Theoretical Study of the Oxidation Reaction and Electron Spin Resonance Parameters Involving Sulfite Oxidase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a density functional theory (DFT) study on the conversion of sulfite to sulfate with a model complex representing the active site of the molybdenum-containing enzyme sulfite oxidase (SO). This study considers the attack of the sulfur lone pair from SO(3)(2-) on the equatorial oxo ligand of the model complex as the initial step in the oxidation process. The good agreement between our energy profile and data derived from experimental kinetic parameters provides some support for the reaction mechanism of the oxidative half-reaction of SO proposed in this study. The enzymatic reductive half-reaction involves the formation of an Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) active Mo(V) species. Experimentally, differences in ESR parameters (g-values and (1)H hyperfine coupling constant) of the low- and high-pH forms of the enzyme have been found. The current study also presents DFT-based calculations on ESR parameters for three model complexes representing the paramagnetic center Mo(V) of SO in its possible low- and high-pH forms. We provide an analysis of the magnetic orbital coupling responsible for the calculated g-values. Finally, we suggest how the conformation and hydrogen bonding interactions of the hydroxyl ligand can explain the different ESR parameters at low- and high-pH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".