| Literature DB >> 28684974 |
Weslley G D P Silva1, Carolyne B Braga1, Roberto Rittner1.
Abstract
The understanding of the conformational behavior of amino acids and their derivatives is a challenging task. Here, the conformational analysis of esterified and N-acetylated derivatives of L-methionine and L-cysteine using a combination of 1H NMR and electronic structure calculations is reported. The geometries and energies of the most stable conformers in isolated phase and taking into account the implicit solvent effects, according to the integral equation formalism polarizable continuum model (IEF-PCM), were obtained at the ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ level. The conformational preferences of the compounds in solution were also determined from experimental and theoretical 3JHH coupling constants analysis in different aprotic solvents. The results showed that the conformational stability of the esterified derivatives is not very sensitive to solvent effects, whereas the conformational equilibrium of the N-acetylated derivatives changes in the presence of solvent. According to the natural bond orbital (NBO), quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) and noncovalent interactions (NCI) methodologies, the conformational preferences for the compounds are not dictated by intramolecular hydrogen bonding, but by a joint contribution of hyperconjugative and steric effects.Entities:
Keywords: NMR spectroscopy; amino acid derivatives; conformational analysis; cysteine; methionine; quantum chemical calculations
Year: 2017 PMID: 28684974 PMCID: PMC5480334 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.13.94
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Beilstein J Org Chem ISSN: 1860-5397 Impact factor: 2.883
Depiction of the studied compounds (1–4).
| compound | R1 | R2 | R3 |
| L-methionine ethyl ester ( | CH2SCH3 | Et | H |
| L-cysteine methyl ester ( | SH | Me | H |
| CH2SCH3 | Et | COMe | |
| SH | Me | COMe | |
Figure 1Most stable conformers of 1 and 2 obtained theoretically at the ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ level.
Calculated parameters (ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ) for the conformers of 1 and 2. Relative Gibbs free energy (ΔG) and electronic energy with ZPE corrections (ΔE) are given in kcal mol−1, populations (P) in % and dihedral angles in degrees.
| conformer | isolated | CHCl3 | CH2Cl2 | CH3CN | DMSO | dihedral angles | ||||||
| Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Ha−C−C−Hb1 | Ha−C−C−Hb2 | ||||||
| – | – | 0.00 | 24.6 | 0.00 | 19.8 | 0.05 | 17.0 | 0.06 | 16.8 | −57.48 | −174.32 | |
| 1.38 | 5.2 | 0.23 | 16.6 | 0.08 | 17.2 | 0.05 | 17.0 | 0.06 | 16.9 | 64.78 | −51.15 | |
| 1.97 | 2.0 | 0.37 | 13.2 | 0.14 | 15.7 | 0.00 | 18.5 | 0.00 | 18.6 | −62.89 | −178.89 | |
| 1.99 | 1.9 | 0.46 | 11.3 | 0.28 | 12.3 | 0.33 | 10.6 | 0.33 | 10.8 | 64.89 | −50.56 | |
| 2.04 | 1.7 | 0.54 | 9.9 | 0.40 | 10.1 | 0.37 | 9.9 | 0.38 | 9.8 | −179.14 | 65.24 | |
| 2.27 | 1.2 | 0.59 | 9.1 | 0.37 | 10.6 | 0.31 | 11.0 | 0.32 | 10.9 | −178.19 | 66.45 | |
| – | – | 0.65 | 8.2 | 0.55 | 7.9 | 0.45 | 8.6 | 0.46 | 8.5 | −59.02 | −176.61 | |
| – | – | 0.74 | 7.1 | 0.67 | 6.4 | 0.54 | 7.4 | 0.52 | 7.7 | −58.19 | −175.66 | |
| 0.00 | 53.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | −67.20 | 176.11 | |
| 0.70 | 16.4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | −68.81 | 174.67 | |
| 0.66 | 17.7 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | −68.81 | 174.67 | |
| Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Ha−C−C−Hb1 | Ha−C−C−Hb2 | ||||||
| 0.00 | 32.7 | 0.00 | 38.7 | 0.00 | 37.8 | 0.00 | 29.4 | 0.00 | 28.9 | −64.21 | 176.88 | |
| 0.21 | 23.0 | 0.50 | 16.6 | 0.52 | 15.8 | 0.33 | 16.9 | 0.32 | 16.9 | 59.63 | −59.75 | |
| 0.30 | 19.6 | 0.44 | 18.5 | 0.44 | 18.0 | 0.24 | 19.7 | 0.23 | 19.7 | 65.19 | −54.06 | |
| 0.93 | 6.8 | 1.01 | 7.1 | 0.99 | 7.2 | 0.55 | 11.7 | 0.50 | 12.4 | 64.87 | −114.09 | |
| 0.81 | 8.3 | 1.08 | 6.3 | 1.11 | 5.8 | 0.93 | 6.1 | 0.91 | 6.2 | 61.72 | −57.86 | |
| 1.31 | 3.6 | 1.30 | 4.3 | 1.16 | 5.3 | 0.91 | 6.3 | 0.91 | 6.2 | −60.06 | −179.39 | |
| 1.50 | 2.6 | 1.44 | 3.4 | 1.40 | 3.5 | 1.20 | 3.9 | 1.19 | 3.9 | 179.96 | 61.62 | |
| 1.34 | 3.4 | 1.20 | 5.1 | 1.03 | 6.6 | 0.94 | 6.0 | 0.96 | 5.7 | 56.55 | −63.06 | |
Figure 2Three possible dispositions presented by geometries of the analyzed compounds 1−4.
Experimental and calculated 1H NMR data for the compound 1 in different solvents. The chemical shifts values are given in ppm and the 3JHH coupling constants in Hz.
| solvent | ε | δHa | δHb1 | δΗb2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| CDCl3 | 4.8 | 4.00 | 2.24 | 2.17 | 5.1 ± 0.05 | 4.6 | 7.1 ± 0.05 | 7.5 |
| CD2Cl2 | 9.1 | 3.97 | 2.22 | 2.14 | 5.2 ± 0.05 | 4.8 | 7.0 ± 0.05 | 7.3 |
| CD3CN | 37.5 | 3.84 | 2.09 | 2.09 | 6.1 ± 0.05 | 4.7 | 6.1 ± 0.05 | 7.4 |
| DMSO- | 46.7 | 3.55 | 1.89 | 1.78 | 5.6 ± 0.05 | 4.7 | 7.4 ± 0.05 | 7.4 |
Calculated NBO parameters (ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ) for the most stable conformers of the compounds 1 and 2. Relative energy of the steric (Erel,Lewis) and hyperconjugative (Erel,Hyper) interactions are given in kcal mol−1. The sum of Erel,Lewis and Erel,Hyper is the total energy of the system.
| conformer | CHCl3 | DMSO | |||
| 0.89 | 1.66 | 1.76 | 2.27 | 0.72 | |
| 1.84 | 2.44 | 1.92 | 2.51 | − | |
| 2.02 | 2.63 | 2.32 | 3.03 | − | |
| 4.04 | 4.42 | 4.02 | 4.51 | − | |
| 0.00 | 0.22 | 0.00 | 0.21 | − | |
| 1.23 | 1.14 | 0.91 | 0.96 | − | |
| 0.18 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 0.94 | |
| 0.54 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.31 | 0.86 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.74 | 2.76 | − | |
| 2.05 | 2.11 | 4.76 | 5.98 | − | |
| 4.31 | 4.33 | 6.26 | 7.48 | − | |
| 6.38 | 5.97 | 5.84 | 6.69 | 1.32 | |
| 3.59 | 2.95 | 7.62 | 8.03 | − | |
| 2.14 | 1.26 | 0.00 | 0.00 | − | |
| 3.73 | 2.95 | 6.22 | 6.43 | − | |
| 4.44 | 3.73 | 7.30 | 7.70 | − | |
aNBO calculations were realized with an energy threshold of 0.5 kcal mol−1.
Figure 3Most stable conformers of 3 and 4 obtained theoretically at the ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ level.
Calculated parameters (ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ) for conformers of 3 and 4 in isolated phase and in solution (IEF−PCM). Relative Gibbs free energies (ΔG) and electronic energies with ZPE corrections (ΔE) are given in kcal mol−1, populations (P) in %, and dihedral angles in degrees.
| conformer | isolated | CHCl3 | CH2Cl2 | CH3CN | DMSO | dihedral angles | ||||||
| Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Ha−C−C−Hb1 | Ha−C−C−Hb2 | ||||||
| 0.00 | 45.6 | 0.00 | 54.9 | 0.00 | 45.7 | 0.00 | 36.4 | 0.00 | 34.8 | 62.03 | −53.73 | |
| 1.44 | 4.0 | 0.60 | 19.9 | 0.51 | 19.4 | 0.16 | 27.6 | 0.13 | 27.8 | 174.83 | −69.51 | |
| – | – | 1.11 | 8.4 | 0.84 | 11.0 | 0.68 | 11.6 | 0.66 | 11.3 | 175.55 | −67.86 | |
| – | – | 1.24 | 6.7 | 0.99 | 8.5 | 0.73 | 10.5 | 0.60 | 12.7 | 177.18 | −66.41 | |
| 1.07 | 7.4 | 1.00 | 10.1 | 1.00 | 8.6 | 1.00 | 6.8 | 1.00 | 6.5 | 69.28 | 184.60 | |
| – | – | – | – | 1.13 | 6.8 | 0.98 | 7.1 | 0.96 | 6.9 | 62.43 | −53.08 | |
| 0.41 | 22.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 179.17 | −64.16 | |
| 0.49 | 20.1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -177.35 | −60.85 | |
| Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Ha−C−C−Hb1 | Ha−C−C−Hb2 | ||||||
| 0.00 | 97.2 | 0.00 | 87.0 | 0.00 | 82.0 | 0.00 | 69.7 | 0.00 | 67.7 | 62.60 | −55.56 | |
| 2.17 | 2.5 | 1.21 | 11.2 | 0.98 | 15.7 | 0.57 | 26.8 | 0.51 | 28.7 | −56.64 | −175.04 | |
| 3.79 | 0.2 | 2.68 | 0.9 | 2.68 | 0.9 | 2.47 | 1.1 | 2.47 | 1.1 | −62.18 | 178.85 | |
| 3.87 | 0.1 | 2.72 | 0.9 | 2.42 | 1.4 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.93 | 2.5 | −164.09 | 77.48 | |
Experimental and calculated 1H NMR data for the compounds 3 and 4 in different solvents. The chemical shifts values are given in ppm and the 3JHH coupling constants in Hz.
| compound | solvent | ε | δΗ(N) | δHa | δHb1 | δΗb2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| CDCl3 | 4.8 | 6.18 | 4.70 | 2.17 | 1.98 | 7.1 ± 0.07 | 7.0 | 5.1 ± 0.07 | 4.0 | 7.0 ± 0.07 | |
| CD2Cl2 | 9.1 | 6.18 | 4.62 | 2.13 | 1.95 | 7.7 ± 0.07 | 7.3 | 5.1 ± 0.07 | 3.9 | 5.5 ± 0.07 | |
| CD3CN | 37.5 | 6.70 | 4.45 | 2.03 | 1.89 | 8.6 ± 0.07 | 8.1 | 4.9 ± 0.07 | 3.7 | – | |
| DMSO- | 46.7 | 8.26 | 4.31 | 1.92 | 1.84 | 9.1 ± 0.07 | 8.2 | 4.9 ± 0.07 | 3.7 | 7.4 ± 0.07 | |
| CDCl3 | 4.8 | 6.43 | 4.90 | 3.03 | 3.00 | 3.9 ± 0.05 | 3.1 | 4.3 ± 0.05 | 4.1 | 7.8 ± 0.05 | |
| CD2Cl2 | 9.1 | 6.47 | 4.83 | 3.00 | 2.98 | 4.3 ± 0.05 | 3.2 | 4.4 ± 0.05 | 4.4 | 7.5 ± 0.05 | |
| CD3CN | 37.5 | 6.84 | 4.62 | 2.91 | 2.86 | 4.8 ± 0.05 | 3.5 | 6.0 ± 0.05 | 6.3 | 7.9 ± 0.05 | |
| DMSO- | 46.7 | 8.32 | 4.44 | 2.83 | 2.74 | 5.0 ± 0.05 | 3.9 | 7.5 ± 0.05 | 6.6 | 7.6 ± 0.05 | |
Figure 4(a) QTAIM molecular graphs [30]; (b) NCI isosurfaces generated with S = 0.6 au and blue−green−red scaling from −0.02 < (λ2)ρ(r) < 0.02 au, and (c) NCI plots of the reduced density gradients S versus sign (λ2)ρ(r) for the conformers of 3.
Figure 5(a) QTAIM molecular graphs; (b) NCI isosurfaces generated with S = 0.6 au and blue−green−red scaling from −0.02 < (λ2)ρ(r) < 0.02 au, and (c) NCI plots of the reduced density gradients S versus sign (λ2)ρ(r) for the conformers of 4.
NBO parameters for conformers of compounds 3 and 4, calculated at the ωB97X-D/aug-cc-pVTZ level of theory. Relative energy of the steric (Erel,Lewis) and hyperconjugative (Erel,Hyper) interactions are given in kcal mol−1. The sum of Erel,Lewis and Erel,Hyper is the total energy of the system.
| conformation | CHCl3 | DMSO | ||||
| 7.47 | 8.65 | 5.19 | 5.90 | 0.98 | – | |
| 3.13 | 3.63 | 3.11 | 3.91 | – | – | |
| 1.17 | 1.44 | 0.16 | 0.35 | – | – | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | – | – | |
| 3.85 | 3.75 | 0.92 | 0.39 | 0.70 | – | |
| – | – | 4.63 | 4.12 | – | – | |
| 2.32 | 2.72 | 3.14 | 2.54 | 1.03 | – | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | – | – | |
| 3.86 | 1.63 | 5.94 | 2.51 | – | – | |
| 5.26 | 3.24 | 7.15 | 4.99 | – | 0.86 | |
aNBO calculations were realized with an energy threshold of 0.5 kcal mol−1.
Figure 6Definition of the selected dihedral angles for the studied compounds.