Home Cart Sign in  
Chemical Structure| 1633-05-2 Chemical Structure| 1633-05-2

Structure of 1633-05-2

Chemical Structure| 1633-05-2

*Storage: {[sel_prStorage]}

*Shipping: {[sel_prShipping]}

,{[proInfo.pro_purity]}

4.5 *For Research Use Only !

{[proInfo.pro_purity]}
Cat. No.: {[proInfo.prAm]} Purity: {[proInfo.pro_purity]}

Change View

Size Price VIP Price

DE Stock

US Stock

Asia Stock

Global Stock

In Stock
{[ item.pr_size ]} Inquiry {[ getRatePrice(item.pr_usd,item.pr_rate,item.mem_rate,item.pr_is_large_size_no_price, item.vip_usd) ]}

  • {[ item.pr_size ]}

In Stock

- +

Please Login or Create an Account to: See VIP prices and availability

  • 1-2 Day Shipping
  • High Quality
  • Technical Support
Product Citations

Product Citations

Lottes, Brett M ;

Abstract: Uranium (U) separation from spent nuclear fuel is an area of current research interest as reprocessing and advanced fuel development are important for fully utilizing nuclear energy resources. Currently reprocessing requires dissolution of UO2 fuel pellets in nitric acid mediawhich yields the U(VI)O22+ cation which can be separated via the PUREX process. However; radiolysis of aqueous solution can generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as •OH, O2•-, e(aq) , •H, and H2O2 that cause extractant degradation and the high concentrations of HNO3 are severe explosion, corrosion, and fire hazards. An alternative to this process is a CARBonate EXtraction method, termed CARBEX that in several studies has show to both be capable of dissolving and extracting U from UO2 in an elevated pH (pH = 7-10). Problems may arise though from large amounts of H2O2 added to aid in dissolution that will also generate through H2O2 decomposition. This thesis intends to further understand solution state speciation and interactions with UO22+ at similar pH conditions. Hydrothermal and photochemical synthetic methods were used for generating and in a few cases binding with UO22+ through H2O2 decomposition. In general, hydrothermal and photochemical reactions both can produce UPCs while photochemical reactions were also found to produce peroxide dimers. All compounds were structurally characterized using single crystal X-ray diffraction and vibrational modes were assigned using Raman and infrared spectroscopies. were first detected via a colorimetric assay and further characterization of the radical species required electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy (EPR) studies. Free radical identification was done using spin trapping methods in aqueous solutions where •OH and O2•-were found to be present in UPCs and O2•-. Only O2•- was found to be stable within UPCs while •OH caused a loss of crystallinity overtime seen during x-ray diffraction studies.

Purchased from AmBeed:

Alternative Products

Product Details of [ 1633-05-2 ]

CAS No. :1633-05-2
Formula : CO3Sr
M.W : 147.63
SMILES Code : [O-]C([O-])=O.[Sr+2]
MDL No. :MFCD00011250
InChI Key :LEDMRZGFZIAGGB-UHFFFAOYSA-L
Pubchem ID :15407

Safety of [ 1633-05-2 ]

GHS Pictogram:
Signal Word:Warning
Hazard Statements:H302-H315-H319-H335-H413
Precautionary Statements:P261-P305+P351+P338-P273

Computational Chemistry of [ 1633-05-2 ] Show Less

Physicochemical Properties

Num. heavy atoms 5
Num. arom. heavy atoms 0
Fraction Csp3 0.0
Num. rotatable bonds 0
Num. H-bond acceptors 3.0
Num. H-bond donors 0.0
Molar Refractivity 6.77
TPSA ?

Topological Polar Surface Area: Calculated from
Ertl P. et al. 2000 J. Med. Chem.

63.19 Ų

Lipophilicity

Log Po/w (iLOGP)?

iLOGP: in-house physics-based method implemented from
Daina A et al. 2014 J. Chem. Inf. Model.

0.0
Log Po/w (XLOGP3)?

XLOGP3: Atomistic and knowledge-based method calculated by
XLOGP program, version 3.2.2, courtesy of CCBG, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry

-0.13
Log Po/w (WLOGP)?

WLOGP: Atomistic method implemented from
Wildman SA and Crippen GM. 1999 J. Chem. Inf. Model.

-2.45
Log Po/w (MLOGP)?

MLOGP: Topological method implemented from
Moriguchi I. et al. 1992 Chem. Pharm. Bull.
Moriguchi I. et al. 1994 Chem. Pharm. Bull.
Lipinski PA. et al. 2001 Adv. Drug. Deliv. Rev.

-1.6
Log Po/w (SILICOS-IT)?

SILICOS-IT: Hybrid fragmental/topological method calculated by
FILTER-IT program, version 1.0.2, courtesy of SILICOS-IT, http://www.silicos-it.com

-0.44
Consensus Log Po/w?

Consensus Log Po/w: Average of all five predictions

-0.92

Water Solubility

Log S (ESOL):?

ESOL: Topological method implemented from
Delaney JS. 2004 J. Chem. Inf. Model.

-0.67
Solubility 31.3 mg/ml ; 0.212 mol/l
Class?

Solubility class: Log S scale
Insoluble < -10 < Poorly < -6 < Moderately < -4 < Soluble < -2 Very < 0 < Highly

Very soluble
Log S (Ali)?

Ali: Topological method implemented from
Ali J. et al. 2012 J. Chem. Inf. Model.

-0.74
Solubility 26.7 mg/ml ; 0.181 mol/l
Class?

Solubility class: Log S scale
Insoluble < -10 < Poorly < -6 < Moderately < -4 < Soluble < -2 Very < 0 < Highly

Very soluble
Log S (SILICOS-IT)?

SILICOS-IT: Fragmental method calculated by
FILTER-IT program, version 1.0.2, courtesy of SILICOS-IT, http://www.silicos-it.com

1.49
Solubility 4550.0 mg/ml ; 30.8 mol/l
Class?

Solubility class: Log S scale
Insoluble < -10 < Poorly < -6 < Moderately < -4 < Soluble < -2 Very < 0 < Highly

Soluble

Pharmacokinetics

GI absorption?

Gatrointestinal absorption: according to the white of the BOILED-Egg

Low
BBB permeant?

BBB permeation: according to the yolk of the BOILED-Egg

No
P-gp substrate?

P-glycoprotein substrate: SVM model built on 1033 molecules (training set)
and tested on 415 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.72 / AUC=0.77
External: ACC=0.88 / AUC=0.94

No
CYP1A2 inhibitor?

Cytochrome P450 1A2 inhibitor: SVM model built on 9145 molecules (training set)
and tested on 3000 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.83 / AUC=0.90
External: ACC=0.84 / AUC=0.91

No
CYP2C19 inhibitor?

Cytochrome P450 2C19 inhibitor: SVM model built on 9272 molecules (training set)
and tested on 3000 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.80 / AUC=0.86
External: ACC=0.80 / AUC=0.87

No
CYP2C9 inhibitor?

Cytochrome P450 2C9 inhibitor: SVM model built on 5940 molecules (training set)
and tested on 2075 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.78 / AUC=0.85
External: ACC=0.71 / AUC=0.81

No
CYP2D6 inhibitor?

Cytochrome P450 2D6 inhibitor: SVM model built on 3664 molecules (training set)
and tested on 1068 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.79 / AUC=0.85
External: ACC=0.81 / AUC=0.87

No
CYP3A4 inhibitor?

Cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor: SVM model built on 7518 molecules (training set)
and tested on 2579 molecules (test set)
10-fold CV: ACC=0.77 / AUC=0.85
External: ACC=0.78 / AUC=0.86

No
Log Kp (skin permeation)?

Skin permeation: QSPR model implemented from
Potts RO and Guy RH. 1992 Pharm. Res.

-7.29 cm/s

Druglikeness

Lipinski?

Lipinski (Pfizer) filter: implemented from
Lipinski CA. et al. 2001 Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.
MW ≤ 500
MLOGP ≤ 4.15
N or O ≤ 10
NH or OH ≤ 5

0.0
Ghose?

Ghose filter: implemented from
Ghose AK. et al. 1999 J. Comb. Chem.
160 ≤ MW ≤ 480
-0.4 ≤ WLOGP ≤ 5.6
40 ≤ MR ≤ 130
20 ≤ atoms ≤ 70

None
Veber?

Veber (GSK) filter: implemented from
Veber DF. et al. 2002 J. Med. Chem.
Rotatable bonds ≤ 10
TPSA ≤ 140

0.0
Egan?

Egan (Pharmacia) filter: implemented from
Egan WJ. et al. 2000 J. Med. Chem.
WLOGP ≤ 5.88
TPSA ≤ 131.6

0.0
Muegge?

Muegge (Bayer) filter: implemented from
Muegge I. et al. 2001 J. Med. Chem.
200 ≤ MW ≤ 600
-2 ≤ XLOGP ≤ 5
TPSA ≤ 150
Num. rings ≤ 7
Num. carbon > 4
Num. heteroatoms > 1
Num. rotatable bonds ≤ 15
H-bond acc. ≤ 10
H-bond don. ≤ 5

2.0
Bioavailability Score?

Abbott Bioavailability Score: Probability of F > 10% in rat
implemented from
Martin YC. 2005 J. Med. Chem.

0.55

Medicinal Chemistry

PAINS?

Pan Assay Interference Structures: implemented from
Baell JB. & Holloway GA. 2010 J. Med. Chem.

0.0 alert
Brenk?

Structural Alert: implemented from
Brenk R. et al. 2008 ChemMedChem

0.0 alert: heavy_metal
Leadlikeness?

Leadlikeness: implemented from
Teague SJ. 1999 Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
250 ≤ MW ≤ 350
XLOGP ≤ 3.5
Num. rotatable bonds ≤ 7

No; 1 violation:MW<1.0
Synthetic accessibility?

Synthetic accessibility score: from 1 (very easy) to 10 (very difficult)
based on 1024 fragmental contributions (FP2) modulated by size and complexity penaties,
trained on 12'782'590 molecules and tested on 40 external molecules (r2 = 0.94)

2.08
 

Historical Records