BioG 1105-1106 at Cornell University
more options
Unit 1: Demos

Objective 1:

The Octet "Rule"

Objectives 2 and 3:

Electronegativity
Polarity and Chemical Bonds

Objective 7:

Wettability and Capillarity
Density of ice/water

Objective 8:

Hydrophobic, hydrophilic, and detergents
How does dry cleaning work?
Water as a Solvent

Objective 9:

Buffers (9c) (optional)

Objective 13:

Saturated v. unsaturated fats (13a)

Objective 17:

Protein structure

Objective 18:

Folding of long polypeptides in water
New research on Parkinson's disease emphasizes the importance of a protein's shape on its function

Optional Supplementary Material:

Caught on Tape: A different way to stay clean (and sticky)
Sticky Feet: On geckos and Spider-man

Electronegativity

Electronegativity[1] is a formal measure of the tendency for an atom to pull electrons toward itself. An atom's relative electronegativity depends on:
  • the number of spaces in the outer energy level left to be filled, and

  • the distance of the outer energy level from the nucleus. (The smaller the atom, the stronger the tendency of the atom to attract electrons.) 

Atoms whose outermost energy levels are almost full have a stronger attraction for electrons (i.e., a higher electronegativity) than atoms whose outermost energy levels have four or more vacancies.  Thus an atom like sodium, with seven vacancies, attracts electrons less strongly (that is, is less electronegative) than nitrogen, which has three vacancies, or oxygen, which has two vacancies.  Fluorine, a small atom with only one electron vacancy, is highly electronegative. 

The figures below relate the negativity of various atoms to their size and position on the periodic table of elementsNote that oxygen (O) and nitrogen (N), two important elements in living systems, are both highly electronegative.  


(click images for larger versions)


            The relative tendency of an atom to attract electrons depends on the number of spaces in the outer shell left to be filled and on the distance of the outer shell from the nucleus.  Hence, lithium (Li) with seven vacancies is less attractive to electrons (that is, less electronegative) than carbon (C), which has four. Oxygen (O), with only two missing electrons, is yet more electronegative.  This graph also helps explain why in methane (CH4) the shared electrons will be nearer the carbon atom, while in carbon dioxide (CO2) they will be nearer the oxygens: carbon is more electronegative  than hydrogen, but less electronegative than oxygen.  The electronegativity of the noble gases (which have filled outer shells) cannot be measured, and so is simply estimated.  This knowledge of relative electronegativity permits us to make important predictions about many biochemical reactions.  (The covalent bonding capacity of each atom is shown in parentheses.)


[1] From:  Gould, J. and W. Keeton, 1996.  Biological Science, W. W. Norton, New York.


Electronegativities of Carbon and Sulfur

         In general, if the difference between the electronegativities of two atoms is greater than or equal to 2.0, then a bond between them will be ionic.  If the difference in electronegativity is less than 2.0, then the bond will be covalent.  If in a covalent bond the difference is close to zero, the bond will be nonpolar covalent, and between about 0.4 and 2.0 it will be polar covalent.  How close does the difference have to be to zero before the bond is nonpolar covalent?  Carbon and sulfur are both generally listed as having electronegativities of 2.5 while hydrogen has an electronegativity of 2.1 (see chart below).  Consequently, the difference in electronegativity between carbon and hydrogen (0.4) is the same as the difference between sulfur and hydrogen (0.4).  These electronegativity differences are right on the borderline between polar and nonpolar covalent.  In fact, the bond between carbon and hydrogen is considered to be nonpolar while the one between sulfur and hydrogen is considered to be polar.  How can this be?  The following explains.

            Presented here are the results of five different methods of calculating electronegativities and the average of these five values for carbon and sulfur.  It can be seen that although C and S have very similar electronegativities by all of these methods, sulfur tends to be appreciably higher on the average.  Since both these values are rounded to 2.5 for general presentation, the real difference between them is not ordinarily seen.

 

Pauling (1960)

Original Pauling

Allred (1961)

Revised Pauling

Mulliken

(1934 & 1935)

Allred/Rochow

(1958)

Sanderson

(1967)

Average

C

2.5

2.55

2.5

2.50

2.47

2.50

S

2.5

2.58

2.5

2.44

2.66

2.54

© BIOG 1105-1106