C axis according
to the nature of the trans ligand. The physical basis
of the offset is thought to be modulation of Fe–C σ bonding
and HOMO electron density on FeCO by ligand charge and basicity. The
extraordinarily high position of [Fe(OEP)CO] in Figure 2 and the ordinary frequency ordering of νFe–C and δFeCO for all reported heme carbonyls constitute
compelling evidence that heme-CO complexes previously assigned as
5-c have significant trans ligand fields. Thus, we
reconsider the coordination chemistry of heme-CO.As a means
of probing the relationship between trans ligand
field and frequency ordering of the FeCO bend and stretch,
DFT calculations were carried out for a series of in silico porphine complexes, [Fe(P)(L)(CO)], in which the trans ligand, L, ranged in strength from CH3S– and Im– to Ne and Ar atoms. In order to calibrate
this approach, minimized structures and vibrational frequencies of
[Fe(P)(ImH)(CO)] and [Fe(P)(CO)] were calculated using a number of
GGA and hybrid DFT methods. Tables S1 and S2 list calculated FeCO bond length and vibrational parameters for
the 6-cImH and 5-c complexes, respectively, with experimental values
listed for comparison. Overall agreement between computed and experimental
values in Tables S1 and S2 is satisfactory.[15] The optimized structure and vibrational frequencies
were also calculated for [Fe(OEP)(CO)], the molecule used in the NRVS
experiments described above. Calculated parameters are in good agreement
with experiment (Table S2), lending validity
to the relative bond lengths and frequencies calculated for the simpler
6-cImH and 5-c heme carbonyls. All methods yield changes in bond
lengths consistent with available crystal structure data.[12,15] Consistent with the NRVS data in Figure 1, all show reversal of the νFe–C and δFeCO frequencies between the 6-c and 5-c complexes. Overall
agreement with experimental values of FeCO bond lengths and vibrational
frequencies leads us to use the B3LYP results in the ensuing discussion.
However, whether one considers values calculated by a GGA method,
such as BLYP, or a hybrid method like B3LYP, the conclusions are unchanged.Calculated
Fe–C stretching (blue), FeCO bending (red), and
C–O stretching (green) frequencies, showing correlations with
calculated trans-Fe–L bond distances. Neutral
and anionic ligands are indicated by squares and circles, respectively.
Solid points indicate ligands that coordinate through atoms from the
second row of the periodic table. Ligands having coordinating atoms
from the third to fifth rows are shown by open symbols. Negative charge
significantly reduces the otherwise nearly invariant νC–O frequencies but has little effect on the correlation of νFe–C and δFeCO. Heavy atom ligands
are shown as open points. Frequencies and RFe–L values are listed in Table S3. The turquoise
line marks RFe–L at the bend–stretch
crossover and extends around the heavier-atom ligands to show that
they form 6-cheme carbonyls, albeit on different, but currently indeterminant
trend lines.Points corresponding
to the in silicotrans-ligand complexes
in Figure 2 fall into two narrow νC–O frequency ranges,
one for neutral ligands near 1960 cm–1 and the other
between 1900 and 1920 cm–1 for anionic ligands.
The νC–O regions are narrow because there
are no nonbonded interactions to influence backbonding in these isolated
molecules and they are relatively insensitive to the σ-donor
effects thought to be the origin of the trans-ligand
effect on νFe–C frequency. The separation
based on charge is attributed to increased electrostatic polarization
of the d-π electrons toward CO by anionic trans ligands with the result of weakening the CO bond. Distribution of
the anionic ligand points along the νFe–C axis
is attributable to their range of σ donor strengths (i.e., Brønsted
basicity). These correlations suggest that all complexes on the blue
and violet correlation lines in Figure 2, including
the Tyr-liganded proteins, contain neutral O atom donor ligands.These results reveal systematic interplay between Fe–L bond
distance (RFe–L) and (a) RFe–C and νFe–C frequency, (b) δFeCO frequency, and (c) displacement
of the Fe atom from the mean 4-Npyrrole plane of the porphyrin
(RFe–Ct, see Figure S1). Figure 3 shows plots of calculated νFe–C, δFeCO, and νC–O frequencies versus RFe–L (Table S3). The calculated νFe–C, δFeCO, and νC–O frequencies
were scaled by 1.061, 0.9749, and 0.9342, respectively, to calibrate
them to the experimental NRVS frequencies. This plot reveals that
the νFe–C and δFeCO lines
cross at a value of RFe–L near
furan. As an exceedingly weak base, furan is likely a weaker ligand
than water, which is corroborated by their calculated Fe–L
bond lengths. Positions along the curves to the left of the crossover
point are characterized by νFe–C occurring
at lower frequency than δFeCO. To the right of the
crossover point, that frequency ordering is reversed. These curves
provide insight into the strength of the trans ligand
field required to drive the νFe–C below that
of δFeCO. Although the positions of ligands that
bond through atoms from below the second row are offset from the curves
toward longer RFe–L, their νFe–C, δFeCO frequency ordering is characteristic of
hexacoordination. These offsets are attributed to their large covalent
radii and, in the case of the halides and thiolate, their negative
charge. Note that this plot also reflects the effect of negative charge
on the νC–O frequencies seen in Figure 2.
Figure 3
Calculated
Fe–C stretching (blue), FeCO bending (red), and
C–O stretching (green) frequencies, showing correlations with
calculated trans-Fe–L bond distances. Neutral
and anionic ligands are indicated by squares and circles, respectively.
Solid points indicate ligands that coordinate through atoms from the
second row of the periodic table. Ligands having coordinating atoms
from the third to fifth rows are shown by open symbols. Negative charge
significantly reduces the otherwise nearly invariant νC–O frequencies but has little effect on the correlation of νFe–C and δFeCO. Heavy atom ligands
are shown as open points. Frequencies and RFe–L values are listed in Table S3. The turquoise
line marks RFe–L at the bend–stretch
crossover and extends around the heavier-atom ligands to show that
they form 6-c heme carbonyls, albeit on different, but currently indeterminant
trend lines.
Interest in authentic 5-c heme carbonyls
has been refocused in
part through pursuit of the structural basis of mechanism in the NO
receptor, soluble guanylyl cyclase (sGC).[20−22] The cyclase
activity of sGC is triggered by release of the proximal His ligand
from its heme upon coordination of NO to yield a 5-c {FeNO}[7] complex. In contrast, exposure of the enzyme
to CO forms a 6-c complex in which the proximal His remains coordinated
to iron with little induction of activity. Effector molecules have
been shown to drive formation of a new CO adduct characterized by
intermediate enzyme activity along with higher νFe–C and lower νC–O frequencies, +33 and −12
cm–1, respectively.[20,22] Addition of
the substrate, GTP, increases the population of that sGC–CO
form,[20] which falls on the highest backbonding
correlation line in Figure 2. Other CO complexes
of heme-containing proteins and enzymes also fall on that correlation
line, including cytochrome c oxidase,[23] the heme catalases,[18] and a number of recently discovered bacterial heme trafficking proteins
having proximal Tyr ligands.[7,24] A number of tetraarylporphyrin
derivatives, prepared in wet organic solvents, also fall on that line.[13] Except for the proteins having proximal Tyr
ligands, a position along that line has heretofore been taken as diagnostic
for either a 5-c or distally compressed heme carbonyl.[4,23] By virtue of the FeCO frequency shifts and the inducement of sGC–CO
activity in the presence of effector, the active state of sGC–CO
has also been concluded to be 5-c.[20,21] However, given
that their correlation line falls between the authentic 5-c point
reported herein and the two lowest correlation lines on the νFe–C axis (Figure 2), their coordination
sites trans to CO are likely to be occupied by a
relatively weak ligand. We suggest that such ligands must drive π-electron
density into the FeCO region of the HOMO, such that the π-bonding
character of the Fe–C bond is increased. A list of candidate
ligands would include charge-neutral π-donor ligands, such as
water, alcohols, ethers, and phenols. Of these, water and the phenol
side chain of Tyr[7,24] are the most likely ligands in
a heme protein. All of these ligands are weakly π donating and,
consequently, occupy low to intermediate positions in the classical
spectrochemical series. Thus, the bias effects of proximal ligand
bonding on the heights of the correlation lines along the νFe–C axis appear more nuanced than previously thought.A previous DFT result predicted νFe–C to
occur at higher energy than δFeCO in a 5-c heme carbonyl.[16] We have reproduced that result using a variety
of DFT functionals. However, NRVS evidence of authentic pentacoordination
appears tenuous.[22] The 520 and 550 cm–1 frequencies assigned to νFe–C and δFeCO would put their complex far below the
position shown in Figure 2 for a 5-c heme carbonyl.
This may be due to coordination of H2O from addition of
aqueous dithionite. However, small NRVS bands were observed at ∼505
and ∼580 cm–1. Even though the authors did
not discuss these bands[16] and the directionalities
of their Fe motions were not discernible in frozen toluene solution,
their VDOS suggest a small amount of the 5-c heme carbonyl.In summary, the experimental results presented herein demonstrate
with unprecedented clarity that the FeCO vibrational signature of
crystallographically verified 5-c [Fe(OEP)(CO)][15] is distinct from any previously reported heme carbonyl.
Its νFe–C band occurs at higher frequency
than δFeCO. We attribute this distinction to the
absence of any bound ligand trans to CO. Computational
evidence strongly suggests that any exogenous or endogenous axial
ligands relevant to heme proteins are strong enough to drive νFe–C to lower frequency than δFeCO.
This work brings us to the hypothesis that all heme carbonyls reported
to date, whether synthetic or in heme proteins, are hexacoordinate.
Authors: Weiqiao Zeng; Nathan J Silvernail; David C Wharton; Georgi Y Georgiev; Bogdan M Leu; W Robert Scheidt; Jiyong Zhao; Wolfgang Sturhahn; E Ercan Alp; J Timothy Sage Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2005-08-17 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Jeffrey W Pavlik; Alexander Barabanschikov; Allen G Oliver; E Ercan Alp; Wolfgang Sturhahn; Jiyong Zhao; J Timothy Sage; W Robert Scheidt Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2010-06-14 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Brajesh K Rai; Stephen M Durbin; Earl W Prohofsky; J Timothy Sage; Mary K Ellison; Arne Roth; W Robert Scheidt; Wolfgang Sturhahn; E Ercan Alp Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2003-06-11 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Elizabeth B Draganova; Neval Akbas; Seth A Adrian; Gudrun S Lukat-Rodgers; Daniel P Collins; John H Dawson; Courtni E Allen; Michael P Schmitt; Kenton R Rodgers; Dabney W Dixon Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2015-10-26 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Rizvan C Uluisik; Neval Akbas; Gudrun S Lukat-Rodgers; Seth A Adrian; Courtni E Allen; Michael P Schmitt; Kenton R Rodgers; Dabney W Dixon Journal: J Inorg Biochem Date: 2016-11-23 Impact factor: 4.155
Authors: Elizabeth B Draganova; Seth A Adrian; Gudrun S Lukat-Rodgers; Cyrianne S Keutcha; Michael P Schmitt; Kenton R Rodgers; Dabney W Dixon Journal: J Biol Inorg Chem Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 3.358
Authors: Qian Peng; Jeffrey W Pavlik; Nathan J Silvernail; E Ercan Alp; Michael Y Hu; Jiyong Zhao; J Timothy Sage; W Robert Scheidt Journal: Chemistry Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Saumen Chakraborty; Julian Reed; J Timothy Sage; Nicole C Branagan; Igor D Petrik; Kyle D Miner; Michael Y Hu; Jiyong Zhao; E Ercan Alp; Yi Lu Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: M Corva; A Ferrari; M Rinaldi; Z Feng; M Roiaz; C Rameshan; G Rupprechter; R Costantini; M Dell'Angela; G Pastore; G Comelli; N Seriani; E Vesselli Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-11-08 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Jianfeng Li; Qian Peng; Allen G Oliver; E Ercan Alp; Michael Y Hu; Jiyong Zhao; J Timothy Sage; W Robert Scheidt Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 15.419