Photosystem II (PSII), the water-plastoquinone photooxidoreductase that generated Earth's oxygen atmosphere, splits water at a protein-bound Mn₄CaO₅ cluster — the oxygen-evolving complex (OEC) — which accumulates four oxidizing equivalents in the S-state cycle of Kok before releasing O₂. A 2009 DFT account by Siegbahn posed four open questions for the field: refine the partly ambiguous backbone and metal–ligand positions (notably Asp170), explore alternative ligation patterns exhaustively, reduce the dependence of computed redox/pKa energetics on adjustable empirical parameters, and test the predicted near-degenerate S₃ electronic isomers (oxygen-radical vs closed-shell hydroxo character) against targeted experiments. The first two items were resolved by high-resolution crystallography (1.9 Å structure of 2011; damage-free XFEL structures), and ⁵⁵Mn ENDOR settled the resting S₃ state as homovalent all-Mn(IV) with spin S = 3, i.e. metal-centered, with no oxyl radical. The surviving open core, reframed by Cox et al. (2014) and pursued by microsecond time-resolved crystallography and infrared spectroscopy in 2018–2024, is the atomistic mechanism of the final oxidation step: whether the fourth oxidizing equivalent is ligand-centered (a Mn(IV)-oxyl radical), metal-centered (Mn(V)=O), or otherwise distributed; which two oxygens form the O–O bond (O5–Ox/O6 favored but unproven); the gating proton releases; and a quantitative energetic description of the S₃→S₄→S₀ sequence accurate enough to discriminate among candidate pathways. Conflicting interpretations of the S₄-like intermediates and of the S₃ 'extra oxygen' Ox remain unresolved in the 2026 literature, so the problem is open.

Background

Oxygenic photosynthesis converts water into the O₂ of our atmosphere, and the reaction that does it — the four-electron oxidation of two water molecules to dioxygen — happens at a single metal cluster. That cluster is the oxygen-evolving complex (OEC) of Photosystem II (PSII), a Mn₄CaO₅ unit in which four manganese ions and one calcium ion are linked by oxo bridges, ligated by carboxylate and histidine residues of the PSII reaction-center proteins (D1 and CP43). Light-driven charge separation at the PSII reaction center chlorophyll P680 creates a strong oxidant P680⁺· whose oxidizing power is relayed, one equivalent at a time, through the redox-active tyrosine TyrZ (D1-Tyr161) to the OEC. The OEC advances through the five S-states of the Kok cycle (S₀–S₄), one flash advancing one step; after the fourth oxidation (the transient S₄ state) the O–O bond forms, O₂ is released, and the cluster resets to S₀ (Kok, Forbush and McGloin, 1970). Water oxidation chemistry thus has to be reconstructed from a µs-lived transient and from metastable intermediates, which is why the final step has resisted a definitive mechanistic assignment for half a century.

The problem originated in the DFT cluster-model era. Before 2011 the best crystallographic models of the OEC were the 3.5 Å 'London' structure (Ferreira et al., 2004) and the 3.0 Å 'Berlin' structure (Loll et al., 2005); metal positions, ligand connectivities and substrate-water placements were ambiguous, and mechanistic proposals were tested with quantum-chemical cluster models — typically 100–200-atom truncations of the active site treated with hybrid density functional theory (hybrid DFT, e.g. the B3LYP* functional, a version of B3LYP with reduced exact exchange calibrated for spin-state energetics of transition metals), with broken-symmetry solutions (different Mn centers assigned different local spin directions) describing the antiferromagnetically coupled cluster, a dielectric continuum standing in for the protein, and empirical corrections for spin-coupling energies and hydrogen bonds. Siegbahn's 2009 review of this program summarized a complete computed free-energy cycle for O₂ formation, including an oxo–oxyl coupling mechanism in which an oxygen-centered radical on a µ-oxo bridge inside the Mn₃Ca unit attacks a second oxo ligand. The paper's closing limitations section acknowledged what its methodology could not settle: the low-resolution ligand/backbone ambiguity (notably the positioning of Asp170 and alternative carboxylate ligation patterns such as the proposed detachment of Glu189 from Ca), typical hybrid-DFT errors of a few kcal/mol (with redox/pKa energetics still dependent on adjustable parameters and on an assumed dielectric constant ε), the possibility that computed structures were not global minima, and — most pointedly — two nearly isoenergetic S₃ electronic isomers differing in oxidation character: one with an oxo/oxyl ligand on an internal Mn (ligand-centered character) and one with an innocent hydroxo ligand (metal-centered), whose ordering could not be decided computationally and required targeted experiments.

Two experimental revolutions then reset the problem. First, X-ray crystallography reached 1.9 Å (Umena et al., 2011), resolving the Mn₄CaO₅ core, all first-sphere ligands and their binding modes (D1-Asp170 bridging Mn4 and Ca; D1-Glu189 monodentate on Mn1; the W1–W4 terminal waters), and X-ray free-electron-laser (XFEL) serial femtosecond crystallography (SFX) — diffraction from thousands of microcrystals, each measured faster than radiation damage develops — delivered damage-free structures of the dark-stable and flash-advanced states at room temperature (Suga et al., 2015, 2017; Young et al., 2016; Kern et al., 2018; Li et al., 2024). These structures revealed that during the S₂→S₃ transition an extra oxygen ligand (variously called Ox or O6) inserts between Ca and Mn1. Second, advanced electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy made the oxidation-state question experimental: ⁵⁵Mn electron-nuclear double resonance (ENDOR) and ELDOR-detected NMR (electron–electron double-resonance-detected nuclear magnetic resonance), techniques that resolve the hyperfine couplings of individual Mn nuclei, established (Cox et al., 2014; Marchiori et al., 2020) that the resting S₃ state contains four Mn(IV) ions (a homovalent Mn(IV)₄ core) with a spin S = 3 ground state and an open-cubane geometry (a cube-like Mn₄O₄ arrangement with one edge opened) — i.e. the first three oxidizing equivalents are stored on the manganese centers, not on ligand oxygens. That result answers the 2009 S₃-isomer question for the resting state (the non-radical, metal-centered arrangement wins) and simultaneously sharpens the remaining question: with all four Mn already at Mn(IV), the final, O–O-bond-forming oxidation must be either ligand-centered — a Mn(IV)-oxyl radical on a substrate oxygen — or metal-centered — a formally Mn(V)=O species (or an intermediate charge-delocalized case), and current structural methods cannot distinguish these.

The state of the art as of 2026: microsecond time-resolved SFX after the third flash has visualized the S₃→[S₄]→S₀ sequence structurally (Bhowmick et al., 2023), showing TyrZ oxidation within ≤50 µs, loss of the Ox electron density and a peroxide-like intermediate around 500–1200 µs, and a delayed Mn1–Mn4 contraction; µs-infrared spectroscopy with computational modeling (Greife et al., 2023) identifies the rate-limiting step as a gated deprotonation followed by formation of a reactive oxygen radical, i.e. an oxyl-radical S₄; pump-probe SFX from nanoseconds to milliseconds (Li et al., 2024) traced the origin of the inserted O6 to a water appearing near D1-Glu189 that binds Ca²⁺ within a microsecond. Yet the atomistic interpretation remains contested: systematic comparison of the deposited XFEL geometries with quantum-mechanics/molecular-mechanics (QM/MM, a method coupling a quantum-mechanical active site to a classical protein environment) models questions whether they depict well-defined catalytic intermediates (Drosou et al., 2023), the chemical identity and even the conditional existence of the S₃ 'extra oxygen' Ox are debated within a 'low oxidation state' framework that disputes the standard high-valent picture itself (Ariafard et al., 2026; against low-valent models, Pantazis, 2020), and a 2026 review of photosystem-II-inspired water oxidation concludes that the mechanistic basis of O–O bond formation remains unresolved (Niu et al., 2026).

Problem Statement

Determine the atomistic mechanism of the final oxidation step and O–O bond formation at the oxygen-evolving complex of Photosystem II, the question left open by Siegbahn's 2009 formulation of ligand-centered versus metal-centered oxidation character after the resolution of its structural and resting-S₃ parts. Concretely, after the third flash, as the OEC proceeds from S₃ through the transient S₄ to S₀ with O₂ release: (a) establish the electronic structure and geometry of the S₄ transient — whether the fourth oxidizing equivalent is ligand-centered, i.e. a Mn(IV)-oxyl radical on a substrate oxygen, or metal-centered, i.e. a Mn(V)=O species, or a charge-delocalized alternative — together with the spin state and oxidation-state distribution over the four Mn ions; (b) identify the two oxygen atoms that form the O–O bond and the provenance of the second substrate oxygen — in particular whether the pair is O5–Ox/O6 (the oxo bridge O5 plus the extra oxygen inserted between Ca and Mn1 during the S₂→S₃ transition), as current evidence favors but has not proven, and which channel delivers it; (c) establish the timing, pathway and acceptors of the proton releases that gate the final electron transfer (including the protonation states of the μ-oxo bridges — the bridging oxide ions linking the Mn and Ca ions — and the role of the Cl1/O1/O4 water channels, the crystallographically identified water-filled pathways that connect the OEC to the protein surface); and (d) provide a quantitative energetic description of the S₃→S₄→S₀ sequence — redox potentials, pKa values and activation barriers consistent with the measured microsecond kinetics — at the accuracy needed to discriminate among candidate pathways, removing the source program's acknowledged dependence of computed redox/pKa energetics on adjustable empirical elements (empirical corrections, an assumed dielectric constant, and constrained-backbone cluster truncation). These components are jointly required and together answer a single question — how PSII forms O₂ from water — and a resolution must be consistent with the full body of existing observables: the ⁵⁵Mn ENDOR/EPR constraints on S₃ and S₂, microsecond infrared kinetics and isotope effects, time-resolved XFEL omit maps (crystallographic difference-density maps recomputed with the contested atoms left out of the model) and their population analysis, and substrate-water exchange kinetics (the measured rates at which the substrate waters exchange with bulk water).

References

  1. Kok, B.; Forbush, B.; McGloin, M. Cooperation of charges in photosynthetic O₂ evolution – I. A linear four step mechanism. Photochemistry and Photobiology 11, 457-475 (1970). DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-1097.1970.tb06017.x. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-1097.1970.tb06017.x
  2. Ferreira, K. N.; Iverson, T. M.; Maghlaoui, K.; Barber, J.; Iwata, S. Architecture of the Photosynthetic Oxygen-Evolving Center. Science 303, 1831-1838 (2004). DOI: 10.1126/science.1093087. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1093087
  3. Loll, B.; Kern, J.; Saenger, W.; Zouni, A.; Biesiadka, J. Towards complete cofactor arrangement in the 3.0 Å resolution structure of photosystem II. Nature 438, 1040-1044 (2005). DOI: 10.1038/nature04224. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04224
  4. Siegbahn, P. E. M. Structures and Energetics for O₂ Formation in Photosystem II. Accounts of Chemical Research 42, 1871-1880 (2009). DOI: 10.1021/ar900117k. URL: https://doi.org/10.1021/ar900117k
  5. Umena, Y.; Kawakami, K.; Shen, J. R.; Kamiya, N. Crystal structure of oxygen-evolving photosystem II at a resolution of 1.9 Å. Nature 473, 55-60 (2011). DOI: 10.1038/nature09913. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09913
  6. Cox, N.; Retegan, M.; Neese, F.; Pantazis, D. A.; Boussac, A.; Lubitz, W. Electronic structure of the oxygen-evolving complex in photosystem II prior to O–O bond formation. Science 345, 804-808 (2014). DOI: 10.1126/science.1254910. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254910
  7. Suga, M.; Akita, F.; Hirata, K.; Ueno, G.; Murakami, H.; Nakajima, Y.; Shimizu, T.; Yamashita, K.; Yamamoto, M.; Ago, H.; Shen, J. R. Native structure of photosystem II at 1.95 Å resolution viewed by femtosecond X-ray pulses. Nature 517, 99-103 (2015) (online 26 November 2014). DOI: 10.1038/nature13991. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13991
  8. Young, I. D.; Ibrahim, M.; Chatterjee, R.; Gul, S.; Fuller, F. D.; Koroidov, S.; Brewster, A. S.; Tran, R.; Alonso-Mori, R.; Kroll, T.; Michels-Clark, T.; Laksmono, H.; Sierra, R. G.; Stan, C. A.; Hussein, R.; Zhang, M.; Douthit, L.; Kubin, M.; de Lichtenberg, C.; Vo Pham, L.; Nilsson, H.; Cheah, M. H.; Shevela, D.; Saracini, C.; Bean, M. A.; Seuffert, I.; Sokaras, D.; Weng, T. C.; Pastor, E.; Weninger, C.; Fransson, T.; Lassalle, L.; Bräuer, P.; Aller, P.; Docker, P. T.; Andi, B.; Orville, A. M.; Glownia, J. M.; Nelson, S.; Sikorski, M.; Zhu, D.; Hunter, M. S.; Lane, T. J.; Aquila, A.; Koglin, J. E.; Robinson, J.; Liang, M.; Boutet, S.; Lyubimov, A. Y.; Uervirojnangkoorn, M.; Moriarty, N. W.; Liebschner, D.; Afonine, P. V.; Waterman, D. G.; Evans, G.; Wernet, P.; Dobbek, H.; Weis, W. I.; Brunger, A. T.; Zwart, P. H.; Adams, P. D.; Zouni, A.; Messinger, J.; Bergmann, U.; Sauter, N. K.; Kern, J.; Yachandra, V. K.; Yano, J. Structure of photosystem II and substrate binding at room temperature. Nature 540, 453-457 (2016). DOI: 10.1038/nature20161. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20161
  9. Suga, M.; Akita, F.; Sugahara, M.; Kubo, M.; Nakajima, Y.; Nakane, T.; Yamashita, K.; Umena, Y.; Nakabayashi, M.; Yamane, T.; Nakano, T.; Suzuki, M.; Masuda, T.; Inoue, S.; Kimura, T.; Nomura, T.; Yonekura, S.; Yu, L. J.; Sakamoto, T.; Motomura, T.; Chen, J. H.; Kato, Y.; Noguchi, T.; Tono, K.; Joti, Y.; Kameshima, T.; Hatsui, T.; Nango, E.; Tanaka, R.; Naitow, H.; Matsuura, Y.; Yamashita, A.; Yamamoto, M.; Nureki, O.; Yabashi, M.; Ishikawa, T.; Iwata, S.; Shen, J. R. Light-induced structural changes and the site of O=O bond formation in PSII caught by XFEL. Nature 543, 131-135 (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nature21400. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21400
  10. Siegbahn, P. E. M. Nucleophilic water attack is not a possible mechanism for O–O bond formation in photosystem II. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 4966-4968 (2017). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1617843114. URL: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1617843114
  11. Vinyard, D. J.; Brudvig, G. W. Progress Toward a Molecular Mechanism of Water Oxidation in Photosystem II. Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 68, 101-116 (2017). DOI: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-052516-044820. URL: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-physchem-052516-044820
  12. Kern, J.; Chatterjee, R.; Young, I. D.; Fuller, F. D.; Lassalle, L.; Ibrahim, M.; Gul, S.; Fransson, T.; Brewster, A. S.; Alonso-Mori, R.; Hussein, R.; Zhang, M.; Douthit, L.; de Lichtenberg, C.; Cheah, M. H.; Shevela, D.; Wersig, J.; Seuffert, I.; Sokaras, D.; Pastor, E.; Weninger, C.; Kroll, T.; Sierra, R. G.; Aller, P.; Butryn, A.; Orville, A. M.; Liang, M.; Batyuk, A.; Koglin, J. E.; Carbajo, S.; Boutet, S.; Moriarty, N. W.; Holton, J. M.; Dobbek, H.; Adams, P. D.; Bergmann, U.; Sauter, N. K.; Zouni, A.; Messinger, J.; Yano, J.; Yachandra, V. K. Structures of the intermediates of Kok’s photosynthetic water oxidation clock. Nature 563, 421-425 (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0681-2. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0681-2
  13. Suga, M.; Akita, F.; Yamashita, K.; Nakajima, Y.; Ueno, G.; Li, H.; Yamane, T.; Hirata, K.; Umena, Y.; Yonekura, S.; Yu, L. J.; Murakami, H.; Nomura, T.; Kimura, T.; Kubo, M.; Baba, S.; Kumasaka, T.; Tono, K.; Yabashi, M.; Isobe, H.; Yamaguchi, K.; Yamamoto, M.; Ago, H.; Shen, J. R. An oxyl/oxo mechanism for oxygen-oxygen coupling in PSII revealed by an x-ray free-electron laser. Science 366, 334-338 (2019). DOI: 10.1126/science.aax6998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax6998
  14. Pantazis, D. A. Evaluation of new low-valent computational models for the oxygen-evolving complex of photosystem II. Chemical Physics Letters 753, 137629 (2020). DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2020.137629. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2020.137629
  15. Ibrahim, M.; Fransson, T.; Chatterjee, R.; Cheah, M. H.; Hussein, R.; Lassalle, L.; Sutherlin, K. D.; Young, I. D.; Fuller, F. D.; Gul, S.; Kim, I. S.; Simon, P. S.; de Lichtenberg, C.; Chernev, P.; Bogacz, I.; Pham, C. C.; Orville, A. M.; Saichek, N.; Northen, T.; Batyuk, A.; Carbajo, S.; Alonso-Mori, R.; Tono, K.; Owada, S.; Bhowmick, A.; Bolotovsky, R.; Mendez, D.; Moriarty, N. W.; Holton, J. M.; Dobbek, H.; Brewster, A. S.; Adams, P. D.; Sauter, N. K.; Bergmann, U.; Zouni, A.; Messinger, J.; Kern, J.; Yachandra, V. K.; Yano, J. Untangling the sequence of events during the S₂ → S₃ transition in photosystem II and implications for the water oxidation mechanism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 12624-12635 (2020). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2000529117. URL: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2000529117
  16. Marchiori, D. A.; Debus, R. J.; Britt, R. D. Pulse EPR spectroscopic characterization of the S₃ state of the oxygen-evolving complex of Photosystem II isolated from Synechocystis. Biochemistry 59, 4864-4872 (2020). DOI: 10.1021/acs.biochem.0c00880. URL: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.0c00880
  17. Drosou, M.; Comas-Vilà, G.; Neese, F.; Salvador, P.; Pantazis, D. A. Does Serial Femtosecond Crystallography Depict State-Specific Catalytic Intermediates of the Oxygen-Evolving Complex?. Journal of the American Chemical Society 145, 10604-10621 (2023). DOI: 10.1021/jacs.3c00489. URL: https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.3c00489
  18. Greife, P.; Schönborn, M.; Capone, M.; Assunção, R.; Narzi, D.; Guidoni, L.; Dau, H. The electron–proton bottleneck of photosynthetic oxygen evolution. Nature 617, 623-628 (2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06008-5. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06008-5
  19. Bhowmick, A.; Hussein, R.; Bogacz, I.; Simon, P. S.; Ibrahim, M.; Chatterjee, R.; Doyle, M. D.; Cheah, M. H.; Fransson, T.; Chernev, P.; Kim, I. S.; Makita, H.; Dasgupta, M.; Kaminsky, C. J.; Zhang, M.; Gätcke, J.; Haupt, S.; Nangca, I. I.; Keable, S. M.; Aydin, A. O.; Tono, K.; Owada, S.; Gee, L. B.; Fuller, F. D.; Batyuk, A.; Alonso-Mori, R.; Holton, J. M.; Paley, D. W.; Moriarty, N. W.; Mamedov, F.; Adams, P. D.; Brewster, A. S.; Dobbek, H.; Sauter, N. K.; Bergmann, U.; Zouni, A.; Messinger, J.; Kern, J.; Yano, J.; Yachandra, V. K. Structural evidence for intermediates during O2 formation in photosystem II. Nature 617, 629-636 (2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06038-z. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06038-z
  20. Li, H.; Nakajima, Y.; Nango, E.; Owada, S.; Yamada, D.; Hashimoto, K.; Luo, F.; Tanaka, R.; Akita, F.; Kato, K.; Kang, J.; Saitoh, Y.; Kishi, S.; Yu, H.; Matsubara, N.; Fujii, H.; Sugahara, M.; Suzuki, M.; Masuda, T.; Kimura, T.; Thao, T. N.; Yonekura, S.; Yu, L. J.; Tosha, T.; Tono, K.; Joti, Y.; Hatsui, T.; Yabashi, M.; Kubo, M.; Iwata, S.; Isobe, H.; Yamaguchi, K.; Suga, M.; Shen, J. R. Oxygen-evolving photosystem II structures during S1–S2–S3 transitions. Nature 626, 670-677 (2024). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06987-5. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06987-5
  21. Ariafard, A.; Longhurst, M.; Swiegers, G. F.; Stranger, R. Why Ox appears and disappears in the S₃ state of photosystem II: insights from the low oxidation state model. Chemical Communications 62, 6387-6390 (2026). DOI: 10.1039/d5cc05959c. URL: https://doi.org/10.1039/d5cc05959c
  22. Niu, X.; Kwon, C.; Nilajakar, M.; Hong, Y. H. Mechanistic principles of photosystem II-inspired water oxidation. Trends in Chemistry 8, 585-600 (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.trechm.2026.06.009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trechm.2026.06.009