Skip to main content
Heliyon logoLink to Heliyon
. 2019 Sep 11;5(9):e02322. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02322

S(-) and R(+) species derived from antihistaminic promethazine agent: structural and vibrational studies

María Eugenia Manzur 1, Silvia Antonia Brandán 1,
PMCID: PMC6744594  PMID: 31535039

Abstract

Structural and vibrational properties of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species derived from both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of antihistaminic promethazine (PTZ) agent have been theoretically evaluated in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using the hybrid B3LYP/6-31G* calculations. The initial structures of S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of hydrochloride PTZ were those polymorphic forms 1 and 2 experimentally determined by X-ray diffraction. Here, all structures in aqueous solution were optimized at the same level of theory by using the polarized continuum (PCM) and the universal solvation model. As was experimentally reported, variations in the unit cell lead to slight energy, density, and melting point differences between the two forms but, this behavior is not carried through in isotropic condition, like in solution with non-chiral solvents. Hence, the N–C distances, Mulliken, atomic natural population (NPA) and Merz-Kollman (MK) charges, bond orders, stabilization and solvation energies, frontier orbitals, some descriptors and their topological properties were compared with the antihistaminic cyclizine agent. The frontier orbitals studies show that the free base species of both forms in solution are more reactive than cyclizine. Higher electrophilicity indexes are observed in the cationic and hydrochloride species of PTZ than cyclizine while the cationic species of cyclizine have higher nucleophilicity index than both species of PTZ. The presences of bands attributed to cationic species of both enantiomers are clearly supported by the infrared and Raman spectra in the solid phase. The expected 114, 117 and 120 vibration normal modes for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both forms were completely assigned and the force constants reported. Reasonable concordances among the predicted infrared, Raman, UV-Vis and Electronic Circular Dichroism (ECD) with the corresponding experimental ones were found.

Keywords: Computer science, Theoretical chemistry, Electronic, Structural properties, DFT calculations, Promethazine, Descriptor properties

1. Introduction

Species containing in their structures the N–CH3 group presenting a wide range of pharmacological and medicinal properties such as tropane alkaloids whose known biologics effects can cause from pain cure up to addiction [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. However, there are another groups of species that also contain that group but that present other different biological properties such as, diphenhydramine and cyclizine, where both species are broadly used in pharmacology as antihistaminic agents [8, 9]. Nevertheless, the most remarkable differences among the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of those two antihistaminic agents are that in the species derived from diphenhydramine their two N–CH3 groups are not linked to rings while in the cyclizine species those groups are linked to piperazine rings [8, 9]. Previous theoretical studies on structures and properties of alkaloids have evidenced that when the N–CH3 group is linked to fused rings as in scopolamine, cocaine and tropane some properties are slightly different from those where the N–CH3 group is linked to only one ring as in heroin and morphine [1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7]. Besides, the stabilities of these series of alkaloids are strongly dependent on the N–C distances [6, 7]. On the other hand, the reactivities predicted for the three species of diphenhydramine practically are the same than that reported for cationic form of cocaine [3, 7] while lowest solvation energy value was observed for the free base of cyclizine, as compared with the corresponding to tropane alkaloids [9]. Evidently, there is an important connection between the quantity of N–CH3 groups and the type of groups linked to N atom, that is, >N- tertiary or >N< quaternary. Consequently, the biological activities and effects of these types of species on human health are obviously resulted of their nature and structural, electronic and topological properties. Hence, the interest to study another antihistaminic agent, in this case promethazine (PTZ) [10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33], which has two N–CH3 groups (as diphenhydramine) linked to a chiral carbon and, as a consequence two enantiomeric S and R structures are expected for their three free base, cationic and hydrochloride species. PTZ hydrochloride is a drug used to treatment of nausea, vomiting, and dizziness associated with motion sickness and, besides possesses anti-pruritic, anti-allergic, anticholinergic, antihistaminic, central nervous system depressant, and with general anaesthetics effects. Their metabolic and clinic effects were studied from long time together with their side effects [13, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33]. Some known chemical names of promethazine are proazamine, diphergan, phenargan or phensedyl while its IUPAC name is N,N-dimethyl-1-phenothiazin-10-ylpropan-2-amine. PTZ has structurally two >N–CH3 groups, three fused six members rings (two phenyl and one phenothiazine) and a chiral carbon and where experimentally Borodi et al [19] have determined by X-ray diffraction two enantiomeric disordered structures of promethazine hydrochloride but, so far, the structural properties and vibrational assignments of those three species of PTZ were not published. The vibrational analyses of the three species of PTZ are actually of great interest and significance taking into account that the infrared, Raman and SERS spectroscopies are practically the most used spectroscopic techniques to identify these species in different systems and preparations [10, 12, 15, 17, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28]. Hence, the aims of this work are: (i) to study the structural, electronic, topological and vibrational properties of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ, (ii) to find some correlations between their properties that can explain the differences between its biological properties, as compared with alkaloids and other antihistaminic agents, (iii) to perform the complete vibrational assignments of those three species of PTZ because, so far, these are not reported. In accordance to previous studies, the infrared spectra of many hydrochloride species show clearly the presence of their cationic forms in the solid phase and in aqueous solution [1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8]. To achieve those purposes, the theoretical structures of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers were optimized in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using the hybrid B3LYP/6-31G* method [34, 35] while experimental infrared and Raman spectra available from the literature were used to perform the vibrational analyses [17, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28]. The studies in solution were performed with the integral equation formalism variant polarised continuum method (IEFPCM) because it scheme contemplates the solvent effects while the solvation energies were computed with the universal solvation model [36, 37, 38]. Hence, for those three S(-) and R(+)-PTZ species, atomic charges, molecular electrostatic potential, bond orders, frontier orbitals and topological properties were calculated together with the harmonic force fields by using the scaled quantum mechanical force field (SQMFF) and transferable scaling factors [39, 40]. Then, the complete assignments for the three species were performed by using the corresponding force fields, internal normal coordinates and the experimental available vibrational spectra of PTZ hydrochloride [41] together with the Molvib program [42]. Taking into account the wide range of biological activities that presents PTZ, the reactivities and behaviours of those three S(-) and R(+)-PTZ species were predicted in both media by using the frontier orbitals [43, 44] and global descriptors [45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53]. Finally, the predicted properties of both enantiomeric series of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ were evaluated and then compared with the available data reported for alkaloids, diphenhydramine and cyclizine [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9].

2. Methodology

2.1. Ab-initio calculations

The initial structure of S(-) enantiomer of PTZ hydrochloride was that experimental polymorphic form 1 determined by X-ray diffraction by Borodi et al [19] and taken from the available CIF file. The corresponding cationic and free base species were modelled respectively by using the GaussView program [54] where the Cl atom was first removed from that initial structure of PTZ hydrochloride and, later, the H atom. A similar procedure was employed to obtain the three species of R(+) enantiomer but in this case the structures were built from that experimental polymorphic form 2 determined by X-ray diffraction by Borodi et al [19]. The Revision A.02 of Gaussian program was employed to optimize those six species in both media [55] by using the hybrid B3LYP/6-31G* method [34, 35]. In solution, the three species were optimized by using PCM and SMD calculations [36, 37, 38] while their volumes changes were evaluated with the Moldraw program [56]. In Fig. 1 can be seen the six S(-) and R(+)-PTZ structures as free base, cationic and hydrochloride together with the atoms labelling and the identifications of their three rings. The solvation energies corrected by zero point vibrational energy (ZPVE) were computed for all species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ with the universal solvation model [36, 37, 38]. Besides, atomic natural population (NPA), Mulliken and Merz-Kollman (MK) charges [57], molecular electrostatic potentials, bond orders and topological properties were calculated by using the NBO program [58] and with the Bader's theory of atoms in molecules (AIM) by using AIM2000 program [59, 60]. On the other hand, the evaluation of reactivities and behaviours of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ species were performed calculating the gap values [43, 44] and some useful and known global descriptors with the frontier orbitals [45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53]. The harmonic force fields and force constants in gas phase and in aqueous solution were computed at the B3LYP/6-31G* level by using the normal internal coordinates and transferable scaling factors with the scaled quantum mechanical force field (SQMFF) and the Molvib program [39, 40, 42]. Here, the predicted Raman activities for all species were corrected to intensities by using recommended equations [61, 62] while the scale factors used were those reported for the B3LYP/6-31G* method. At this point, it is necessary to clarify that all studied properties were computed for six S(-) and R(+)-PTZ species by using only the B3LYP/6-31G* level because they are compared with properties reported at the same level of theory for other species containing N–CH3 groups, such as alkaloids, diphenhydramine and cyclizine [1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9].

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Theoretical molecular structures of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Properties of species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in both media

The structural studies in solution of these species are of great interest because the >N–CH3 group can present fast N-methyl inversion in this medium, as suggested by Lazni et al [63]. Here, in Table 1 are summarized calculated total uncorrected and corrected by ZPVE energies, dipole moments and volumes (V) of three species of both enantiomers S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in gas and aqueous solution phases by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method. Analyzing deeply the results, it is observed that the total energy values corrected by ZPVE decrease for all species in both media while the dipole moment and volume values increase in solution, as expected because these species are possibly hydrated in solution. The exception is observed only for the cationic form of S(-)-PTZ because the E and V values decrease in solution. Here, the imaginary frequencies obtained for that species could justify clearly these differences. Note that the cationic species of both enantiomers have higher dipole moments in solution while the hydrochloride forms present the higher volumes in both media having the S(-) species slightly the higher values in the two media. In Table 2 can be observed corrected and uncorrected solvation energies by the total non-electrostatic terms and by zero point vibrational energy (ZPVE) of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method. The variations observed experimentally in the unit cell lead to small displacements of the molecules in the crystal structures and, consequently, to slight energy, density, and melting point differences between the forms. Note that these obtained values are closer to those observed in the study of interaction of gelatin with promethazine hydrochloride [64]. These values are compared in the same table with morphine, cocaine, scopolamine, heroin and tropane alkaloids and with cyclizine [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9]. In particular, due to the imaginary frequencies predicted for the cationic form of cyclizine in solution the value for cyclizine was obtained by using B3LYP/6-31+G* calculations while for S(-)-PTZ in solution the value of -14,48 kJ/mol was obtained directly from Table 1. The ΔGc values for the three species of tropane were calculated in this work. Fig. 2 shows clearly the variations of ΔGc for all compared species by using the solvation model [38]. In general, it is observed that all cationic species have more negative values while the free bases the less negative values. The cationic forms of morphine, scopolamine and heroin have the most negative values while the S(-) form of PTZ the most low ΔGc value. Probably, this resulted change if other basis set is used. Interesting results are observed for cyclizine (-244,36 kJ/mol) and tropane (-244,33 kJ/mol) because their cationic forms have practically the same values. In both species, the N–CH3 groups are linked to rings, in cyclizine to piperazine ring while in tropane a two fused piperidine and pyrrolidine rings. The heroin hydrochloride species present the most negative ΔGc value while the R(+)-PTZ the lower value. On the other hand, the free base of heroin presents the most negative ΔGc value while the tropane species the lowest value. Evidently, the acetyl groups in heroin increase the solvation energies of their three species, as compared with morphine. Obviously, these comparisons show easily why the hydrochloride species are highly used in pharmacology, as compared with their free base and cationic ones. Besides, the hydrochloride species in solution are in their cationic forms and show clearly high solubility in this medium. Evidently, the solubility limits visibly the drug absorption, as mentioned by Bohloko studying the formulation of an intranasal dosage form for cyclizine hydrochloride [65].

Table 1.

Calculated total energies (E), dipole moments (μ) and volumes (V) of three species of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution phases.

B3LYP/6-31G* Method
Medium E (Hartrees) ZPVE μ (D) V (Å3)
S(-)-Free base
GAS -1167.5298 -1167.1923 2.18 312.7
PCM
-1167.5383
-1167.2000
3.75
314.2
S(-)-Cationic
GAS -1167.9143 -1167.5615 14.62 316.3
PCM#
-1167.9121
-1167.5588
15.20
315.1
S(-)-Hydrochloride
GAS -1628.3493 -1627.9992 9.33 342.1
PCM
-1628.3849
-1628.0312
14.16
342.8
R(+)-Free base
GAS -1167.5263 -1167.1907 1.92 312.3
PCM
-1167.5277
-1167.1894
3.03
312.2
R(+)-Cationic
GAS -1167.9127 -1167.5599 14.77 315.9
PCM
-1168.0075
-1167.6532
19.73
319.0
R(+)-Hydrochloride
GAS -1628.3509 -1628.0002 7.50 338.6
PCM -1628.3836 -1627.9920 11.72 341.4
#

Imaginary frequencies.

Table 2.

Corrected and uncorrected solvation energies by the total non-electrostatic terms and by zero point vibrational energy (ZPVE) of three species of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method compared with other similar species.

B3LYP/6-31G* methoda
Solvation energy (kJ/mol)
Condition ΔGun# ΔGne ΔGc
Free base
S(-)-Promethazinea -20.19 15.88 -36.07
R(+)-Promethazinea -3.41 14.46 -17.87
Cyclizineb -23.60 5.93 -29.53
Morphinec -47.74 13.17 -60.91
Cocained -42.75 28.51 -71.26
Scopolaminee -56.66 18.81 -75.47
Heroinf -59.54 29.13 -88.67
Tropanea,g
-11.80
0.75
-12.55
Cationic
S(-)-Promethazinea -7.08 7.40 -14.48
R(+)-Promethazinea -255.22 7.59 -262.81
Cyclizineb,# -238.43 5.93 -244.36
Morphinec -282.23 26.96 -309.19
Cocained -216.66 38.58 -255.24
Scopolaminee -279.87 30.47 -310.34
Heroinf -280.13 43.01 -323.14
Tropanea,g
-228.99
15.34
-244.33
Hydrochloride
S(-)-Promethazinea -101.25 30.81 -70.44
R(+)-Promethazinea -21.51 30.51 -52.02
Cyclizineb -81.57 23.49 -105.06
Morphinec -118.82 25.92 -144.74
Cocained -99.94 38.20 -138.14
Scopolaminee -95.19 27.55 -122.74
Heroinf -118.56 43.38 -161.94
Tropanea,g -72.13 15.05 -87.18

ΔGun# = uncorrected solvation energy: defined as the difference between the total energies in aqueous solutions and the values in gas phase. ΔGun = Solvation energy (kJ/mol) corrected by ZPVE.

ΔGne = total non electrostatic terms: due to the cavitation, dispersion and repulsion energies.

ΔGc = corrected solvation energies: defined as the difference between the uncorrected and non-electrostatic solvation energies.

a

This work.

b

From Ref [9].

c

From Ref [1].

d

From Ref [3].

e

From Ref [7].

f

From Ref [5].

g

From Ref [2].

#

Cation cyclizine: 6-31+G*.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Corrected solvation energies of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

3.2. Geometries of species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in both media

Calculated geometrical parameters for three species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in both media are compared with the corresponding experimental polymorphic forms 1 and 2 [19] in Tables 3 and 4, respectively by using the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) values. Despite theoretical B3LYP/6-31G* calculations show visibly overestimated values, as compared with the corresponding experimental ones, the results for all species of S(-)-PTZ forms show very good correlations for bond lengths (0.020–0.012 Å) but the three species of R(+)-PTZ evidence the better correlations for bond (1.7–1.3°) and dihedral angles (6.1–3.7°) than the S(-) ones. On the other hand, the higher differences in dihedral angles are predicted for the three species of S(-) form (176.1–137.9°), as can be seen in Table 3. Here, it is necessary to remember that those two polymorphic conformations found by Borodi et al [19] are experimentally the same where the two forms are present in the unit cell but our theoretical calculations show slight differences in the dihedral angles of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms. Thus, the calculated bonds N2–C6 and N2–C7 lengths of phenothiazine rings belong to the three species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers are practically predicted with same values but different from the bond N2–C5 lengths of side chain. In the same way, the calculated S1–C9 bonds of phenothiazine rings are approximately the same than the S1–C10 bonds while the predicted N3–C11 bonds are practically the same than the N3–C12 bonds. The predicted values for both pairs bonds are different from the corresponding experimental ones.

Table 3.

Comparison of calculated geometrical parameters for three species of S(-)-promethazine in both media with the corresponding experimental ones.

B3LYP/6-31G* Methoda
Form 1
Parameter Free base
Cation
Hydrochloride
Experimentalb
Gas PCM Gas Gas PCM
Bond lengths (Å)
S1–C9 1.783 1.786 1.786 1.783 1.786 1.772
S1–C10 1.783 1.786 1.785 1.784 1.786 1.781
N2–C5 1.464 1.471 1.445 1.457 1.465 1.435
N2–C6 1.416 1.419 1.427 1.420 1.420 1.422
N2–C7 1.416 1.418 1.424 1.420 1.419 1.418
C6–C9 1.406 1.409 1.404 1.407 1.408 1.379
C7–C10 1.406 1.409 1.406 1.407 1.409 1.389
C4–C5 1.553 1.552 1.547 1.545 1.543 1.545
N3–C4 1.472 1.482 1.550 1.511 1.525 1.513
N3–C11 1.454 1.463 1.505 1.485 1.495 1.502
N3–C12 1.456 1.465 1.505 1.484 1.495 1.491
C6–C13 1.401 1.405 1.399 1.402 1.404 1.398
C9–C15 1.392 1.395 1.395 1.395 1.396 1.394
C13–C17 1.393 1.396 1.396 1.395 1.396 1.396
C15–C19 1.393 1.396 1.395 1.395 1.396 1.392
C17–C19 1.391 1.394 1.394 1.393 1.395 1.366
C7–C14 1.401 1.404 1.400 1.402 1.404 1.402
C14–C18 1.393 1.396 1.397 1.396 1.396 1.387
C16–C10 1.392 1.395 1.395 1.394 1.395 1.394
C16–C20 1.393 1.396 1.395 1.395 1.396 1.382
C18–C20 1.391 1.395 1.394 1.393 1.394 1.379
RMSDb
0.020
0.019
0.014
0.012
0.013

Bond angles (°)
C9–S1–C10 97.8 97.8 98.2 98.0 98.0 96.4
C6–C9–S1 118.6 118.5 118.8 118.7 118.6 119.0
C7–C10–S1 118.6 118.5 118.7 118.6 118.6 117.9
C5–N2–C6 119.5 118.7 120.2 119.5 119.0 118.9
C5–N2–C7 119.3 119.2 119.8 119.6 119.3 119.1
C6–N2–C7 117.5 117.0 118.3 117.9 117.7 115.6
N2–C5–C4 112.7 113.2 108.6 111.3 110.6 108.9
C5–C4–N3 113.1 113.0 111.8 111.6 111.1 106.9
C4–N3–C11 114.3 112.4 113.1 114.3 113.2 111.7
C4–N3–C12 116.2 114.1 114.4 115.8 114.9 112.1
C11–N3–C12 111.9 109.8 111.2 111.2 110.7 111.4
N2–C7–C14 122.5 122.5 122.6 122.5 122.5 122.4
N2–C6–C13 122.6 122.6 122.5 122.6 122.5 121.9
S1–C10–C16 120.4 120.3 120.8 120.6 120.3 120.0
S1–C9–C15 120.4 120.3 120.7 120.5 120.3 120.0
RMSDb
2.4
2.1
1.8
2.0
1.6

Dihedral angles (°)
C11–N3–C4–C5 75.9 72.8 75.7 71.0 73.8 167.0
C12–N3–C4–C5 -56.6 -53.1 -53.0 -60.3 -54.9 -67.0
N3–C4–C5–N2 -168.3 -167.7 -165.4 -169.6 -165.2 175.4
C4–C5–N2–C6 -137.3 -142.2 -127.8 -135.3 -136.5 -68.6
C4–C5–N2–C7 63.8 63.4 66.3 64.2 66.2 140.3
C14–C7–N2–C6 -135.8 -134.5 -134.5 -135.2 -136.0 -129.1
C15–C9–S1–C10- -144.8 -144.5 -144.2 -144.7 -144.8 -139.1
C8–C4–C5–N2 65.1 66.0 69.7 64.9 70.4 -65.9
RMSDb 138.9 139.5 137.9 176.1 223.0

The letters bold indicated RMSD values.

a

This work.

b

Ref [19].

Table 4.

Comparison of calculated geometrical parameters for three species of R(+)-promethazine in both media with the corresponding experimental ones.

B3LYP/6-31G* Methoda
Form 2
Experimentalb
Parameter Free base
Cation
Hydrochloride
Gas PCM Gas PCM Gas PCM
Bond lengths (Å)
S1–C9 1.783 1.785 1.786 1.785 1.784 1.785 1.772
S1–C10 1.783 1.786 1.785 1.786 1.782 1.785 1.781
N2–C5 1.464 1.470 1.443 1.462 1.457 1.464 1.435
N2–C6 1.418 1.418 1.427 1.420 1.423 1.421 1.422
N2–C7 1.417 1.418 1.425 1.420 1.418 1.421 1.418
C6–C9 1.408 1.409 1.404 1.408 1.407 1.409 1.379
C7–C10 1.408 1.409 1.406 1.408 1.409 1.409 1.389
C4–C5 1.551 1.549 1.554 1.547 1.552 1.548 1.545
N3–C4 1.479 1.486 1.551 1.533 1.520 1.527 1.513
N3–C11 1.460 1.468 1.508 1.502 1.487 1.496 1.502
N3–C12 1.460 1.468 1.508 1.503 1.486 1.496 1.491
C6–C13 1.403 1.404 1.399 1.403 1.402 1.404 1.398
C9–C15 1.394 1.395 1.395 1.396 1.395 1.395 1.394
C13–C17 1.395 1.396 1.396 1.396 1.395 1.396 1.396
C15–C19 1.395 1.396 1.395 1.396 1.395 1.395 1.392
C17–C19 1.393 1.395 1.394 1.395 1.393 1.394 1.366
C7–C14 1.403 1.404 1.400 1.403 1.403 1.403 1.402
C14–C18 1.395 1.396 1.397 1.396 1.396 1.396 1.540
C16–C10 1.394 1.395 1.395 1.395 1.394 1.395 1.540
C16–C20 1.395 1.396 1.396 1.396 1.395 1.396 1.540
C18–C20 1.393 1.395 1.394 1.394 1.393 1.394 1.325
RMSDb
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.015
0.058
0.058

Bond angles (°)
C9–S1–C10 97.8 97.8 98.2 98.0 98.0 98.0 96.4
C6–C9–S1 118.6 118.5 118.7 118.6 118.8 118.7 119.0
C7–C10–S1 118.6 118.4 118.7 118.6 118.7 118.7 117.9
C5–N2–C6 119.2 119.3 120.0 118.9 119.1 118.7 118.9
C5–N2–C7 119.4 119.1 119.7 119.2 119.4 119.1 119.1
C6–N2–C7 117.6 117.3 118.2 117.8 118.0 117.6 115.6
N2–C5–C4 113.1 112.4 109.5 111.2 110.9 111.2 108.9
C5–C4–N3 107.7 109.1 109.4 108.2 108.6 108.6 106.9
C4–N3–C11 114.8 111.9 113.6 113.5 114.5 113.5 112.1
C4–N3–C12 111.9 110.5 112.8 112.8 113.2 112.7 111.7
C11–N3–C12 108.9 107.2 109.2 108.8 109.6 108.9 111.4
N2–C7–C14 122.5 122.5 122.7 122.5 122.6 122.5 122.4
N2–C6–C13 122.5 122.6 122.6 122.5 122.5 122.5 121.9
S1–C10–C16 120.4 120.3 120.8 120.3 120.5 120.2 121.0
S1–C9–C15 120.4 120.3 120.8 120.3 120.3 120.1 120.0
RMSDb
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.3

Dihedral angles (°)
C11–N3–C4–C5 157.1 165.9 165.5 164.2 160.7 163.5 167.0
C12–N3–C4–C5 -77.8 -74.4 -69.3 -71.2 -72.5 -71.9 -67.0
N3–C4–C5–N2 172.2 165.7 170.5 171.6 171.4 166.4 175.4
C4–C5–N2–C6 137.0 136.7 130.3 137.3 133.5 137.6 139.9
C4–C5–N2–C7 -64.6 -66.7 -65.9 -65.5 -67.5 -66.7 -69.0
C14–C7–N2–C6 135.9 135.5 134.3 136.0 136.5 136.0 131.7
C15–C9–S1–C10- 144.6 144.1 144.1 144.7 144.7 144.8 140.1
C8–C4–C5–N2 -64.5 -71.0 -65.8 -65.7 -65.9 -70.7 -62.7
RMSDb 6.1 5.8 4.6 3.7 4.8 5.4

The letters bold indicated RMSD values.

a

This work.

b

Ref [19].

Another interesting comparisons are observed in the average bond N–C lengths of the N–CH3 groups belonging to the three species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ with those observed for cyclizine, morphine, heroin, cocaine, scopolamine and tropane where the results in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations can be seen in Table 5. Here, due to the presence of two N–CH3 groups the average of N–C distances between both groups were considered. In Fig. 3 are easily observed the behaviours of N–C distances of all compared species in both media. In gas phase, the comparisons between the free base and cationic species show that cationic form of cyclizine has the lowest value (1.453 Å) while the highest value is observed in the cationic species of R(+)-PTZ (1.508 Å). In solution, it is observed that the free base species have low values and different from the hydrochloride ones. Evidently, the presence of charged cationic species and electronegative Cl atoms in all hydrochloride species produce increase in the N–C distances. The tropane hydrochloride has the shorter value while the species corresponding to R(+)-PTZ the higher value.

Table 5.

Bond lengths observed between the N and C atoms of the N–CH3 bonds belonging to the three S(-) and R(+)-promethazine species in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations.

N–CH3 bonds ()
Species Gas phase
Aqueous solution
Free base Cationic Hydrobromide Free base Cationic Hydrobromide
R(+)-promethazineγ 1.460 1.508 1.487 1.468 1.501 1.496
S(-)-Promethazineγ 1.455 1.505 1.485 1.464 # 1.495
Cyclizine 1.453 1.453 # 1.459 # 1.489
Scopolamine 1.462 1.492 1.491 1.466 1.491 1.493
Heroin 1.453 1.501 1.483 1.460 1.498 1.492
Morphine 1.453 1.500 1.483 1.460 1.497 1.493
Cocaine 1.459 1.493 1.487 1.467 1.492 1.494
Tropane 1.458 1.496 1.478 1.467 1.491 1.486
#

Imaginary frequencies.

γ

average.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Calculated N–C distances corresponding to N–CH3 groups of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine in both media by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

3.3. Atomic charges, molecular electrostatic potentials and bond orders

Mulliken, Merz-Kollman (MK) and atomic natural population (NPA) charges, molecular electrostatic potentials (MEP) and bond orders (BO), expressed as Wiberg indexes were calculated for the three forms of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations. The resulted only for the S1, N2, N3, C8, C11 and C12 atoms can be seen in Table 6 because these atoms present the higher variations in all species while the behaviours of MK charges on these atoms are represented in Fig. 4. Analyzing first the MK charges for the free base species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ we observed from Fig. 4 that: (i) the MK charges on the N2, C8 and C11 atoms of all free base species undergoes important changes, presenting the highest change on N2 of free base of R(+)-PTZ in solution and (ii) the charges on the S1, N3 and C12 atoms of all species in both media have practically the same values. In the cationic species, the lower MK charges values are observed on those five atoms of S(-)-PTZ in gas phase while on N2 atoms of R(+) species in the two media are observed the higher changes. Different behaviours are observed on the MK charges of those five atoms corresponding to the hydrochloride species in both media. Hence, the charges on the N3 atoms have the higher values, as expected due to the presences in these species of electronegative Cl atoms. The Mulliken charges on those five atoms of free base species show practically the same behaviours but, in particular, on the N2 and C8 atoms are observed the most negative values while the NPA charges on C8 atoms of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species show the lower values in both enantioners. The Mulliken charges in the cationic and hydrochloride species present basically the same behaviours but on the N2 atoms are observed the lower values.

Table 6.

Mulliken, Merz-Kollman and NPA charges, molecular electrostatic potentials (MEP) and bond orders, expressed as Wiberg indexes for three forms of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations.

S(-)-Free base
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
S1 -0.120 0.157 0.330 -59.182 2.335 -0.118 0.156 0.328 -59.182 2.333
N2 -0.311 -0.581 -0.452 -18.312 3.305 -0.360 -0.581 -0.449 -18.311 3.305
N3 -0.346 -0.365 -0.506 -18.356 3.127 -0.357 -0.367 -0.501 -18.354 3.115
C8 -0.272 -0.455 -0.685 -14.757 3.844 -0.267 -0.455 -0.685 -14.756 3.844
C11 -0.222 -0.300 -0.468 -14.719 3.819 -0.266 -0.305 -0.473 -14.719 3.820
C12
-0.138
-0.308
-0.475
-14.719
3.819
-0.124
-0.311
-0.479
-14.720
3.820
S(-)-Cationic
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO





S1 -0.097 0.186 0.348 -59.085 2.343
N2 -0.122 -0.587 -0.471 -18.197 3.264
N3 -0.025 -0.492 -0.450 -18.052 3.469
C8 -0.279 -0.498 -0.718 -14.593 3.809
C11 -0.335 -0.348 -0.475 -14.519 3.713
C12
-0.368
-0.351
-0.479
-14.519
3.715





S(-)-Hydrochloride
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
S1 -0.106 0.171 0.340 -59.167 2.339 -0.101 0.174 0.340 -59.164 2.338
N2 -0.215 -0.583 -0.456 -18.291 3.291 -0.257 -0.586 -0.453 -18.283 3.294
N3 0.370 -0.481 -0.497 -18.250 3.341 0.452 -0.480 -0.483 -18.223 3.383
C8 -0.212 -0.488 -0.708 -14.733 3.816 -0.180 -0.490 -0.711 -14.725 3.811
C11 -0.400 -0.321 -0.477 -14.673 3.756 -0.357 -0.328 -0.474 -14.660 3.745
C12
-0.348
-0.325
-0.481
-14.673
3.759
-0.337
-0.334
-0.479
-14.658
3.748
R(+)-Free base
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
S1 -0.344 0.155 0.329 -59.182 2.334 -0.126 0.154 0.327 -59.183 2.332
N2 -0.344 -0.584 -0.455 -18.313 3.303 -0.018 -0.583 -0.454 -18.312 3.304
N3 -0.344 -0.387 -0.511 -18.354 3.112 -0.336 -0.390 -0.504 -18.353 3.104
C8 -0.330 -0.484 -0.695 -14.753 3.836 -0.341 -0.484 -0.694 -14.752 3.837
C11 -0.255 -0.296 -0.472 -14.723 3.815 -0.215 -0.300 -0.476 -14.723 3.816
C12
-0.123
-0.306
-0.469
-14.720
3.821
-0.127
-0.309
-0.473
-14.720
3.822
R(+)-Cationic
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
S1 -0.106 0.188 0.349 -59.085 2.343 -0.090 0.190 0.351 -59.088 2.341
N2 0.033 -0.586 -0.471 -18.197 3.263 -0.048 -0.591 -0.460 -18.193 3.276
N3 0.046 -0.495 -0.449 -18.050 3.470 0.033 -0.490 -0.447 -18.047 3.471
C8 -0.145 -0.499 -0.722 -14.597 3.805 -0.155 -0.492 -0.719 -14.593 3.806
C11 -0.308 -0.343 -0.476 -14.521 3.708 -0.298 -0.343 -0.476 -14.519 3.707
C12
-0.384
-0.351
-0.473
-14.519
3.713
-0.358
-0.353
-0.473
-14.517
3.711
R(+)-Hydrochloride
GAS
PCM
Atoms
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
MK
Mulliken
NPA
MEP
BO
S1 -0.129 0.158 0.331 -59.173 2.335 -0.122 0.160 0.332 -59.170 2.335
N2 -0.132 -0.588 -0.457 -18.299 3.295 -0.226 -0.588 -0.456 -18.292 3.293
N3 0.407 -0.481 -0.492 -18.244 3.353 0.454 -0.482 -0.479 -18.221 3.389
C8 -0.208 -0.496 -0.710 -14.725 3.818 -0.190 -0.497 -0.712 -14.715 3.816
C11 -0.319 -0.315 -0.476 -14.671 3.753 -0.314 -0.322 -0.475 -14.660 3.743
C12 -0.448 -0.324 -0.472 -14.668 3.760 -0.415 -0.332 -0.471 -14.657 3.749

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Calculated Merz-Kollman charges of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

The bond orders (BO) expressed as Wiberg indexes in the three species of both enantiomers in the two media have approximately the same values and behaviours, observing the higher values in the C8, C11 and C12 atoms and the lower values in the S1 atoms. In general, higher values are observed for the N2 atoms of the free base and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in the two media than for the N3 atoms and only in the cationic species are observed higher values in the N3 atoms.

The molecular electrostatic potentials (MEP) presented in Table 6 show practically the same values and behaviours in the three species of both enantiomers, however, when the surfaces of these species are mapped the colorations show important differences among them, as can be seen in Fig. 5. Thus, the cationic species of both enantiomers in gas phase show blue colours on the entire surface but, in particular, strong blue colours it is observed on the protonated N–H region. In the free base species the strong red colours are observed on the N3 atoms and S1 atoms while in the hydrochloride species the strong red colours are observed on the Cl atoms. Hence, the typical nucleophilic sites are clearly identified with red colours while the electrophilic sites with blue colours, as observed in other species [6, 7, 8, 9].

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Calculated electrostatic potential surfaces on the molecular surfaces of the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine. B3LYP functional and 6-31G* basis set. Isodensity value of 0.005.

3.4. NBO study

For the three species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers the main delocalization energies in gas and aqueous solution were calculated by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations with the NBO program [58]. The resulted for the three species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ are summarized in Tables 7 and 8, respectively. Different interactions can be observed in the three species and, especially in the hydrochloride species due to the presence of Cl atoms where in particular, the π*→π* and π→π* interactions present the higher values in the S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms, respectively. Thus, the free base (3509.36–3522.22 kJ/mol) and hydrochloride (6253.53–5840.28 kJ/mol) species present higher total energies than the cationic ones (1541.01 kJ/mol) and, for these reasons, these two species are most stable than the cationic ones. However, the hydrochloride species of R(+)-PTZ have higher values in both media than the corresponding to other enantiomer (7527.88–7332.02 kJ/mol). Nevertheless, the free base of R(+)-PTZ present lower values than the corresponding to S(-)-PTZ (3484.4–3193.04 kJ/mol) while the cationic form of R(+)-PTZ is most stable than the corresponding to S(-)-PTZ (1540.08–1612.71 kJ/mol). These studies shows clearly that the hydrochloride species are most stable than the other two species of both forms and in the two media studied but, in particular the species of R(+)-PTZ show higher total energy values evidencing a slight higher stability than the S(-) one. The three PTZ species show higher stabilities than the corresponding to cyclizine [9].

Table 7.

Main delocalization energies (in kJ/mol) for three species of S(-)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations.

B3LYP/6-31G*a
Delocalization Free base
Hydrochloride
Gas PCM Gas PCM
πC6-C13→ π*C9–C15 74.32 74.28 73.40 73.19
πC6-C13→ π*C17–C19 88.41 88.49 85.98 85.77
πC7-C14→ π*C10–C16 74.49 74.61 72.73 72.02
πC7-C14→ π*C18–C20 88.28 88.49 85.23 85.19
πC9-C15→ π*C6–C13 83.56 83.39 85.27 85.27
πC9-C15→ π*C17–C19 71.18 71.27 72.02 71.98
πC10-C16→ π*C7–C14 83.81 83.60 85.90 86.19
πC10-C16→ π*C18–C20 71.52 71.60 72.23 72.10
πC17-C19→ π*C6–C13 79.59 79.59 81.34 81.97
πC17-C19→ π*C9–C15 93.84 93.67 94.09 94.26
πC18-C20→ π*C7–C14 80.05 80.21 82.05 82.26
πC18-C20→ π*C10–C16 93.75 93.67 94.26 94.30
Σπ→π* 982.8 982.87 984.5 984.5
LP(2)S1→ π*C9–C15 45.98 45.44 46.27 46.02
LP(2)S1→ π*C10–C16 45.98 45.23 46.36 46.27
LP(1)N2→ π*C6–C13 99.86 99.36 92.96 94.89
LP(1)N2→ π*C7–C14 100.74 99.44 94.30 97.56
ΣLP→π* 292.56 289.47 279.89 284.74
π*C9–C15→ π*C17–C19 1106.65 1113.09
π*C10–C16→ π*C18–C20 1127.35 1136.79
π*C6–C13→ π*C17–C19 1101.14 978.58
π*C7–C14→ π*C18–C20 909.65 805.44
π*C9–C15→ π*C17–C19 1057.33 1045.67
π*C10–C16→ π*C18–C20 1040.23 1046.42
Σπ*→π* 2234 2249,88 4108,35 3876,11
σN3-C4→ LP(1)*H41 44,60 62,57
σN3-C11→ LP(1)*H41 50,08 62,82
σN3-C12→ LP(1)*H41 47,61 60,19
Σσ→LP* 142,29 185,58
LP(1)N3→ LP(1)*H41 1158,49 1456,02
LP(1)Cl42→ LP(1)*H41 46,94 16,51
LP(4)Cl42→ LP(1)*H41 797,46 306,06
ΣLP→LP* 2002,89 1778,59
ΣTOTAL 3509.36 3522,22 6253,53 5840,28
Cationica
Delocalization Gas
πC13-C17→ π*C6–C9 47.86
πC15-C19→ π*C6–C9 43.22
πC15-C19→ π*C13–C17 46.98
Σπ→π* 138.06
πC7-C10→ LP(1)*C16 93.51
πC18-C20→ LP(1)*C16 107.22
Σπ→LP* 200.73
LP(1)C14→ π*C7–C10 171.17
LP(1)C14→ π*C18–C20 125.57
LP(1)C16→ π*C7–C10 176.65
LP(1)C16→ π*C18–C20 133.97
ΣLP→π* 607.36
π*C6–C9→ π*C13–C17 361.99
π*C6–C9→ π*C15–C19 232.87
Σπ*→π* 594.86
ΣTOTAL 1541.01

The letters bold indicated RMSD values.

a

This work.

Table 8.

Main delocalization energies (in kJ/mol) for three species of R(+)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* calculations.

B3LYP/6-31G*a
Delocalization Free base
Hydrochloride
Gas PCM Gas PCM
πC6-C13→ π*C9–C15 74.70 74.65 76.53 76.07
πC6-C13→ π*C17–C19 88.41 88.49 86.23 85.65
πC7-C14→ π*C10–C16 74.65 72.48 72.23
πC7-C14→ π*C18–C20 88.45 86.82 86.57
πC9-C15→ π*C6–C13 83.43 83.35 83.06 82.51
πC9-C15→ π*C17–C19 71.18 71.14 70.56 70.30
πC10-C16→ π*C7–C14 83.68 84.98 85.77
πC10-C16→ π*C18–C20 71.44 72.15 72.56
πC17-C19→ π*C6–C13 79.80 79.88 82.26 82.93
πC17-C19→ π*C9–C15 93.97 93.97 95.89 96.14
πC18-C20→ π*C7–C14 80.09 80.59
πC18-C20→ π*C10–C16 93.84 93.13
Σπ→π* 983.64 491.48 810.96 984.45
πC10-C16→ LP(1)*C7 202.39
πC10-C16→ LP(1)*C20 167.07
πC14-C18→ LP(1)*C7 219.66
πC14-C18→ LP(1)*C20 183.38
Σπ→LP* 772.5
LP(2)S1→ π*C9–C15 45.73 45.02 44.73 44.77
LP(2)S1→ π*C10–C16 45.81 45.27 47.23 47.02
LP(1)N2→ π*C6–C13 99.32 99.44 91.37 92.13
LP(1)N2→ π*C7–C14 101.03 101.78 100.74
LP(1)C20→ π*C10–C16 337.28
LP(1)C20→ π*C14–C18 305.43
ΣLP→π* 291.89 832.44 285.11 284.66
LP(1)*C7→ π*C10–C16 267.60
LP(1)*C7→ π*C14–C18 258.91
ΣLP*→π*
π*C9–C15→ π*C17–C19 1084.83
π*C10–C16→ π*C18–C20 1123.92
π*C6–C13→ π*C17–C19 1247.39 1083.04
π*C7–C14→ π*C18–C20 1071.67 978.87
π*C9–C15→ π*C17–C19 1096.62 843.40 817.61
π*C10–C16→ π*C18–C20 1184.32 1207.85
Σπ*→π* 2208.87 1096.62 4346.78 4087.37
σN3-C4→ LP(1)*H41 49.70 61.65
σN3-C11→ LP(1)*H41 49.16 59.73
σN3-C12→ LP(1)*H41 46.48 57.85
Σσ→LP* 145.34 179.23
LP(1)N3→ LP(1)*H41 1234.86 1491.17
LP(1)Cl42→ LP(1)*H41
LP(4)Cl42→ LP(1)*H41 704.83 305.14
ΣLP→LP* 1939.69 1796.31
ΣTOTAL 3484.4 3193.04 7527.88 7332.02
Cationica
Delocalization Gas PCM
πC13-C17→ π*C6–C9 47.90 46.98
πC15-C19→ π*C6–C9 43.30 43.43
πC15-C19→ π*C13–C17 47.07 47.61
Σπ→π* 138.27 138.02
πC7-C10→ LP(1)*C16 93.63 94.47
πC18-C20→ LP(1)*C16 107.30 107.05
Σπ→LP* 200.93 201.52
LP(1)N2→ π*C6–C9 42.72
LP(1)N2→ π*C7–C10 44.68
LP(1)C14→ π*C7–C10 171.67 168.95
LP(1)C14→ π*C18–C20 125.57 125.69
LP(1)C16→ π*C7–C10 176.65 177.86
LP(1)C16→ π*C18–C20 133.72 133.84
ΣLP→π* 607.61 693.74
π*C6–C9→ π*C13–C17 361.78 356.18
π*C6–C9→ π*C15–C19 231.49 223.25
Σπ*→π* 593.27 579.43
ΣTOTAL 1540.08 1612.71

The letters bold indicated RMSD values.

a

This work.

3.5. AIM studies

According to the Bader's theory the topological properties are interesting parameters to predict different types of interactions, such as intra or inter-molecular, ionic and hydrogen bonds interactions [59]. Hence, these properties can be easily computed in the bond critical points (BCPs) and in the ring critical points (RCPs) with the AIM2000 program [60]. Here, the electron density, ρ(r), the Laplacian values, ∇2ρ(r), the eigenvalues (λ1, λ2, λ3) of the Hessian matrix and, the |λ1|/λ3 ratio calculated by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method for the three forms of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers can be observed from Tables 9, 10 and 11. Note that the ionic and hydrogen bonds interactions are observed when λ1/λ3< 1 and ∇2ρ(r) > 0 [9]. Here, RCPN1, RCPN2 and RCPN3 are new RCPs formed as a consequence of C⋯H and H⋯H interactions while RCP1, RCP2 and RCP3 are RCPs corresponding to the R1, R2 and R3 rings, as defined in Fig. 1. In all species, the topological properties of RCP1 and RCP3 are practically the same in the two phenyl rings but different from RCP2 because this ring is the phenothiazine ring. First, analyzing the free bases species of both enantiomers, we observed that S(-)-PTZ present two C14⋯H21 and H⋯H interactions in both media but the involved atoms change of H24--H32 in gas phase to H23--H33 in solution. In R(+)-PTZ, the free base presents in gas phase the C14⋯H21 and H22⋯H31 interactions while in solution are observed three different H⋯H interactions. In the cationic species of S(-)-PTZ are not observed interactions while in R(+)-PTZ is observed a H⋯H interaction in gas phase while in solution are observed two C⋯H and a H⋯H interactions. The hydrochloride species of S(-)-PTZ present two interactions in gas phase and three different in solution while in the R(+)-PTZ enantiomer in gas phase (Table 11) are observed five interactions and only three in solution. In the hydrochloride species the Cl⋯H are ionic interactions where in S(-)-PTZ the Cl–H distances are 1.716 Å in gas phase and 2.032 Å in solution while in R(+)-PTZ the distances change to 1.748 Å in gas phase and 2.029 Å in solution. Evidently, both hydrochloride species are the most stable due to the higher values of their topological properties. These results are in agreement with those analyzed by NBO studies. The hydrochloride species of both forms of PTZ reveals higher stabilities than the corresponding to cyclizine [9].

Table 9.

Analysis of the Bond Critical Points (BCPs) and Ring critical point (RCPs) for three species of S(-)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

B3LYP/6-31G* Method
Free base
Gas phase
Parameter#
C14--H21
RCPN1
H24--H32
RCPN2
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3

ρ(r) 0.0088 0.0088 0.0095 0.0095 0.0198 0.0170 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0333 0.0357 0.0400 0.0421 0.1580 0.1104 0.1580
λ1 -0.0043 -0.0036 -0.0084 -0.0080 -0.0146 -0.0055 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0011 0.0013 -0.0014 0.0015 0.0815 0.0552 0.0813
λ3 0.0388 0.0379 0.0500 0.0485 0.0910 0.0608 0.0911
|λ1|/λ3 0.1108 0.0950 0.1680 0.1649 0.1604 0.0905 0.1592
Distances (Å)
2.693

2.190





Aqueous solution

Parameter#
C14--H21
RCPN1
H23--H33
RCPN2
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3

ρ(r) 0.0093 0.0090 0.0133 0.0133 0.0198 0.0169 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0344 0.0398 0.0626 0.0656 0.1573 0.1103 0.1572
λ1 -0.0049 -0.0026 -0.0084 -0.0077 -0.0145 -0.0055 -0.0144
λ2 0.0035 0.0050 -0.0019 0.0020 0.0809 0.0569 0.0808
λ3 0.0429 0.0375 0.0729 0.0712 0.0909 0.0590 0.0908
|λ1|/λ3 0.1142 0.0693 0.1152 0.1081 0.1595 0.0932 0.1586
Distances (Å)
2.646

2.086





Cationic
Gas phase
Parameter#
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3





ρ(r) 0.0199 0.0173 0.0199
2ρ(r) 0.1584 0.1084 0.1586
λ1 -0.0146 -0.0050 -0.0146
λ2 0.0832 0.0469 0.0835
λ3 0.0896 0.0665 0.0896
|λ1|/λ3
0.1629
0.0752
0.1629





Hydrochloride
Gas phase
Parameter#
Cl42--H25

Cl42--H41
RCPN1
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3

ρ(r) 0.0080 0.0804 0.0080 0.0198 0.0171 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0263 0.0866 0.0284 0.1582 0.1100 0.1582
λ1 -0.0062 -0.1359 -0.0062 -0.0146 -0.0053 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0017 -0.1357 0.0018 0.0822 0.0530 0.0820
λ3 0.0342 0.3583 0.0327 0.0905 0.0624 0.0906
|λ1|/λ3 0.1813 0.3793 0.1896 0.1613 0.0849 0.1600
Distances (Å)
2.908

1.716





Aqueous solution
Parameter#
C13--H23
RCPN1
H22---28
RCPN2
Cl42--H41
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3
ρ(r) 0.0134 0.0133 0.0090 0.0090 0.0416 0.0198 0.0169 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0617 0.0666 0.0384 0.0398 0.0764 0.1574 0.1094 0.1574
λ1 -0.0093 -0.0081 -0.0079 -0.0074 -0.0534 -0.0145 -0.0056 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0031 0.0036 -0.0014 0.0014 -0.0532 0.0813 0.0552 0.0811
λ3 0.0742 0.0711 0.0476 0.0458 0.1828 0.0906 0.0597 0.0907
|λ1|/λ3 0.1253 0.1139 0.1660 0.1616 0.2921 0.1600 0.0938 0.1599
Distances (Å) 2.508 2.189 2.032

# This symbol implies values in a.u. units.

Table 10.

Analysis of the Bond Critical Points (BCPs) and Ring critical point (RCPs) for free base and cationic species of R(+)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

B3LYP/6-31G* Method
Free base
Gas phase
Parameter#
C14--H21
RCPN1
H22--H31
RCPN2
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3


ρ(r) 0.0084 0.0084 0.0120 0.0110 0.0198 0.0170 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0315 0.0332 0.0483 0.0571 0.1580 0.1105 0.1580
λ1 -0.0037 -0.0033 -0.0127 0.0078 -0.0146 -0.0055 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0008 0.0009 -0.0083 0.0107 0.0815 0.0551 0.0813
λ3 0.0362 0.0355 0.0694 0.0542 0.0911 0.0609 0.0911
|λ1|/λ3 0.1022 0.0930 0.1830 -0.1439 0.1603 0.0903 0.1592
Distances (Å)
2.727

2.024






Aqueous solution
Parameter#
H31--H34
H22--H31
RCPN1
H23--H33
RCPN2
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3

ρ(r) 0.0057 0.0128 0.0057 0.0132 0.0132 0.0198 0.0170 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0212 0.0511 0.0208 0.0605 0.0656 0.1573 0.1103 0.1572
λ1 -0.0041 -0.0137 -0.0038 -0.0093 -0.0080 -0.0145 -0.0055 -0.0144
λ2 -0.0022 -0.0092 0.0029 -0.0033 0.0039 0.0809 0.0559 0.0807
λ3 0.0275 0.0742 0.0216 0.0732 0.0697 0.0909 0.0598 0.0909
|λ1|/λ3 0.1491 0.1846 0.1759 0.1270 0.1148 0.1595 0.0920 0.1584
Distances (Å)
2.353
1.995

2.072





Cationic
Gas phase
Parameter#
H22--H31
RCPN1
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3




ρ(r) 0.0120 0.0108 0.0199 0.0173 0.0199
2ρ(r) 0.0478 0.0533 0.1584 0.1084 0.1588
λ1 -0.0131 -0.0087 -0.0146 -0.0049 -0.0146
λ2 -0.0086 0.0107 0.0832 0.0472 0.0836
λ3 0.0696 0.0513 0.0897 0.0664 0.0896
|λ1|/λ3 0.1882 0.1696 0.1628 0.0738 0.1629
Distances (Å)
2.008








Aqueous solution
Parameter#
C14--H21
RCPN1
C13--H23
RCPN2
H22--H31
RCPN3
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3
ρ(r) 0.0085 0.0085 0.0131 0.0131 0.0124 0.0112 0.0198 0.0169 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0326 0.03369 0.0617 0.0639 0.0495 0.0556 0.1576 0.1095 0.1575
λ1 -0.0033 -0.0030 -0.0085 -0.0080 -0.0135 -0.0090 -0.0145 -0.0056 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0006 0.0006 -0.0014 0.0015 -0.0087 0.0108 0.0815 0.0553 0.0811
λ3 0.0366 0.0360 0.0716 0.0704 0.0717 0.0538 0.0906 0.0598 0.0908
|λ1|/λ3 0.0902 0.0833 0.1187 0.1136 0.1883 0.1673 0.1600 0.0936 0.1597
2.718 2.520 1.996

# This symbol implies values in a.u. units.

Table 11.

Analysis of the Bond Critical Points (BCPs) and Ring critical point (RCPs) for three species of R(+)-promethazine in gas and aqueous solution by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

B3LYP/6-31G* Method
Hydrochloride
Gas phase
Parameter#
C5⋯H34
RCPN1
C13⋯H23
RCPN2
H22⋯H31
RCPN3
Cl42⋯H23
Cl42⋯H41
RCPN3
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3
ρ(r) 0.0112 0.0112 0.0130 0.0130 0.0120 0.0109 0.0093 0.0746 0.0082 0.0198 0.0170 0.0199
2ρ(r) 0.0508 0.0508 0.0624 0.0624 0.0484 0.0548 0.0311 0.0935 0.0343 0.1580 0.1096 0.1584
λ1 -0.0092 -0.0092 -0.0090 -0.0090 -0.0130 -0.0087 -0.0072 -0.1220 -0.0057 -0.0146 -0.0055 -0.0146
λ2 -0.0005 -0.0005 -0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0085 0.0107 -0.0051 -0.1219 0.0068 0.0815 0.0535 0.0820
λ3 0.0606 0.0606 0.0720 0.0720 0.0699 0.0528 0.0435 0.3374 0.0331 0.0910 0.0615 0.0909
|λ1|/λ3 0.1518 0.1518 0.1250 0.1250 0.1860 0.1648 0.1655 0.3616 0.1722 0.1604 0.0894 0.1606
Distances (Å)
2.637

2.520

2.008

2.814
1.748




Aqueous solution
Parameter#
C13⋯H23
RCPN1
H22⋯H31
RCPN2
Cl42⋯H41
RCP1
RCP2
RCP3




ρ(r) 0.0134 0.0134 0.0122 0.0111 0.0418 0.0198 0.0169 0.0198
2ρ(r) 0.0633 0.0668 0.0494 0.0558 0.0771 0.1575 0.1093 0.1576
λ1 -0.0094 -0.0085 -0.0131 -0.0088 -0.0536 -0.0145 -0.0057 -0.0145
λ2 -0.0023 0.0025 -0.0085 0.0106 -0.0535 0.0813 0.0557 0.0808
λ3 0.0750 0.0726 0.0711 0.0537 0.1843 0.0907 0.0592 0.0911
|λ1|/λ3 0.1253 0.1171 0.1842 0.1639 0.2908 0.1599 0.0963 0.1592
Distances (Å) 2.507 1.999 2.029

# This symbol implies values in a.u. units.

3.6. Frontier orbitals and global descriptors studies

To predict reactivities and behaviours of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms are of interest to understand why the presence of two N–CH3 groups in their structures present the same biological activities than cyclizine despite those two groups in PTZ are not linked to rings. Hence, from the frontier orbitals and their differences is possible to compute the gap values [43, 44] and later, by using known equations the chemical potential (μ), electronegativity (χ), global hardness (η), global softness (S), global electrophilicity index (ω) and global nucleophilicity index (Ε) descriptors can be calculated by using the hybrid B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory [45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53]. The gap and descriptors values for both PTZ enantiomers in the two media are presented in Table 12. The evaluation of gap values for the three species show easily that the hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms in solution have low gap values and, for these reasons, the two species are more reactive but the S(-) form is most reactive than the R(+)-PTZ one, as expected because this latter form presents higher stability by NBO analysis (>Total energy). Moreover, the free base and cationic species of S(-) form are most reactive than the corresponding to the R(+) form. Comparisons of these results with the observed for similar species containing N–CH3 groups, as scopolamine, heroin morphine, cocaine, tropane and cyclizine are presented in Table 13 while their behaviours can be seen in Fig. 6. This figure shows that the hydrochloride species of cocaine in both media present the lower gap values and, obviously, are the most reactive species while in all media the tropane species are the less reactive being, the cationic one in gas phase the less reactive. Note that the free base and cationic species of two forms of PTZ are most reactive than the corresponding to cyclizine, however, the hydrochloride species of cyclizine is most reactive than both forms of PTZ. If now the descriptors are analyzed it is observed from Table 12 that the three species of S(-)-PTZ have higher electrophilicity indexes than the corresponding to R(+) form while, on the contrary, the species of R(+) form have higher nucleophilicity indexes than the species of S(-)-PTZ. The only exception is the hydrochloride species in gas phase of S(-) form because it present a higher value (-7.6061 eV) than the corresponding to R(+) form (7.1020 eV). If both electrophilicity and nucleophilicity indexes of the two S(-) and R(+)-PTZ are compared with other species from Table 14 the behaviours can easily be seen in Fig. 7. Higher electrophilicity indexes are observed in the cationic and hydrochloride species of PTZ than cyclizine while the cationic species of cyclizine have higher nucleophilicity index than both species of PTZ. The higher electrophilicity indexes are observed for all cationic forms in gas phase and, in particular, for cocaine while tropane in both media presents the lowest values. In relation to nucleophilicity indexes, the cationic species of tropane in gas phase presents the highest negative value indicating probably that for these two reasons, this species is the less reactive than the other ones (see Table 13).

Table 12.

Frontier molecular HOMO and LUMO orbitals , gap values and descriptors for the three species of S(−) and R(+)-promethazine (in eV) in gas and aqueous solution by using the B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Orbitals Free base
Cationic
Hydrochloride
Gas PCM Gas PCM Gas PCM
S(-)-promethazine
HOMO -5.0096 -5.0559 -7.943 -5.5593 -5.0151
LUMO -0.2939 -0.2857 -3.3769 -0.6939 -0.8109
∣GAP∣
4.7157
4.7702
4.5661

4.8654
4.2042
Descriptors
χ -2.3579 -2.3851 -2.2831 -2.4327 -2.1021
μ -2.6518 -2.6708 -5.6600 -3.1266 -2.9130
η 2.3579 2.3851 2.2831 2.4327 2.1021
S 0.2121 0.2096 0.2190 0.2055 0.2379
ω 1.4911 1.4954 7.0158 2.0092 2.0184
Ε
-6.2524
-6.3701
-12.9219

-7.6061
-6.1234
R(+)-promethazine
HOMO -5.0504 -5.0776 -7.9403 -5.5593 -5.3579 -5.1538
LUMO -0.2748 -0.2748 -3.3633 -0.6939 -0.5469 -0.6612
∣GAP∣
4.7756
4.8028
4.5770
4.8654
4.8110
4.4926
Descriptors
χ -2.3878 -2.4014 -2.2885 -2.4327 -2.4055 -2.2463
μ -2.6626 -2.6762 -5.6518 -3.1266 -2.9524 -2.9075
η 2.3878 2.4014 2.2885 2.4327 2.4055 2.2463
S 0.2094 0.2082 0.2185 0.2055 0.2079 0.2226
ω 1.4845 1.4912 6.9790 2.0092 1.8118 1.8817
Ε -6.3578 -6.4266 -12.9341 -7.6061 -7.1020 -6.5311

χ = - [E(LUMO)- E(HOMO)]/2; μ = [E(LUMO) + E(HOMO)]/2; η = [E(LUMO) - E(HOMO)]/2.

S = ½η; ω = μ2/2η; Ε = μ*η.

Table 13.

Frontier molecular HOMO and LUMO orbitals and gap values for the three species of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine compared with other species in gas and aqueous solution phases by using the B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Orbital Scopolamine#,b Heroinc Morphined Cocainee Tropanef Cyclizineg Promethazinea
S(-) R(+)
Free base/Gas phase
∣GAP∣
5.4004
5.6563
5.6044
4.8580
7.5506
5.3946
4.7157
4.7756
Free base/Aqueous solution
∣GAP∣
5.4758
5.6414
5.4750
4.9487
7.6611
5.5067
4.7702
4.8028
Cationic/Gas phase
∣GAP∣
5.6356
5.4268
5.1889
5.4468
9.5595
5.5823
4.5661
4.5770
Hydrochloride/Gas phase
∣GAP∣
4.9239
5.3024
5.4417
3.6813
6.8246

4.8654
4.8110
Hydrochloride/Aqueous solution
∣GAP∣ 5.4026 4.4469 4.5840 3.6813 5.9119 4.2159 4.2042 4.4926
#

Hydrobromide.

a

This work.

b

From Ref [7].

c

From Ref [5].

d

From Ref [1].

e

From Ref [3].

f

From Ref [2].

g

From Ref [9].

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Calculated gap values of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine in both media by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method compared with reported values for alkaloids and antihistaminic agents.

Table 14.

Global electrophilicity(ω) and nucleophilicity (E) indexes for the three species of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine compared with other species in gas and aqueous solution phases by using the B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Descriptor Scopolamine#,b Heroinc Morphined Cocainee Tropanef Cyclizineg Promethazinea
S(-) R(+)
Free base/Gas phasea
ω 1.7393 1.5083 1.3639 2.5183 0.3914 1.6777 1.4911 1.4845
Ε
-8.2756
-8.2606
-7.7475
-8.4959
-6.4905
-8.1146
-6.2524
-6.3578
Free base/Aqueous solutiona
ω 1.7504 1.5180 1.2339 2.5297 0.4429 1.7288 1.4954 1.4912
Ε
-8.4763
-8.2545
-7.1153
-8.7546
-7.0557
-8.4953
-6.3701
-6.4266
Cationic/gas phasea
ω 6.4529 6.7459 6.8155 7.9799 6.9598 6.5083 7.0158 6.9790
Ε
-16.9925
-16.4174
-15.4288
-17.9548
-38.9872
-16.8238
-12.9219
-12.9341
Hydrochloride/Aqueous solutiona
ω 0.9799 1.9667 1.8414 2.6828 0.6421 1.9053 2.0184 1.8817
Ε -6.2154 -6.5755 -6.6589 -5.7845 -5.7592 -5.9742 -6.1234 -6.5311

ω = μ2/2η; Ε = μ*η.

#

Hydrobromide.

a

This work.

b

From Ref [7].

c

From Ref [5].

d

From Ref [1].

e

From Ref [3].

f

From Ref [2].

g

From Ref [9].

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Calculated electrophilicity indexes of free base, cationic and hydrocloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of promethazine in both media by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method.

3.7. Vibrational study

B3LYP calculations have optimized the three species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms with C1 symmetries. The normal vibration modes expected for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species are respectively 114, 117 and 120 and, where all modes are active, in both spectra. The experimental available infrared and Raman spectra for promethazine hydrochloride were taken from Refs [10] and [66]. The experimental IR from Ref [66] was compared with the corresponding predicted for the three species of both enantiomers in Fig. 8 while the comparisons of the corresponding predicted Raman spectra with the experimental one are given in Fig. 9. Evidently, the hydrochloride forms of both enantiomers are not present in the experimental IR spectrum because the predicted intense IR bands of both S(-) and R(+) forms at 1625 and 1713 cm−1 respectively are not observed in the experimental one with the same intensities. Besides, the predicted IR spectra in the 2000-500 cm−1 region show strong differences between the intensities of IR bands at 1459 and 759 cm−1 in the three species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers but when only the average of cationic forms by using frequencies and intensities Lorentzian band shapes for a 1:1 population ratio of each species the ratio between those two bands decreases notably, as shown in Fig. 10. Note that in the higher wavenumbers region the predicted IR spectra for both cationic species are similar to the corresponding experimental ones. Hence, it is evident the presence of both cationic species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ in the solid phase, as revealed by Borodi et al [19]. The normal internal coordinates, the SQMFF methodology [39] and the Molvib program [42] were used to calculate the harmonic force fields in order to perform the complete vibrational assignments of all species of DHC. The scale factors used were those reported in the literature [40]. In Table 15 are presented the experimental and calculated wavenumbers together with the assignments of three species of S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms, respectively. Below, discussions of assignments for some groups are presented.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

Experimental infrared spectrum of hydrocloride promethazine compared with the corresponding predicted for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers by using B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Fig. 9.

Fig. 9

Experimental Raman spectrum of hydrocloride promethazine compared with the corresponding predicted for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers by using B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Fig. 10.

Fig. 10

Experimental infrared spectrum of hydrocloride promethazine compared with the corresponding average predicted for the cationic species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers by using frequencies and intensities Lorentzian band shapes for a 1:1 population ratio of each species at B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Table 15.

Observed and calculated wavenumbers (cm−1) and assignments for the three species of S(-) and R(+)-promethazine in gas phase by using B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

Experimental
B3LYP/6-31G* Methoda
S(-)-PTZ
R(+)-PTZ
Free base
Cationic
Hydrochloride
Free base
Cationic
Hydrochloride
IRc IRd Ramane SQMb Assignmentsa SQMb Assignmentsa SQMb Assignmentsa SQMb Assignmentsa SQMb Assignmentsa SQMb Assignmentsa
3391w,br 3448w 3411vw 3295 νN3-H41 3273 νN3-H41
3104w 3092 νC14-H34 3092 νC19-H39
3091 νC20-H40
3104w 3090 νaCH3(C11) 3090 νC13-H33
3087 νC13-H33 3088 νaCH3(C12) 3087 νC14-H34
3081 νC15-H35
3079 νC20-H40 3080 νC17-H37 3080 νC20-H40
3078 νC19-H39 3078 νC16-H36 3078 νaCH3(C11)
3073 νC15-H35 3071 νaCH3(C12)
3071 νC14-H34 3072 νC18-H38 3070 νC17-H37
3066 νC13-H33 3069 νC20-H40 3067 νC14-H34 3066 νC15-H35 3067 νaCH3(C12) 3067 νC16-H36
3069 νC19-H39 3065 νC19-H39 3066 νC16-H36 3063 νaCH3(C11) 3060 νC19-H39
3058sh 3059 νC20-H40 3057 νC17-H37 3059 νC13-H33 3058 νC18-H38
3058sh 3058 νC19-H39 3056 νC16-H36
νC18-H38
3060 νC20-H40 3057 νC18-H38
3051 νaCH3(C12) 3057 νC13-H33 3056 νC17-H37 3055 νC14-H34
3050 νC16-H36
νC15-H35
3049 νC16-H36
3046 νC16-H36 3050 νC15-H35 3047 νC15-H35
3045 νC15-H35 3044 νaCH3(C11) 3040 νC18-H38
3046w,br 3044m 3039 νC13-H33 3039 νC17-H37 3039 νaCH3(C12)
3037 νC17-H37 3037 νC14-H34 3036 νaCH3(C11)
3035 νaCH3(C12)
3035sh 3037 νC18-H38 3031 νaCH3(C11) 3032 νaCH3(C12) 3030 νaCH3(C8) 3031 νaCH2
3019 νaCH3(C11) 3021 νaCH3(C11) 3025 νaCH3(C8)
3006 νaCH3(C11) 3013 νaCH3(C8) 3014 νaCH3(C8)
3018w 3004 νaCH3(C12) 3012 νaCH2 3012 νaCH3(C8)
2986 νaCH3(C8) 2995 νaCH3(C8) 2999 νaCH3(C8) 3000 νaCH3(C12) 2989 νC4-H21
2980w 2984 νaCH2 2984 νaCH2 2986 νaCH2 2999 νaCH3(C8) 2982 νsCH3(C12)
2966sh 2978 νaCH3(C12) 2974 νaCH3(C8) 2979 νaCH3(C8) 2978 νsCH3(C11)
2948w 2968 νaCH3(C8) 2955 νC4-H21 2962 νaCH3(C11) 2958 νsCH3(C12)
2962 νaCH3(C11) 2952 νsCH3(C12) 2953 νC4-H21 2957 νaCH3(C12) 2956 νsCH3(C11)
2938w,br 2930sh 2928 νC4-H21 2947 νsCH3(C11) 2931 νsCH3(C12) 2974 νaCH2 2945 νsCH3(C8)
2925 νsCH3(C12) 2926 νsCH3(C11) 2929 νsCH3(C8) 2933 νsCH3(C8) 2941 νC4-H21
2918 νsCH3(C11) 2913 νsCH3(C8) 2915 νsCH2 2926 νsCH2
2907sh 2907 νsCH3(C8) 2908 νsCH3(C8)
2872sh 2888sh 2887sh 2875 νsCH2 2863 νsCH2 2872 νsCH2 2837 νC4-H21 2894 νsCH2
2824m 2793 νaCH3(C12) 2820 νsCH3(C12)
2747m 2782 νaCH3(C11) 2812 νsCH3(C11)
2673w
2370s 2508w
1688w 1625 νN3-H41 1713 νN3-H41
1638vw 1633w 1630vw 1600 νC13-C17 1596 νC13-C17
νC14-C18
1599 νC14-C18
1596w 1586w 1581sh 1581 νC14-C18 1580 νC14-C18 1581 νC18-C20
νC17-C19
1584 νC17-C19
νC18-C20
1581 νC17-C19
νC15-C19
1558s 1577 νC13-C17
νC14-C18
1577 νC14-C18 1578 νC7-C14 1578 νC13-C17
1573w 1582sh 1558s 1561 νC7-C14 1566 νC17-C19 1564 νC7-C14 1570 νC17-C19
νC18-C20
1573 νC18-C20
νC17-C19
1571 νC7-C14
1558s 1556 νC13-C17 1558 νC7-C14 1557 νC13-C17
1550w 1552sh 1550 νC17-C19
νC18-C20
1554 νC17-C19 1552 νC17-C19
νC18-C20
1498 ρN3-H41
1489m 1500w 1489 βC13-H33
βC16-H36
1486 δaCH3(C8) 1488 βC14-H34
1480sh 1483 δaCH3(C8) 1484 δaCH3(C8) 1480 δaCH3(C8)
1466sh 1470w 1473 ρN3-H41 1474 δCH2 1478 δaCH3(C12) 1476 δCH2
δaCH3(C8)
1466sh 1470w 1470 βC16-H36
βC14-H34
1471 δaCH3(C11) δaCH3(C12) 1473 δaCH3(C8)
1466sh 1470w 1469 βC16-H36
βC14-H34
βC13-H33
1467 βC15-H35
βC13-H33
βC14-H34
1468 δaCH3(C8) 1468 δaCH3(C8)
1459vs 1454sh 1463 δaCH3(C12) 1463 δaCH3(C11) 1464 δaCH3(C11) δaCH3(C12)
1459vs 1454sh 1456 δaCH3(C12)
δaCH3(C11)
1456 δaCH3(C11) 1458 δaCH3(C11) 1460 βC14-H34
βC13-H33
1461 δaCH3(C12)
1459vs 1454sh 1452 δaCH3(C11) 1454 δCH2 1455 δCH2 1453 δCH2 1454 δCH2
1451sh 1451 δCH2 1451 δaCH3(C12) 1451 δaCH3(C8) 1450 δaCH3(C12) 1451 δaCH3(C11) 1449 δaCH3(C11)
1447sh 1447sh 1444 δaCH3(C8) 1446 δaCH3(C8)
δaCH3(C12)
1449 δaCH3(C11) 1447 βC20-H40
βC18-H38
1447 βC20-H40
βC18-H38
1447sh 1447sh 1440 δaCH3(C8) 1444 δaCH3(C12) 1442 βC13-H33 1446 βC20-H40
βC18-H38
1446 βC19-H39 1446 βC19-H39
1433sh 1438sh 1437 δaCH3(C12)
δaCH3(C8)
1440 δCH2 1438 δaCH3(C8) 1444 βC19-H39 1442 δaCH3(C12) 1443 δaCH3(C11) δaCH3(C12)
1433sh 1438sh 1435sh 1435 δaCH3(C8) 1432 βC19-H39 1438 δaCH3(C12)
1430 δaCH3(C12) 1431 βC20-H40
βC17-H37
1430 βC20-H40 1435 δsCH3(C12) δsCH3(C11)
1429 βC17-H37
βC19-H39
1429 δaCH3(C11) δaCH3(C12) 1429 βC19-H39 1427 δsCH3(C12) 1425 wagCH2
ρ′N3–H41
1421sh 1427 βC19-H39 1423 δaCH3(C8) 1426 δaCH3(C12) 1406 wagCH2 1407 wagCH2 1420 wagCH2
1419sh 1417 δaCH3(C11) 1411 δsCH3(C12) 1420 δaCH3(C11) 1400 ρN3-H41 1408 δsCH3(C11)
1408vw 1403sh 1406 δsCH3(C11) 1400 δaCH3(C8) 1408 ρ′N3–H41 1402 wagCH2
δsCH3(C11)
1397 δsCH3(C11) 1401 δsCH3(C12)
1390vw 1395sh 1392 ρ′N3–H41 wagCH2 1394 wagCH2 1394 ρ′N3–H41
1378w 1387w 1388 wagCH2 1381 ρN3-H41 1376 δsCH3(C11) δsCH3(C12) 1375 δsCH3(C8)
ρ′C4–H21
1380 δsCH3(C8) 1379 δsCH3(C8)
1364sh 1374vw 1376 δsCH3(C12) 1379 δsCH3(C11) 1360 δsCH3(C8)
1354w 1362 ρC4-H21 1361 δsCH3(C8) 1355 νN3-H41
δsCH3(C12)
1357 δsCH3(C8) 1350 ρ′C4–H21
ρCH2
1356 ρ′C4–H21
1342sh 1347sh 1340w 1342 δsCH3(C8) 1349 ρC4-H21 1351 ρC4-H21
1334m 1327sh 1326sh 1323 ρ′C4–H21 1335 ρ′C4–H21 1330 ρC4-H21
νN2-C6
1327 ρCH2
νN2-C6
1320w 1319 ρCH2
νN2-C6
1320 ρ′C4–H21 1318 ρC4-H21 1320 ρ′C4–H21 1313 ρC4-H21
1292sh 1312sh 1315sh 1309 νN2-C6
ρCH2
1307 ρ′C4–H21 1315 νN2-C6 1301 νC6-C13 1300 νC6-C13 1301 νC6-C13
1285m 1294s 1296sh 1286 βC15-H35
νC16-C10
1282 νC9-C15
νC6-C9
νC7-C10
1288 βC15-H35
βC13-H33
1285m 1294s 1296sh 1283 νC6-C13 1282 νC6-C13 1283 νC6-C13 1285 νC9-C15
νC6-C9
1286 βC15-H35 1285 νC16-C10
νC7-C10
νC6-C9
1270m 1279sh 1289m 1273 βC15-H35
νC16-C10
1274 νC16-C10
νC9-C15
1275 νC16-C10 1270 νN3-C4
ρCH3(C12)
1274sh 1267 νC9-C15
νC6-C9
νC7-C10
1256m 1253sh 1265 νN3-C4 1264 νC7-C10
νC6-C9
1266 νC9-C15
νC7-C10
νC6-C9
1267 ρCH2 1266 ρCH2 1269 ρCH2
βC16-H36
1249sh 1247m 1253 ρCH2 1255 ρCH2
βC16-H36
1260 ρCH2
1228m 1233sh 1236sh 1233 νN2-C5
νN2-C7
1234 νN2-C5
νN2-C7
1243 νN2-C6
βC14-H34
νC7-C14
1248 νN2-C5
νN2-C7
1242 νN2-C6
1228m 1223sh 1228 νN2-C6 1228 ρ′CH3(C12)
ρ′CH3(C11)
1224 νN3-C12 1226 ρCH3(C12) 1238 ρCH3(C12)
1218sh 1208s 1218w 1217 νN2-C7 1216 ρ′CH3(C12) 1221 νN2-C7 1216 ρ′CH3(C11) 1223 νN2-C7
1218sh 1208s 1209sh 1210 νN2-C6 1211 νN2-C7
βC15-H35
1170w 1189vs 1209sh 1187 νN3-C11 1187 ρ′CH3(C11) 1181 ρCH3(C11)
δC8C4N3
1178 ρ′CH3(C12) 1200 ρ′CH3(C11)
1170w 1189vs 1171sh 1166 βC17-H37 1167 βC17-H37 1172 ρCH3(C11)
1162sh 1167sh 1164m 1153 βC18-H38
βC20-H40
1156 βC17-H37 1155 βC17-H37 1164 ρCH3(C11)
ρ′CH3(C12)
1166 βC18-H38
βC20-H40
1167 βC17-H37
1156sh 1157sh 1151 βC17-H37 1155 βC18-H38
βC20-H40
1153 βC18-H38 1163 βC18-H38 1157 ρ′CH3(C11)
ρCH3(C11)
1164 βC18-H38
βC20-H40
1142w 1143 ρCH3(C11)
ρCH3(C12)
1141 ρ′CH3(C12) 1138 ρCH3(C12) 1137 βC20-H40 1138 βC19-H39 1138 νC15-C19
1128m 1129sh 1126 βC19-H39
βC20-H40
1128 νC15-C19 1128 βC19-H39
βC20-H40
1120 βC19-H39
βC20-H40
1121 νC15-C19 1121 νC16-C20
1106w 1117sh 1118m 1109 νC15-C19 1111 νC16-C20
νC15-C19
1111 νC16-C20 1111 ρCH3(C8) 1100 ρCH3(C8)
νN2-C5
1091sh 1103m 1105m 1097 ρ′CH3(C8) 1094 ρ′CH3(C8) 1103 ρCH3(C11)
ρ′CH3(C12)
1095 ρCH3(C8) 1107 ρCH3(C8)
1091sh 1103m 1105m 1084 ρCH3(C12)
ρCH3(C11)
1089 νN2-C5 1089 νN2-C5
νC7-C10
1091 νN2-C5
1082sh 1075sh 1088sh 1080 νN2-C5
νC9-S1
1084 νN2-C5 1082 νN2-C5 1079 ρ′CH3(C8) 1079 νC4-C8
1066vw 1066sh 1073 νC4-C8 1069 νC4-C8 1067 νC4-C8 1072 νC4-C8
1059vw 1058sh 1060 ρ′CH3(C11) 1057 ρ′CH3(C8) 1052 βR1(A3) 1057 βR1(A3) 1057 ρ′CH3(C12)
1048sh 1047 βR1(A3) 1054 βR1(A1) 1050 ρCH3(C11) 1052 βR1(A3) 1053 βR1(A3)
1043m 1040sh 1044sh 1043 βR1(A1) 1048 βR1(A3) 1048 βR1(A1) 1048 βR1(A1) 1051 βR1(A1) 1051 βR1(A1)
1034m 1027vs 1030 ρ′CH3(C12)
νN3-C11
1023 νC17-C19
ρCH3(C12)
1040 βR1(A3) 1036 ρ′CH3(C11)
νN3-C11
1031 νC17-C19 1034 νC4-C8
βR1(A3)
1034m 1027vs 1023 νC17-C19 1020 ρCH3(C11)
ρCH3(C12)
1033 νC17-C19
νC15-C19
1029 νC18-C20
νC16-C20
1033 νC17-C19
νC18-C20
1034m 1027vs 1021 νC18-C20
νC16-C20
1019 νC18-C20
νC16-C20
1024 νC17-C19 1031 νC18-C20
νC16-C20
1025 ρCH3(C11) 1032 νC18-C20
νC17-C19
νC15-C19
1009sh 1012s 1008sh 1015 νC4-C8
νC4-C5
1021 νC18-C20
νC15-C19
1005w 1012s 1008sh 1006 ρ′CH3(C8) 1002 νN3-C11
987s 996sh 987 γC19-H39
γC17-H37
988 νN3-C11
νN3-C12
981 γC19-H39
γC17-H37
988vw 973 γC18-H38
γC20-H40
980 γC20-H40
976w 971vw 971 γC17-H37 986 γC20-H40 976 γC20-H40
γC18-H38
968 νN3-C12
νN3-C11
971 γC17-H37
975 γC19-H39
γC17-H37
964 γC17-H37
957sh 955s 957 νN3-C12 963 γC18-H38 958 νN3-C11
νN3-C12
965 γC20-H40
γC18-H38
950w 949vw 949 νN3-C11
νN3-C12
935sh 941sh 935 γC16-H36 943 γC15-H35 937 γC15-H35 937 γC15-H35 939 ρCH3(C8)
930w 930sh 934 γC15-H35 941 γC16-H36
γC18-H38
936 γC16-H36 928 γC15-H35
γC13-H33
930 γC16-H36
γC18-H38
932 γC15-H35
924sh 929w 924 ρCH3(C8) 928 νN3-C4
ρCH3(C8)
923 γC16-H36 928 ρCH3(C8)
γC15-H35
922 γC16-H36
902w 893m 917sh 915 ρCH3(C8) 918 ρCH3(C8) 920 γC15-H35 915 νN3-C12
884vw 893m 875 νN3-C4 866 νC4-C5 873 νC4-C5 867 γC13-H33
νC4-C5
874vw 873sh 854 γC13-H33 856 γC13-H33 862 νC4-C5 861 γC13-H33
859w 856s 856w 851 γC14-H34 854 γC14-H34 853 γC14-H34 856 γC13-H33 854 γC14-H34 857 γC13-H33
γC15-H35
852w 832sh 842sh 847 νC4-C5 852 γC14-H34
γC16-H36
850 γC13-H33 852 γC14-H34 844 νN3-C11
νN3-C12
850 γC14-H34
807vw 817sh 808m 803 τwCH2 808 τwCH2 813 τwCH2 816 τwCH2 811 τwCH2 813 τwCH2
778sh 775sh 775sh 778 βR2(A1) 774 βR2(A1) 777 βR2(A1) 794 δC5C4N3 787 νN3-C4 803 νN3-C4
δC5C4N3
759vs 758s 761w 752 γC19-H39 756 γC19-H39
γC17-H37
754 νN3-C4 760 νN3-C4 760 γC19-H39
γC17-H37
762 βR2(A1)
759vs 758s 761w 756 γC19-H39 755 γC20-H40
γC14-H34
757 γC19-H39
759vs 758s 754sh 751 γC20-H40 751 γC20-H40
γC18-H38
752 γC20-H40 751 γC20-H40 752 γC20-H40
γC18-H38
752sh 742sh 745 γC20-H40
γC19-H39
746 γC20-H40
γC18-H38
747 νN3-C4
734m 737sh 722 τR1(A1) 723 τR1(A3)
τR1(A1)
722 τR1(A1) 723 τR1(A3) 722 τR1(A3) 722 τR1(A3)
729m 720 τR1(A1)
712vw 718m 714 τR1(A3) 713 τR1(A3) 714 τR1(A3) 716 τR1(A1) 716 τR1(A1) 715 τR1(A1)
695w 687m 688sh 686 βR2(A3) 683 τR1(A3)
τR1(A1)
686 βR2(A3) 688 βR2(A3) 685 τR1(A3)
τR1(A1)
688 τR1(A3)
τR1(A1)
675w 655m 672s 676 βR3(A1) 675 βR3(A1)
βR2(A3)
677 βR3(A1) 677 βR3(A1) 676 βR3(A1) 677 βR3(A1)
βR2(A3)
646s 616vw 623 βR3(A3) 619 βR3(A3) 631 βR3(A3) 623 βR3(A3) 619 βR3(A3) 622 βR3(A3)
613w 594vw 609 βR2(A1) 611 βR2(A1) 613 βR2(A1) 605 βR2(A1)
βR1(A2)
601 βR1(A2)
βR2(A1)
604 βR2(A1)
βR1(A2)
567s 540w 539 τR1(A2)
τR3(A1)
534 τR3(A1) 546 τR2(A3)
τR1(A2)
537 τR1(A2)
τR3(A1)
532 τR1(A2)
τR3(A1)
538 τR1(A2)
γN2-C5
524 βR1(A2) 526 βR1(A2) 530 βR1(A2) 524 τR3(A1) 519 τR3(A1) 525 τR3(A1)
510vw 518sh 520 τR3(A3) 517 τR3(A3) 520 τR3(A3)
τR3(A1)
522 τR3(A3) 514 τR3(A3) 520 τR3(A3)
486sh 508w 502 δC8C4N3 497 τR3(A1) 490 δC8C4N3 494 δC5C4C8
δC11N3C12
503 δC5C4C8
νH41-Cl42
486sh 508w 486 δC4N3C12
τR2(A1)
489 δC8C4N3 479 δC5C4C8 475 δC11N3C12
δC4N3C11
482s 479sh 473 δC8C4N3 466 δC11N3C12
δC4N3C11
471 δC4N3C12
470w 451 δC4N3C11 444 τR2(A3) 447 τR2(A3)
τR2(A1)
445 τR2(A3)
τR2(A1)
441 τR2(A3)
440s 440sh 439 δC11N3C12 439 τR2(A3)
ButtC6-C9
438 τR2(A3)
435 τR2(A3) 432 τR2(A1) 434 τR2(A1) 434 τR2(A1) 434 τR2(A1) 434 τR2(A1)
423sh 423m 426 τR2(A1)
νC10-S1
427 νC9-S1
νC10-S1
429 νC9-S1 427 νC9-S1
νC10-S1
427 νC10-S1
νC9-S1
βR2(A3)
429 νC10-S1
νC9-S1
423sh 423m 421 δC5C4N3 417 δC11N3C12 424 νC10-S1 418 δC8C4N3
δC4N3C12
392w 394sh 402 βR2(A2)
βR3(A2)
401 βR2(A2) 404 βR2(A2) 407 βR2(A2)
βN2-C5
402 βR2(A2) 407 βR2(A2)
392w 394sh 382 δC5C4C8 395 δC5C4C8
370w 370sh 360 γN2-C5 375 δC11N3C12 379 δC4N3C11 377 δC8C4N3
357sh 357sh 352 δC5C4C8 358 βR3(A2) 356 βR3(A2)
δC5C4C8
356 γN2-C5
βR3(A2)
357 βR3(A2) 356 βR3(A2)
357sh 357sh 349 δC5C4C8 346 δC4N3C12 347 δC4N3C12
δC4N3C11
340sh 333 βR2(A2) 331 τR2(A3) 332 τR2(A3)
337s 325 βN2-C5 337 τR2(A3) 336 τR2(A3) 340 τR2(A3)
γN2-C5
320sh 325sh 319 τR2(A3)
δC11N3C12
315 βN2-C5 318 βN2-C5
303m 294vw 302 δC11N3C12 305 βN2-C5
δC5C4N3
278sh 281 βN2-C5
δC4N3C12
288 δC4N3C12
δC4N3C11
280 τR2(A2)
278sh 273 δC4N3C12 272 τR2(A2) 272 τwCH3(C8) 273 τR2(A2) 284 τR2(A2)
245sh 266 τR2(A2) 263 δC4N3C11 257 τwCH3(C8) 267 τwCH3(C8)
235m 232 νH41-Cl42 233 ButtC7-C10 232 ButtC7-C10
ButtC6-C9
235m 227 ButtC6-C9
ButtC7-C10
228 ButtC6-C9
ButtC7-C10
228 ButtC6-C9
ButtC7-C10
220 τwCH3(C11) 225 τwCH3(C11) 226 ButtC7-C10
ButtC6-C9
222 νH41-Cl42
215s 211 τwCH3(C11)
τwCH3(C12)
214 τwCH3(C8) 213 τwCH3(C12) 218 τwCH3(C11)
209 τwCH3(C12) 209 τwCH3(C8)
204sh 203 τwCH3(C11) 201 δN2C5C4 201 δN2C5C4 206 δN2C5C4
198 δN2C5C4 197 δN2C5C4
195sh 194 τwCH3(C8) 196 τwCH3(C12) 194 τwCH3(C11)
188sh 188 τwCH3(C11)
178 τwCH3(C12) 177 τR2(A2)
τR1(A2)
178 τR2(A2)
τwCH3(C12)
180 τR2(A2)
τR1(A2)
155 τR1(A2) 159 δC5C4N3 157 τR1(A2)
τR2(A2)
140 τR1(A2) 164 τwCH3(C12) 154 τwCH3(C12)
144 τR1(A2) 143 τR1(A2) 143 τR1(A2)
136 τR3(A1) 139 τR1(A2)
118 τR3(A2) 115 τR3(A2) 119 τR3(A2) 122 τR3(A2)
τR3(A3)
119 τR3(A2) 119 τR3(A2)
105 τN3-H41
80 τN3-C4 80 δN3H41Cl42 83 δN3H41Cl42
ρ′N3–H41
62 τR2(A2)
γN2-C5
72 τN3-C4 66 τN3-C4 72 τR3(A2) 70 τN3-C4
τN3-H41
54 τR2(A2)
δN2C5C4
58 τR2(A2) 57 τR2(A2) 60 τR2(A2) 61 γN2-C5
τwN2-C5
62 τN3-H41
42 γN2-C5
τwN2-C5
52 γN2-C5
τN3-C4
47 τN3-C4 58 τR2(A2) 54 τR2(A2)
τR2(A2)
36 τC4-C5 31 γN2-C5 37 τC4-C5 35 τC4-C5 37 γN2-C5
τwN2-C5
31 τwN2-C5
τC4-C5
27 τN3-C4
τC4-C5
27 τwN2-C5 32 τN3-C4
γN2-C5
31 τC4-C5
24 γN2-C5
τwN2-C5
21 τC4-C5
τwN2-C5
18 τN3-C4 18 τN3-C4

Abbreviations: ν, stretching; β, deformation in the plane; γ, deformation out of plane; wag, wagging; τ, torsion; βR, deformation ring; τR, torsion ring; ρ, rocking; τw, twisting; δ, deformation; a, antisymmetric; s, symmetric; (A1), Ring 1.

a

This work.

b

From scaled quantum mechanics force field.

c

From Ref [66].

d

From Ref [10].

e

From Ref [10].

3.7.1. Band assignments

3.7.1.1. N–H modes

For both PTZ forms, the NH stretching modes are expected only for the cationic and hydrochloride species. For instance, in monomer and dimer of clonidine hydrochloride [67] these modes are assigned at 3427/3341 and 2584cm−1, respectively while in those two forms of diphenhydramine [8] these modes are predicted respectively at 3150 and 1748 cm−1. Here, in the cationic and hydrochloride species of S(-) form of DHC these modes are predicted to 3295 and 1638 cm−1 and in the R(+) form they are predicted to 3273 and 1713 cm−1. Then, they can be assigned in the same region. Here, the group of bands observed in IR spectrum of DHC between 2800 and 2200 cm−1 with a strong band centered at 2370 cm−1 could be assigned to the N–H stretching modes due to H bonds, as was also reported for clonidine hydrochloride [67]. The N–H rocking modes for both cationic and hydrochloride forms are predicted in different regions, as observed in Table 15. Later, these modes are assigned in accordance. The torsion τN3-H41 modes expected only in both hydrochloride forms are predicted by calculations to 105 and 70 cm−1 and they cannot be assigned because there are not observed bands in this region.

3.7.1.2. CH modes

In the three species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantomers, eight aromatics C–H stretching modes are expected and only one stretching mode (C4–H21) with aliphatic characteristic. Hence, they are predicted by the SQM/B3LYP/6-31G* calculations in different regions. Evidently, the aromatics modes are assigned at higher wavenumbers than the other ones, as shown in Tables 15 and 16. Besides, the in-plane deformation or rocking and out-of-plane deformation modes expected only for these C–H aromatics are predicted respectively between 1489/1120 and 987/745 cm−1. Hence, they can be assigned in these regions. These modes in carquejol [50] are assigned between 1483/1121 and 972/746 cm−1.

Table 16.

Scaled internal force constants for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of S(-) and R(+)- prometazine in gas phase by using the B3LYP/6-31G* method compared with the corresponding to cyclizine.

Force constant Promethazinea
Cyclizineb
S(-)
R(+)
Free base Cationic HCl Free base Cationic HCl Free base Cationic HCl/PCM
f(νN-H) 6.02 2.47 5.94 2.60 5.91 4.61
f(νN-CH3) 4.67 3.92 4.25 4.70 3.94 4.94 4.85 4.06 4.33
f(νC-N) 4.97 4.65 4.82 5.05 4.74 4.96 4.54 4.13 4.19
f(νCH2) 4.74 4.72 4.74 4.85 4.76 4.89 4.62 4.82 4.87
f(νCH3) 4.82 4.83 4.85 4.90 4.94 4.95 4.69 5.06 5.07
f(νC-H)R 5.11 5.11 5.11 5.18 5.19 5.19 5.15 5.17 5.18
f(νC-H) 4.73 4.82 4.81 4.45 4.90 4.78 4.31 4.44 4.74
f(νC=C) 6.50 6.50 6.46
f(νC-C) 3.40 3.57 3.65 3.70 3.56 3.69
f(δCH2) 0.78 0.79 0.79 0.81 0.82 0.81 0.74 0.73 0.73
f(δCH3) 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.56 0.55

Units are mdyn Å−1 for stretching and mdyn Å rad−2 for angle deformations.

a

This work.

b

From Ref. [9].

3.7.1.3. CH3 modes

The three species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers present three CH3 groups, where two of them are linked to N3 atoms and the other one to C4 atoms. Then, these modes are predicted in different regions and, thus, they can be easily assigned in accordance to the calculations. In carquejol [50] these stretching modes are assigned between 3031 and 2919 cm−1 while in this case these modes are assigned to the IR and Raman bands between 3411 and 2747 cm−1. Note that the symmetrical stretching modes corresponding to CH3 groups linked to N3 atoms of two free base species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ are predicted at lower wavenumbers and, hence, they are assigned to the IR bands at 2824 and 2747 cm−1. The CH3 deformation, rocking and twisting modes in carquejol [50] are respectively assigned between 1587/1436, 1084/1026 and 220/171 cm−1. Here, those three vibration modes are assigned to the IR and Raman bands to 1500/1340, 1289/902 and 267/154 cm−1. These latter modes between 178 and 154 couldn't be assigned due to that there are not observed bands in these regions.

3.7.1.4. CH2 modes

All PTZ species have only one CH2 group, for which, the expected antisymmetrical and symmetrical stretching, deformation, wagging, rocking and twisting modes are clearly assigned as predicted by the calculations. For the free base and hydrochloride species of R(+)-PTZ the antisymmetrical modes are predicted at higher wavenumbers than the other species of S(-) form, hence, those modes are assigned to the groups of IR and Raman bands at 3037/2872, 1470/1433, 1421/1387, 1354/1247 and 817/808 cm−1. Those vibration modes of the two CH2 groups of Carquejol are assigned in approximately the same regions [50].

3.7.1.5. Skeletal modes

In the three species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers are very important the N3–C11 and N3–C12 stretching modes because their corresponding bonds are predicted by B3LYP/6-31G* calculations longer than the corresponding to N3–C4 bonds, as was experimentally observed by X-ray diffraction [19]. Therefore, the strong IR bands at 1012, 987, 955 and 893 cm−1 could be associated to the N3–C11 and N3–C12 stretching modes. Note that the IR band of medium intensity at 1256 cm−1 could be also attributed to the N3–C4 stretching mode of free base of S(-)-PTZ while the strong IR band at 1189 cm−1 could be assigned to the N3–C11 stretching mode of free base of that form. Moreover, the very strong IR band at 759 cm−1 and the band at 893 cm−1 could be associated to N3–C4 stretching modes of both forms. The IR bands at 1128, 1208 and 1105 cm−1 could be assigned to other N–C stretching modes (N2–C5, N2–C6 and N2–C7) expected for all species of PTZ because the calculations predicted these modes in those regions. The C=C stretching modes are usually assigned between 1680 and 1659 cm−1 [[1], [2], [3], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [45], [47], [48], [49], [50], [52], [53], [67]]; thus, the strong IR bands at 1558 cm−1 is without difficulty associated to these vibration modes of three species of both enantiomeric forms. Here, a very important result is the very strong Raman band observed at 1027 cm−1 which is attributed to C–C stretching modes of both phenyl rings of both forms, as was reported for identification of PTZ by Assi [22]. In the IR spectrum that band is observed with medium intensity at 1034 cm−1. The two C9–S1 and C10–S1 stretching modes expected in all species of both enantiomers can be associated to the IR band of medium intensity at 423 cm−1 because all species, with exception of free base of S(-) form, are predicted in this region. In the free base of S(-) form the C9–S1 stretching mode is predicted at 1080 cm−1 coupled with the N2–C5 stretching mode. The remaining skeletal modes including the deformation and torsion modes of both phenyl rings are assigned in the regions predicted by SQM calculations and according the assignments for similar compounds [1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 67], as detailed in Table 15.

3.8. Force fields

Both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers have evidenced differences in the positions of IR bands because differences in their geometrical parameters are observed. Hence, it is necessary to investigate if the harmonic force constants present some changes since these parameters are also strongly dependent of their structures. Hence, the force fields for all species of both forms are calculated in gas phase by using B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory. These parameters are compared in Table 16 with the reported for the three species of cyclizine [9]. In general, the force constants for the R(+)-PTZ enantiomer have higher values than the corresponding to the S(-) form. Comparing the f(νN-H) force constants of all species, we observed that the cationic species of both forms of PTZ and cyclizine are higher than the hydrochloride ones because the presence of electronegative Cl atoms linked to H atoms generate a enlargement of N–H bonds with the consequent reduction of their f(νN-H) force constants. Note that in hydrochloride cyclizine the presence of N–CH3 group linked to two rings produces a higher value in its force constant (4.61 mdyn Å−1), as compared with both forms of PTZ. Probably, for this same reason, the f(νN-CH3) force constants of free base and cationic species of cyclizine have higher values than the corresponding to PTZ. On the other hand, the hydrochloride species of R(+) has higher value than the other ones because the distances observed for both N–CH3 groups are lower in the R(+) form than the S(-) one, as observed in Tables 3 and 4. Note that the f(νC-H) force constants corresponding to the aromatic rings in general are higher in all species than the aliphatic ones and, moreover, these values are similar to those published for the species of diphenhydramine [8]. The remaining constants have similar values in the two compared species, as is observed in Table 16.

3.9. Ultraviolet-visible spectrum

The electronic spectra of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ enantiomers were predicted in aqueous solution with the TD-DFT method and the Gaussian program [55] by using the B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory. The experimental UV-Vis spectrum of a racemic mixture of hydrochloride species of both enantiomers in ethanol solution was taken from Ref. [68] where in each enantiomer it is observed one intense band at c. a. 250 nm and where one of them is slightly most intense than the other one. In all theoretical spectra are observed one intense band, whose positions are respectively in free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of S(-) form at 247.0 (shoulder at 283.2 nm), 290.8 and 290.2 nm while and in the R(+) form the positions of those bands change at 245.7 (shoulder at 280.0 nm), 292.7 and 284.4 nm, respectively. The shifting of the bands observed in the experimental UV spectra from 250 to 290 nm, in relation to the theoretical ones, can be attributed to the different solvents. All UV spectra are compared in Fig. 11 with the corresponding experimental one. Here, it is evident that the free base species of both forms are protonated, as suggested by the shoulders at higher wavelengths and closer to the values for the cationic species. Also, the proximities between the maxima of both hydrochloride forms show that these species are as cationic species. Hence, these spectra evidence clearly the presence of both cationic S(-) and R(+) forms in solution. Obviously, the π→π* transitions due to the C=C double bonds justify the intense bands observed in the experimental spectra, as supported by NBO calculations.

Fig. 11.

Fig. 11

Experimental electronic spectrum of hydrocloride promethazine in ethanol solution compared with the corresponding predicted for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+) enantiomers in aqueous solution by using B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory.

3.10. Electronic circular dichroism (ECD)

The experimental ECD spectrum of hydrobromide prometazine was taken from Ref [66] which shows two bands with opposite polarity, one of them with cotton effect and the other one positive. This ECD spectrum is similar to that recorded in the 190–240 nm region by Rub et al. in the study of interaction of gelatin with promethazine hydrochloride [64]. On the other hand, the predicted ECD spectra for the free base of R(+) shows one positive band while in the S(-) form one negative in the same position. In the same region, in the cationic species of R(+) form can be observed two bands one positive and other negative while in the S(-) form two bands negative. The hydrochloride species of S(-) and R(+) forms show one band positive and two negative in different positions, hence, these forms evidently are not present in the experimental spectrum in solution. Here, only the predicted ECD spectra in solution for the cationic species of both enantiomers present similarity with the experimental one, for which, both species are present in a racemic sample of hydrochloride promethazine in aqueous solution. Then, the two negative and positive bands observed in the experimental spectrum at 250 nm could be assigned to π→π* transitions.

4. Conclusions

In this work, the molecular structures of free base, cationic and hydrochloride species of both S(-) and R(+)- enantiomers of promethazine antihistaminic agent were theoretically studied in gas phase and in aqueous solution by using the hybrid B3LYP/6-31G* method. The initial structures of S(-) and R(+) enantiomers of PTZ hydrochloride were those polymorphic forms 1 and 2 experimentally determined by X-ray diffraction. In solution, all species were optimized with the SCRF methodology by using the PCM and SD models. The corrected solvation energies (ΔGc) by the total non-electrostatic terms and by zero point vibrational energy (ZPVE) were computed for all species showing the higher value the cationic species of R(+) form. The comparisons of geometrical parameters with the corresponding experimental ones have showed slight differences in the dihedral angles of both S(-) and R(+)-PTZ forms that later they are evidenced in the different vibrational assignments of their infrared and Raman spectra and in the calculated force constants. Here, the studied MK, Mulliken and NPA charges have evidenced variations in the three species of both enantiomers observing the higher MK charges on N2 atoms of the cationic species of R(+) species in the two media. The cationic and hydrochloride species present basically the same behaviours in the Mulliken charges where the lower values are observed on N2 atoms. The mapped surfaces MEP have clearly evidenced nucleophilic sites in the free base on the N3 and S1 atoms and in the hydrochloride species on the Cl atoms. The NBO and AIM studies reveal clearly that the hydrochloride species are most stable than the other two species of both forms and in both media and, in particular, the species of R(+)-PTZ evidence a slight higher stability than the S(-) one. The frontier orbitals studies show that the free base species of both forms in solution are more reactive than cyclizine. Higher electrophilicity indexes are observed in the cationic and hydrochloride species of PTZ than cyclizine while the cationic species of cyclizine have higher nucleophilicity index than both species of PTZ. The predicted infrared, Raman, UV-Visible and ECD have showed a reasonable concordance with the corresponding experimental available spectra. The presences of cationic species of both enantiomers are clearly supported by the infrared, Raman, UV-Vis and ECD spectra. The increase in the volume of cationic and hydrochloride species in solution could suggest the H bonds formation, as supported by AIM study. The force fields were computed by using the SQMFF approach and Molvib program which were used to perform the complete vibrational analysis. Here, the 114, 117 and 120 vibration normal modes expected for the free base, cationic and hydrochloride species were assigned and the force constants reported and compared with other reported from the literature.

Declarations

Author contribution statement

María Eugenia Manzur: Performed the experiments; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data.

Silvia A. Brandán: Conceived and designed the experiments; Performed the experiments; Analyzed and interpreted the data; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data; Wrote the paper.

Funding statement

This work was supported by grants from CIUNT Project Nº 26/D608 (Consejo de Investigaciones, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán).

Competing interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

References

  • 1.Brandán S.A. Why morphine is a molecule chemically powerful. Their comparison with cocaine. Indian J. Appl. Res. 2017;7(7):511–528. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rudyk R.A., Brandán S.A. Force field, internal coordinates and vibrational study of alkaloid tropane hydrochloride by using their infrared spectrum and DFT calculations. Paripex - Indian J. Res. 2017;6(8):616–623. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Romani D., Brandán S.A. Vibrational analyses of alkaloid cocaine as free base, cationic and hydrochloride species based on their internal coordinates and force fields. Paripex - Indian J. Res. 2017;6(9):587–602. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.MA Iramain, AE Ledesma, Brandán S.A. Analyzing the effects of halogen on properties of a halogenated series of R and S enantiomers analogues alkaloid cocaine-X, X=F, Cl, Br, I. Paripex - Indian J. Res. 2017;6(12):454–463. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Brandán S.A. Understanding the potency of heroin against to morphine and cocaine, IJSRM. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2018;12(2):97–140. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rudyk R.A., Checa M.A., Guzzetti K.A., Iramain M.A., Brandán S.A. Behaviour of N-CH3 group in tropane alkaloids and correlations in their properties, IJSRM. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2018;10(4):70–97. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rudyk R.A., Checa M.A., Catalán C.A.N., Brandán S.A. Structural, FT-IR, FT-Raman and ECD spectroscopic studies of free base, cationic and hydrobromide species of scopolamine alkaloid, submitted to. J. Mol. Struct. 2018;1180:603–617. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.MA Iramain, Brandán S.A. Structural and vibrational properties of three species of anti-histaminic diphenhydramine by using DFT calculations and the SQM approach. Chem. J. 2018;1(1):105–130. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Márquez María J., Iramain Maximiliano A., Brandán Silvia Antonia. Ab-initio and vibrational studies on free base, cationic and hydrochloride species derived from antihistaminic cyclizine agent, IJSRM. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2018;12(2):97–140. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Davies M.C., Binns J.S., Melia C.D., Hendra P.J., Bourgeois D., Church S.P., Stephenson P.J. FT Raman spectroscopy of drugs in polymers. Int. J. Pharm. 1990;66:223–232. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lara Francisco J., García-Campaña Ana M., Al'es-Barrero F., Bosque-Sendra Juan M. Determination of thiazinamium, promazine and promethazine in pharmaceutical formulations using a CZE method. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2005;535:101–108. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Mazurek Sylwester, Szostak Roman. Quantitative determination of diclofenac sodium in solid dosage forms by FT-Raman spectroscopy. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2008;48:814–821. doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2008.08.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Page C.B., Duffull S.B., Whyte I.M., Isbister G.K. Promethazine overdose: clinical effects, predicting delirium and the effect of charcoal. Q. J. Med. 2009;102:123–131. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcn153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Tiwari Ruchi, Srivastava Birendra, Tiwari Gaurav, Rai Awanik. Extended release promethazine HCl using acrylic polymers by freeze-drying and spray-drying techniques: formulation considerations. Braz. J. Pharma. Sci. 2009;45(4):829–840. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Abalde-Cela Sara, Aldeanueva-Potel Paula, Mateo-Mateo Cintia, Rodríguez-Lorenzo Laura, Alvarez-Puebla R.A., Luis M., Liz-Marzán Surface-enhanced Raman scattering biomedical applications of plasmonic colloidal particles. J. R. Soc. Interface. 2010;7:S435–S450. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2010.0125.focus. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Charles J. Choi, Hsin-Yu Wu, Jonathan Weyhenmeyer, Sherine George, and Brian T. Cunningham, Nanodome Sensor Tubing for Monitoring of Intravenous Drug Infusion and Metabolites, 2011 11th IEEE International Conference on Nanotechnology Portland Marriott August 15-18, 2011, Portland, Oregon, USA.
  • 17.Hargreaves Michael D., Macleod Neil A., Smith Mark R., Andrews Darren, Hammond Stephen V., Matousek Pavel. Characterisation of transmission Raman spectroscopy for rapid quantitative analysis of intact multi-component pharmaceutical capsules. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2011;54:463–468. doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2010.09.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Charles J. Choi, Wu Hsin-Yu, Weyhenmeyer Jonathan, George Sherine, Cunningham Brian T. Biochemical sensor tubing for point-of-care monitoring of intravenous drugs and metabolites. Lab Chip. 2012;3 doi: 10.1039/c2lc20586f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Borodi Gheorghe, Pop Mihaela M., Onija Oana, Filip Xenia. Distinct disordered forms of promethazine hydrochloride: a case of intergrowth of polymorphic domains? Cryst. Growth Des. 2012;12:5846–5851. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Maurya Neha, ud din Parray Mehraj, Maurya Jitendra Kumar, Kumar Amit, Patel Rajan. Interaction of promethazine and adiphenine to human hemoglobin: a comparative spectroscopic and computational analysis. Spectrochim. Acta A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 2018;199:32–42. doi: 10.1016/j.saa.2018.03.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Cantisani C., Ricci S., Grieco T., Paolino G., Faina V., Silvestri E., Calvieri S. Vol. 2013. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, BioMed Research International; 2013. Topical Promethazine Side Effects: Our Experience and Review of the Literature; p. 9. Article ID 151509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Assi Sulaf. Raw material identification using dual laser handheld Raman spectroscopy. Eur. Pharma. Rev. 2013;18(5):25–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Xie Wei, Schlücker Sebastian. Medical applications of surface-enhanced Raman scattering. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013;15:5329–5344. doi: 10.1039/c3cp43858a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Li Ying-Sing, Church Jeffrey S. Raman spectroscopy in the analysis of food and pharmaceutical nanomaterials. J. Food Drug Anal. 2014;22:29–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jfda.2014.01.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Kong Kenny, Kendall Catherine, Stone Nicholas, Notingher Ioan. Raman spectroscopy for medical diagnostics-From in-vitro biofluid assays to in-vivo cancer detection. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2015;89:121–134. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2015.03.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Paudel Amrit, Raijada Dhara, Rantanen Jukka. Raman spectroscopy in pharmaceutical product design. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2015;89:3–20. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2015.04.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bumbrah Gurvinder Singh, Sharma Rakesh Mohan. Raman spectroscopy – basic principle, instrumentation and selected applications for the characterization of drugs of abuse. Egypt. J. Food Sci. 2016;6:209–215. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Saleh Tawfik A. Pharmaceutical characterization and detection using surface-enhanced Raman scattering. Saleh. Int. Arch. Clin. Pharmacol. 2017;3:7. 010. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Tarkkila P., Torn K., Tuominen M., Lindgren L. Premedication with promethazine and transdermal scopolamine reduces the incidence of nausea and vomiting after intrathecal morphine. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 1995;39(7):983–986. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1995.tb04210.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Vidal Pan C., Gonz'alez Quintela A., Galdos Anuncibay P., MateoVic J. Topical promethazine intoxication. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 2012;28(4):623–642. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Promethazine should not be used for infants. Die Pharmazie. 2010;65(5):339–342. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Cohen M.R. Frequency and severity of promethazine adverse event reports obligated the ISMP alert. Jt. Comm. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 2010;36(3):143–144. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(10)36023-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kai Y., Okamoto O., Fujiwara S. Fixed drug eruption caused bythreeunrelated drugs: promethazine, pethidineand omeprazole. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 2011;36(7):755–758. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2230.2011.04093.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Becke A.D. Density-functional exchange-energy approximation with correct asymptotic behavior. Phys. Rev. 1988;A38:3098–3100. doi: 10.1103/physreva.38.3098. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Lee C., Yang W., Parr R.G. Development of the Colle-Salvetti correlation-energy formula into a functional of the electron density. Phys. Rev. 1988;B37:785–789. doi: 10.1103/physrevb.37.785. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Miertus S., Scrocco E., Tomasi J. Electrostatic interaction of a solute with a continuum. Chem. Phys. 1981;55:117–129. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Tomasi J., Persico J. Molecular interactions in solution: an overview of methods based on continous distributions of the solvent. Chem. Rev. 1994;94:2027–2094. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Marenich A.V., Cramer C.J., Truhlar D.G. Universal solvation model based on solute electron density and a continuum model of the solvent defined by the bulk dielectric constant and atomic surface tensions. J. Phys. Chem. 2009;B113:6378–6396. doi: 10.1021/jp810292n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Pulay P., Fogarasi G., Pongor G., Boggs J.E., Vargha A. Combination of theoretical ab initio and experimental information to obtain reliable harmonic force constants. Scaled quantum mechanical (QM) force fields for glyoxal, acrolein, butadiene, formaldehyde, and ethylene. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983;105:7073. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.a) Rauhut G., Pulay P. Transferable scaling factors for density functional derived vibrational force fields. J. Phys. Chem. 1995;99:3093–3100. [Google Scholar]; b) Rauhut G., Pulay P. J. Phys. Chem. 1995;99:14572. Correction. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Available from. DL- 3,4- Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, Spectra BASE, https://spectrabase.com/spectrum/4IWjF3I2JuZ.
  • 42.Sundius T. Scaling of ab-initio force fields by MOLVIB. Vib. Spectrosc. 2002;29:89–95. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Parr R.G., Pearson R.G. Absolute hardness: companion parameter to absolute electronegativity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983;105:7512–7516. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Brédas J.-L. Mind the gap! Mater. Horizons. 2014;1:17–19. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Romani D., Brandán S.A., Márquez M.J., Márquez M.B. Structural, topological and vibrational properties of an isothiazole derivatives series with antiviral activities. J. Mol. Struct. 2015;1100:279–289. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Romani D., Tsuchiya S., Yotsu-Yamashita M., Brandán S.A. Spectroscopic and structural investigation on intermediates species structurally associated to the tricyclic bisguanidine compound and to the toxic agent, saxitoxin. J. Mol. Struct. 2016;1119:25–38. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Romano E., Castillo M.V., Pergomet J.L., Zinczuk J., Brandán S.A. Synthesis, structural and vibrational analysis of (5,7-Dichloro-quinolin-8-yloxy) acetic acid. J. Mol. Struct. 2012;1018:149–155. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Chain F.E., Ladetto M.F., Grau A., Catalán C.A.N., Brandán S.A. Structural, electronic, topological and vibrational properties of a series of N-benzylamides derived from Maca (Lepidium meyenii) combining spectroscopic studies with ONION calculations. J. Mol. Struct. 2016;1105:403–414. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Chain F., Iramain M.A., Grau A., Catalán C.A.N., Brandán S.A. Evaluation of the structural, electronic, topological and vibrational properties of N-(3,4-dimethoxybenzyl)-hexadecanamide isolated from Maca (Lepidium meyenii) using different spectroscopic techniques. J. Mol. Struct. 2016;1119:25–38. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Minteguiaga M., Dellacassa E., Iramain M.A., Catalán C.A.N., Brandán S.A. A structural and spectroscopic study on carquejol, a relevant constituent of the medicinal plant Baccharis trimera (Less.) DC. (Asteraceae) J. Mol. Struct. 2017;1150:8–20. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Iramain M.A., Davies L., Brandán S.A. Structural and spectroscopic differences among the Potassium 5-hydroxypentanoyltrifluoroborate salt and the furoyl and isonicotinoyl salts. J. Mol. Struct. 2019;1176:718–728. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Issaoui N., Ghalla H., Brandán S.A., Bardak F., Flakus H.T., Atac A., Oujia B. Experimental FTIR and FT-Raman and theoretical studies on the molecular structures of monomer and dimer of 3-thiopheneacrylic acid. J. Mol. Struct. 2017;1135:209–221. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Minteguiaga M., Dellacassa E., Iramain M.A., Catalán C.A.N., Brandán S.A. FT-IR, FT-Raman, UV-Vis, NMR and structural studies of Carquejyl Acetate, a component of the essential oil from Baccharis trimera (Less.) DC. (Asteraceae), submitted to. J. Mol. Struct. 2018 [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Nielsen A.B., Holder A.J. GAUSSIAN Inc.; Pittsburgh, PA: 2000–2003. Gauss View 3.0, User’s Reference. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Frisch M.J., Trucks G.W., Schlegel H.B., Scuseria G.E., Robb M.A., Cheeseman J.R., Scalmani G., Barone V., Mennucci B., Petersson G.A., Nakatsuji H., Caricato M., Li X., Hratchian H.P., Izmaylov A.F., Bloino J., Zheng G., Sonnenberg J.L., Hada M., Ehara M., Toyota K., Fukuda R., Hasegawa J., Ishida M., Nakajima T., Honda Y., Kitao O., Nakai H., Vreven T., Montgomery J.A., Jr., Peralta J.E., Ogliaro F., Bearpark M., Heyd J.J., Brothers E., Kudin K.N., Staroverov V.N., Kobayashi R., Normand J., Raghavachari K., Rendell A., Burant J.C., Iyengar S.S., Tomasi J., Cossi M., Rega N., Millam J.M., Klene M., Knox J.E., Cross J.B., Bakken V., Adamo C., Jaramillo J., Gomperts R., Stratmann R.E., Yazyev O., Austin A.J., Cammi R., Pomelli C., Ochterski J.W., Martin R.L., Morokuma K., Zakrzewski V.G., Voth G.A., Salvador P., Dannenberg J.J., Dapprich S., Daniels A.D., Farkas O., Foresman J.B., Ortiz J.V., Cioslowski J., Fox D.J. Gaussian, Inc.; Wallingford CT: 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Ugliengo P. University of Torino, Dipartimento Chimica IFM; Torino, Italy: 1998. Moldraw Program. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Besler B.H., Merz K.M., Jr., Kollman P.A. Atomic charges derived from demiempirical methods. J. Comput. Chem. 1990;11:431–439. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Glendening E.D., Badenhoop J.K., Reed A.D., Carpenter J.E., Weinhold F. Theoretical Chemistry Institute, University of Wisconsin; Madison, WI: 1996. NBO 3.1. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Bader R.F.W. Oxford University Press; Oxford: 1990. Atoms in Molecules, A Quantum Theory. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Biegler-Köning F., Schönbohm J., Bayles D. AIM2000; a program to analyze and visualize atoms in molecules. J. Comput. Chem. 2001;22:545. doi: 10.1002/jcc.10085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Keresztury G., Holly S., Besenyei G., Varga J., Wang A.Y., Durig J.R. Vibrational spectra of monothiocarbamates-II. IR and Raman spectra, vibrational assignment, conformational analysis and ab initio calculations of S-methyl-N,N-dimethylthiocarbamate Spectrochim. Acta. 1993;49A:2007–2026. [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Michalska D., Wysokinski R. The prediction of Raman spectra of platinum(II) anticancer drugs by density functional theory. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2005;403:211–217. [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Lazny R., Ratkiewicz A., Nodzewska A., Wynimko A., Siergiejczyk L. Determination of the N-methyl stereochemistry in tropane and granatane derivatives in solution: a computational and NMR spectroscopic study. Tetrahedron Lett. 2012 [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Rub M.A., Asiri A.M., Khan J.M., Khan R.H. Kabir-ud Din, Interaction of gelatin with promethazine hydrochloride: conductimetry, tensiometry and circular dichroism studies. J. Mol. Struct. 2013;1050:35–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Bohloko N.S. Faculty of Health Sciences at the Department of Pharmaceutics, Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education; Potchefstroom: 2003. Development and Formulation of an Intranasal Dosage Form for Cyclizine Hydrochloride, Doctoral Thesis. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Available from: http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry.
  • 67.Romano E., Davies L., Brandán S.A. Structural properties and FTIR-Raman spectra of the anti-hypertensive clonidine hydrochloride agent and their dimeric species. J. Mol. Struct. 2017;1133:226–235. [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Sánchez F.G., Navas Díaz A., Sánchez Torreño E., Aguilar A., Medina Lama I., Algarra M. Determination of enantiomeric excess by chiral liquid chromatography without enantiomerically pure starting standards. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2012 doi: 10.1002/bmc.2685. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Heliyon are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES