Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Aug 14.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Chem Soc. 2013 Dec 12;135(51):19064–19067. doi: 10.1021/ja409896y

Table 1.

Comparison of Calculated and Experimental Absorption Bands, Including the Wavelength of Maximum Absorption (λ) in nm, Oscillator (f) and Rotatory (R) Strengths in au, and the Change in the Ground- (S0) and Excited-State (S2 for USB; S1 for PSB) Dipole Moments (Δμ) of USB11 and/or PSB11 in the Protein (QM/MM) Environments of WT, F86Y, S90A, and S90C SHUV Pigment Modelsa

SHUV pigment models first vertical excited-state properties
protein
λ f R Δμ expt.
strong HBWT/USB11 369 (0) 1.62 0.13 11.26 359 (0)
F86Y/USB11+10.392 382 (+13) 1.23 0.10 10.00 376 (+17)
F86Y/PSB110.000 421 (+39) 1.52 0.04 11.67 432 (+56)
broken HBS90A/USB11 363 (−6) 0.35 0.00 5.18 358 (−1)
weak HBS90C/USB11 364 (−5) 1.60 0.09 11.13 358 (−1)
a

Strong, weak, and broken HB refers to the nature of the HB between S90 and E113. Numbers in superscript refer to the relative energies, whereas numbers in parentheses indicate the spectral shift relevant to the WT/USB11 model, except for F86Y/PSB11, which is referenced against F86Y/USB11.