ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Conversion of a UO22+ Precursor to UH+ and U+ Using Tandem Mass Spectrometry to Remove Both “yl” Oxo Ligands
My Activity

Figure 1Loading Img
  • Open Access
Short Communication

Conversion of a UO22+ Precursor to UH+ and U+ Using Tandem Mass Spectrometry to Remove Both “yl” Oxo Ligands
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry

Cite this: J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2023, 34, 11, 2439–2442
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/jasms.3c00260
Published October 16, 2023

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0 .

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Multiple-stage collision-induced dissociation (CID) of a uranyl propiolate cation, [UO2(O2C–C≡CH)]+, can be used to prepare the U-methylidyne species [O═U≡CH]+ [J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2019, 30, 796–805]. Here, we report that CID of [O═U≡CH]+ causes elimination of CO to create [UH]+, followed by a loss of H to generate U+. A feasible, multiple-step pathway for the generation of [UH]+ was identified using DFT calculations. These results provide the first demonstration that multiple-stage CID can be used to prepare both U+ and UH+ directly from a UO22+ precursor for the subsequent investigation of ion–molecule reactivity.

This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0 .
  • cc licence
  • by licence
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society

Introduction

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The high stability and inertness of U═O bonds make activation and/or functionalization of UO22+ and UO2+ challenging. (1−6) There is ample evidence that U═O bonds can be activated and substituted using collision-induced dissociation (CID) in multidimensional (MSn) tandem MS experiments. (7−14) Recently, we showed that CID of the organometallic species [UO2(C≡CH)]+ induces the elimination of CO to furnish [OUCH]+. (12) Density functional theory (DFT) calculations strongly supported the conclusion that the [OUCH]+ ion is an oxouranium-methylidyne ([O═U≡CH]+) product.
In general, the formation of [O═U≡CH]+ is important because it might be used as an intermediate to prepare new U-containing ions for the investigation of intrinsic structure, bonding, and reactivity. As we describe below, the CID of the methylidyne species causes elimination of CO to create [UH]+. An additional dissociation step causes the elimination of H to generate U+. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first demonstration that the stable UO22+ ion can be converted to low oxidation state species such as [UH]+ and subsequently U+ for studies of intrinsic reactivity using an ion trap mass spectrometer.

Experimental and Computational

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Generation of [O═U≡CH]+ using MSn has been described in detail elsewhere, (12) and the experimental and computational details are provided in the Supporting Information. Briefly, [UO2(O2C–C≡CH)(CH3OH)2]+ was created by electrospray ionization (ESI), and the CH3OH ligands were eliminated in sequential CID steps (MS2 and MS3). Decarboxylation of [UO2(O2C–C≡CH)]+ to create [UO2(C≡CH)]+ (MS4) was followed by generation of [O═U≡CH]+ by elimination of CO (MS5, Figure 1a).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Product ion spectra generated by MSn of [UO2(O2C≡CH)]+ precursor: (a) CID (MS5 stage) of [UO2C≡CH]+, (b) CID (MS6 stage) of [OUCH]+ and (c) CID (MS7 stage) of [UH]+. m/z values in bold represent precursor ions; those that are italicized are product ions. Normalized collision energies (NCE) used at each MSn stage are provided in each spectrum.

Results

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The product ion spectrum generated by collisional activation of [O═U≡CH]+ (m/z 267, MS5 stage) is shown in Figure 1b. The base peak appeared at m/z = 239, corresponding to the elimination of 28 Da from [O═U≡CH]+. Because the composition of the ion at m/z 267 was confirmed as [OUCH]+ by high-resolution mass measurement, (12) a loss of 28 Da is logically attributed to the elimination of CO to yield [UH]+ at m/z 239. Subsequent CID of [UH]+ at m/z 239 (MS6 stage) causes the elimination of 1 Da (H) to generate U+ at m/z 238 (Figure 1c). When including the loss of CO observed during production of [OUCH]+ from [UO2(C≡CH)]+, the results shown in Figure 1a demonstrate that both “yl” oxo ligands of UO22+ can be eliminated in a multiple-stage CID experiment.
Also observed in the CID spectrum of [O═U≡CH]+ (Figure 1b) were peaks at m/z 254 and 255, which are assigned as [UO]+ and [UOH]+, respectively, likely created by ion–molecule reactions of [UH]+ and/or U+ with background H2O and O2 present in the ion trap during CID. To test this hypothesis, the ions at m/z 239 and 238 were independently isolated, held in the ion trap for 100 ms, and allowed to react with adventitious neutrals (typically H2O and O2). As shown in Figure 2a, isolation of [UH]+ at m/z 239 leads to the formation of peaks at m/z 254, 255, 270, 271, and 287. Suggested reaction pathways are summarized in Scheme S1. Formation of the product ion at m/z 271 is attributed to the reaction of [UOH]+ with O2 to generate [UO2H]+, while a subsequent reaction with adventitious H2O would lead to the formation of [UO2OH]+ and (neutral) H2. Isolation instead of U+ at m/z 238 for 100 ms (Figure 2b) yielded product ions at m/z 254 ([UO]+) and 270 (UO2+) and proposed pathways are summarized in Scheme S2. The tendency to react with O2 was probed using 18O2 labeled gas, which was deliberately introduced into the ion trap. We note that the product ions reported here for U+ are consistent with earlier studies. (15,16) To the best of our knowledge, the intrinsic reactions of [UH]+ have yet to be studied and will be investigated by our laboratory in the future.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Product ion spectra generated by the isolation and storage of (a) [UH]+ and (b) U+, without imposed collisional activation, in the ion trap for 100 ms. m/z values in bold represent precursor ions; those that are italicized are product ions.

Reaction energy profiles (thermally corrected enthalpies of singlet-, triplet-, and quintet-state species) generated at the B3LYP level of theory (computational methodology is provided in the SI) for dissociation of [O═U≡CH]+ are shown in Figure 3 (PBE0 data are provided in the Supporting Information). Calculations suggest that the formation of [UH]+ proceeds through a multiple-step mechanism initiated from [O═U≡CH]+ in the singlet spin state. The computed energy of the [O═U≡CH]+ precursor (I) in the singlet state was lower than that in the triplet state by ca. 74 kJ/mol. A crossing to the triplet surface occurs prior to the first transition state (TSIII) to create an [O-UH-C]+ insertion intermediate (II). Rearrangement continues through TSIIIII, to create a second intermediate, [UH(CO)]+ (III). Structures for I, TSIII, II, and TSIIIII failed to converge in the quintet spin state. However, III and [UH]+ (IV) have similar energies in the triplet and quintet states, and separation of III into [UH]+ (IV) was computed to require 34 and 77 kJ/mol on the triplet and quintet surfaces, respectively. An important benchmark for our study is the report by Armentrout and co-workers that the ground state of [UH]+, created using reaction of U+ with H2, is the quintet, (17) with a U–H bond dissociation energy of 252.199 kJ/mol (without spin–orbit correction) compared to an experimental value of 239.270 (±5.789) kJ/mol. As a benchmark for our computational work, independent calculation of the U–H (quintet state) BDE in this study yielded a value of 254.369 kJ/mol, which is in reasonable agreement with the value of Armentrout and co-workers. (17)

Figure 3

Figure 3. Reaction energy diagram (298 K) for the generation of [UH]+ from [OUCH]+. Relative energies for species in a singlet spin state indicated by blue symbols and lines; black symbols and lines indicate species in the triplet spin state, and red indicates the quintet states of the final two species.

The importance of “two-state reactivity” in gas-phase organometallic chemistry (18) and the chemistry of electronic excited states (19) has been summarized elsewhere, and the crossings of energy profiles for different spin states are consistent with our earlier studies with gas-phase U species, including (7) the formation of [NUO]+ from [UO2(C≡N)]+ and generation of [O═U≡CH]+ from the CID of [UO2(C≡CH)]+. (14) While spin–orbit effects were not included in our computed reaction energetics, a previous experimental and computational study of the U–H bond dissociation energy (17) have shown that spin–orbit corrections can lower the energies of [UH]+ and U+ by 0.779 eV (75.2 kJ/mol) and 0.852 eV (85.2 kJ/mol), respectively. Based on previous reports, (20−25) we expect that spin–orbit effects for the U 5f orbitals could enhance the coupling between the singlet, triplet, and quintet potential energy surfaces. (26)

Conclusion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

To summarize, CID of an [O═U≡CH]+ intermediate causes elimination of CO to create [UH]+ and H to form U+. This remarkable outcome further illustrates the advantage of using MSn to remove both “yl” oxo ligands of the uranyl ion. DFT calculations provide a reasonable, multiple-step pathway with crossing from the singlet to triplet surface to explain the formation of the uranium hydride cation. To date, U+ has been formed using discharge or laser ablation sources to great effect (15,16,27,28) and UH+ by the reaction of U+ with H2 or hydrocarbons. (17,29,30) Our results show that the MSn experiment effectively converts the stable uranyl dication to [UH]+ and U+ for investigation of ion–molecule reactivity using ion trap mass MS, thus broadening the range of species that can be created and accessed using conventional instruments equipped with ESI sources. Reliable formation of [UH]+ is important given the interest in actinide hydrides in catalysis and the need to understand the behavior of uranium hydrides in the context of safe storage of spent nuclear fuels.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jasms.3c00260.

  • Reaction energy diagram (PBE0 level of theory) for the generation of [UH]+ from [OUCH]+; proposed pathways for the reaction of [UH]+ and U+ with (neutral) O2 and H2O; experimental and computational methods; Cartesian coordinates for precursor, intermediate, and transition state structures; electronic energies and thermally corrected enthalpies for all species (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Justin G. Terhorst - Department of Chemistry, Duquesne University, 600 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15282, United States
    • Theodore A. Corcovilos - Department of Physics, Duquesne University, 600 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15282, United StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5716-1188
  • Author Contributions

    The manuscript was written through contributions of all authors. All authors have given approval to the final version of the manuscript.

  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (CHE-1726824) and the Robert Dean Loughney Faculty Development Endowment of Duquesne University.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 30 other publications.

  1. 1
    Fortier, S.; Hayton, T. W. Oxo Ligand Functionalization in the Uranyl Ion (UO22+). Coord. Chem. Rev. 2010, 254 (3–4), 197214,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.06.003
  2. 2
    Baker, R. J. New Reactivity of the Uranyl (VI) Ion. Chem.─Eur. J. 2012, 18 (51), 1625816271,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201203085
  3. 3
    Jones, M. B.; Gaunt, A. J. Recent Developments in Synthesis and Structural Chemistry of Nonaqueous Actinide Complexes. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113 (2), 11371198,  DOI: 10.1021/cr300198m
  4. 4
    Cowie, B. E.; Purkis, J. M.; Austin, J.; Love, J. B.; Arnold, P. L. Thermal and Photochemical Reduction and Functionalization Chemistry of the Uranyl Dication, [UVIO2]2+. Chem. Rev. 2019, 119 (18), 1059510637,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00048
  5. 5
    Arnold, P. L.; Love, J. B.; Patel, D. Pentavalent Uranyl Complexes. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2009, 253 (15–16), 19731978,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.03.014
  6. 6
    Sarsfield, M. J.; Helliwell, M. Extending the Chemistry of the Uranyl Ion: Lewis Acid Coordination to a UO Oxygen. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126 (4), 10361037,  DOI: 10.1021/ja039101y
  7. 7
    Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Michelini, M. d. C.; Plaviak, A.; Martin, D.; Gibson, J. K. Formation of Bare UO22+ and NUO+ by Fragmentation of Gas-Phase Uranyl–Acetonitrile Complexes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2014, 118 (36), 78387846,  DOI: 10.1021/jp5066067
  8. 8
    Gong, Y.; Vallet, V.; del Carmen Michelini, M.; Rios, D.; Gibson, J. K. Activation of Gas-Phase Uranyl: From an Oxo to a Nitrido Complex. J. Phys. Chem. A 2014, 118 (1), 325330,  DOI: 10.1021/jp4113798
  9. 9
    Gong, Y.; De Jong, W. A.; Gibson, J. K. Gas Phase Uranyl Activation: Formation of a Uranium Nitrosyl Complex from Uranyl Azide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137 (18), 59115915,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b02420
  10. 10
    Abergel, R. J.; de Jong, W. A.; Deblonde, G. J.-P.; Dau, P. D.; Captain, I.; Eaton, T. M.; Jian, J.; van Stipdonk, M. J.; Martens, J.; Berden, G.; Oomens, J.; Gibson, J. K. Cleaving off Uranyl Oxygens through Chelation: A Mechanistic Study in the Gas Phase. Inorg. Chem. 2017, 56 (21), 1293012937,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.7b01720
  11. 11
    Hu, S.-X.; Jian, J.; Li, J.; Gibson, J. K. Destruction of the Uranyl Moiety in a U(V) “Cation–Cation” Interaction. Inorg. Chem. 2019, 58 (15), 1014810159,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.9b01265
  12. 12
    Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Tatosian, I. J.; Iacovino, A. C.; Bubas, A. R.; Metzler, L. J.; Sherman, M. C.; Somogyi, A. Gas-Phase Deconstruction of UO22+: Mass Spectrometry Evidence for Generation of [OUVICH]+ by Collision-Induced Dissociation of [UVIO2 (C≡CH)]+. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2019, 30 (5), 796805,  DOI: 10.1007/s13361-019-02179-6
  13. 13
    Metzler, L. J.; Farmen, C. T.; Corcovilos, T. A.; Van Stipdonk, M. J. Intrinsic Chemistry of [OUCH]+: Reactions with H2O, CH3C≡N and O2. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2021, 23 (8), 44754479,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CP00177A
  14. 14
    Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Perez, E. H.; Metzler, L. J.; Bubas, A. R.; Corcovilos, T.; Somogyi, A. Destruction and Reconstruction of UO22+ Using Gas-Phase Reactions. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2021, 23 (20), 1184411851,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CP01520F
  15. 15
    Armentrout, P.; Beauchamp, J. Reactions of U+ and UO+ with O2, CO, CO2, COS, CS2 and D2O. Chem. Phys. 1980, 50 (1), 2736,  DOI: 10.1016/0301-0104(80)87022-4
  16. 16
    Jackson, G. P.; King, F. L.; Goeringer, D. E.; Duckworth, D. C. Gas-Phase Reactions of U+ and U2+ with O2 and H2O in a Quadrupole Ion Trap. J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106 (34), 77887794,  DOI: 10.1021/jp0259420
  17. 17
    Zhang, W.-J.; Demireva, M.; Kim, J.; de Jong, W. A.; Armentrout, P. Reactions of U+ with H2, D2, and HD Studied by Guided Ion Beam Tandem Mass Spectrometry and Theory. J. Phys. Chem. A 2021, 125 (36), 78257839,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.1c05409
  18. 18
    Schröder, D.; Shaik, S.; Schwarz, H. Two-State Reactivity as a New Concept in Organometallic Chemistry. Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33 (3), 139145,  DOI: 10.1021/ar990028j
  19. 19
    Armentrout, P. B. Chemistry of Excited Electronic States. Science 1991, 251 (4990), 175179,  DOI: 10.1126/science.251.4990.175
  20. 20
    Kaltsoyannis, N. Transuranic Computational Chemistry. Chem.─Eur. J. 2018, 24 (12), 28152825,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201704445
  21. 21
    Pegg, J. T.; Shields, A. E.; Storr, M. T.; Scanlon, D. O.; de Leeuw, N. H. Noncollinear Relativistic DFT + U Calculations of Actinide Dioxide Surfaces. J. Phys. Chem. C 2019, 123 (1), 356366,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b07823
  22. 22
    Wdowik, U. D.; Piekarz, P.; Legut, D.; Jagło, G. Effect of Spin-Orbit and on-Site Coulomb Interactions on the Electronic Structure and Lattice Dynamics of Uranium Monocarbide. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 94 (5), 054303,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.054303
  23. 23
    Marian, C. M. Spin–Orbit Coupling and Intersystem Crossing in Molecules. WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2012, 2 (2), 187203,  DOI: 10.1002/wcms.83
  24. 24
    Pereira, C. C. L.; Michelini, M. d. C.; Marcalo, J.; Gong, Y.; Gibson, J. K. Synthesis and Properties of Uranium Sulfide Cations. An Evaluation of the Stability of Thiouranyl, {S = U=S}2+. Inorg. Chem. 2013, 52 (24), 1416214167,  DOI: 10.1021/ic4020493
  25. 25
    Marks, J.; Rittgers, B.; Van Stipdonk, M.; Duncan, M. Photodissociation and Infrared Spectroscopy of Uranium–Nitrogen Cation Complexes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2021, 125 (33), 72787288,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.1c05823
  26. 26
    Moreland, P. E., Jr; Rokop, D. J.; Stevens, C. M. Mass-Spectrometric Observations of Uranium and Plutonium Monohydrides Formed by Ion─Molecule Reaction. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. Ion Phys. 1970, 5 (1–2), 127136,  DOI: 10.1016/0020-7381(70)87011-5
  27. 27
    Marçalo, J.; Santos, M.; Gibson, J. K. Gas-Phase Reactions of Doubly Charged Actinide Cations with Alkanes and Alkenes─Probing the Chemical Activity of 5f Electrons from Th to Cm. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011, 13 (41), 1832218329,  DOI: 10.1039/c1cp21399g
  28. 28
    Ephritikhine, M. Synthesis, Structure, and Reactions of Hydride, Borohydride, and Aluminohydride Compounds of the f-Elements. Chem. Rev. 1997, 97 (6), 21932242,  DOI: 10.1021/cr960366n
  29. 29
    Totemeier, T. Characterization of Uranium Corrosion Products Involved in a Uranium Hydride Pyrophoric Event. J. Nucl. Mater. 2000, 278 (2–3), 301311,  DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3115(99)00245-7
  30. 30
    Le Guyadec, F.; Génin, X.; Bayle, J.; Dugne, O.; Duhart-Barone, A.; Ablitzer, C. Pyrophoric Behaviour of Uranium Hydride and Uranium Powders. J. Nucl. Mater. 2010, 396 (2–3), 294302,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.11.007

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article is cited by 2 publications.

  1. Samuel J. Lenze, Justin Terhorst, Amina Ihabi, Theodore Corcovilos, Michael J. van Stipdonk. Creation of Gas‐Phase Organo‐Uranium Species by Removal of “yl” Oxo Ligands From UO 2 2+ Carboxylate Precursor Ions. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 2025, 39 (4) https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.9954
  2. Justin G. Terhorst, Theodore A. Corcovilos, Samuel J. Lenze, Michael J. van Stipdonk. Synthesis of organo-uranium( ii ) species in the gas-phase using reactions between [UH] + and nitriles. Dalton Transactions 2024, 54 (1) , 231-238. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4DT02508C

Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry

Cite this: J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2023, 34, 11, 2439–2442
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/jasms.3c00260
Published October 16, 2023

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0 .

Article Views

513

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Product ion spectra generated by MSn of [UO2(O2C≡CH)]+ precursor: (a) CID (MS5 stage) of [UO2C≡CH]+, (b) CID (MS6 stage) of [OUCH]+ and (c) CID (MS7 stage) of [UH]+. m/z values in bold represent precursor ions; those that are italicized are product ions. Normalized collision energies (NCE) used at each MSn stage are provided in each spectrum.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Product ion spectra generated by the isolation and storage of (a) [UH]+ and (b) U+, without imposed collisional activation, in the ion trap for 100 ms. m/z values in bold represent precursor ions; those that are italicized are product ions.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Reaction energy diagram (298 K) for the generation of [UH]+ from [OUCH]+. Relative energies for species in a singlet spin state indicated by blue symbols and lines; black symbols and lines indicate species in the triplet spin state, and red indicates the quintet states of the final two species.

  • References


    This article references 30 other publications.

    1. 1
      Fortier, S.; Hayton, T. W. Oxo Ligand Functionalization in the Uranyl Ion (UO22+). Coord. Chem. Rev. 2010, 254 (3–4), 197214,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.06.003
    2. 2
      Baker, R. J. New Reactivity of the Uranyl (VI) Ion. Chem.─Eur. J. 2012, 18 (51), 1625816271,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201203085
    3. 3
      Jones, M. B.; Gaunt, A. J. Recent Developments in Synthesis and Structural Chemistry of Nonaqueous Actinide Complexes. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113 (2), 11371198,  DOI: 10.1021/cr300198m
    4. 4
      Cowie, B. E.; Purkis, J. M.; Austin, J.; Love, J. B.; Arnold, P. L. Thermal and Photochemical Reduction and Functionalization Chemistry of the Uranyl Dication, [UVIO2]2+. Chem. Rev. 2019, 119 (18), 1059510637,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00048
    5. 5
      Arnold, P. L.; Love, J. B.; Patel, D. Pentavalent Uranyl Complexes. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2009, 253 (15–16), 19731978,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.03.014
    6. 6
      Sarsfield, M. J.; Helliwell, M. Extending the Chemistry of the Uranyl Ion: Lewis Acid Coordination to a UO Oxygen. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126 (4), 10361037,  DOI: 10.1021/ja039101y
    7. 7
      Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Michelini, M. d. C.; Plaviak, A.; Martin, D.; Gibson, J. K. Formation of Bare UO22+ and NUO+ by Fragmentation of Gas-Phase Uranyl–Acetonitrile Complexes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2014, 118 (36), 78387846,  DOI: 10.1021/jp5066067
    8. 8
      Gong, Y.; Vallet, V.; del Carmen Michelini, M.; Rios, D.; Gibson, J. K. Activation of Gas-Phase Uranyl: From an Oxo to a Nitrido Complex. J. Phys. Chem. A 2014, 118 (1), 325330,  DOI: 10.1021/jp4113798
    9. 9
      Gong, Y.; De Jong, W. A.; Gibson, J. K. Gas Phase Uranyl Activation: Formation of a Uranium Nitrosyl Complex from Uranyl Azide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137 (18), 59115915,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b02420
    10. 10
      Abergel, R. J.; de Jong, W. A.; Deblonde, G. J.-P.; Dau, P. D.; Captain, I.; Eaton, T. M.; Jian, J.; van Stipdonk, M. J.; Martens, J.; Berden, G.; Oomens, J.; Gibson, J. K. Cleaving off Uranyl Oxygens through Chelation: A Mechanistic Study in the Gas Phase. Inorg. Chem. 2017, 56 (21), 1293012937,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.7b01720
    11. 11
      Hu, S.-X.; Jian, J.; Li, J.; Gibson, J. K. Destruction of the Uranyl Moiety in a U(V) “Cation–Cation” Interaction. Inorg. Chem. 2019, 58 (15), 1014810159,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.9b01265
    12. 12
      Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Tatosian, I. J.; Iacovino, A. C.; Bubas, A. R.; Metzler, L. J.; Sherman, M. C.; Somogyi, A. Gas-Phase Deconstruction of UO22+: Mass Spectrometry Evidence for Generation of [OUVICH]+ by Collision-Induced Dissociation of [UVIO2 (C≡CH)]+. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2019, 30 (5), 796805,  DOI: 10.1007/s13361-019-02179-6
    13. 13
      Metzler, L. J.; Farmen, C. T.; Corcovilos, T. A.; Van Stipdonk, M. J. Intrinsic Chemistry of [OUCH]+: Reactions with H2O, CH3C≡N and O2. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2021, 23 (8), 44754479,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CP00177A
    14. 14
      Van Stipdonk, M. J.; Perez, E. H.; Metzler, L. J.; Bubas, A. R.; Corcovilos, T.; Somogyi, A. Destruction and Reconstruction of UO22+ Using Gas-Phase Reactions. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2021, 23 (20), 1184411851,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CP01520F
    15. 15
      Armentrout, P.; Beauchamp, J. Reactions of U+ and UO+ with O2, CO, CO2, COS, CS2 and D2O. Chem. Phys. 1980, 50 (1), 2736,  DOI: 10.1016/0301-0104(80)87022-4
    16. 16
      Jackson, G. P.; King, F. L.; Goeringer, D. E.; Duckworth, D. C. Gas-Phase Reactions of U+ and U2+ with O2 and H2O in a Quadrupole Ion Trap. J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106 (34), 77887794,  DOI: 10.1021/jp0259420
    17. 17
      Zhang, W.-J.; Demireva, M.; Kim, J.; de Jong, W. A.; Armentrout, P. Reactions of U+ with H2, D2, and HD Studied by Guided Ion Beam Tandem Mass Spectrometry and Theory. J. Phys. Chem. A 2021, 125 (36), 78257839,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.1c05409
    18. 18
      Schröder, D.; Shaik, S.; Schwarz, H. Two-State Reactivity as a New Concept in Organometallic Chemistry. Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33 (3), 139145,  DOI: 10.1021/ar990028j
    19. 19
      Armentrout, P. B. Chemistry of Excited Electronic States. Science 1991, 251 (4990), 175179,  DOI: 10.1126/science.251.4990.175
    20. 20
      Kaltsoyannis, N. Transuranic Computational Chemistry. Chem.─Eur. J. 2018, 24 (12), 28152825,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201704445
    21. 21
      Pegg, J. T.; Shields, A. E.; Storr, M. T.; Scanlon, D. O.; de Leeuw, N. H. Noncollinear Relativistic DFT + U Calculations of Actinide Dioxide Surfaces. J. Phys. Chem. C 2019, 123 (1), 356366,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b07823
    22. 22
      Wdowik, U. D.; Piekarz, P.; Legut, D.; Jagło, G. Effect of Spin-Orbit and on-Site Coulomb Interactions on the Electronic Structure and Lattice Dynamics of Uranium Monocarbide. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 94 (5), 054303,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.054303
    23. 23
      Marian, C. M. Spin–Orbit Coupling and Intersystem Crossing in Molecules. WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2012, 2 (2), 187203,  DOI: 10.1002/wcms.83
    24. 24
      Pereira, C. C. L.; Michelini, M. d. C.; Marcalo, J.; Gong, Y.; Gibson, J. K. Synthesis and Properties of Uranium Sulfide Cations. An Evaluation of the Stability of Thiouranyl, {S = U=S}2+. Inorg. Chem. 2013, 52 (24), 1416214167,  DOI: 10.1021/ic4020493
    25. 25
      Marks, J.; Rittgers, B.; Van Stipdonk, M.; Duncan, M. Photodissociation and Infrared Spectroscopy of Uranium–Nitrogen Cation Complexes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2021, 125 (33), 72787288,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.1c05823
    26. 26
      Moreland, P. E., Jr; Rokop, D. J.; Stevens, C. M. Mass-Spectrometric Observations of Uranium and Plutonium Monohydrides Formed by Ion─Molecule Reaction. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. Ion Phys. 1970, 5 (1–2), 127136,  DOI: 10.1016/0020-7381(70)87011-5
    27. 27
      Marçalo, J.; Santos, M.; Gibson, J. K. Gas-Phase Reactions of Doubly Charged Actinide Cations with Alkanes and Alkenes─Probing the Chemical Activity of 5f Electrons from Th to Cm. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011, 13 (41), 1832218329,  DOI: 10.1039/c1cp21399g
    28. 28
      Ephritikhine, M. Synthesis, Structure, and Reactions of Hydride, Borohydride, and Aluminohydride Compounds of the f-Elements. Chem. Rev. 1997, 97 (6), 21932242,  DOI: 10.1021/cr960366n
    29. 29
      Totemeier, T. Characterization of Uranium Corrosion Products Involved in a Uranium Hydride Pyrophoric Event. J. Nucl. Mater. 2000, 278 (2–3), 301311,  DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3115(99)00245-7
    30. 30
      Le Guyadec, F.; Génin, X.; Bayle, J.; Dugne, O.; Duhart-Barone, A.; Ablitzer, C. Pyrophoric Behaviour of Uranium Hydride and Uranium Powders. J. Nucl. Mater. 2010, 396 (2–3), 294302,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.11.007
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jasms.3c00260.

    • Reaction energy diagram (PBE0 level of theory) for the generation of [UH]+ from [OUCH]+; proposed pathways for the reaction of [UH]+ and U+ with (neutral) O2 and H2O; experimental and computational methods; Cartesian coordinates for precursor, intermediate, and transition state structures; electronic energies and thermally corrected enthalpies for all species (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.