| Literature DB >> 32478268 |
Olga Dvořáčková1,2, Zdeněk Chval1.
Abstract
The kinetics of the hydration reaction onEntities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32478268 PMCID: PMC7254792 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c01161
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Scheme 1Reaction Mechanism of the Hydration Reactions Studied in This Contribution
All reaction pathways proceeded over pentacoordinated X-TS transition state structures.
Scheme 2Poly-X Ligands Considered in This Study and Their Designation (X = F, NH2, NO2)
Gas Phase NPA Charges of the NpyrX Atom (q(NpyrX), in e) Calculated in the Isolated pyrX Ligands and in the X-R and X-P Complexes
| PyrX | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X/position | o- | m- | p- | o- | m- | p- | o- | m- | p- |
| H | –0.459 | –0.503 | –0.452 | ||||||
| DMA | –0.527 | –0.444 | –0.504 | –0.530 | –0.482 | –0.553 | –0.504 | –0.423 | –0.480 |
| NH2 | –0.522 | –0.443 | –0.497 | –0.551 | –0.481 | –0.547 | –0.493 | –0.426 | –0.499 |
| Br | –0.509 | –0.476 | –0.493 | –0.535 | –0.491 | –0.510 | –0.462 | –0.439 | –0.490 |
| SH | –0.501 | –0.443 | –0.471 | –0.537 | –0.488 | –0.522 | –0.486 | –0.436 | –0.478 |
| OH | –0.491 | –0.442 | –0.485 | –0.564 | –0.486 | –0.530 | –0.510 | –0.433 | –0.482 |
| F | –0.486 | –0.440 | –0.470 | –0.544 | –0.489 | –0.516 | –0.502 | –0.440 | –0.467 |
| Cl | –0.472 | –0.442 | –0.460 | –0.531 | –0.491 | –0.510 | –0.485 | –0.441 | –0.464 |
| CH3 | –0.479 | –0.456 | –0.467 | –0.514 | –0.496 | –0.511 | –0.460 | –0.444 | –0.462 |
| C≡CH | –0.437 | –0.453 | –0.453 | –0.492 | –0.498 | –0.508 | –0.445 | –0.446 | –0.464 |
| NO2 | –0.420 | –0.446 | –0.430 | –0.503 | –0.497 | –0.490 | –0.467 | –0.449 | –0.445 |
Pt–pyrX Interaction (X = H, NH2, NO2) in the Gas Phase Optimized X-R, X-TS, and X-P Structures: Pt–NpyrX Bond Lengths (in Å); Total NPA Charges of the Pt Atom (q(Pt)) and pyrX Ligands (q(pyrX)) (in e); and ETS-NOCV Energy Decomposition Terms ΔEPauli, ΔEelst, ΔEorb, ΔEdisp, ΔEorbσ, and ΔEorbπ Obtained at the BLYP-D3BJ/TZ2P//B3LYP/BS1 Levela
| Pt–NpyrX | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 2.081 | 0.617 | 0.241 | 127.6 | –122.5 | –61.6 | –7.2 | –40.7 | –11.6 | –65.7 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.086 | 0.601 | 0.257 | 135.6 | –129.9 | –64.5 | –9.0 | –41.2 | –10.9 | –69.9 |
| m- | 2.078 | 0.616 | 0.254 | 129.7 | –127.4 | –63.4 | –7.4 | –41.8 | –10.3 | –70.4 | |
| p- | 2.077 | 0.612 | 0.268 | 130.5 | –131.0 | –64.0 | –7.3 | –42.5 | –12.1 | –73.8 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.111 | 0.613 | 0.205 | 114.4 | –103.3 | –57.7 | –10.2 | –34.7 | –11.6 | –57.5 |
| m- | 2.089 | 0.618 | 0.220 | 120.3 | –108.0 | –59.5 | –7.3 | –38.0 | –10.4 | –55.6 | |
| p- | 2.084 | 0.618 | 0.221 | 122.8 | –109.6 | –60.6 | –7.2 | –38.6 | –12.7 | –57.5 | |
| H | 2.046 | 0.791 | 0.294 | 174.2 | –147.2 | –78.6 | –7.6 | –53.4 | –12.5 | –62.7 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.050 | 0.770 | 0.312 | 192.7 | –160.6 | –85.9 | –9.8 | –57.4 | –12.5 | –67.1 |
| m- | 2.044 | 0.789 | 0.304 | 176.9 | –152.4 | –80.8 | –7.8 | –54.8 | –10.7 | –67.5 | |
| p- | 2.043 | 0.784 | 0.319 | 177.0 | –155.4 | –81.5 | –7.7 | –55.7 | –12.7 | –71.1 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.072 | 0.799 | 0.243 | 159.6 | –128.2 | –73.2 | –10.7 | –45.6 | –12.5 | –54.5 |
| m- | 2.053 | 0.797 | 0.269 | 166.8 | –133.1 | –75.8 | –7.7 | –49.8 | –10.9 | –52.5 | |
| p- | 2.050 | 0.799 | 0.268 | 169.6 | –134.8 | –77.1 | –7.6 | –50.5 | –13.7 | –52.4 | |
| H | 2.011 | 0.749 | 0.424 | 147.3 | –153.1 | –101.7 | –7.5 | –64.2 | –19.6 | –114.3 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.016 | 0.736 | 0.439 | 152.7 | –159.0 | –105.1 | –9.5 | –63.9 | –18.9 | –120.4 |
| m- | 2.007 | 0.745 | 0.437 | 151.0 | –162.4 | –105.8 | –7.7 | –66.0 | –19.3 | –123.7 | |
| p- | 2.005 | 0.738 | 0.450 | 152.6 | –168.4 | –107.5 | –7.6 | –66.8 | –22.3 | –130.0 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.038 | 0.780 | 0.369 | 131.8 | –128.7 | –97.0 | –10.1 | –55.2 | –19.1 | –102.7 |
| m- | 2.016 | 0.757 | 0.404 | 139.4 | –132.5 | –100.1 | –7.6 | –61.4 | –19.6 | –99.3 | |
| p- | 2.014 | 0.757 | 0.404 | 141.0 | –133.1 | –100.1 | –7.5 | –61.5 | –21.1 | –98.6 | |
ΔEbind energy values were calculated at the B3LYP-D3BJ/BS2//B3LYP/BS1 level. All energy values are in kcal/mol. The data for all X’s are shown in Table S1.
Figure 1Relative Pt–pyrX (upper panels) and Pt–Cl and Pt–w (lower left and right panels, respectively) gas phase binding energies calculated with respect to the strength of the bonds in the non-substituted H-R and H-P complexes (set as 100%). The values of reference Pt–pyrH binding energies in H-R and H-P complexes are −65.7 and −114.3 kcal/mol, respectively (Table ). Reference values for Pt–Cl and Pt–w bonds are −248.7 and −46.8 kcal/mol, respectively (Table ).
Interactions of Cl– and Water Ligands with the Rest of the Complex in the Gas Phase Optimized X-R and X-P Structures (X = H, NH2, NO2), Respectively: Pt–Cl, Pt–Ow Bond Lengths (in Å); the Total NPA Charges of the Cl– and Water Ligands (q(Cl), q(w)); and ETS-NOCV Energy Decomposition Terms ΔEPauli, ΔEelst, ΔEorb, ΔEdisp, ΔEorbσ, and ΔEorbπ Obtained at the BLYP-D3BJ/TZ2P//B3LYP/BS1 Levela,b
| Pt–Cl | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 2.315 | –0.477 | 130.5 | –283.4 | –95.3 | –3.0 | –67.5 | –9.8 | –248.7 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.316 | –0.482 | 130.4 | –282.6 | –94.4 | –3.1 | –67.0 | –9.4 | –247.4 |
| m- | 2.317 | –0.486 | 131.8 | –278.3 | –95.8 | –3.0 | –68.5 | –9.7 | –243.6 | |
| p- | 2.320 | –0.492 | 128.4 | –275.0 | –92.5 | –3.0 | –65.2 | –10.1 | –240.0 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.301 | –0.444 | 135.0 | –289.8 | –100.4 | –2.8 | –70.9 | –10.4 | –255.5 |
| m- | 2.308 | –0.460 | 135.2 | –288.7 | –100.7 | –2.9 | –72.4 | –9.9 | –256.0 | |
| p- | 2.309 | –0.462 | 131.9 | –289.8 | –98.0 | –3.0 | –69.0 | –10.7 | –255.5 | |
All energy values are in kcal/mol. The data for all X’s are shown in Table S2.
ΔEbind energies were calculated at the B3LYP-D3BJ/BS2//B3LYP/BS1 level.
Figure 2X-R structures: panel A: dependence of pyr-X ligand binding energies on the Pt–NpyrX bond lengths. The o-DMA point was not included in the regression analysis for the ortho-X subset (blue line). Panel B: dependence of the σ-donation energy ΔEorbσ contributions on total ΔEorb energies. One regression line was constructed for both meta-X and para-X subsets in the two graphs (black lines). The graphs for X-TS and X-P structures are shown in Figure S3.
Figure 3Electron density difference isosurfaces of -R (A) and -R (B) structures with respect to the reference H-R structure which show electron accumulation (blue: 0.0004 a.u.) and depletion (red: −0.0004 a.u.) regions caused by p-NH2 (A) and p-NO2 (B) substitution of the pyr ring. Electron densities were calculated on the H-R geometry for all atoms of respective complexes except the atoms of the X substituent whose positions were optimized.
Figure 4Dependence of the Pt–pyr(X) (panels A, B), Pt–Cl (panel C), and Pt–w (panel D) gas phase binding energies in X-R and X-P complexes (A, C and B, D panels, respectively) on the 2p(NpyrX) NAO energies calculated on the isolated pyrX ligands. Panels E, F, G, and H represent analogous results calculated in the water solvent. Points for the poly-X complexes were not included in the regression analyses (cf. below). Relative orientation of the 2p(NpyrX) orbital with respect to the isolated pyrX ligand (panel I). 2p(NpyrX) represents 2p(NpyrX) NAO orbital oriented along the C4–NpyrX axis which is the direction of the pyrX nucleophilic attack to form the Pt–NpyrX bond.
Pt–Cl and Pt–Ow Bonds in the Gas Phase Optimized X-TS Structures (X = H, NH2, NO2): Pt–Cl, Pt–Ow Bond Lengths (in Å); the Total NPA Charges of the Cl and Water Ligands (q(Cl), q(w); in e)a
| Pt–Cl | Pt–Ow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 2.770 | 2.327 | –0.765 | 0.058 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.710 | 2.384 | –0.761 | 0.064 |
| m- | 2.768 | 2.344 | –0.765 | 0.054 | |
| p- | 2.776 | 2.344 | –0.768 | 0.051 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.752 | 2.302 | –0.735 | 0.073 |
| m- | 2.760 | 2.307 | –0.758 | 0.068 | |
| p- | 2.759 | 2.309 | –0.763 | 0.067 |
The data for all X’s are shown in Table S3.
Gas Phase Optimized X-TS Structures (X = H, NH2, NO2): ETS-NOCV Energy Decomposition Terms ΔEPauli, ΔEelst, ΔEorb, ΔEdisp, and ΔEorbσ for the Interaction of the Joint (Cl + w) Fragment (Leaving and Entering Ligands) with the Rest of the Complex Were Obtained at the BLYP-D3BJ/TZ2P//B3LYP/BS1 Levela,b
| Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | Δ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 88.0 | –236.2 | –69.8 | –6.0 | –37.7 | –222.9 | 33.2 | |
| NH2 | o- | 93.6 | –243.6 | –69.6 | –6.8 | –36.7 | –225.3 | 29.9 |
| m- | 87.3 | –231.2 | –68.5 | –6.0 | –37.5 | –217.9 | 32.7 | |
| p- | 85.8 | –227.4 | –67.3 | –6.0 | –36.1 | –214.2 | 32.6 | |
| NO2 | o- | 91.4 | –242.2 | –74.0 | –6.1 | –39.8 | –230.0 | 33.3 |
| m- | 92.2 | –241.8 | –74.6 | –6.1 | –41.5 | –230.4 | 34.4 | |
| p- | 90.8 | –243.2 | –73.2 | –6.1 | –39.4 | –230.8 | 34.3 |
All energy values are in kcal/mol. The data for all X’s are shown in Table S4.
ΔEbind energies of the (Cl + w) fragment and activation Gibbs energies ΔG⧧ were calculated at the B3LYP-D3BJ/BS2//B3LYP/BS1 level.
Figure 5Dependence of the gas phase activation Gibbs free energies (ΔG⧧) on the energies of 2p(NpyrX) NAO’s calculated on the isolated pyrX ligand (see Figure I). One regression line was constructed for m-X and p-X reaction paths while excluding all o-X and poly-X (see below) points.
Figure 6Dependence of the relative values of the activation Gibbs free energy barriers (Δ(ΔG⧧)) of the hydration reactions of the trans-[Pt(NH3)2(pyrX) Cl]+ complexes on the nature and the position of the X in the gas phase and in the water solvent. Δ(ΔG⧧) was calculated with respect to the reference values (33.2 and 25.7 kcal/mol in the gas and water solvent, respectively) determined for the X = H pathway. Absolute values of ΔG⧧ are shown in Table , Table S4 and Table , and Table S6 for the gas phase and the water solvent, respectively.
Activation Free Energies (ΔG⧧) and Bonding Interactions in X-TS Structures (X = H, NH2, NO2) Optimized in the Water Solvent and Calculated by the B3LYP-D3BJ-PCM/BS2//B3LYP-PCM/BS1 Method: Pt–NpyrX,Pt–Cl, and Pt–Ow Bond Lengths (in Å); Total NPA Charges of the pyrX, Cl and Water Ligands (q(pyrX), q(Cl) and q(w), Respectively) (in e); and ΔEbind and ΔG⧧ Energy Values in kcal/mola
| Pt–NpyrX | Δ | Pt–Cl | Pt–Ow | Δ | Δ | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 2.034 | 0.318 | –42.9 | 2.837 | –0.837 | 2.476 | 0.050 | –18.6 | 25.9 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.042 | 0.333 | –45.0 | 2.806 | –0.832 | 2.482 | 0.053 | –18.5 | 24.3 |
| m- | 2.032 | 0.327 | –44.3 | 2.843 | –0.841 | 2.469 | 0.050 | –18.1 | 26.0 | |
| p- | 2.029 | 0.350 | –47.0 | 2.846 | –0.841 | 2.495 | 0.044 | –17.3 | 25.4 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.074 | 0.252 | –33.0 | 2.783 | –0.821 | 2.431 | 0.067 | –21.9 | 26.5 |
| m- | 2.042 | 0.281 | –37.2 | 2.822 | –0.830 | 2.447 | 0.059 | –20.2 | 27.3 | |
| p- | 2.035 | 0.272 | –38.1 | 2.816 | –0.828 | 2.448 | 0.059 | –19.6 | 27.2 | |
The data for all X’s are shown in Table S6.
Figure 7Energetically the most feasible structures of -TS, , -TS, and in the gas phase (upper structures) and in the water solvent (lower structures) with depicted distances of the X···HNH2, X···Pt nonbonding, and X···Cl (X···w) electrostatic interactions. The Gibbs energy conformational preferences (Δ(ΔGconf⧧)) of the water nucleophilic attack from the semispace defined by the plane of the Pt complex and the position of the o-X group relative to the opposite direction are also shown (in kcal/mol). Pt–NpyrX, Pt–Cl, and Pt–Ow bond lengths are shown in Table , Table S1 and Table 4, and Table S3, respectively, for the gas phase optimized structures and in Table and Table S6 for the water solvent ones.
Bonding Interactions in X-R and X-P Structures (X = H, NH2, NO2) Optimized in the Water Solvent and Calculated by the B3LYP-D3BJ-PCM/BS2//B3LYP-PCM/BS1 Method: Pt–NpyrX, Pt–Cl, and Pt–Ow Bond Lengths (in Å); the Total NPA Charges of the pyrX, Cl, and Water Ligands (q(pyrX), q(Cl) and q(w), Respectively) (in e); ΔEbind Energy Values are in kcal/mola
| Pt–NpyrX | Δ | Pt–Cl | Δ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | 2.052 | 0.284 | –43.9 | 2.370 | –0.597 | –38.7 | |
| NH2 | o- | 2.064 | 0.292 | –46.2 | 2.363 | –0.594 | –38.2 |
| m- | 2.051 | 0.289 | –45.3 | 2.363 | –0.599 | –38.5 | |
| p- | 2.047 | 0.312 | –47.7 | 2.378 | –0.610 | –37.0 | |
| NO2 | o- | 2.084 | 0.231 | –35.4 | 2.341 | –0.560 | –42.3 |
| m- | 2.067 | 0.251 | –38.8 | 2.353 | –0.576 | –41.2 | |
| p- | 2.056 | 0.247 | –39.7 | 2.360 | –0.580 | –40.8 | |
The data for all X’s are shown in Table S5.
Figure 8Plots of estimated vs calculated (eq ) values of Pt–ligand binding energies for complexes with poly-substituted ligands in the gas phase (panels A–D) and the water solvent (panels E–H). Panels A, C, E, and G and B, D, F, and H correspond to poly-X-R and poly-X-P structures, respectively. The solid line represents equality of the two values.