4.7 Article

MECHANISTICAL STUDIES ON THE PRODUCTION OF FORMAMIDE (H2NCHO) WITHIN INTERSTELLAR ICE ANALOGS

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 734, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/734/2/78

关键词

astrochemistry; cosmic rays; ISM: clouds

资金

  1. NASA
  2. NASA Astrobiology Institute
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration through the NASA Astrobiology Institute
  4. Office of Space Science [NNA09DA77A]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Formamide, H2NCHO, represents the simplest molecule containing the peptide bond. Consequently, the formamide molecule is of high interest as it is considered an important precursor in the abiotic synthesis of amino acids, and thus significant to further prebiotic chemistry, in more suitable environments. Previous experiments have demonstrated that formamide is formed under extreme conditions similar throughout the interstellar medium via photolysis and the energetic processing of ultracold interstellar and solar system ices with high-energy protons; however, no clear reaction mechanism has been identified. Utilizing a laboratory apparatus capable of simulating the effects of galactic cosmic radiation on ultralow temperature ice mixtures, we have examined the formation of formamide starting from a variety of carbon monoxide (CO) to ammonia (NH3) ices of varying composition. Our results suggest that the primary reaction step leading to the production of formamide in low-temperature ices involves the cleavage of the nitrogen-hydrogen bond of ammonia forming the amino radical (NH2) and atomic hydrogen (H), the latter of which containing excess kinetic energy. These suprathermal hydrogen atoms can then add to the carbon-oxygen triple bond of the carbon monoxide (CO) molecule, overcoming the entrance barrier, and ultimately producing the formyl radical (HCO). From here, the formyl radical may combine without an entrance barrier with the neighboring amino radical if the proper geometry for these two species exists within the matrix cage.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据