| Literature DB >> 27604277 |
Mateusz Jasik1, Borys Szefczyk2.
Abstract
Menthol's various biological properties render it a useful component for medical and cosmetological applications, while its three centers of asymmetry mean that it can be used in a range of organic reactions. Menthol-substituted ionic liquids (ILs) have been found to exhibit promising antimicrobial and antielectrostatic properties, as well as being useful in organic catalysis and biochemical studies. However, so far, a force field designed and validated specifically for the menthol molecule has not been constructed. In the present work, the validation and optimization of force field parameters with regard to the ability to reproduce the macroscopic properties of menthol is presented. The set of optimized potentials for liquid simulations all atom (OPLS-AA) compatible parameters was tested and carefully tuned. The refinement of parameters included fitting of partial atomic charges, optimization of Lennard-Jones parameters, and recalculation of the dihedral angle parameters needed to reproduce quantum energy profiles. To validate the force field, a variety of physicochemical properties were calculated for liquid menthol. Both thermodynamic and kinetic properties were taken into account, including density, surface tension, enthalpy of vaporization, and shear viscosity. The obtained force field was proven to accurately reproduce the properties of the investigated compound while being fully compatible with the OPLS-AA force field.Entities:
Keywords: Force field parameterization; GROMACS; Menthol; OPLS-AA
Year: 2016 PMID: 27604277 PMCID: PMC5014899 DOI: 10.1007/s00894-016-3082-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Mol Model ISSN: 0948-5023 Impact factor: 1.810
Fig. 1Profile of the dihedral angle describing the rotation of the hydroxyl group plotted using optimized parameters. Quantum chemical energy is shown using squares, optimized force field energy is shown using dashed line, force field energy calculated with original (non-optimized) parameters is shown using solid line
Fig. 2Profile of the dihedral angle describing rotation of isopropyl group plotted using optimized parameters. Quantum chemical energy is shown using squares, optimized force field energy is shown using dashed line, force field energy calculated with original (non-optimized) parameters is shown using solid line.
Force field parameters for menthol molecule
| Force field parameter | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lennard-Jones parameters [ | ||||
| Atom type | σ [Å] | ε [kJ mol−1] | ||
| CTa | 3.50 | 0.327921 | ||
| HCa | 2.50 | 0.149055 | ||
| O | 3.12 | 0.844645 | ||
| HOa | 0.00 | 0.000000 | ||
| Bond stretching parameters [ | ||||
| Bond type |
|
| ||
| CT–CT | 1.529 | 224.2624 | ||
| CT–HC | 1.090 | 284.5120 | ||
| CT–O | 1.410 | 267.7760 | ||
| O–HO | 0.945 | 462.7504 | ||
| Angle bending parameters [ | ||||
| Angle type | θeq [o] |
| ||
| HC–CT–HC | 107.8 | 276.144 | ||
| HC–CT–CT | 110.7 | 313.800 | ||
| CT–CT–CT | 112.7 | 488.273 | ||
| CT–CT–O | 109.5 | 418.400 | ||
| CT–O–HO | 108.5 | 460.240 | ||
| HC–CT–O | 109.5 | 292.880 | ||
| Torsional parameters [kJ/mol] | ||||
| Dihedral type | V1 | V2 | V3 | V4 |
| CT–CT–CT–CT [ | −3.3472 | −0.20920 | 0.8368 | 0.0 |
| CT–CT–CT–HC [ | −7.531 | 0.000 | −1.255 | 0.0 |
| HC–CT–CT–HC [ | −7.531 | 0.000 | −1.255 | 0.0 |
| CT–CT–CT–Ob | 7.159 | −2.092 | 2.774 | 0.0 |
| HC–CT–CT–Ob | −0.00002 | 0.000 | 1.958 | 0.0 |
| HC–CT–O–HOb | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.0 |
| CT–CT–O–HOb | 7.448 | −1.430 | 7.261 | 0.0 |
| Torsional parameters for isopropyl group | ||||
| CT–CT–CT–CTb | 12.681 | −1.557 | 2.934 | 0.0 |
| CT–CT–CT–HCb | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.0 |
| HC–CT–CT–HCb | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.0 |
aSymbols used: CT sp3 carbon (all carbons in molecule), HC hydrogen attached to a carbon, HO hydrogen of hydroxyl group, O oxygen of hydroxyl group
bObtained in this work
Atomic charges set used in the force field for a menthol molecule
Comparison of experimental and calculated properties of liquid menthol for the obtained force field.
| Experimental | Calculated | SDa | Deviation from experimental valueb | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Density [kg m−3] | [%] | ||||
| T [K] | 293 | 890 [ | 921.1 | 1.1 | 3.49 |
| 298 | 923.6 [ | 917.3 | 1.2 | 0.68 | |
| 318 | 889 [ | 902.0 | 3.4 | 1.46 | |
| 353 | 877 [ | 872.1 | 3.5 | 0.56 | |
| 393 | 865.1 [ | 836.4 | 3.8 | 3.32 | |
| Surface tension [mN m−1] | [%] | ||||
| T [K] | 313 | 31.61 [ | 28.6 | 8.2 | 9.52 |
| 333 | 29.2 [ | 27.1 | 6.5 | 7.19 | |
| 353 | 27.82 [ | 24.9 | 5.4 | 10.50 | |
| 373 | 25.62 [ | 22.7 | 3.6 | 11.40 | |
| 393 | 23.75 [ | 20.6 | 3.0 | 13.26 | |
| Enthalpy of vaporization [kJ mol−1] | [%] | ||||
| T [K] | 382 | 56.92 [ | 52.8 | 5.7 | 7.24 |
| 421 | 53.42 [ | 51.1 | 4.8 | 4.34 | |
| 473 | 48.42 [ | 49.5 | 5.5 | 2.23 | |
| Shear viscosity [mPa s−1] | [%] | ||||
| T [K] | 320 | 10.8 [ | 5.9 | 1.2 | 45.37 |
| 350 | 2.3 [ | 3.8 | 0.58 | 65.22 | |
| 380 | 0.83 [ | 2.8 | 0.36 | 237.4 | |
aStandard deviation of the calculated values
bPercentage deviation of the results calculated with obtained force field from the corresponding experimental values
Density and enthalpy of vaporization of liquid menthol calculated using standard and optimized parameters, in comparison with experimental values
| Experimental | Standard parameters | Relative error [%] | Optimized parameters | Relative error [%] | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Density [kg m−3] | ||||||
| T [K] | 293 | 890 [ | 896.1 | 0.7 | 921.1 | 3.5 |
| 318 | 889 [ | 875.0 | 1.6 | 902.0 | 3.4 | |
| 393 | 865.1 [ | 801.8 | 7.3 | 836.4 | 3.8 | |
| Enthalpy of vaporization [kJ mol−1] | ||||||
| T [K] | 382 | 56.92 [ | 31.9 | 44.0 | 52.8 | 7.2 |
| 421 | 53.42 [ | 29.7 | 44.4 | 51.1 | 4.3 | |
| 473 | 48.42 [ | 26.7 | 44.9 | 49.5 | 2.2 | |
Fig. 3Comparison between calculated and experimental [23, 24, 27] thermodynamic properties of pure menthol
Fig. 4Comparison between calculated and experimental [29] shear viscosity of pure menthol. The experimental value is represented as a calculated function within the recommended temperature range [29]