Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 IN: 976-855 CODEN (UA) CHIA5 olumetric and thermodynamic parameters of Ɩ-leucine in ethanol+ water mixtures at different temperatures Arun B. Nikumbh* and Ganesh K. Kulkarni* P. G. Department of Chemistry,..G.M. College, Kopargaon-436 (M..) India INTRODUCTION The physicochemical properties of amino acids in aqueous solutions provide valuable information on solutesolute and solute-solvent interactions [-6]. These interactions are important in understanding the stability of proteins, and are implicated in several biochemical and physiological processes in a living cell [7-9]. A.Ali and hahajan measured the density and viscosity and refractive index in aqueous tetrapropylammonium bromide containing Ɩ-leucine DƖ-alanine DƖ-valine and glycine for several concentrations of amino acids at different temperatures. A.Ali,. Khan and F. Nabi measured the density and viscosity and refractive index in aqueous glycerol containing Ɩ-leucine DƖ-alanine DƖ-valine, DƖ-α- amino-n- butyric acid and glycine for several concentrations of amino acids at different temperatures. In the present article, we report the densities, ρ, viscosities, η, of Ɩ-leucine in aqueous ethanol ( to wt. % of ethanol, w/w in water) at 98.5, 33.5, 38.5, 3.5, and 33.5 K. Experimental data have been used to calculate, apparent molar volume, Φ, limiting apparent molar volume, Φ and the slopes, v, transfer volumes,, Falkenhagen Coefficient, A and Jones Dole coefficient, B. These parameters have been used to discuss the Φ tr solute-solute and solute-solvent interactions in these systems. MATERIAL AND METHOD Analytical grade Ɩ-leucine (Research Lab.) was used as it is without further purification. Ethanol (Research Lab) was distilled using quick fit glass assembly. The aqueous ethanol solutions ( to wt % of ethanol, w/w in water) were prepared using triple distilled water (conductivity less than x -6 cm - ) and they were used as solvents to prepare Ɩ-leucine solutions of eight different molar concentrations (ranging from.54 to.58 M). The weightings were done on an electric one pan balance (Model Dhona, India) with a precision of ±. mg.the solutions were prepared with care and stored in special airtight bottles to avoid contamination and evaporation. The densities of the sample solutions were measured by using a bicapillary pycnometer (made of borosil glass) having a bulb capacity of 5 ml. The graduated marks on the capillary were calibrated by using triply distilled water. The accuracy of density measurements was estimated to be ±.9x -6 kg m -3. The viscosities of the solutions were measured by using Ubbelohde type suspended level viscometer in similar manner as reported by Nikam et al. The viscometer containing the test liquid was allowed to stand for about minutes in a thermostatic water bath so that the thermal fluctuations in viscometer were minimized. The time of flow was recorded in triplicate with a digital stopwatch with an accuracy of ±. s. The accuracy of viscosity measurements was found to be ±.7 x -6 N.s.m -. The temperature of the test solution during the measurements was maintained to an accuracy of ±.K in an electronically controlled thermostatic water bath. 6
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 REULT AND DICUION The experimental values of density, ρ, and viscosity, η of Ɩ-leucine solutions in aqueous ethanol solvents as a function of molar concentration and at various temperatures are listed in Table and Table respectively. 3.Partial molar volume The partial molar volume, Φ of this solute Φ the relations Φ = ( ρ ρ) M + Cρ ρ ρ of Ɩ-leucine in aqueous ethanol solutions were calculated by using where C is the molar concentration of Ɩ-leucine, ρ and ρ are the densities of the solution and the solvent (aqueous - ethanol) respectively is the molar mass of Ɩ -isoleucine. Table Densities, ρ, of solutions of Ɩ - leucine in ethanol + water ( to % ethanol, w/w in water) solvents as a functions of molar concentration of Ɩ - leucine in ethanol + water and at various temperatures. -3 density, ρ, kg. m density, ρ, kg. m -3 C/ mol kg - Temperature K Temperature K 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 % ethanol % ethanol.54 995.7 993.99 99.48 99.7 99.63 993.8 99.85 988.5 987.84 987.5.79 995.3 994. 99.5 99. 99.66 993.3 99.88 988.55 987.87 987.55.8 995.34 994.6 99.55 99.4 99.7 993.35 99.9 988.59 987.9 987.59.4 995.38 994. 99.59 99.8 99.74 993.39 99.96 988.63 987.95 987.63.57 995.4 994. 99.6 99. 99.77 993.43 99.98 988.65 987.97 987.65.3 995.49 994. 99.7 99.9 99.85 993.49 99.6 988.73 988.5 987.74.399 995.59 994.3 99.8 99.39 99.95 993.6 99.7 988.84 988.6 987.84.58 995.75 994.47 99.96 99.55 99. 993.76 99.33 989. 988.3 988. 3% ethanol 4% ethanol.54 99.73 99.36 988.8 988.8 987.8 989.99 988.6 987.4 986.3 985.36.79 99.76 99.4 988.86 988. 987. 99. 988.65 987.7 986.36 985.4.8 99.8 99.43 988.89 988.4 987.5 99.6 988.69 987. 986.39 985.43.4 99.84 99.47 988.93 988.8 987.9 99. 988.73 987.5 986.43 985.47.57 99.86 99.5 988.96 988.3 987. 99. 988.75 987.7 986.45 985.49.3 99.95 99.58 989.4 988.39 987.3 99. 988.83 987.5 986.54 985.58.399 99.5 99.68 989.4 988.49 987.4 99.3 988.94 987.36 986.64 985.68.58 99. 99.84 989.3 988.65 987.56 99.47 989. 987.5 986.8 985.84 5% ethanol 6% ethanol.54 988.46 987. 985. 984.75 983.59 985.49 983.93 98.8 98.9 98.5.79 988.49 987.3 985.3 984.79 983.63 985.5 983.96 98.83 98.94 98.8.8 988.53 987.7 985.7 984.8 983.66 985.55 983.99 98.87 98.98 98..4 988.57 987. 985. 984.86 983.7 985.6 984.4 98.9 98. 98.6.57 988.59 987.3 985.3 984.88 983.7 985.6 984.6 98.93 98.4 98.8.3 988.67 987. 985. 984.96 983.8 985.7 984.4 983. 98. 98.6.399 988.78 987.3 985.3 985.7 983.9 985.8 984.5 983. 98. 98.36.58 988.94 987.48 985.48 985.3 984.7 985.96 984.4 983.7 98.38 98.5 7% ethanol 8% ethanol.54 985.8 983.77 98.4 98.8 98. 98.57 98.4 979.3 978.5 977.69.79 985. 983.8 98.7 98.3 98.5 98.6 98.8 979.33 978.55 977.7.8 985.3 983.83 98. 98.35 98.9 98.64 98. 979.37 978.58 977.75.4 985.9 983.87 98.4 98.38 98. 98.68 98.5 979.4 978.6 977.79.57 985.3 983.89 98.6 98.4 98.5 98.7 98.7 979.43 978.64 977.8.3 985.39 983.97 98.4 98.49 98.33 98.78 98.35 979.5 978.7 977.89.399 985.5 984.8 98.35 98.59 98.43 98.88 98.45 979.6 978.83 978..58 985.66 984.4 98.5 98.75 98.59 983.4 98.6 979.78 978.99 978.6 9% ethanol % ethanol.54 98. 98.84 979. 978.6 977.5 979.48 978.6 976.74 976.3 974.74.79 98.5 98.87 979.6 978.9 977.8 979.5 978.9 976.77 976.7 974.77.8 98.9 98.9 979.9 978.3 977. 979.54 978.33 976.8 976. 974.8.4 98.33 98.95 979.3 978.36 977.5 979.58 978.37 976.85 976.4 974.84.57 98.35 98.97 979.5 978.38 977.7 979.6 978.39 976.87 976.6 974.86.3 98.43 98.5 979.3 978.46 977.5 979.68 978.47 976.95 976.34 974.94.399 98.53 98.5 979.33 978.56 977.36 979.78 978.57 977.5 976.44 975.4.58 98.69 98.3 979.5 978.73 977.5 979.94 978.7 977. 976.6 975. () 6
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 The partial molar volumes, Φ, as functions of square root of concentration at various temperatures are shown graphically in Fig.. It is observed that, for Ɩ-leucine in all the ten aqueous-ethanol solvents, Φ was almost linear in the studied concentration range and at each investigated temperature. Table iscosities, η, N.s.m - of solutions of Ɩ - leucine in ethanol + water ( to % ethanol, w/w in water) solvents as a functions of molar concentration of Ɩ - leucine in ethanol + water and at various temperatures. iscosity, η, iscosity, η, C/ Temperature K Temperature K mol kg - 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 % ethanol % ethanol.54.9.88.746.769.679.957.8459.765.736.6948.79.93.839.749.799.686.96.8489.768.7355.6977.8.96.834.753.73.6848.9633.85.77.7387.79.4.997.837.7557.764.688.9667.8555.7746.74.744.57.934.8387.7577.783.69.9685.8576.7766.744.765.3.9375.8448.7638.7344.6963.9746.864.787.75.77.399.9457.859.779.745.745.98.875.798.758.78.58.9557.863.784.754.753.999.886.8.768.737 3% ethanol 4% ethanol.54.993.8695.766.75.78.335.95.85.7738.7368.79.9933.874.7645.755.7.364.98.854.7767.7399.8.9965.8756.7676.758.743.397.94.887.7798.743.4..879.77.765.777.43.948.83.783.7466.57.7.889.773.7636.798.449.966.84.7853.7487.3.75.8869.779.7696.736.5.96.833.794.7548.399.4.8954.787.7778.7443.585.937.8385.7996.763.58.34.96.7976.7885.755.685.946.8495.83.7739 5% ethanol 6% ethanol.54.777.949.86.85.7534.98.9773.865.889.767.79.85.95.864.877.7547.44.983.868.87.77.8.856.955.8674.89.7578.89.9835.87.846.7735.4.899.9586.878.844.763.336.9869.8746.88.7773.57.9.966.878.864.7633.363.9888.8766.83.7793.3.997.9666.8789.86.7694.445.9949.887.836.7858.399.84.9744.887.839.7776.534.6.899.844.7943.58..9844.898.8468.7896.659.7.96.8547.85 7 % ethanol 8 % ethanol.54.64.9733.89.834.7879.6.444.99.8687.877.79.69.9764.894.8377.797.76.474.9.877.86.8.747.9798.897.84.7939.3.55.95.8749.837.4.88.9834.96.8446.7974.9.539.987.8783.87.57.84.9854.95.8466.7994..563.937.884.89.3.946.997.987.8538.857.37.68.9368.8866.835.399.74.9993.968.868.84.449.678.945.895.843.58.5.97.975.8734.887.69.799.9558.959.8537 9 % ethanol % ethanol.54.49.85.9535.8983.836.37..56.9693.864.79.534.846.9566.96.8386.34.33.549.974.8644.8.58.89.96.97.843.395.66.584.9756.8676.4.68.938.9635.9.8447.37..6.979.87.57.65.963.9653.955.8467.333..64.98.873.3.736.47.977.969.857.3438.8.77.9873.8793.399.84.64.979.937.86.36.354.785.995.886.58.988.99.9888.9543.879.3868.45.89.57.895 3. Limiting partial molar volume The values of limiting partial molar volume, Φ and the slope, v, have been obtained using method of linear regression of Φ 3. vs. molar concentration (C) of Ɩ-leucine in ethanol- water solvents from the following relation Φ = Φ + v C Where the intercepts, by definition are free from solute-solute interactions and therefore provide a measure of Φ solute-solvent interactions, whereas the experimental slope, v, provides information regarding solute-solute () 6
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 interaction. The values of Φ, and v for Ɩ-leucine in aqueous ethanol solutions at different temperatures are listed in Table 3. 63
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 64
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 Fig.. ariation of partial molar volumes, Φ vs. molar concentration, C of Ɩ - leucin in ethanol + water (w/w) solutions, at (i) 98.5 K, (ii) 33.5 K, ( iii )38.5 K, (iv) 3.5 K, (v) 33.5 K, Table 3. Limiting apparent molar volume, 5. Φ /m3 mole - and slopes, 5. v/ m 3 mole - kg - in ethanol + water ( to % ethanol, w/w in water) solvents as a function of concentration, C, of Ɩ-isoleucine at various temperatures. 98.5 K 33.5 K 38.5 K 3.5 K 33.5 K Φ v Φ v Φ v Φ v Φ v % ethanol.7 6.665.7 6.33.89 5.643.89 5.884.83 6.379 % ethanol.59 6.74.58 6.69.63 6.548.75 6.3.74 6.584 3% ethanol.89 9.593.5 8.958.7 7.774.33 7.56.3 7.775 4% ethanol.8 9.856.74.97.9 9.395.8 7.76.33 7.53 5% ethanol.5..56 9.8.9 9..3 7.75.8 7.6 6% ethanol.44.8.68 9.8.77 9.577.94 8.739.3 8.39 7% ethanol.4.5.4.6.5.4.8 9.37.8 9.73 8% ethanol.3.73.36.73.38.8.69 9.58.75 9.383 9% ethanol..5.9.7.3.88.47.44.66 9.733 % ethanol..4.3.4.37.4.47.6.63 9.387 A close perusal of Table 3 reveals that the and Φ v values are positive for Ɩ-leucine in aqueous-ethanol solutions indicating the presence of strong solute solvent interactions and strong solute solute interactions respectively in the solvent systems under investigation. The trends observed in values can be due to their hydration behavior Φ 4-8, which comprises of the following interactions in the present solvent: (a) The terminal groups of zwitterions of amino acids, NH + 3 and COO - are hydrated in an electrostatic manner whereas, hydration of R group depends on its nature, which may be hydrophilic, hydrophobic or amphiphilic; and (b) the overlap of 65
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 hydration co-spheres of terminal NH + 3 and COO - groups and of adjacent groups results in volume change. The Φ values increase due to reduction in the electrostriction at terminals, whereas it decreases due to disruption of side group hydration by that of the charged end. The increase in values with increase in temperature for Ɩ-leucine in aqueous- ethanol solutions can be explained Φ by considering the size of primary and secondary solvation layers around the zwitterions. At higher temperatures the solvent from the secondary solvation layer of Ɩ-leucine zwitterions is released into the bulk of the solvent, resulting in the expansion of the solution, as inferred from larger Φ values at higher temperatures 9,. imilar trends in Φ values were obtained by.li,. Khan and F. Nabi on interactions of Ɩ-leucine in aqueous solution of glycerol. 3.3 Transfer volume Limiting apparent molar properties of transfer volume Φ provide qualitative as well as quantitative information regarding solute-solvent interactions without taking into account the effects of solute solute interactions. The transfer volumes, Φ tr relation Φ tr Φaq.ethanol of Φ,water Ɩ-leucine from water to aqueous ethanol solutions were calculated by using the = (3) Where, φ, water, is the limiting apparent molar volume of Ɩ-leucine in water. The Φ, tr values for Ɩ-leucine from water to aqueous ethanol solutions are included in Table 4. Transfer volumes, values of Ɩ-leucine are positive Φ tr as well as negative. In general, the types of interactions occurring between Ɩ-leucine and ethanol can be classified as follows,,3 (a) The hydrophilic ionic interaction between OH groups of ethanol and zwitterions of Ɩ- isoleucine. (b) Hydrophilic hydrophilic interaction the OH groups of ethanol and NH groups in the side chain of acid Ɩ- leucine through hydrogen bonding. (c) Hydrophilic hydrophobic interaction between the OH groups of ethanol molecule and non- polar (-CH ) in the side chain of Ɩ-leucine molecule. (d) Hydrophobic hydrophobic group interactions between the non- polar groups of ethanol and non polar (-CH ) in the side chain of Ɩ-leucine molecule. Table 4. Transfer volume, for Ɩ - leucine in aqueous ethanol at different temperatures. Φ tr Mole fraction of ethanol Φ tr mol - Temperature K 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5.39. -..4 -. -..79 -.8 -. -.9 -.4 -.4.9 -.54 -.46 -.4 -.43 -.44.6 -.74 -.6 -.6 -.5 -.47. -.75 -.7 -.66 -.54 -.55.43 -.93 -.73 -.76 -.7 -.7.85 -.7 -.94 -.94 -.88 -.8.38 -.8 -. -.4 -.5 -.89.37 -. -.7 -.64 -.7 -.94.46 -.4 -. -.4 -. -. The Φ tr values decrease due to disruption of side group hydration by that of the charged end by negative contribution from the interactions of type (c) and (d) mentioned earlier. The observed positive values upto Φ tr.9 mole fraction of ethanol suggest that the hydrophilic ionic group and hydrophilic hydrophilic group interactions dominate in these systems. The Φ tr values decrease with increase in ethanol concentration in the 66
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 solutions. This may be due to greater Hydrophilic hydrophobic groups and Hydrophobic hydrophobic group interactions with increased concentrations of ethanol. The similar trends in and Φ with sucrose Φ tr concentration were also observed by Zhao et al. 4 from volumetric properties of arginine in aqueous-carbohydrate solutions at 98.5K. Table 5 Parameters of Jones Dole equation B, dm 3 mole - and A, dm 3 mole - ½ for Ɩ - leucine in Water + Ethanol mixtures at different temperatures 98.5 K 33.5 K 38.5 K 3.5 K 33.5 K B A B A B A B A B A % ethanol.367 -.86.3638 -.76.3669 -.78.338 -.8.365 -. % ethanol.3636 -.398.3579 -.338.3556 -..3556 -.74.3686 -.486 3% ethanol.3543 -.9754.3579 -.636.3643 -.486.366 -.45.3537 -.68 4% ethanol.363 -.976.358 -.94.383 -.87.36 -.5.3638 -.53 5% ethanol.3584 -.43.3648 -.54.753 -.36.3498 -.358.3739 -.365 6% ethanol.379 -.66.3537 -.46.385 -.4349.36 -.394.376 -.364 7% ethanol.36 -.378.463 -.466.3537 -.355.364 -.374.3584 -.385 8% ethanol.3644 -.47.358 -.54.3585 -.48.46 -.69.3997 -.698 9% ethanol.47.394.4767 -.49.3675 -.39.365 -.3594.345 -.4795 % ethanol.373.5.5589 -.46.35 -.447.3743 -.86.354 -.4 Table 6: Hydration number for Ɩ - leucine in mole fraction of ethanol at different temperatures. Mole fraction of ethanol 98.5 K. 33.5 K 38.5 K 3.5 K 33.5 K.39 3.39 3.39 3.47 3.46 3.46.79 3.34 3.36 3.3 3.3 3.39.9 3.6 3. 3. 3.5 3.4.6.93 3.3 3.8 3. 3.3..94.99 3.6 3. 3.9.43.83.99 3. 3. 3..85.8.9.93 3. 3.6.38.8.87.87.99 3..37.75.85.86.9.98.46.8.86.9.9.95 4. Analysis of viscosity data The viscosity data were analysed by using Jones Dole 4 equation of the form η r = η η = + AC / + BC (4) Where η r is the relative viscosity of the solution, η and η are the viscosities of solution and the solvent (ethanol + water), respectively, C is the molar concentration of Ɩ-leucine in ethanol + water solvent, A and B are the Falkenhagen 5,6 and Jones Dole 4 coefficients, respectively. Coefficient A accounts for the solute solute interactions and B is a measure of structural modifications induced by the solute solvent interactions 7, 8. The values of A and B have been obtained as the intercept and slope from linear regression of [(η r )/ C / ] s. C / curves, which were found almost linear for this systems. The values of A and B are listed in Table 5. The values of A-coefficients are negative while that of B-coefficients are positive. The A- coefficients are much smaller in magnitude as compared to B-coefficients, suggesting weak solute- solute and solute- solvent interactions in these solutions. Positive B-coefficients values, which increase with increasing concentration of ethanol, also indicate a structure to allow the co solute (ethanol) to act on solvent. B - Coefficients increase when the water is replaced by ethanol, i.e., ethanol acts as water structure maker by H- bonding. B-coefficients increases with increasing concentration of ethanol, the reason may be that the friction increases to prevent water flow at increased ethanol concentration. 67
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 5. Hydration number The value of hydration numbers (N h ) reflects the electrostriction effect of the charge centre of the amino acids on the nearby water molecules. The hydration numbers of amino acids in aqueous ethanol solutions were estimated using the method reported by hahidi et al 9 and are included in Table 6. = [N Φ tr h (in water) - N h (in ethanol solution)] x 3 (5) According to Millero et al 9, the hydration number of amino acid in water can be evaluated by the following equation, N h (in water) = where elect elect e b is the molar mass of electrostricted water and b (6) is the molar volume of bulk water. The value of is approximately 3.3 e b cm3 mol -. The electrostriction partial molar volume ( elect the measured value of the amino acid using the following equation. Φ elect = Φ (7) inter ) can be estimated from The intrinsic molar volume of the amino acid can be estimated from the crystal volume ( inter ) and the cryst crystal volume can be calculated from the density of the dry-state amino acid 3. int =.7.634 cryst The hydration numbers decrease with the increasing ethanol concentration, which again indicates that the increase in solute-co solute interactions reduces the electrostriction effect of the amino acids. It also suggests that ethanol has a dehydration effect on the Ɩ-leucine under investigation. On comparison with the N h values for the amino acids in ethanol solutions, it can be concluded that ethanol has a little large dehydration effect on the L- isoleucine. 3.6 The free energy of activation per mole of the solvent The free energy of activation per mole of the solvent ( µ * ), and the free energy of activation per mole of the solute ( µ * ) were calculated 7 from the equation 9 and. (8) µ * µ * η v = RT ln ( ).9 hn = µ * + v RT v [B ( v )]. Where h is planks constant N is Avogadro s number, η is the viscosity of solvent and the other symbols have their usual meanings. The values of µ *, µ *, and * calculated at different temperatures are given in table 7. It is clear from table 7 that the values of µ * are positive and larger than µ * indicating a stronger solutesolvent interactions suggesting that the formation of the transition state is less favored in the presence of Ɩ - leucine, meaning thereby the formation of transition state is accompanied by the rupture and the distortion of the intermolecular bonds in solvent structure. This feature is similar to that observed for aqueous glycine solution of transition metal chloride 3, or -4 dioxanes 7. 68
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 According to Feakin s model, the greater the value of µ * close perusal of table.7 shows that µ * mass % ethanol µ *, greater is the structure making ability of the solute. A values increase with composition and decrease with temperature. At low values of Ɩ-leucine are lower, showing structure breaking tendency. The activation energy ( * )* for Ɩ - leucine has been calculated 3 from the relationship in as given by d µ * dt = - *. Table 7: alues of v x-6 / m 3 mol -, v x6 / m 3 mol -, µ * /kj mol, µ * / kj mol - of Ɩ - leucine in aqueous ethanol solutions at 98.5, 33.5, 38.5, 3.5 and 33.5 K. Mass% ethanol 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Temperature K v v µ * 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5 98.5 33.5 38.5 3.5 33.5.837.838.86.83.858.837.84.847.8466.89.853.8635.859.869.935.8696.873.8759.8798.979.886.89.897.8965.43.983.97.9.939.567.997.943.97.93.99.937.949.9449.9488.45.9546.9598.963.9668.869.974.977.98.9849.34.6.7.38 44.37.4.7.5.9.9.35.7.8.93.99.99.53.66.75.9.95.45.57.69.88.9.39.5.58.65.79.997.34.39.57.59.6.7.3.49.5.3..7.35.49..9.9.34.36 µ * 43.43 43.9 44.37 44.56 44.98 43.5 43.99 44.44 44.63 44.98 43.65 44. 44.54 44.73 45. 43.78 44.9 44.64 44.83 45.7 43.89 44.33 44.8 44.98 45.37 44. 44.4 44.85 45.3 45.5 44.3 44.4 44.96 45.4 45.63 44. 44.63 45.7 45.4 45.76 44.36 44.78 45.5 45.33 45.87 44.49 44.84 45.43 45.53 46. 6.9 59.73 58.89 58.53 58. 6.84 6.43 59.47 59. 59.5 6.8 6. 59.66 59.58 59.5 64. 6.3 6.9 6.8 6.8 64.99 63.37 6. 6. 6.48 66. 64.9 6.33 6.67 6.6 67.9 64.7 63. 6.5 6.79 68.4 66.3 63.93 63.5 6.6 69.6 66.9 64.68 63.65 63. 7.97 67.9 67.8 65.6 63.9 The values of * have been calculated from the slopes of linear plots of µ * against T. The activation enthalpy ( Η * ) has been calculated from the following equation. 69
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 Η * = µ * + * The values of T * and * H T at different temperatures are recorded in table.8. It is evident from table 8 that entropy of activation is negative, indicating that the formation of transition state is associated with the bond making and a decrease in order. The * H values in and % ethanol are positive suggesting the formation of activated species necessary for viscous flow appears difficult in these solutions 3. Table 8: Entropy, T * /kj mol - and enthalpy Η * / kj mol- of activation of Ɩ leucine in aqueous ethanol solutions at 98.5, 33.5, 38.5, 3.5 and 33.5 K. Mass% ethanol T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * T * Η * 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 98.5 K 33.5 K 38.5 K 3.5K 33.5 K -54.6 6.66-5.88 9.96-86.87-6.6-8.5-6.49-9.33-5.35 -.7-34.95-7.63-4.34-6.57-48.34-3.48-6.67-9.7-58.7-55.7 4.56-5.75 7.68-7.3-8.9-8.85-9.6-9.85-8.48.77-38.68-9.43-45.6-8.53-5.5-33.69-66.78-3.87-63.96-56.8.8-53.6 5.85-7.8 -.5-83. -.8-93.37-83. -4.6-4.3 -.4-48.4 -.49-56.55-35.89-7. -34.5-66.86-56.45.8-53.97 5.4-7.65 -.6-83.74-3.46-93.98-3.85-5.4-43.47 -.96-49.8 -.7-58. -36.78-73.7-34.9-89.3-56.99. -54.49 5. -7.34 -.83-84.55-4.47-94.88-34.4-6.5-44.99-3.5-5.6 -.44-59.84-38.9-74.98-36. -7.3 Acknowledgements One of the authors (GKK) is thankful to BCUD, University of Pune for financial assistance and the Principal,.. G. M. College, Kopargaon for providing the necessary laboratory facilities. REFERENCE [] C.Zhao, P. Ma, J. Li, J. Chem. Thermodynamics, (5) 37, 37-4. [] T..Banipal, J. Kaur, P.K. Banipal, K. ing, J. Chem. Eng. Data (8), 53, 83-86. [3] A.Ali,.Khan,. Hyder, A.K. Nain, Physics and Chemistry of Liquid (6), 44, 655-66. [4] A.Ali,.abir,. Hyder, A.K. Nain,. Ahmed, R. Patel, Journal The chemical ociety. (7), 54,659-666. [5] K. Zhuo, Q. Liu, Y. Yang, Q. Ren, J. Wang, J. Chem. Eng. Data, (6), 5, 99-97. [6] A.Ali, R. Patel, hahajahan,. Bhushan, Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung a: J. of Physical ciences (9), 64 A 758-764. [7] A.M. Renero, E. Moreno, J. L. Rojas, Thermochima Acta. (999), 38, 33-38. [8] Z. Yan, J. Wang, W. Kong, J. Lu, Fluid Phase Equilibria (4), 5, 43-5. [9] F.J. Millero, A.L. urdo,. hin, J. of Phys. Chem, (978), 8, 784-79. [] A.Ali and hahajahan, J.Iranian Chem. oc. (6), 3, No. 4, pp.34-35. [] A.Ali.. Khan and F. Nabi, J. erb. Chem. oc.. (7), 7 (5), 495-5. 7
Arun B. Nikumbh et al Der Chemica inica,, 3(5):6-7 [] Pandharinath. Nikam and Arun B. Nikumbh, J. Chem. Eng. Data, (), 47, 4-44. [3] D. O. Masson, Phil. Mag. (99), 8, 8-3. [4] D. P. Kharakoz, Biophysical Chemistry, (989), 34, 5-5. [5] B. inha,. K. Dakua, M. N. Roy, J. Chem. Eng. Data (7), 5, 768-77. [6] G. R. Hedwig, H. Holland, The J. Chem. Thermodynamics, (993), 5, 34-354. [7] A. K. Mishra, J. C. Ahluwalia, The J. Phy. Chem., (984), 88, 86-9. [8] J. C. Ahluwalia, C. Cstiguy, G. Perron, J. Desnoyers, Can. J. of Chem., (977), 55, 3364-3367. [9] R.K. Wadi, P. Ramsami, J. Chem. oc. Faraday Trans. (977), 93, 43-47. [] A. Ali,. Khan, F. Nabi, J. erb. Chem.l oc (7), 7, 495-5. [] H. Rodriguez, A. oto, A. Arce, M. K. Ahluwalia, Khoshkbarchi Moha, J. ol. Chemistry. (3), 3, 53-63. [] A. oto, A. Arce, M. K. Khoshkbarch, J. ol. Chemistry (3), 33, -. [3]. Banerjee, N. Kishore, J. ol. Chemistry (5), 34, 37-53. [4] C. Jones and M. Dole, J. Am. Chem. oc, (99), 5, 95-964. [5] H. Falkenhagen, M. Dole, Zeitschrift für Physik (99), 3, 6-66. [6] H. Falkenhagen, E.L. ernon, Phil. Mag. (93), 4. 9, 537-565. [7] D. Feakins, D. J. Freemantle, K. G. Lawrence, J. of the Chem. oc. Faraday Trans.I, (974), 7, 795-86. [8]. C. Bai, G. B. Yan, Carbohydrate Research (3), 338, 9-97. [9] F. hahidi, P.G. Harreil, J.T. Edward, J. ol. Chemistry (976), 5, 87-86. [3] E. Berlin, M. J. Pallancsh, J. Phys. Chem (968), 7, 887-889. [3].Glasstone, K. Laidler and H. Eyring The Theory of Rate Processes, (MacGraw-Hill,New York, (94) 477. [3] A. Ali,. abir, A. K. Nain,. Hyder,. Ahmed. J. Chinese Chem. oc, (7), 54, 659-666.. 7