{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0616, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0128, 'mean_word_length': 5.38265306122449, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Spin trapping nitric oxide from neuronal nitric oxide synthase: A look at several iron–dithiocarbamate complexes

The free radical, nitric oxide (√NO), is responsible for a myriad of physiological functions. The ability to verify and study √NO in vivo is required to provide insight into the events taking place upon its generation and in particular the flux of √NO at relevant cellular sites. With this in mind, several iron-chelates (Fe2+(L)2) have been developed, which have provided a useful tool for the study and identification of √NO through spin-trapping and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy. However, the effectiveness of √NO detection is dependent on the Fe2+(L)2 complex. The development of more efficient and stable Fe2+(L)2 chelates may help to better understand the role of √NO in vivo. In this paper, we present data comparing several proline derived iron–dithiocarbamate complexes with the more commonly used spin traps for √NO, Fe2+-di(N-methyl-D-glutamine-dithiocarbamate) (Fe2+(MGD)2) and Fe2+-di(N-(dithiocarboxy)sarcosine) (Fe2+(DTCS)2). We evaluate the apparent rate constant (kapp) for the reaction of √NO with these Fe2+(L)2 complexes and the stability of the corresponding Fe2+(NO)(L)2 in presence of NOS I.