The interactions of epinephrine ((R)-(−)-3,4-dihydroxy-α-(methylaminomethyl)benzyl alcohol; Eph−) with different toxic cations (methylmercury(II): CH3Hg+; dimethyltin(IV): (CH3)2Sn2+; dioxouranium(VI): UO22+) were studied in NaClaq at different ionic strengths and at T = 298.15 K (T = 310.15 K for (CH3)2Sn2+). The enthalpy changes for the protonation of epinephrine and its complex formation with UO22+ were also determined using isoperibolic titration calorimetry:∆HHL = −39 ± 1 kJ mol−1, ∆HH2L = −67 ± 1 kJ mol−1(overall reaction), ∆HML = −26 ± 4 kJ mol−1 ,and ∆HM2L2(OH)2 = 39 ± 2 kJ mol−1. The results were that UO22+ complexation by Eph− was an entropy-driven process. The dependence on the ionic strength of protonation and the complex formation constants was modeled using the extended Debye–Hückel, specific ion interaction theory (SIT), and Pitzer approaches. The sequestering ability of adrenaline toward the investigated cations was evaluated using the calculation of pL0.5 parameters. The sequestering ability trend resulted in the following: UO22+ >> (CH3)2Sn2+ > CH3Hg+. For example, at I = 0.15 mol dm−3 and pH = 7.4(pH = 9.5 for CH3Hg+), pL0.5 = 7.68, 5.64, and 2.40 for UO22+, (CH3)2Sn2+, and CH3Hg+, respectively. Here, the pH is with respect to ionic strength in terms of sequestration.
Understanding the Solution Behavior of Epinephrine in the Presence of Toxic Cations: A Thermodynamic Investigation in Different Experimental Conditions
Francesco Crea
Primo
Writing – Review & Editing
;Concetta De StefanoSecondo
Funding Acquisition
;Anna IrtoInvestigation
;Gabriele LandoVisualization
;Demetrio MileaSoftware
;Silvio SammartanoUltimo
Methodology
2020-01-01
Abstract
The interactions of epinephrine ((R)-(−)-3,4-dihydroxy-α-(methylaminomethyl)benzyl alcohol; Eph−) with different toxic cations (methylmercury(II): CH3Hg+; dimethyltin(IV): (CH3)2Sn2+; dioxouranium(VI): UO22+) were studied in NaClaq at different ionic strengths and at T = 298.15 K (T = 310.15 K for (CH3)2Sn2+). The enthalpy changes for the protonation of epinephrine and its complex formation with UO22+ were also determined using isoperibolic titration calorimetry:∆HHL = −39 ± 1 kJ mol−1, ∆HH2L = −67 ± 1 kJ mol−1(overall reaction), ∆HML = −26 ± 4 kJ mol−1 ,and ∆HM2L2(OH)2 = 39 ± 2 kJ mol−1. The results were that UO22+ complexation by Eph− was an entropy-driven process. The dependence on the ionic strength of protonation and the complex formation constants was modeled using the extended Debye–Hückel, specific ion interaction theory (SIT), and Pitzer approaches. The sequestering ability of adrenaline toward the investigated cations was evaluated using the calculation of pL0.5 parameters. The sequestering ability trend resulted in the following: UO22+ >> (CH3)2Sn2+ > CH3Hg+. For example, at I = 0.15 mol dm−3 and pH = 7.4(pH = 9.5 for CH3Hg+), pL0.5 = 7.68, 5.64, and 2.40 for UO22+, (CH3)2Sn2+, and CH3Hg+, respectively. Here, the pH is with respect to ionic strength in terms of sequestration.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
molecules-25-00511-v2.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
3.23 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
3.23 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.