Dielectric Theory and Solvation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 61
About This Presentation
Title:

Dielectric Theory and Solvation

Description:

Why do better' charges give worse results? Hydrophobicity ... R. L. Mancera, A. D. Buckingham and N. T. Skipper. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday T rans., 1997, V ol. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:44
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 62
Provided by: anthonyn2
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Dielectric Theory and Solvation


1
Dielectric Theory and Solvation
  • What happens if we choose to believe?

2
Puzzles
  • Why do better charges give worse results?
  • Hydrophobicity strength (air-water, water-hexane)
  • Why is Surface Tension gtgt Hydrophobicity
  • Macroscopic surface tensions (vac-water,
    water-oil)
  • Cyclic alkanes why so soluble
  • Why do fluorocarbons repel water so?
  • Slopes from MD simulations
  • Super-hydrophobic surfaces/ hydrophobic gaps

3
What are little charges made of ?
Quantum Calculation
ElectroStatic Potential (ESP) Fitting
-0.011
0.033
-0.010
-0.012
4
One Small Problem
5
What is a Dielectric?
6
Does the internal dielectric really matter for
neutral molecules?
7
Was does an interior dielectric mean?
8
The heart of the matter spheres and ions
  • exterior_potentialF(?out)
  • solvationG(?out,r)
  • FG with respect to ?in

9
The heart of the matter spheres and dipoles
  • Exterior_potentialF(?in,?out)
  • SolvationG(?in,?out,r)
  • F?G with respect to ?in
  • F(r?) G, ???in)
  • ?????)1.15

10
Small molecules really are like dipoles in a
sphere!
11
(No Transcript)
12
Huh?
Potentials (q) Solvation (q2)
13
Meet The Halides
14
(No Transcript)
15
Bad molecules with no hope of solvation
Carbon Tetrafluoride Solvation 3.1 kcals Area
180 Å2 1.4 kcals Electrostatics -1.5 kcals
16
A Dielectric Theory of Hydrophobicity
e80
Water
H
e1.76 d2.26 Debye
O
R
e1.76
H
Molecule
R1.52
  • Sample all orientations of water
  • Sample all contact positions around molecule
  • 50,000 ZAP calculations

17
(No Transcript)
18
From ZAP to Hydrophobicity
  • Local DG at each (accessible) surface point
  • Multiply by lt of superficial watersgt (1 per
    11Å2)
  • Adjust for the internal dielectric of the molecule

19
What are we trying to predict?
  • From Ethane to Decane 880 cals/CH2
  • Accessible area increase 27Å2
  • Hydrophobicity880/2732.6 cals/ Å2

20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
Expt. Alkane Hydrophobicity
24
DGnp Converged MD vs SA
Mobley et al. JCP B, asap 2007
DGnp
Bondi SA (Zap)
  • No correlation with Surface Area
  • With N and O functionality, Converged MD DGnp
    decreases by 0.7 kcal/mol (N, O vdW parameters?)

25
Why Chris is an awkward bastard
2,2-dichlorobiphenyl -2.76 kcals AM1BCC10
cals/ Å2 -3.81 kcals QM Dielectric
Theory -2.56 kcals
26
Happy now, Chris?
  • Molecule SA cals/ Å2 Me (kcal) Dave
  • Toluene 9.0 2.2 2.2
  • Phenol 8.1 1.9 1.5
  • Aniline 6.8 1.6 1.3
  • Benzene 8.4 1.7 1.9
  • Naph. 8.3 2.5 2.4
  • Biphen. 10.2 3.3 1.6

27
Curvature
Nicholls, Sharp Honig, Proteins, Vol.11281-296
(1991)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
Prediction of Alkane/Water Surface Tension
  • Flat part of Array 63 cals/A2
  • N-S-H fudge factor of 10 roughness
  • Final value 69 cals/A2
  • Experimental Oil-Water 72 cals/A2

32
Prediction of Air-Water Surface Tension/ Or
Air-Water Hydrophobicity
  • Water-Vacuum Cavity
  • 1.31Water-Hexane 82 cals/ A2
  • Water-Vacuum Surface Tension
  • 104 cals/A2
  • Difference water-oil vdw 22 cals/A2
  • Therefore water-vacuum hydrophobic
  • 32-22 10 cals/A2

33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
RMS Error0.88
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
Summary
52
(No Transcript)
53
Prospective Predictions?
  • Salt effects on hydrophobicity
  • Entropy/ Enthalpy prediction
  • Temperature dependence
  • Super-hydrophobicity

54
Conclusions Do I really believe?(The first
principle is that you must not fool yourself and
you are the easiest person to fool Feynman)
  • Its awfully sweet (NH3, SH2, Hydrazine,
    Pyridine, Biphenyl)
  • Errors, e.g. benzene derivatives, make sense
  • But
  • No VdW
  • Density corrections
  • Different dielectric models
  • Integrating over a volume
  • Local dielectrics much, much work to do
  • Secondary, tertiary amines, ethers by HQ-Quantum

55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
(No Transcript)
58
(No Transcript)
59
(No Transcript)
60
Radial distribution function of water around
methane
The aggregation of methane in aqueous
solution R. L. Mancera, A. D. Buckingham and N.
T. Skipper J. Chem. Soc., Faraday T rans., 1997,
V ol. 93
61
Methane cavity
Cavity Area 185A Cavity Dispersion 10
cal/A Predicted Solvation 1.85 kCal, Expt2.0
kCals
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com