Chi Chung Lee1, Yilin Hu1, Markus W Ribbe1,2. 1. Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-3900, United States. 2. Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-2025, United States.
Abstract
Isolated nitrogenase cofactors can reduce CO, CN-, and CO2 to short-chain hydrocarbons in reactions driven by a strong reductant. Here, we use activity analyses and isotope labeling experiments to show that formaldehyde and acetaldehydes can be reduced as-is or reductively condensed into alkanes and alkenes by the isolated cofactor of Mo-nitrogenase in the presence of EuII-diethylenetriamine pentaacetate (DTPA). Further, we demonstrate that aldehydes can be condensed with CO by the isolated cofactor under the same reaction conditions, pointing to aldehyde-derived species as possible intermediates of nitrogenase-catalyzed CO reduction. Our deuterium labeling experiments suggest the formation of a cofactor-bound hydroxymethyl intermediate upon activation of the formaldehyde, as well as the release of C2H4 as a product upon β-hydride elimination of an acetaldehyde-derived hydroxyethyl intermediate. These findings establish the reductive condensation of aldehydes as a previously unobserved reactivity of a biogenic catalyst while at the same time shed light on the mechanism of enzymatic CO reduction and C-C bond formation, thereby providing a useful framework for further exploration of the unique reactivity and potential applications of nitrogenase-based reactions.
Isolated nitrogenase cofactors can reduce CO, CN-, and CO2 to short-chain hydrocarbons in reactions driven by a strong reductant. Here, we use activity analyses and isotope labeling experiments to show that formaldehyde and acetaldehydes can be reduced as-is or reductively condensed into alkanes and alkenes by the isolated cofactor of Mo-nitrogenase in the presence of EuII-diethylenetriamine pentaacetate (DTPA). Further, we demonstrate that aldehydes can be condensed with CO by the isolated cofactor under the same reaction conditions, pointing to aldehyde-derived species as possible intermediates of nitrogenase-catalyzed CO reduction. Our deuterium labeling experiments suggest the formation of a cofactor-bound hydroxymethyl intermediate upon activation of the formaldehyde, as well as the release of C2H4 as a product upon β-hydride elimination of an acetaldehyde-derived hydroxyethyl intermediate. These findings establish the reductive condensation of aldehydes as a previously unobserved reactivity of a biogenic catalyst while at the same time shed light on the mechanism of enzymatic CO reduction and C-C bond formation, thereby providing a useful framework for further exploration of the unique reactivity and potential applications of nitrogenase-based reactions.
Nitrogenase is known
for its key role in the global nitrogen cycle,
catalyzing the ambient reduction of atmospheric N2 to bioavailable
NH4+.[1−4] Recently, nitrogenase was shown to reduce C1 substrates, such as CO and CN–,[5−7] to short-chain
alkanes and alkenes under ambient conditions, thereby gaining recognition
as a versatile metalloenzyme capable of both Haber-Bosch[8,9] and Fischer–Tropsch[10,11] like reactions. The
“conventional” Mo-nitrogenase utilizes a two-component
system for catalysis, with a reductase component (Fe protein) transferring
electrons—concomitant with ATP hydrolysis—to the cofactor
site (M-cluster) of the catalytic component (MoFe protein) for substrate
reduction (Figure S1A). Interestingly,
the protein-bound M-cluster only shows a marginal activity of CO reduction
that is 700–800 times lower than that of its protein-bound
counterpart in the “alternative” V-nitrogenase;[7] upon extraction into an organic solvent, however,
the isolated M-cluster is comparable to its V-counterpart in total
carbon turnover yields when catalyzing the reduction of CO and other
C1 substrates (i.e., CN– and CO2), in the presence of a strong reductant (e.g., EuII-DTPA
or SmI2) (Figure S1B).[12,13] The ability of the extracted M-cluster to catalyze the reduction
of C1 substrates is important, as it presents a unique
opportunity for us to investigate the reactivity of isolated cofactors
toward certain oxygenated carbon species, such as aldehydes, alcohols,
and acetone, which cannot be directly applied to the protein-bound
cofactors because of their destabilizing effects on protein structures.
Knowledge in this regard will not only enable a further expansion
of the catalytic repertoire of nitrogenase cofactors, but also lead
to a better understanding of the mechanism of enzymatic CO reduction
and C–C bond formation, as these oxygenated carbon species
are potential intermediates of this nitrogenase-catalyzed reaction.[14,15]
Results and Discussion
We started out by testing if oxygenated
C1 and C2 species, including aldehydes, alcohols,
and acetone, could
be converted by the isolated M-cluster into hydrocarbon products.
(Note: no unexpected safety hazards were encountered.) Driven by EuII-DTPA (E0′ = −1.14
V at pH 8)[16] in a H2O-based
reaction, the isolated M-cluster was capable of converting aldehydes
(CH2O, C2H4O), but not alcohols (CH3OH, CH3CH2OH) or acetone ((CH3)2CO), into hydrocarbons (Figure A). GC-MS analysis confirmed that the hydrocarbon
products were derived from the aldehyde substrates, showing the expected
mass shifts and fragmentation patterns upon substitution of 13C-aldehyde for the corresponding 12C-aldehyde (Figure B,C; also see Figure S5). Notably, formaldehyde (CH2O) gave rise to C1–C4 alkanes (C2H4, C2H6, C3H6, C3H8, C4H8,
C4H10), and acetaldehyde (C2H4O) gave rise to C2 and C4 alkanes (C2H4, C2H6, C3H6, C3H8, C4H8,
C4H10), suggesting that aldehyde was either
reduced as-is or coupled with each other into the respective products
(see Figure A). Moreover,
compared to CO, both formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were converted
by the isolated M-cluster to hydrocarbons at considerably higher yields
(see Figure A). Together,
these observations firmly established aldehyde as a substrate of the
isolated nitrogenase cofactor, which can undergo direct reduction
or reductive condensation into hydrocarbon products.
Figure 1
Reduction of oxygenated
C1 and C2 substrates
by the isolated M-cluster. (A) TONs of reactions catalyzed by the
isolated M-cluster, where CO or oxygenated C1 or C2 species was supplied as a substrate. TON, turnover number,
calculated based on the number of reduced carbons in hydrocarbon products.
(B, C) Product distributions (left) and fragmentation patterns (right)
of hydrocarbons generated from the reduction of CH2O (B)
and CH3CHO (C). The masses of the base peaks of products
are indicated (B, C). Note that the formation of hydrocarbons from
CH2O and CH3CHO was completed after ∼1
h (Figure S2); however, all assays were
performed overnight to demonstrate that product formation was only
detected when aldehydes (and not alcohols or ketones) were supplied
as substrates. Control experiments with omissions of the reductant
or the M-cluster pointed to the isolated M-cluster as the actual catalyst
of the reactions of aldehyde reduction and condensation (Figure S3A,B, 1–3), which was further
supported by the inability of Fe/S fragments or degraded M-clusters
to enable the same reactivity (Figure S3A,B, 4–6) and a linear correlation between the integrity of the
M-cluster and the activity of the M-cluster in product formation over
a time period of 2 h (Figure S4).
Reduction of oxygenated
C1 and C2 substrates
by the isolated M-cluster. (A) TONs of reactions catalyzed by the
isolated M-cluster, where CO or oxygenated C1 or C2 species was supplied as a substrate. TON, turnover number,
calculated based on the number of reduced carbons in hydrocarbon products.
(B, C) Product distributions (left) and fragmentation patterns (right)
of hydrocarbons generated from the reduction of CH2O (B)
and CH3CHO (C). The masses of the base peaks of products
are indicated (B, C). Note that the formation of hydrocarbons from
CH2O and CH3CHO was completed after ∼1
h (Figure S2); however, all assays were
performed overnight to demonstrate that product formation was only
detected when aldehydes (and not alcohols or ketones) were supplied
as substrates. Control experiments with omissions of the reductant
or the M-cluster pointed to the isolated M-cluster as the actual catalyst
of the reactions of aldehyde reduction and condensation (Figure S3A,B, 1–3), which was further
supported by the inability of Fe/S fragments or degraded M-clusters
to enable the same reactivity (Figure S3A,B, 4–6) and a linear correlation between the integrity of the
M-cluster and the activity of the M-cluster in product formation over
a time period of 2 h (Figure S4).The newly discovered reactivity
of the isolated cofactor toward
aldehydes provided a platform for us to use isotope labeling experiments
to probe the mechanism of cofactor-based aldehyde reduction. The first
question we asked was whether activation of formaldehyde (CH2O) would result in a cluster-bound hydroxymethyl intermediate via
several plausible routes.[17−19] Should this be the case, the
hydroxymethyl species would need to undergo a series of proton/electron
transfer steps, coupled with removal of oxygen as water, to generate
CH4 that contains two substrate-derived hydrogens and two
solution-derived hydrogens (Figure A). To test our hypothesis, we monitored the amount
of H/D labels in product CH4 when CH2O and CD2O were supplied as the respective substrates to D2O- and H2O-based reactions (Figure A, ①, ②). GC-MS analysis revealed
formation of CH2D2 as the predominant species
upon reduction of CH2O in a D2O-based reaction
(Figure B, ①),
or upon reduction of CD2O in an H2O-based reaction
(Figure B, ②;
also see Figure S6A). The appearance of
two solution-derived hydrogens in CH4 would be consistent
with the appearance of a cluster-bound hydroxymethyl intermediate
as an activated C1 species in the cofactor-catalyzed reaction
of aldehyde reduction (see Discussion in the Supporting Information for consideration of alternative mechanisms).
Figure 2
Activation
of formaldehyde by the isolated M-cluster. (A) Expected
identities of products when CH2O is supplied as a substrate
to a D2O-based reaction (①) or when CD2O is supplied as a substrate to an H2O-based reaction
(②), assuming CH2O is bound to the M-cluster as
a hydroxymethyl group (without losing H). M, the isolated M-cluster.
(B) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of CH4 formed in a D2O-based reaction, where CH2O was supplied as a
substrate (①), or in an H2O-based reaction, where
CD2O was supplied as a substrate (②). The masses
of the base peaks of products are indicated (B).
Activation
of formaldehyde by the isolated M-cluster. (A) Expected
identities of products when CH2O is supplied as a substrate
to a D2O-based reaction (①) or when CD2O is supplied as a substrate to an H2O-based reaction
(②), assuming CH2O is bound to the M-cluster as
a hydroxymethyl group (without losing H). M, the isolated M-cluster.
(B) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of CH4 formed in a D2O-based reaction, where CH2O was supplied as a
substrate (①), or in an H2O-based reaction, where
CD2O was supplied as a substrate (②). The masses
of the base peaks of products are indicated (B).Having tackled the question related to the identity of the
activated
C1 species, we then asked the question of whether the product
formed upon C–C bond formation could be released via β-hydride
elimination.[20] In this scenario, a partially
reduced, cofactor-bound C2 species—such as a cofactor-bound
hydroxyethyl group derived from acetaldehyde (C2H4O)—could undergo multiple proton/electron transfer events
that are coupled with the removal of its oxygen atom as water, as
well as β-hydride elimination that occurs concurrently with
the formation of a C=C bond, which eventually leads to the
release of C2H4 as a product (Figure A). To test our hypothesis,
we monitored the amount of D labels in product C2H4 when D3- or D4-labeled C2H4O (i.e., CD3CHO or CD3CDO) was
used as a substrate in an H2O-based buffer system (Figure A, ①, ②).
GC-MS analysis demonstrated a predominant formation of C2HD3 (i.e., CD2CDH) when CD3CDO was
used as a substrate (Figure B, ①), and the predominant formation of C2H2D2 (i.e., CD2CH2) when
CD3CHO was used as a substrate (Figure B, ②; also see Figure S6B). The observation that only one β-hydrogen
of C2H4O was replaced in both cases strongly
pointed to a mechanism of product release via β-hydride elimination
(see Discussion in the Supporting Information for consideration of alternative mechanisms).
Figure 3
Release of C2 product from the isolated M-cluster. (A)
Expected identities of products when CD3CDO (①)
or CD3CHO (②) is supplied as a substrate to a H2O-based reaction, assuming the CH3CHO-derived intermediate
is reduced upon removal of its oxygen atom and undergoes β-hydride
elimination concomitant with the formation of a C=C bond, which
results in the release of C2H4 as a product.
(B) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of C2H4 formed
in an H2O-based reaction, where CD3CDO (①)
or CD3CHO (②) was supplied as a substrate. The masses
of the base peaks of products are indicated (B).
Release of C2 product from the isolated M-cluster. (A)
Expected identities of products when CD3CDO (①)
or CD3CHO (②) is supplied as a substrate to a H2O-based reaction, assuming the CH3CHO-derived intermediate
is reduced upon removal of its oxygen atom and undergoes β-hydride
elimination concomitant with the formation of a C=C bond, which
results in the release of C2H4 as a product.
(B) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of C2H4 formed
in an H2O-based reaction, where CD3CDO (①)
or CD3CHO (②) was supplied as a substrate. The masses
of the base peaks of products are indicated (B).The successful identification of formaldehyde- and acetaldehyde-derived
species as catalytically competent intermediates for cofactor-based
hydrocarbon formation led to the question of whether these intermediates
could be shared by other carbon substrates, such as CO and CN–, in the same type of reactions catalyzed by the cofactor
of nitrogenase. To address this question, we examined whether the
C1 or C2 aldehyde could be coupled with CO into
C2 or C3 products. Excitingly, when CO was supplied
in addition to formaldehyde (CH2O), there was an increase
in the yield of C2 products (C2H4, C2H6), whereas when CO was supplied in addition
to acetaldehyde (C2H4O), C3 products
(C3H6, C3H8)—which
were absent when CH3CHO was supplied as the sole substrate—were
detected in the reaction (Figure A, highlights). Similar effects were observed when
CN–, another known C1 substrate of the
nitrogenase cofactor, was supplied in addition to CH2O
or C2H4O to the reaction (Figure A, highlights). GC-MS analysis further confirmed
a cross condensation between aldehyde and the C1 substrate,
showing the expected mass shifts and fragmentation patterns of C2 (containing one 13C and one 12C) or
C3 (containing two 13C and one 12C) products when 13CH2O or 13C2H4O (the origin of one or two 13C) was
supplemented with 12CO or 12CN– (the origin of one 12C) as the substrates of the reaction
(Figure B,C; also
see Figure S7A,B).
Figure 4
Cross condensation of
formaldehyde and acetaldehyde with CO or
CN by the isolated M-cluster. (A)
TONs of reactions catalyzed by isolated M-clusters, where CH2O or CH3CHO was supplied alone or in combination with
CO or CN– as a substrate(s). Products generated
upon cross condensation between CH2O (left) or CH3CHO (right) and CO or CN– are highlighted. TON,
turnover number, calculated based on the number of reduced carbons
in hydrocarbon products. (B, C) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of C2 (B) and C3 (C) hydrocarbons generated from the
cross condensation between 13CH2O (B) or 13CH31CHO (C) and 12CO or 12CN–. The masses of the base peaks of products
are indicated (B, C). Note that, as expected, C3 products
were not detected in the activity assay (A) and GC-MS analysis (C)
when CH3CHO was supplied alone as a substrate.
Cross condensation of
formaldehyde and acetaldehyde with CO or
CN by the isolated M-cluster. (A)
TONs of reactions catalyzed by isolated M-clusters, where CH2O or CH3CHO was supplied alone or in combination with
CO or CN– as a substrate(s). Products generated
upon cross condensation between CH2O (left) or CH3CHO (right) and CO or CN– are highlighted. TON,
turnover number, calculated based on the number of reduced carbons
in hydrocarbon products. (B, C) GC-MS fragmentation patterns of C2 (B) and C3 (C) hydrocarbons generated from the
cross condensation between 13CH2O (B) or 13CH31CHO (C) and 12CO or 12CN–. The masses of the base peaks of products
are indicated (B, C). Note that, as expected, C3 products
were not detected in the activity assay (A) and GC-MS analysis (C)
when CH3CHO was supplied alone as a substrate.Strikingly, the fragmentation patterns of C2 and C3 products, particularly those of C2H4, C2H6 and C3H6, remained
largely unchanged following the expected mass shift upon incorporation
of 13C labels (see Figure B,C, green or blue traces vs black traces). This observation
implied that these products were predominantly derived from a cross
condensation between aldehyde (13CH2O or 13C2H4O) and the C1 substrate
(12CO or 12CN–) instead of
from a direct condensation of the C1 substrate (12CO or 12CN–) itself, as peaks arising
from products with only 12C labels would have become more
prominent in the latter case, resulting in alterations of the fragmentation
patterns. Moreover, addition of CO or CN– seemed
to decrease the formation of C1 and C2 products,
respectively, via direct reduction of CH2O and C2H4O (see Figure A), which could be explained by a preferential cross condensation
between aldehyde (CH2O, C2H4O) and
the C1 substrate (CO, CN–) over a direct
reduction of aldehyde itself. The observation of C–C bond formation
via an aldehyde-derived moiety and a CO- or CN–-derived
moiety was consistent with a recent study that excluded condensation
between two neighboring, cofactor-bound CO moieties[21] and pointed to aldehydes as possible intermediates along
the reaction pathway of CO reduction.Interestingly, Fe-bound
C1 (hydroxymethyl) and C2 (hydroxyethyl) species
have been suggested by density functional
theory (DFT) calculations as potential intermediates of CO2 reduction by synthetic [Fe4S4] clusters in
a reaction driven by SmI2 (E0′ ≈ – 1.5 V in DMF).[22] It is appealing, therefore, to consider the plausible scenario that
the cofactor of nitrogenase—a complex FeS cluster variant—also
reduces CO via certain aldehyde-derived intermediates. The significant
increase of hydrocarbon yields when aldehydes are supplied as substrates
instead of CO seems to support this argument, as aldehydes are further
reduced and, therefore, “easier” substrates to enter
the CO reduction pathway.The involvement of β-hydride
elimination in the termination
step of alkene formation does not come as a complete surprise, not
only because of its prevalence in organometallic chemistry,[20] but also because of its implications in nitrogenase-catalyzed
reactions. Previously, it was observed that ethene was predominately
produced in the enzymatic CO condensation reaction catalyzed by nitrogenase,[5,6] which points to a possible product release mechanism via β-hydride
elimination in this case. Recently, it was proposed that metal hydride
could play a central role in the reduction of N2 by nitrogenase.
In this proposal, the protein-bound M-cluster would first accumulate
hydrides as a form of reducing equivalents, which can then be reductively
eliminated to generate a “super reduced” state of the
metal center for N2 activation.[23,24] While the involvement of a β-hydride elimination step in CO
reduction seems to serve a different purpose in terminating the reaction
and facilitating product release, it could act in a manner analogous
to that proposed for N2 reduction by “shortcutting”
the reduction cycle via a “recharge” of the metal center
with one hydride for the subsequent reduction events along the CO
reduction pathway.The reductive condensation of aldehydes that
directly leads to
the formation of hydrocarbons is, to our knowledge, unprecedented
in biochemistry. The aldehyde deformylating oxygenase (ADO), a diiron
oxygenase that converts aldehyde to hydrocarbon and formate via oxidative
cleavage of the aldehydic carbon, is one loosely related biological
example along this line of reactivity.[25] In the context of organometallic chemistry, reactions catalyzed
by transition metals seem to utilize a mechanism that is distinct
from the reaction catalyzed by the M-cluster in that they typically
generate alcohols by coupling aldehydes and ketones with olefins or
other reactive species.[26] The formation
of hydrocarbons in these reactions would require much harsher conditions.It is important to note that a large variety of homogeneous systems
that mimic the Fischer–Tropsch synthesis (FTS) have been documented
in the literature.[27] Early development
of these systems focused on direct reduction of CO with hydrides,
such as the reduction of CpFe(CO)3+ with NaBH4, or conversion of CO to reduced C2 species, by
metal hydride complexes.[28,29] In addition, substantial
efforts were dedicated to development of metal clusters as FTS models
based on the premise that metal clusters, particularly heterobimetallic
systems, could exhibit metal surface reactivity patterns in CO activation
and C–C bond coupling.[30,31] One relatively well-known
example of this genre is the lanthanide-hydride tetramers, which react
with CO under ambient conditions to generate ethylene.[32] This is one of the few systems capable of performing
the facile conversion of CO to hydrocarbons, encompassing some of
the difficult steps, such as C–O bond cleavage and product
release. However, upon removal of the oxygen atom, the starting cluster
is converted into lanthnide-oxide cubanes, rendering the reaction
not catalytic. Another outstanding example that deals with a similar
oxygen removal scenario is the terphenyl–diphosphine coordinated
molybdenum complex, which is capable of scission of the C–O
bond, C–C coupling, and spontaneous dissociation of the resulting
C fragment. In this case, Me3SiCl is utilized to efficiently
attack and remove oxygen in the presence of K+ to form
reactive metal carbene species.[33,34] It is worth noting
that, as observed in the transition metal-catalyzed reactions of ketone/aldehyde
reduction, our M-cluster-based reaction is efficient in removing oxygen
and hydroxyl because of the protic/aqueous reaction system.Interestingly, it has been demonstrated for the industrial FTS
that aldehyde can be incorporated into hydrocarbons when it is supplied
along with syngas in the feedstock, which allows for more selective
synthesis of desired hydrocarbon products, depending on the aldehyde
additive supplied to the reaction.[35] Given
the observation of aldehyde condensation with CO, a similar functionality
may also be achieved by catalysts based on nitrogenase cofactors.
Continued exploration of this reactivity, in combination with further
mechanistic investigations into the enzymatic CO reduction and C–C
bond formation, could facilitate future developments of nitrogenase-based
catalysts for synthesis of valuable chemical commodities.
Authors: Chi Chung Lee; Jarett Wilcoxen; Caleb J Hiller; R David Britt; Yilin Hu Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Kylie A Vincent; Gareth J Tilley; Nina C Quammie; Ian Streeter; Barbara K Burgess; Myles R Cheesman; Fraser A Armstrong Journal: Chem Commun (Camb) Date: 2003-10-21 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Chi Chung Lee; Wonchull Kang; Andrew J Jasniewski; Martin T Stiebritz; Kazuki Tanifuji; Markus W Ribbe; Yilin Hu Journal: Nat Catal Date: 2022-05-16
Authors: Trixia M Buscagan; Kathryn A Perez; Ailiena O Maggiolo; Douglas C Rees; Thomas Spatzal Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 15.336