Aldehyde- and ketone-derived cyanohydrins were reacted with the nitrile hydration catalysts [PtCl(PR(2)OH){(PR(2)O)(2)H}] (1) and Cp(2)Mo(OH)(OH(2))(+) (2) under a variety of hydration reaction conditions. In general, the cyanohydrins were hydrated to the amides rather slowly using these catalysts, but no subsequent hydrolysis of the amide products occurred. Catalyst 2 was much less reactive than catalyst 1, showing at best trace amounts of amide product. Product inhibition-, substrate inhibition-, and cyanide poisoning-tests demonstrated that coordination of cyanide, generated by dehydrocyanation of the cyanohydrins, is responsible for the generally low catalytic activity of 1 and 2 with cyanohydrin substrates. Addition of KCN to reaction mixtures of acetonitrile and 1 gave a linear plot of rate versus cyanide concentration, indicating that binding of cyanide to the catalysts is irreversible. Density functional theory (DFT) calculations showed that, for the hydration reaction catalyzed by 2, the formation of most intermediates and the overall reaction itself are energetically more favorable for lactonitrile (a cyanohydrin) than for 3-hydroxypropionitrile (not a cyanohydrin). From this result, it is concluded that, from an electronic standpoint, there is no intrinsic reason for the lack of reactivity observed for cyanohydrins, a result consistent with the finding that the slow hydration reactivity is caused by cyanide poisoning. In addition, DFT calculations showed that, for nitriles in general (not necessarily cyanohydrins), product inhibition occurs because coordination of the amide product to the metal center is stabilized by isomerization to the more strongly bonded iminol tautomer.

Molecular dynamics simulations of Clostridium pasteurianum rubredoxin in the oxidized and reduced forms have been performed. Good agreement between both forms and crystal data has been obtained (rms deviation of backbone atoms of 1.06 and 1.42 A, respectively), which was due in part to the use of explicit solvent and counterions. The reduced form exhibits an unexpected structural change: the redox site becomes much more solvent-accessible, so that water enters a channel between the surface and the site, but with little actual structural rearrangement (the rms deviation of backbone atoms between the oxidized and reduced is 0.77 A). The increase in solvent accessibility is also seen, although to a much lesser extent, between the oxidized and reduced crystal structures of Pyrococcus furiosus rubredoxin, but no high resolution crystal or nuclear magnetic resonance solution data exist for reduced C. pasteurianum rubredoxin. The electrostatic potential at the iron site and fluctuations in the potential, which contribute to both the redox and electron transfer properties, have also been evaluated for both the oxidized and the reduced simulations. These results show that the backbone plays a significant role (62-70 kcal/mol/e) and the polar side chains contribute relatively little (0-4 kcal/mol/e) to the absolute electrostatic potential at the iron of rubredoxin for both forms. However, both groups contribute significantly to the change in redox state by becoming more polarized and more densely packed around the redox site upon reduction. Furthermore, these results show that the solvent becomes much more polarized in the reduced form than in the oxidized form, even excluding the penetrating water. Finally, the simulation indicates that the contribution of the charged side chains to the electrostatic potential is largely canceled by that of the counterions.

The rates of nitrile hydration reactions were investigated using [Ru(η6-p-cymene)Cl2(PR2R′)] complexes as homogeneous catalysts, where PR2R′ = PMe2(CH2P(O)Me2), PMe2(CH2CH2P(O)Me2), PPh2(CH2P(O)Ph2), PPh2(CH2CH2P(O)Ph2), PMe2OH, P(OEt)2OH. These catalysts were studied because the rate of the nitrile-to-amide hydration reaction was hypothesized to be affected by the position of the hydrogen bond accepting group in the secondary coordination sphere of the catalyst. Experiments showed that the rate of nitrile hydration was fastest when using [Ru(η6-p-cymene)Cl2PMe2OH]: i.e., the catalyst with the hydrogen bond accepting group capable of forming the most stable ring in the transition state of the rate-limiting step. This catalyst is also active at pH 3.5 and at low temperaturesconditions where α-hydroxynitriles (cyanohydrins) produce less cyanide, a known poison for organometallic nitrile hydration catalysts. The [Ru(η6-p-cymene)Cl2PMe2OH] catalyst completely converts the cyanohydrins glycolonitrile and lactonitrile to their corresponding α-hydroxyamides faster than previously investigated catalysts. [Ru(η6-p-cymene)Cl2PMe2OH] is not, however, a good catalyst for acetone cyanohydrin hydration, because it is susceptible to cyanide poisoning. Protecting the −OH group of acetone cyanohydrin was shown to be an effective way to prevent cyanide poisoning, resulting in quantitative hydration of acetone cyanohydrin acetate.

Electronic structure calculations using density functional theory were performed on potential intermediates in the reaction of Fe(dmpe)(2)N(2) (dmpe = 1,2-bis(dimethylphosphino)ethane) with protons. Three mechanisms were investigated and compared, and the possibility of a two-electron reduction by a sacrificial Fe(dmpe)(2)N(2) complex was considered in each mechanism. A Chatt-like mechanism, involving the stepwise addition of protons to the terminal nitrogen, was found to be the least favorable. A second pathway involving dimerization of the Fe(dmpe)(2)N(2) complex, followed by the stepwise addition of protons leading to hydrazine, was found to be energetically favorable; however many of the dimeric intermediates prefer to dissociate into monomers. A third mechanism proceeding through diazene and hydrazine intermediates, formed by alternating protonation of each nitrogen atom, was found to be the most energetically favorable.

The mechanism of the nitrile-to-amide hydration reaction using [Ru(η 6 -arene)Cl 2 (PR 3 )] complexes as catalysts was investigated (η 6 -arene = C 6 H 6 , p-cymene, C 6 Me 6 ; R = NMe 2 , OMe, OEt, Et, iPr). Experiments showed that the mechanism involves the following general sequence of reactions: substitution of a chloride ligand by the nitrile substrate, intermolecular nucleophilic attack by water to form an amidate intermediate, and dissociation of the resulting amide. The effects of secondary coordination sphere interactions on the rates and yields of the hydration reaction were investigated. Ligands that are capable of acting as hydrogen bond acceptors with the entering water molecule result in faster rates and higher yields than nonhydrogen-bonding ligands. The faster rates are attributable to the H-bonding-facilitated deprotonation of the water as the oxygen of the water bonds to the coordinated nitrile. DFT calculations on the proposed H-bonding intermediates support this interpretation. Most homogeneous catalysts will not hydrate cyanohydrins because of the equilibrium amounts of cyanide that are present in solutions of cyanohydrins; the cyanide poisons the catalyst. Because of its increased catalytic reactivity due to secondary coordination sphere effects, the [Ru(η 6 -arene)Cl 2 (P(NMe 2 ) 3 )] catalyst gives significant yields of cyanohydrin hydration products with glycolonitrile, lactonitrile, acetone cyanohydrin, and mandelonitrile. A Taft plot showed that an increase in the steric bulk of the nitrile results in a decrease in the hydration rate, and a Hammett plot showed that electron-withdrawing groups facilitate nitrile hydration. The decrease in rate as the size of the cyanohydrin increases is likely due to both increased steric bulk and to the addition of electron-donating groups on the nitrile. The [Ru(η 6 -arene)Cl 2 (PR 3 )] catalysts are initially less susceptible to cyanide poisoning than other homogeneous nitrile hydration catalysts because [Ru(η 6 -p-cymene)(CN)(Cl)(P-(NMe 2 ) 3 )] forms in the presence of cyanide. The electron-withdrawing cyanide ligand facilitates nucleophilic attack of water on a coordinated nitrile in this molecule.