Oxidation state and chiral configurations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating oxidation states and determining chiral configurations in a biochemistry problem. The oxidation state of phosphorus is debated, with one participant asserting it should be +5 based on its bonds with more electronegative atoms, while another suggests it is +3 due to the number of carbon bonds. For nitrogen, the oxidation state is contested as well, with calculations leading to confusion over whether it is -3 or -2. The participants also discuss the priorities for determining chiral configurations, agreeing that the correct configuration for a specific carbon should be R based on the attached groups. Overall, there is a focus on clarifying oxidation state calculations and the correct application of priority rules in stereochemistry.
Puchinita5
Messages
178
Reaction score
0
I'm doing this same problem found on the following link for a biochemistry homework.

http://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/nucleoside-phosphorothioates-synthetic-nucleotide-analogs-used-enzymology-molecular-biolog-q1481931



My question is regarding both finding the oxidation states as well as finding the absolute configurations.

I am told in my lecture notes that to find the oxidation state you take "the number of bonds the atom forms with more electronegative atoms less the number of the bonds that it forms with less electronegative atoms. The charge should be added to this sum."

However, I am not getting the same answers as given here and so I'm not sure if the person who answered this is wrong or if I'm wrong. But, for example, the first Phosphorous I would have calculated the oxidation state to be +5 since it makes two bonds with Sulfur (which is more electronegative) and then 3 bonds with the oxygens. Is this not correct?

And for the number 2 labeled Nitrogen, I would have calculated the oxidation state to be -3 since it is bonded to three carbons which are less electronegative.

When figuring out the chiral center configurations I'm not getting the same answers as given either, and I'm assuming this has to do with my understanding of priorities.

For example, the bottom right carbon of attached to the OH group, I would have given R configuration because the carbon to the right of this chiral center is attached to an O and an N whereas the other carbon is attached to an O and a C. So the OH group would get priority 1, the carbon to the right priority 2, and the carbon to the left priority 3. This would give a counter clockwise motion, but since the hydrogen is coming out of the page I would flip it to R configuration instead of S.


Am I wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
OS of Phosphorous = +5
OS of Nitrogen = -2. It is only bonded to 2 Carbon Atoms, as far as I can see the molecule.

As for Chiral centre, lookout for sp3 hybrid C-atom (C with 4 valencies) and make sure that all of the 4 valencies are unique. Also, to determine the configuration, try making their Fisher Projection. It is tough, but try it once.
 
Puchinita5 said:
And for the number 2 labeled Nitrogen, I would have calculated the oxidation state to be -3 since it is bonded to three carbons which are less electronegative.
That's what I get too. Actually you should say it is bonded to carbon three times rather than to three carbons.

Puchinita5 said:
For example, the bottom right carbon of attached to the OH group, I would have given R configuration because the carbon to the right of this chiral center is attached to an O and an N whereas the other carbon is attached to an O and a C. So the OH group would get priority 1, the carbon to the right priority 2, and the carbon to the left priority 3. This would give a counter clockwise motion, but since the hydrogen is coming out of the page I would flip it to R configuration instead of S.

C > N
 
Chemisttree, are you saying that carbon attached to an O and C should have higher priority because C is higher priority than Nitrogen? I thought highest priority is given to atoms with higher atomic weight, and Nitrogen has a greater atomic weight than carbon.
 
C > N is wrong. You have it right and the answer should be R.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Back
Top