Disclaimer: This article was originally published by Elsevier and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Abstract
Methyldopa, which released in 1960, is one of the most popular blood pressure lowering drugs. Taking this medicine for high blood pressure, it seems that the effect drug in blood pressure duct ions convection to alpha-methyl is nor epinephrine. Alpha-methyl nor epinephrine from thus reducing central blood pressure is. This work reports an investigation of an antihypertensive drug methyldopa with the combined density functional theory (DFT) and its structure was optimized at B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) levels and the molecular structure in different solvents (SCRF calculation), NMR parameters were calculated using DFT at B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set. And finally we calculated natural bond orbital (NBO) parameters for this structure.
Micro dialysis technique is a useful method for in vivo sampling of neurotransmitters, drugs, and metabolites (Benveniste and Hüttemeier, 1990). The applicability to the study of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic in rats has been demonstrated in several reports (Chen and Steger, 1993; Elmquist and Sawchuk, 1997). Methyldopa (MD) exerts its antihypertensive effect through a central mechanism that involves the biotransformation to methyl norepinephrine (Robertson et al., 1984; van Zwieten et al., 1984). This drug may inhibit the aromatic amino acid decarboxylase, an enzyme in the biosynthetic pathway of catecholamine’s (Ledoux et al., 1983). Sino aortic denervations (SAD) performed according to Krieger’s procedure induces a labile hypertension in rats, alteration in serotonergic and cholinergic pathways and an elevation of the peripheral sympathetic tone (Nakamura and Nakamura, 1981; Giarcovich-Mart́ınez et al., 1983; Alexander et al., 1976, 1980). Alexander et al. (1988), reported that the striatal concentration of dopamine and tyrosine hydroxyls activity of the nigrostriatal system are decreased after differentiation of arterial baroreceptor nerves. Moreover, it was found that 3,4dihydroxyphenylaceticacid (DOPAC) and HVA levels in freely moving SAD rats were lower than in sham operated (SO) rats. In our laboratory, we have seen altered pharmacological responses to clonidine and MD in SAD rats (Taira et al., 1983; Taira and Enero, 1989). Moreover, in a recent study by using the micro dialysis technique, different kinetic profiles of MD in dialysates from arterial blood or striatum were seen in SO and SAD rats (Opezzo et al., 2000). Duncan et al. (1991) and Mizuchi et al., 1983 have demonstrated that the regional brain distribution of the drugs and their accumulation may be significantly different. Therefore, it is possible that the sin aortic denervation modifies the pharmacokinetic profile of MD in different brain structures and this could modify the pharmacological action of this drug on dopaminergic neurotransmission. The aim of this work was to study the time course of MD in brain by using the micro dialysis technique in order to make a pharmacokinetic approach in chloralose–urethane anesthetized SAD rats. We measured the effect of MD on the dopaminergic metabolism through its action on DOPAC and HVA dialysate levels in SO and SAD rats.
Methyldopa, hydroxy-α-methyl-l-tyrosine, is an antihypertensive agent that primarily acts within the central nervous system as an α-adrenergic agonist (Fink et al., 1998). Methyldopa is taken up by adrenergic neurons,where it is decarboxylated and hydroxylated to form the false transmitter, α-methylnoradrenaline, which is less active than noradrenalin on α-receptors and thus less effective in causing vasoconstriction. In this paper, we describe a fast, sensitive and specific liquid chromatography-tandem mass specific (LC–MS–MS) method for the quantization of methyldopa using dopa-phenyl D3 as an internal standard (I.S). The method was applied to a bio-equivalence study of two oral formulations of methyldopa (500 mg tablet, legrand metildopa from Ems industrial pharmaceutical, Brazil, as test formulation and Aldomet from prodome Quimica e faemaceutica, Brazil as reference formulation). Methyldopa (MD) is an antihypertensive that controls the sympathetic nervous system via a central action (Oparil, 1982). This medication is typically administered to patients with heart failures, renal failures, and diabetes (Universal Pharmaceutical Co. Aldomet Tablets, 2008). Furthermore, it is one of the few antihypertensives indicated in pregnancy-induced hypertension (Universal Pharmaceutical Co. Aldomet Tablets, 2008; Ellenbogen et al., 1986). A structural feature of the drug is an amino acid skeleton with a catechol group as found in DOPA, an anti-Parkinsonism medication. In fact MD possesses a structure in which an α-hydrogen found in DOPA is replaced by a methyl group (Fig. 1). It was reported by Garfinkel in 1972 that DOPA is degraded by mixing it with banana pulp (Garfinkel, 1972). He performed an investigation whereby the powdered DOPA was mixed with banana at room temperature, and changes in the coloration of the mixture resulted – from a faint pink, followed by a bright brown, then a dark brown, then a gray, and, finally a liquorice-like black. Currently, there is substantial proof that indicates that the alteration of color is caused by polyphenoloxidase (catechol oxidase; EC 1.10.3.1), an enzyme related with melanin biosynthesis, and found in banana pulp (Yang et al., 2000; Sojo et al., 1999, 2000).
At first, we have modeled the structure of methyldopa with Chem. office package and then optimized at the DFT level of theory with 3–21G∗,6–31G and 6–31G∗ basis set. After full optimization of those structures, we have calculated NMR parameters at the levels of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G,6–31G,6–31G∗) theory and theoretically explored the solvent effects (water, methanol, ethanol) on the structure of methyldopa. All relative energy values and NMR shielding parameters were calculated supposing gauge-included atomic orbital (GIAO) method.
This process involves sequential transformation of non-orthogonal atomic orbital’s (AOs) to those of natural atomic orbital’s (NAOs), natural hybrid orbital’s (NHOs), and NBOs. Each of these localized basis sets is complete and describes the wave functions in the most economic method since electron density and other properties are described by the minimal amount of .Filled orbital sin the most rapidly convergent way. Filled NBOs describe the hypothetical, strictly localized Lewis structure. The interactions between filled and anti bonding (or Rydberg) orbital’s represent the deviation of the molecule from the Lewis structure and can be used as the measure of delocalization. This non covalent bonding-anti bonding interaction can be quantitatively described in terms of NBO approach that is expressed by means of the second-order perturbation interaction energy (E(2)) Reed and Weinhold, 1983, 1985; Reed et al., 1985; Foster and Weinhold, 1980. This energy represents the estimate of the off diagonal NBO Fock matrix elements. It can be deduced from the second-order perturbation approach (Chocholousova et al., 2004).
(1)
where qi is the donor orbital occupancy, εi, εj are diagonal elements (orbital energies) and F(i, j) is the off-diagonal NBO Fock matrix element.
3
3 Result and discussion
In this paper DFT and MP2 method with 3–21G∗,6–31G and 6–31G∗ basis set were employed for investigating the structure’s optimization and energy minimization of methyldopa, (Fig. 1) which have been summarized in Tables 3-1–3-4. The MP2 and DFT energies are of particular interest because they provide results for interactions appearing in solvent medium considered in this letter, which are in accord with the biological behavior of methyldopa. Furthermore, recent papers often tend to ask about the role of water solvent effect on the stability of methyldopa structure. The detailed results of relative energy values for methyldopa structure in gas, water, CH3OH and CH3CH2OH solvents optimized at B3LYP, BLYP and MP2 levels of theory with 3–21G∗,6–31G and 6–31G∗ basis set are summarized in Tables 3-1–3-4.
Table 3-1 Relative energy (kcal/mol) of the methyldopa structures in gas phase.
Methyldopa/B3LYP/3–21G∗(gas)
000.0000
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G(gas)
−2384.0299
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G∗(gas)
−2581.3749
Methyldopa/BLYP/3–21G∗(gas)
−2604.7405
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G(gas)
−2765.666
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G∗(gas)
−5052.5005
Methyldopa/MP2/3–21G∗(gas)
−5175.2312
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G(gas)
−5199.7764
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G∗(gas)
−5335.2635
Table 3-2 Relative energy (kcal/mol) of the methyldopa structures in H2O phase.
Methyldopa/B3LYP/3–21G∗(water)
000.0000
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G(water)
−2385.6486
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G∗(water)
−2579.5178
Methyldopa/BLYP/3–21G∗(water)
−2591.3477
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G(water)
−2757.9845
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G∗(water)
−5041.0206
Methyldopa/MP2/3–21G∗(water)
−5168.3198
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G(water)
−5193.4468
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G∗(water)
−5332.1585
Table 3-3 Relative energy (kcal/mol) of the methyldopa structures in methanol phase.
Methyldopa/ B3LYP/3–21G∗(methanol)
000.0000
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G(methanol)
−2385.6421
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G∗(methanol)
−2579.5192
Methyldopa/BLYP/3–21G∗(methanol)
−2591.3526
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G(methanol)
−2757.9867
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G∗(methanol)
−5041.0048
Methyldopa/MP2/3–21G∗(methanol)
−5168.3208
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G(methanol)
−5193.4325
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G∗(methanol)
−5332.1428
Table 3-4 Relative energy (kcal/mol) of the methyldopa structures in ethanol phase.
Methyldopa/ B3LYP/3–21G∗(ethanol)
000.0000
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G(ethanol)
−2385.6385
Methyldopa/B3LYP/6–31G∗(ethanol)
−2579.5201
Methyldopa/BLYP/3–21G∗(ethanol)
−2591.3549
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G(ethanol)
−2757.9881
Methyldopa/BLYP/6–31G∗(ethanol)
−5040.9963
Methyldopa/MP2/3–21G∗(ethanol)
−5168.3214
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G(ethanol)
−5193.4261
Methyldopa/MP2/6–31G∗(ethanol)
−5332.1343
Regarding most of the systems studied experimentally are in solution, the formulation of satisfactory theoretical models for solvated systems has been the object of continuously increasing interest, therefore, abinitio calculation of nuclear magnetic shielding has become an indispensable aid in the investigation of solvent effects on the structural stability and accurate theoretical NMR data of compounds (Witanowski et al., 1990, 1990).
As we know the effect of solvent molecules on methyldopa plays an important role in the chemical behavior of methyldopa we have already presented the results of our extensive studies of solvent induced effects on the NMR shielding of methyldopa. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is based on the quantum mechanical property of nuclei (Benas et al., 2000). The chemical shielding refers to the phenomenon which is associated with the secondary magnetic field created by the induced motions of the electrons that surround the nuclei when in the presence of an applied magnetic moment μ in a magnetic field, B, is as follows:
(2)
where the shielding σiso the differential resonance shift due to the induced motion of the electrons (Magdalena and Sadlej Joanna, 1998). In general, the electron distribution around a nucleus in a molecule is more spherically symmetric. Therefore, the size of electron current around the field, and hence the size of the shielding, will depend on the orientation of the molecule within the applied field B (Melinda, 2003). For chemical shielding (CS) tensor which describes how the size of shielding varies with molecular orientation, we often use the following convention for the three principal components:
(3)
The three values of the shielding tensor are frequently expressed as the isotropic value σiso and their quantities are defined as follows Sojo et al., 2000. The anisotropy (Δσ)
The isotropic value σiso
(4)
The anisotropy shielding Δσ
(5)
Instead of deriving (σΔind) from the difference of the PCM-optimized in vacuum, it can be obtained from the shielding calculated in vacuum for a molecule that is geometry –optimized in solution (Monajjemi et al., 2007), thus:
(6)
where σvac (Rsol) is the value of nuclear shielding in vacuum but with the solute geometry optimized in solution σvac(Rref) is the corresponding parameter for calculation with reference solvent. in this case, we may suppose that optimization of solute molecule in solvent and then performing shielding calculation is similar to shielding calculations in the isolated system (Lynden, 1997).
Self –consistent reaction field (SCRF) method is based on a continuum model with uniform dielectric constant (ε). The simplest SCRF model is the Onsager reaction field model. In this method, the solute occupies a fixed spherical cavity of radius a within the solvent field. A dipole in the molecule will induce a dipole in the medium, and the electric field applied by the solvent dipole will in turn interact with the molecular dipole leading to net stabilization. The Gauge Including Atomic Orbital (GIAO) approach was used. The abinitio GIAO calculations of NMR chemical shielding tensors were calculated with the GAUSSIAN 98 W program.
The isotropic chemical shielding (σiso) and anisotropy shielding (Δσ) for C8-N15,C9⚌O14 and C2–O11 atoms have been summarized in Tables 3-5–3-16. C8-N15, C9⚌O14 and C2–O11 atoms are very important in this structure, because these atoms are agent bonding methyldopa.
Table 3-5 NMR parameters’ value (ppm) of C8-N15 bond, methyldopa in gas phase at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C8(gas)]
160.481
−794.908
B3LYP/3–21G∗[N15(gas)]
223.570
−62.524
B3LYP/6–31G[C8(gas)]
133.763
−3.0703
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(gas)]
−220.953
349.166
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C8(gas)]
131.753
−219.902
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(gas)]
211.580
−736.911
BLYP/3–21G∗[C8(gas)]
137.178
−469.221
BLYP/3–21G∗[N15(gas)]
210.250
−940.278
BLYP/6–31G[C8(gas)]
123.511
−304.009
BLYP/6–31G[N15(gas)]
208.907
−180.371
BLYP/6–31G∗[C8(gas)]
122.226
−411.053
BLYP/6–31G∗[N15(gas)]
200.729
−1494.614
Table 3-6 NMR parameters value (ppm) of C8-N15 bond, methyldopa in H2O phase at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C8(water)]
145.476
−3.275
B3LYP/3–21G∗[N15(water)]
221.195
−2484.84
B3LYP/6–31G[C8(water)]
132.916
158.158
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(water)]
219.408
−2149.067
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C8(water)]
130.916
−70.712
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(water)]
210.910
−3031.373
BLYP/3–21G∗[C8(water)]
136.171
−277.668
BLYP/3–21G∗[N15(water)]
208.432
−3489.696
BLYP/6–31G[C8(water)]
122.690
−118.858
BLYP/6–31G[N15(water)]
207.526
−2764.233
BLYP/6–31G∗[C8(water)]
121.371
−245.113
BLYP/6–31G∗[N15(water)]
200.486
−3808.631
Table 3-7 NMR parameters value (ppm) of C8–N15 bond, methyldopa in methanol phase and different solvent at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗)basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C8(methanol)]
145.492
−8.667
B3LYP/3–21G∗[N15(methane)]
221.299
−2416.574
B3LYP/6–31G[C8(methanol)]
132.923
156.816
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
219.398
−2096.631
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C8(methanol)]
130.941
−76.9543
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
211.158
−2989.215
BLYP/3–21G∗[C8(methanol)]
136.205
−282.386
BLYP/3–21G∗[N15(methanol)]
208.490
−3413.925
BLYP/6–31G[C8(methanol)]
122.706
−121.576
BLYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
207.675
−2724.406
BLYP/6–31G∗[C8(methanol)]
121.401
−248.215
BLYP/6–31G∗[N15(methanol)]
200.398
−3716.171
Table 3-8 NMR parameters value (ppm) of C8–N15 bond, methyldopa in phase ethanol at the level of B3LYP,BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C8(ethanol)]
145.492
−8.667
B3LYP/3–21G∗[N15(Ethan)]
221.299
−2416.574
B3LYP/6–31G[C8(ethanol)]
132.923
156.816
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
219.398
−2096.631
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C8(methanol)]
130.941
−76.9543
B3LYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
211.158
−2989.215
BLYP/3–21G∗[C8(methanol)]
136.205
−282.386
BLYP/3–21G∗[N15(methanol)]
208.490
−3413.925
BLYP/6–31G[C8(methanol)]
122.706
−121.576
BLYP/6–31G[N15(methanol)]
207.675
−2724.406
BLYP/6–31G∗[C8(methanol)]
121.401
−248.215
BLYP/6–31G∗[N15(methanol)]
200.398
−3716.171
Table 3-9 NMR parameters value (ppm) of C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase gas at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗)basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C9(gas)]
40.881
−5769.462
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O14(gas)]
−68.066
69696.67
B3LYP/6–31G[C9(gas)]
14.761
−3917.943
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(gas)]
−112.591
88895.334
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C9(gas)]
24.044
−4337.621
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(gas)]
−51.163
45375.438
BLYP/3–21G∗[C9(gas)]
38.582
−5472.298
BLYP/3–21G∗[O14(gas)]
−69.961
60826.177
BLYP/6–31G[C9(gas)]
12.644
−3694.721
BLYP/6–31G[O14(gas)]
−113.020
79022.324
BLYP/6–31G∗[C9(gas)]
20.636
−4088.411
BLYP/6–31G∗[O14(gas)]
−59.845
42303.250
Table 3-10 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase H2O at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗)basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C9(water)]
38.522
−5189.657
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O14(water)]
−51.306
63255.245
B3LYP/6–31G[C9(water)]
12.078
−3073.262
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(water)]
−91.174
56809.141
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C9(water)]
22.039
−3863.335
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(water)]
−33.357
37473.70
BLYP/3–21G∗[C9(water)]
36.282
−4961.34
BLYP/3–21G∗[O14(water)]
−54.757
56603.273
BLYP/6–31G[C9(water)]
9.944
−2887.423
BLYP/6–31G[O14(water)]
−94.087
70399.614
BLYP/6–31G∗[C9(water)]
18.468
−3635.592
BLYP/6–31G∗[O14(water)]
−43.303
35822.562
Table 3-11 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase methanol at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C9(methanol)]
38.580
−5203.947
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O14(methane)]
−51.718
63373.81
B3LYP/6–31G[C9(methanol)]
12.137
−3039.50
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(methanol
−91.725
−77567.84
B3LYP/6–31G ∗∗[C9(methanol)]
22.030
−3862.451
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(methanol
−33.776
37620.591
BLYP/3–21G∗[C9(methanol)]
36.346
−4971.069
BLYP/3–21G∗[O14(methanol)
−55.237
56658.707
BLYP/6–31G[C9(methanol)]
10.009
−2911.753
BLYP/6–31G[O14(methanol)]
−94.540
70609.686
BLYP/6–31G∗[C9(methanol)]
20.394
−3655.533
BLYP/6–31G∗[O14(methanol)]
−43.732
35994.25
Table 3-12 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase ethanol at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C9(ethanol)]
38.622
−5212.470
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O14(ethanol)]
−51.990
63434.814
B3LYP/6–31G[C9(ethanol)]
12.177
−3052.207
B3LYP/6–31G[O14(ethanol)]
−92.090
77715.956
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C9(ethano)]
22.055
−3868.328
B3LYP/6–31G∗[O14(ethanol)]
−34.068
37734.66
BLYP/3–21G∗[C9(ethanol)]
36.388
−4979.687
BLYP/3–21G∗[O14(ethanol)]
−55.508
56709.391
BLYP/6–31G[C9(ethanol)]
10.041
−2919.044
BLYP/6–31G[O14(ethanol)]
−94.862
70674.011
BLYP/6–31G∗[C9(ethanol)]
18.554
−2887.433
BLYP/6–31G∗[O14(ethanol)]
−44.025
36079.124
Table 3-13 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase gas at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C2(gas)]
70.145
3589.259
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O11(gas)]
236.582
−7984.781
B3LYP/6–31G[C2(gas)]
52.370
3583.371
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(gas)]
225.693
−7875.795
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C2(gas)]
51.813
3736.603
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(gas)]
238.367
−3478.717
BLYP/3–21G∗[C2(gas)]
66.611
2697.573
BLYP/3–21G∗[O11(gas)]
214.758
−9016.010
BLYP/6–31G[C2(gas)]
48.202
2725.496
BLYP/6–31G[O11(gas)]
205.201
−8730.879
BLYP/6–31G∗[C2(gas)]
48.021
2959.810
BLYP/6–31G∗[O11(gas)]
220.133
−4636.024
Table 3-14 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase H2O at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C2(water)]
70.349
3301.251
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O11(water)]
236.119
−6374.46
B3LYP/6–31G[C2(water)]
54.503
2846.083
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(water)]
227.411
−4451.23
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C2(water)]
52.944
3106.150
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(water)]
240.860
−1239.169
BLYP/3–21G∗[C2(water)]
67.085
2234.05
BLYP/3–21G∗[O11(water)]
214.937
−7786.13
BLYP/6–31G[C2water)]
50.628
804.472
BLYP/6–31G[O11(water)]
208.358
−5371.73
BLYP/6–31G∗[C2(water)]
49.504
2296.166
BLYP/6–31G∗[O11(water)]
223.778
2233.298
Table 3-15 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase methanol at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C2(methanol)]
70.310
3240.964
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O11(methane)]
236.200
−6474.698
B3LYP/6–31G[C2(methanol)]
54.422
2867.284
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(methanol)]
227.374
−4593.612
B3LYP/6–31G ∗[C2(methanol)]
52.899
3140.964
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(methanol)]
240.803
−1302.27
BLYP/3–21G∗[C2(methanol)]
67.044
2259.005
BLYP/3–21G∗[O11(methanol)]
215.079
−7794.946
BLYP/6–31G[C2(methanol)]
50.534
1951.573
BLYP/6–31G[O11(methanol)]
208.231
−5575.375
BLYP/6–31G∗[C2(methanol)]
49.431
2308.995
B3LYP/3–21G∗O11 methanol)]
223.637
−2413.872
Table 3-16 NMR parameters value (ppm) of (C9⚌O14 bond, methyldopa in phase ethanol at the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory.
Method B3LYP/6–31G∗
Isotropic(σiso)
Anisotropy(Δσ)
B3LYP/3–21G∗[C2(ethanol)]
70.303
3256.578
B3LYP/3–21G∗[O11(ethanol)]
236.244
−6250.898
B3LYP/6–31G[C2(ethanol)]
54.381
2892.082
B3LYP/6–31G[O11(ethanol)]
227.373
−4637.340
B3LYP/6–31G v[C2(ethanol)]
52.877
340.931
B3LYP/6–31G∗[O11(ethanol)]
240.763
−1345.40
BLYP/3–21G∗[C2(ethanol)]
67.038
2268.684
BLYP/3–21G∗[O11(ethanol)]
215.110
−7811.743
BLYP/6–31G[C2(ethanol)]
50.447
1992.851
BLYP/6–31G[O11(ethanol)]
208.268
−5603.258
BLYP/6–31G∗[C2(ethanol)]
49.380
52.389
BLYP/6–31G∗[O11(ethanol)]
223.595
−2439.01
In the NBO analysis, in order to compute the span of the valence space, each valence bonding NBO (σAB), must in turn, be paired with a corresponding valence anti bonding NBO (σ∗AB): Namely, the Lewis σ-type (donor) NBO are complemented by the non-Lewis σ∗-type (acceptor) NBO that are formally empty in an idealized Lewis structure picture. Readily, the general transformation to NBO leads to orbital’s that are unoccupied in the formal Lewis structure. As a result, the filled NBO of the natural Lewis structure is well adapted to describe covalency effects in molecules. Since the non-covalent delocalization effects are associated with σ → σ∗ interactions between filled (donor) and unfilled (acceptor) orbital’s, it is natural to describe them as being of donor–acceptor, charge transfer, or generalized “Lewis base-Lewis acid” type. The anti bonds represent unused valence-shell capacity and spanning portions of the atomic valence space that are formally unsaturated by covalent bond formation. Weak occupancies of the valence anti bonds signal irreducible departures from an idealized localized Lewis picture, i.e. true “delocalization effects”. As a result, in the NBO analysis, the donor–acceptor (bond–anti bond) interactions are taken into consideration by examining all possible interactions between ‘filled’ (donor) Lewis-type NBO and ‘empty’ (acceptor) non-Lewis NBO and then estimating their energies by second-order perturbation theory. These interactions (or energetic stabilizations) are referred to as ‘delocalization’ corrections to the zeroth-order natural Lewis structure. The most important interaction between “filled” (donor) Lewis-type NBO and “empty” (acceptor) non-Lewis is reported in Tables 3-17–3-23 the level of B3LYP, BLYP and MP2(3–21G,6–31G,6–31G∗) basis set at the DFT theory, we observed between the LP(1) N15 and σ∗(1) of C7–C8 of methyldopa LP(1) O11 and σ∗(1) of C2–C3 methyldopa and finally we reported the energy of methyldopa in Tables 3-17–3-23 by same level.
Table 3-17 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: B3LYP/3–21G∗ method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BDv(1)C2–C3
4.60
LP(2)O11
BDv(2)C1–C2
33.11
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.79
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.76
LP(1)N15
BDv(1)C7–C8
1.99
LP(1)N15
BDv(1)C8–C9
0.61
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.19
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.02
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.38
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
41.99
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
4.59
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
33.11
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.76
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.76
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.16
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
42.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.98
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.61
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.08
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.00
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
4.59
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
33.11
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.77
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.76
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.17
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
42.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.98
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.61
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.08
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.00
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
4.59
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
33.11
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.77
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.76
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.17
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
42.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.98
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.61
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.08
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.00
Table 3-18 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: B3LYP/6–31G method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.94
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
27.64
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.05
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.97
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.62
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.54
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.69
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.15
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
9.8
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.99
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.92
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
27.61
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.73
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.33
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
17.01
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
35.17
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.68
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.16
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
9.67
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.97
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.92
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
27.61
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.73
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.33
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
17.01
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
35.17
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.68
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.16
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
9.67
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.97
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.92
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
27.61
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.73
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.33
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
17.02
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
35.16
LP(1)N15
BDv(1)C7–C8
1.68
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.16
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
9.67
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.97
Table 3-19 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: B3LYP/6–31G∗ method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
6.52
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
28.65
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.57
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.44
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.53
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
33.98
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.97
LP(1)N15
BDv(1)C8–C9
0.93
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
0.42
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.92
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
6.50
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
28.70
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.53
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.45
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.23
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
34.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.97
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.93
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.30
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.90
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
6.50
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
28.70
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.53
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.45
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.24
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
34.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.97
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.93
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.31
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.91
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
6.50
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
28.70
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.53
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.45
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
19.24
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
34.02
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.97
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.93
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.31
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.91
Table 3-20 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: BLYP/3–21G∗ method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
3.90
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
0.23
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.79
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.70
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
17.18
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
37.95
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.60
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
6.810
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.87
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
3.89
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
29.1
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.76
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.70
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.88
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
37.99
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.59
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
6.72
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.85
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
3.90
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
29.06
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.77
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.70
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.96
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
37.97
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.59
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
6.74
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.86
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
3.90
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
29.06
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.77
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.7
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.97
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
37.97
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.59
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
6.47
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.86
Table 3-21 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: BLYP/6–31G method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.10
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.10
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.64
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.21
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
15.22
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
31.61
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.36
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.88
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.44
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.86
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.08
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.16
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.60
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.20
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
14.99
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
31.65
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.35
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.89
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.32
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.84
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.08
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.16
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.60
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.20
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
150
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
31.65
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.35
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.89
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.33
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.84
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.08
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.15
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.60
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.20
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
15.00
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
31.64
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.35
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.89
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
8.33
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.84
Table 3-22 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: BLYP/6–31G∗ method.
Phase
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
Gas
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.65
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.81
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.46
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.35
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
17.17
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
30.01
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.76
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.71
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
7.16
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.79
H2O
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.64
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.91
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.43
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.35
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.92
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
30.04
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.76
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.72
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
7.10
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.78
CH3OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.64
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.90
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.43
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.35
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.93
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
30.04
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.76
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.72
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
7.10
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.78
CH3CH2OH
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
5.64
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
24.90
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.43
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.35
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
16.93
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
30.03
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
0.76
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.72
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
7.10
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
0.78
Table 3-23 Second order perturbation theory analysis of Fock matrix in NBO basis threshold for printing: for gas phase.
Method
Donor NBO (i)
Acceptor NBO (j)
E(2) (kcal/mol)
MP2/3–21G∗
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C1–C2
0.51
LP(1)O11
BDv(1)C2–C3
6.05
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C3–O12
0.52
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
35.91
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
2.31
LP(1)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
0.93
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
22.22
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
50.98
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
20.05
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
0.82
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
9.60
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.15
MP2/6–31G
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
7.52
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
29.56
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C8–C9
3.72
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.56
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
18.89
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
42.47
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.55
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.56
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
11.51
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.08
MP2–6-31G∗
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C2–C3
8.4
LP(2)O11
BD∗(2)C1–C2
33.74
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C8–C9
3.40
LP(1)O11
BD∗(1)C9–O13
1.76
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C8–C9
22.34
LP(2)O14
BD∗(1)C9–O13
44.66
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C7–C8
1.20
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C9
1.24
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C8–C10
10.80
LP(1)N15
BD∗(1)C10–H22
1.10
Tables 3-24–3-35 show calculated natural orbital occupancy (number of electron, or ‘‘natural population” of the orbital). It is noted that for σC8–N15 bond orbital, decreased or increased occupancy of the localized σC9⚌O15 bond orbital in the idealized Lewis structure, and their subsequent impact on molecular stability and geometry (bond lengths) are also related with the resulting p character of the corresponding O29 natural hybrid orbital (NHO) of σC2–O110 bond orbital.
Table 3-24 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C8–N15) atoms from methyldopa structure in gas phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C8-N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = Sp3.63
1.98257
−0.70021
N15 = sp2.24
B3LYP/6–31G C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98357
−0.71848
N15 = sp1.97
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98389
−0.70489
N15 = sp2.17
BLYP/3–21G∗ C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.65
1.98158
−0.61717
N15 = sp2.38
BLYP/6–31G C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.35
1.98331
−0.63765
N15 = sp2.03
BLYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.36
1.98339
−0.62278
N15 = sp2.26
MP2/3–21G∗ C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.70
1.98383
−0.90423
N15 = sp2.36
MP2/6–31G C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.42
1.98407
−0.92945
N15 = sp2.09
MP2/6–31G∗ C8–N15(gas)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.37
1.98532
-0.93258
N15 = sp2.17
Table 3-25 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C8–N15) atoms from methyldopa structure in H2O phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C8 = Sp3.64
1.98251
−0.70176
N15 = sp2.23
B3LYP/6–31G C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98351
−0.72048
N15 = sp1.96
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98382
−0.70787
N15 = sp2.17
BLYP/3–21G∗ C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.65
1.98143
−0.61935
N15 = sp2.37
BLYP/6–31G C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98323
−0.64037
O11 = sp2.02
BLYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98331
−0.62528
O11 = sp2.26
MP2/3–21G∗ C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.72
1.95510
–
O11 = sp2.36
MP2/6–31G C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.43
1.95489
–
O11 = sp2.07
MP2/6–31G∗ C8–N15(water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.38
1.94810
–
O11 = sp2.19
Table 3-26 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C8–N15) atoms from methyldopa structure in methanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C8-N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C8 = Sp3.64
1.98251
−0.70170
N15 = sp2.23
B3LYP/6–31G C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98351
−0.72041
N15 = sp1.96
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98382
−0.70775
N15 = sp2.17
BLYP/3–21G∗ C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.65
1.98147
−0.61866
N15 = sp2.38
BLYP/6–31G C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98323
−0.64028
O11 = sp2.02
BLYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98331
−0.62518
O11 = sp2.26
MP2/3–21G∗ C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.71
1.95510
–
O11 = sp2.37
MP2/6–31G C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.43
1.95489
–
O11 = sp2.07
MP2/6–31G∗ C8–N15(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.38
1.94810
–
O11 = sp2.19
Table 3-27 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C8–-N15) atoms from methyldopa structure in ethanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C8 = Sp3.64
1.98251
−0.70167
N15 = sp2.23
B3LYP/6–31G C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98351
−0.72037
N15 = sp1.96
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.34
1.98382
−0.70769
N15 = sp2.17
BLYP/3–21G∗ C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C8 = sp3.65
1.98147
−0.61863
N15 = sp2.38
BLYP/6–31G C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98323
−0.64023
O11 = sp2.02
BLYP/6–31G∗ C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.36
1.98331
−0.62513
O11 = sp2.26
MP2/3–21G∗ C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.72
1.95510
–
O11 = sp2.36
MP2/6–31G C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.44
1.95489
–
O11 = sp2.07
MP2/6–31G∗ C8–N15(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.38
1.94810
–
O11 = sp2.19
Table 3-28 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C9⚌O14) atoms from methyldopa structure in gas phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C9 = O14(gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99170
−0.38481
O14 = sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G C9⚌O14(gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99248
−0.39209
O14 = Sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14(gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99267
−0.38507
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99116
−0.32753
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99210
−0.33554
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99219
−0.32806
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99314
−0.52934
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/6–31G C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99348
−0.53287
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (gas)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99392
−0.53459
O14 = Sp99.99
Table 3-29 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C9⚌O14) atoms from methyldopa structure in H20 phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C9⚌O14(water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99188
−0.39004
O14 = sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G C9⚌O14(water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99268
−0.39844
O14 = Sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14(water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99292
−0.39357
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99145
−0.33508
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99236
−0.34312
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99244
−0.33550
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94394
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94101
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (water)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94059
–
O14 = SP1.00
Table 3-30 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C0⚌O14) atoms from methyldopa structure in methanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C9⚌O14(methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99268
−0.39822
O14 = sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G C9⚌O14(methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99039
−0.39556
O14 = Sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14(methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99291
−0.39325
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99137
−0.33295
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99235
−0.34284
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99423
−0.33524
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94391
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94100
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94057
–
O14 = SP1.00
Table 3-31 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C9⚌O14) atoms from methyldopa structure in ethanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C9⚌O14(ethanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99268
−0.39822
O14 = sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G C9⚌O14(ethanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99039
−0.39556
O14 = Sp99.99
B3LYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14(ethanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99291
−0.39325
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (ethanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99137
−0.33295
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G C9⚌O14 (ethanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99235
−0.34284
O14 = Sp99.99
BLYP/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = Sp99.99
1.99423
−0.33524
O14 = Sp99.99
MP2/3–21G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94391
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94100
–
O14 = SP1.00
MP2/6–31G∗ C9⚌O14 (methanol)
BD(2)
C9 = SP1.00
1.94057
–
O14 = SP1.00
Table 3-32 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C2–O11) atoms from methyldopa structure in gas phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C2–O11(gas)
BD(1)
C2 = Sp3.11
1.99299
−0.88826
O11 = sp2.22
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp13.06
1.99330
−0.88785
O11 = sp2.09
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.96
1.99401
−0.89468
O11 = sp1.96
BLYP/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.12
1.90250
−0.79071
O11 = sp2.42
BLYP/6–31G C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.10
1.99335
−0.79082
O11 = sp2.25
BLYP/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.99
1.99373
−0.79718
O11 = sp2.09
MP2/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.04
1.99402
−1.11491
O11 = sp2.25
MP2/6–31G C2–O11 (gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.01
1.99397
−1.11360
O11 = sp2.16
MP2/6–31G∗ C2–O11gas)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.92
1.99486
−1.15333
O11 = sp1.92
Table 3-33 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C2–O11) atoms from methyldopa structure in H2O phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C2–O11(water)
BD(1)
C2 = Sp3.11
1.99305
−0.88670
O11 = sp2.21
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.07
1.99337
−0.88614
O11 = sp2.08
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.97
1.99406
−0.89148
O11 = sp1.96
BLYP/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.13
1.99256
−0.78792
O11 = sp2.41
BLYP/6–31G C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.10
1.99312
−0.78818
O11 = sp2.24
BLYP/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.99
1.99377
−0.79407
O11 = sp2.08
MP2/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.07
1.96698
–
O11 = sp2.38
MP2/6–31G C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.03
1.96526
–
O11 = sp2.28
MP2/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (water)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.93
1.96210
–
O11 = sp2.06
Table 3-34 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C2–O11) atoms from methyldopa structure in methanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C2–O11(methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = Sp3.11
1.99305
−0.88676
O11 = sp2.21
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.07
1.99336
−0.88621
O11 = sp2.08
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.97
1.99406
−0.89161
O11 = sp1.96
BLYP/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.13
1.99255
−0.78880
O11 = sp2.41
BLYP/6–31G C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.10
1.99312
−0.78829
O11 = sp2.24
BLYP/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.99
1.99377
−0.79419
O11 = sp2.08
MP2/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.06
1.96697
–
O11 = sp2.39
MP2/6–31G C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.04
1.96526
–
O11 = sp2.26
MP2/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (methanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.92
1.96210
–
O11 = sp2.06
Table 3-35 Occupancy and energy (kcal/mol) and hybrid for σ (C2–O11) atoms from methyldopa structure in ethanol phase.
Method
Bond
Hybrid
Occupancy
Energy
B3LYP/3–21G∗C2-O11(ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = Sp3.11
1.99304
−0.88679
O11 = sp1.89
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.07
1.99336
−0.88625
O11 = sp2.08
B3LYP/6–31G C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.97
1.99406
−0.89169
O11 = sp1.96
BLYP/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.12
1.99255
−0.78884
O11 = sp2.41
BLYP/6–31G C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.10
1.99312
−0.78835
O11 = sp2.24
BLYP/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.99
1.99377
−0.79426
O11 = sp2.08
MP2/3–21G∗ C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.07
1.96697
–
O11 = sp2.38
MP2/6–31G C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp3.04
1.96526
–
O11 = sp2.26
MP2/6–31G∗ C2–O11 (ethanol)
BD(1)
C2 = sp2.92
1.96209
–
O11 = sp2.06
3.1
3.1 Frequency calculations
The vibrational frequencies of methyldopa were calculated at the, DFT (B3LYP, BLYP) and MP2 levels of theory using the 3–21G∗,6–31G,6–31G∗ basis set (Jensen James, 2005). The entropies and heat capacities were calculated using statistical mechanics based on the vibrational frequencies (Zheng et al., 2005). The nature of all stationary point structures was determined by analytical frequency analysis, which also provide zero–point vibrational energies (ZPEs) (Cherkaoui and Boutalib, 2006). Electronic energies, enthalpies, Gibbs free energies and zero point vibrational energies for both the compounds using frequency calculation at 298.15 K and 310.15 K temperatures are presented in Tables 3-36–3-39. Thermo chemistry analysis follows the frequency and normal mode data.
Table 3-36 Thermo chemistry values for methyldopa in gas phase.
Method
EZPE
Etot
Hcorr
Gcorr
CV(tot)
Stot
Qtot V = 0
B3LYP/3–21G∗
141.155
150.373
150.965
114.942
0.056
0.120
0.164D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G
141.734
151.002
151.594
115.336
0.057
0.121
0.225D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G∗
141.815
151.171
151.763
115.244
0.057
0.122
0.300D + 20
BLYP/3–21G∗
135.677
145.224
145.817
109.081
0.058
0.123
0.267D + 20
BLYP/6–31G
136.118
145.736
146.328
109.198
0.059
0.124
0.487D + 20
BLYP/6–31G∗
136.403
146.066
146.658
109.438
0.059
0.124
0.591D + 20
Table 3-37 Thermo chemistry values for methyldopa in H2O phase.
Method
EZPE
Etot
Hcorr
Gcorr
Cv(tot)
Stot
Qtot V = 0
B3LYP/3–21G∗
141.191
150.400
150.992
115.014
0.056
0.120
0.147D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G
141.769
151.031
151.623
115.439
0.057
0.121
0.192D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G∗
141.869
151.212
151.805
115.399
0.057
0.122
0.253D + 20
BLYP/3–21G∗
136.269
145.776
146.368
109.791
0.058
0.122
0.223D + 20
BLYP/6–31G
136.868
146.426
147.018
110.179
0.059
0.123
0.312D + 20
BLYP/6–31G∗
137.035
146.657
147.250
110.213
0.058
0.124
0.463D + 20
Table 3-38 Thermo chemistry values for methyldopa in ethanol phase.
Method
EZPE
Etot
Hcorr
Gcorr
CV(tot)
Stot
Qtot V = 0
B3LYP/3–21G∗
141.157
150.374
150.966
114.945
0.056
0.120
0.163D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G
141.736
151.003
151.595
115.341
0.057
0.121
0.224D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G∗
141.817
151.173
151.765
115.251
0.057
0.122
0.297D + 20
BLYP/3–21G∗
140.228
148.790
149.382
115.617
0.0552
0.113
0.264D + 20
BLYP/6–31G
136.156
145.768
140.085
109.253
0.059
0.124
0.469D + 20
BLYP/6–31G∗
136.433
146.092
146.684
109.475
0.059
0.124
0.583D + 20
Table 3-39 Thermo chemistry values for methyldopa in ethanol phase.
Method
EZPE
Etot
Hcorr
Gcorr
CV(tot)
Stot
Qtot V = 0
B3LYP/3–21G∗
141.158
150.374
150.966
114.947
0.056
0.120
0.163D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G
141.737
151.004
151.596
115.344
0.057
0.121
0.223D + 20
B3LYP/6–31G∗
141.819
151.174
151.767
115.221
0.057
0.122
0.296D + 20
BLYP/3–21G∗
135.716
145.260
145.852
109.132
0.058
0.123
0.262D + 20
BLYP/6–31G
136.176
145.786
146.378
109.282
0.059
0.124
0.461D + 20
BLYP/6–31G∗
136.448
146.106
146.698
109.495
0.059
0.124
0.579D + 20
Sum of electronic and zero-point energies = ΔE° + EZPE
Sum of electronic and thermal energies = ΔE° + Etot
Sum of electronic and thermal enthalpies = ΔE°
Sum of electronic and thermal free energies = ΔE°Ω ± Gcorr
where ΔE° is the total electronic energy at T = 0 K, Gcorr and Hcorr which represents the thermal correction to Gibbs free energy and enthalpy, respectively. The internal thermal energy Etot is contributed from translational (Et), rotational (Er), vibrational (Ev), and electronic (Ee) energies, and Stot, St, Sr, Sv, Se are their corresponding entropies (An et al., 2005). The next sections about the individual contribution to the internal thermal energy (Etot), constant volume molar heat capacity (Cv)tot, entropy (Stot) and Partition function (Q) Ochterski, 2000. The partition functions are also computed, with both bottom of the vibrational well and lowest (zero-point) vibrational state as reference. The comparison of thermo chemistry values was calculated for two structures, which shows that with increasing temperature, these values increase in both structures and also these values for methyldopa at two temperatures are more than methyldopa which shows the greater stability of methyldopa.
4
4 Conclusion
In this research we have calculated quantum calculations on antihypertensive drugs such as Opt, NMR, NBO and IR and the results of these calculations have been summarized in Tables 3-1–3-4. The main difference of methyldopa is in C8–N15, C9⚌O14 and C2–O11 bonds (Fig. 1) and the structural details of these bonds have been reported in tables which are based on our calculations. In fact these calculations are considered as a model and if a molecule has these properties which have been mentioned in this paper and their data calculations are similar to data calculations of this paper we can call it as a new antihypertensive drug and in the next stage for more surety it is possible to test and synthesize it in the laboratory.
we conclude from the calculations opt stable state with the solvent ethanol is BLYP/3–21G∗ basis set.
we conclude by the calculations that NMR σiso for atoms: C8–N15, C2–O11, C9⚌O14 and Δσ for atoms: C2–O11, C9⚌O14, and C8–N15 are related to the solvent ethanol. (σiso) for C8 = 136.2307, N15 = 208.4537, C9 = 36.3880, O14 = −55.5087, C2 = 67.0383, O11 = 215.1109 and Δσ for C8 = −282.386, N15 = −3413.925, C9 = −4971.069, O14 = 56658.707, C2 = 2259.005, O11 = −7794.946).
From the hybridation calculations of NBO, we conclude the links to the following atoms C8–N15, C9 = O14, and C2–O11 are related to the solvent ethanol. (C8 = sp3.65,N15 = sp2.38, C9 = sp99.99,O14 = sp99.99, C2 = sp3.12, O11 = sp2.41).
The comparison of thermo chemistry parameters of structures that are expressed in Tables 3-36–3-39 show that with increasing temperature, the thermal correction to Gibbs free energy and enthalpy (Gcorr, Hcorr), the internal thermal energy (Etot), constant volume molar heat capacity (Cv) tot, entropy (Stot) and the individual contributions to the internal thermal energy (Etot) increase in structure and from these parameter values for methyldopa we conclude that most frequencies of IR calculations for atoms C9 = O14 = C8–N15 = C2–O11 are related to the solvent ethanol frequency calculations and we conclude that the links are as follows: C8–N15:783.6411, C9⚌O14:783.6411, C2–O11:783.6411.
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the Research Council of Islamic Azad University, Mahshahr Branch.
References
AlexanderN.,
McClaskeyJ.,
MarondeR.F.,
.Elevated plasma dopaminebeta-hydroxylase activity in rats with neurogenic hypertension.Life Sci.. 1976;18:655-662.
AlexanderN.,
VelasquezM.,
DeCuirM.,
MarondeP.F.,
.Indices ofsympathetic activity in the sinoaortic-denervated hypertensive rat.Am. J. Physiol.. 1980;238:H521-H526.
AlexanderN.,
NakaharaD.,
OzakiN.,
KanedaN.,
SasaokaT.,
IwataN,
.Striatal dopamine release and metabolism in sinoaorticdenervatedrats by in vivo microdialysis.Am. J. Physiol. 1988:254.
DuncanG.E.,
PaulI.A.,
FassbergJ.B.,
PowellK.R.,
StumpfW.E.,
BreeseG.R.,
.Autoradiographic analysis of the in vivo distribution of3H-imipramine and 3H-desipramine in brain: comparison to in vitrobinding patterns.Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav.. 1991;38:621-631.
EllenbogenA.,
JaschevatzkyO.,
DavidsonA.,
AndermanS.,
GrunsteinS.,
.Management ofpregnancy-induced hypertension with pindolol—Comparative study with methyldopa.Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet.. 1986;24:3-7.
Jensen JamesO.,
.Quantum chemical analysis of the vibrationalfrequencies and structure of tetrachlorodiborane.J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem). 2005;635:211-219.
Lynden BellR.M.,
RasaiahJ.C.,
.From hydrophobic to hydrophilic behavior: simulation study of salvation entropy and free energy of simple solutes.J. Chem. Phys.. 1997;107:1981-1991.
MelindaA.J.D.,
.Solid State NMR Spectroscopy. Principles and Applications.Cambridge press; 2003. (321,112–118)
MizuchiA.,
KitagawaN.,
MiyachiY.,
.Regional distribution of sultoprideand sulpiride in rat brain measured by radioimmunoassay.Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1983;81:195-198.
MollaaminF.,
NoeiM.,
MonajjemiM.,
RasoolzadehR.,
.Nano theoretical studies of fMet-tRNA structure in protein synthesis of prokaryotes and its comparison with the structure of fAla-tRNA.Afr. J. Microbiol. Res.. 2011;5:2667-2674.
MonajjemiM.,
NoeiM.,
MollaaminF.,
.Design of fMet-tRNA and calculation of its bonding properties by quantum mechanics.Nucleosides, Nucleotides and Nucleic Acids. 2010;299:676-683.
MonajjemiM.,
HeshmatM.,
AghaeiH.,
AhmadiR.,
ZareK.,
.Solvent effects on 14N NMR shielding of glycine, serine, leucineg and threonine: comparison between chemical shift and energy versus dielectric constant.Bull. Chem. Soc. Ethiop.. 2007;21:111-116.
NakamuraK.,
NakamuraK.,
.Influence of sino-aortic baroreceptordenervation on catecholamines, catecholamine-synthesizing enzymesand choline acetyltransferase activity in the brainstem nuclei of therat.Jpn. J. Pharmacol.. 1981;31:95-105.
NoeiM.,
SuzangarzadehS.,
GolshaniS.,
TahanA.,
.The Ab initio study and nbo analysis of the solvent dielectric constant effects and the implicit water moleculesb on the structural stability of the 1_(6_chloroquinoxalin_2_yl)_2_(4_(trifluoromethyl)_2,6_dinitrophenyl) hydrazine1.Russ. J. Phys. Chem. A. 2011;85(6):993-1000.
NoeiM.,
SalariA.A.,
BaeiMohammad T.,
HajizadehF.,
Jamal Kazemi Asl,
Mohammad Ramezani Taghartapeh,
.Theoretical study of fMet-tRNA and fAla-tRNA structures by using quantum calculation.Arab. J. Chem.. 2011;20:23-35.
Ochterski, J.W., 2000. Ph.D., Thermochemistry in Gaussian; June 2. Pavlov, M.Y., Antoun, A., Lovmar, M., Ehrenberg, M., 2008. Complementary roles of initiation factor 1and ribosome recyclingfactor in 70S ribosome splitting. EMBO J. 27, 1706–1717.
OparilS.,
.Review of therapeutic modalities acting directly via central pathways.Clin. Exp. Hypertens. A Theory Pract.. 1982;4:579-593.
OpezzoJ.A.W.,
HöchtC.,
BramugliaG.F.,
TairaC.A.,
.Study of theevolution of blood and striatal levels of methyldopa: a microdialysisstudy in sinoaortic-denervated rats.Pharmacol. Res.. 2000;41:455-459.
TairaC.A.,
EneroM.A.,
.Interaction between clonidine and physostigminein normal rats and in rats after sinoaortic denervation.Naunyn. Schmiedebergs Arch. Pharmacol.. 1989;339:522-527.
TairaC.A.,
CeluchS.M.,
EneroM.A.,
.Effects of acute and short-termtreatment with antihypertensive drugs in sinoaortic-denervated rats.Gen. Pharmacol.. 1983;14:657-661.
ZhengX.L.,
SunH.Y.,
LawC.K.,
.Thermochemical and kineticanalysis on oxidation of isobutenyl radical and 2-hydroperoxymethyl-2-propenyl radical.J. Phys. Chem. A. 2005;109:9044-9053.