No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The enhancement of the spin-lattice relaxation rate for nuclear spins in a ligand bound to a paramagnetic metal ion [known as the paramagnetic relaxation enhancement (PRE)] arises primarily through the dipole-dipole (DD) interaction between the nuclear spins and the electron spins. In solution, the DD interaction is modulated mostly by reorientation of the nuclear spin-electron spin axis and by electron spin relaxation. Calculations of the PRE are in general complicated, mainly because the electron spin interacts so strongly with the other degrees of freedom that its relaxation cannot be described by second-order perturbation theory or the Redfield theory. Three approaches to resolve this problem exist in the literature: The so-called slow-motion theory, originating from Swedish groups [Benetis et al., Mol. Phys. 48, 329 (1983); Kowalewski et al., Adv. Inorg. Chem. 57, (2005); Larsson et al., J. Chem. Phys. 101, 1116 (1994); T. Nilsson et al., J. Magn. Reson. 154, 269 (2002)] and two different methods based on simulations of the dynamics of electron spin in time domain, developed in Grenoble [Fries and Belorizky, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 204503 (2007); Rast et al., ibid. 115, 7554 (2001)] and Ann Arbor [Abernathy and Sharp, J. Chem. Phys. 106, 9032 (1997); Schaefle and Sharp, ibid. 121, 5387 (2004); Schaefle and Sharp, J. Magn. Reson. 176, 160 (2005)], respectively. In this paper, we report a numerical comparison of the three methods for a large variety of parameter sets, meant to correspond to large and small complexes of gadolinium(III) and of nickel(II). It is found that the agreement between the Swedish and the Grenoble approaches is very good for practically all parameter sets, while the predictions of the Ann Arbor model are similar in a number of the calculations but deviate significantly in others, reflecting in part differences in the treatment of electron spin relaxation. The origins of the discrepancies are discussed briefly.

Static zero field splitting effects on the electronic relaxation of paramagnetic metal ion complexes in solution A low-field paramagnetic nuclear spin relaxation theory Electron spin relaxation for an Sϭ1 system and its field dependence in the presence of static zero-field splitting ͑ZFS͒ has been described and incorporated in a model for nuclear spin-lattice relaxation in paramagnetic complexes in solution, proposed earlier by the group in Florence. Slow reorientation is assumed and the electron spin energy level structure ͑at any orientation of the molecule with respect to the laboratory frame͒ is described in terms of the Zeeman interaction and of the static ZFS. The electron spin relaxation is assumed to be caused by a transient ZFS modulated by the deformation of the complex described as a distortional ͑or pseudorotational͒ motion and the Redfield theory is used to derive the electron spin relaxation matrices. In the description of the electron spin relaxation we neglect any contribution from mechanisms involving modulation by reorientation, such as those of the static ZFS and the less important Zeeman interaction, as we limit ourselves to the slow-rotation limit ͑i.e., R ӷ S ͒. This in general covers the behavior of proteins and macromolecules. The decomposition ͑DC͒ approximation is used, which means that the reorientational motion and electron spin dynamics are assumed to be uncorrelated. This is not a serious problem, due to the slow-rotation condition, since reorientational and distortional motions are time-scale separated. The resulting nuclear magnetic relaxation dispersion ͑NMRD͒ profiles obtained using the Florence model are calculated and compared with the calculations of the Swedish approach, which can be considered essentially exact within the given set of assumed interactions and dynamic processes. That theory is not restricted by the Redfield limit and can thus handle electron spin relaxation in the slow-motion regime, which is a consequence of not explicitly defining any electron spin relaxation times. Furthermore, the DC approximation is not invoked, and in addition, the electron spin relaxation is described by reorientationally modulated static ZFS and Zeeman interaction besides the distortionally modulated transient ZFS. The curves computed with the Florence model show a satisfactory agreement with these more accurate calculations of the Swedish approach, in particular for the axially symmetric static ZFS tensor, providing confidence in the adequacy of the electron spin relaxation model under the condition of slow rotation. The comparison is also quite instructive as far as the physical meaning of the electron spin relaxation and of its interplay with the nuclear spin system are concerned.