Indirect optical analysis of a dynamic chemical system

Angewandte Chemie - International Edition

Volumn 48, Issue 25, 2009, Pages 4546-4550

  Gasparini, Giulio ^a   Bettin, Federico ^a   Scrimin, Paolo ^a   Prins, Leonard J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Dynamic covalent chemistry; Parallel screening; Supramolecular chemistry; Thermodynamic equilibria; UV Vis spectroscopy

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL SYSTEMS; CONCENTRATION OF; DYNAMIC COVALENT CHEMISTRY; EQUILIBRIUM REACTIONS; OPTICAL ANALYSIS; PARALLEL SCREENING; REFERENCE COMPOUNDS; THERMODYNAMIC EQUILIBRIA; UV/VIS SPECTROSCOPY;

MACROMOLECULES; THERMODYNAMICS;

SUPRAMOLECULAR CHEMISTRY;

HYDRAZONE DERIVATIVE;

ALGORITHM; CATALYSIS; CHEMISTRY; PROCEDURES; THERMODYNAMICS; ULTRAVIOLET SPECTROPHOTOMETRY;

ALGORITHMS; CATALYSIS; HYDRAZONES; SPECTROPHOTOMETRY, ULTRAVIOLET; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 70349948779     PISSN: 14337851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/anie.200900931     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. S. J. Rowan, S. J. Cantrill, G. R. L. Cousins, J. K. M. Sanders, J. F. Stoddart, Angew. Chem. 2002,114,938-993;
2. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 898-952.
3. C D. Meyer, C S. Joiner, J. F. Stoddart, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2007, J6, 1705-1723.
4. P. T. Corbett, J. Leclaire, L. Vial, K. R. West, J. L. Wietor, J. K. M. Sanders, S. Otto, Chem. Rev. 2006, 106, 3652-3711.
5. J. M. Lehn, Chem. Eur. J. 1999, 5, 2455-2463.
6. J. M. Lehn, Prog. Polym. Sci. 2005, 30, 814-831.
7. R. F. Ludlow, S. Otto, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2008,37,101- 108.
8. L. J. Prins, P. Scrimin, Angew. Chem. 2009, 121, 2324-2343;
9. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 2288-2306.
10. M. G. Woll, S. H. Gellman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126,1117211174.
11. S. M. K. Davidson, S. L. Regen, Chem. Rev. 1997, 97, 12691279.
12. D. A. Erlanson. A. C Braisted. D. R. Raphael. M. Randal, R. M. Stroud. E. M. Gordon, J. A. Wells, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97,9367-9372.
13. G. Gasparini, L. J. Prins, P. Scrimin, Angew. Chem. 2008, 120, 2509-2513;
14. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 2475-2479.
15. G. Gasparini, M. Martin, L. J. Prins, P. Scrimin, Chem. Commun. 2007, 1340-1342.
16. G. Gasparini, B. Vitorge, P. Scrimin. D. Jeannerat, L. J. Prins, Chem. Commun. 2008, 3034-3036.
17. A. Buryak, K. Severin, Angew. Chem. 2005, 117, 8149-8152;
18. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 7935-7938.
19. S. Otto, K. Severin, Creat. Chem. Sens. Syst. 2007,277, 267-288.
20. B. Levrand, Y. Ruff, J. M. Lehn, A. Herrmann, Chem. Commun. 2006,2965-2967.
21. -1). It should be noted that the rate of exchange progressively decreases as the concentration of free hydrazide drops upon scavenging. This decrease makes the initial scavenging period most critical.
22. If the scavenging reaction is a reversible reaction, which by itself is not a prerequisite, a complete scavenging avoids the installment of a second equilibrium involving the scavenging agent, rrarcs-cinnamaldehyde (2).
23. We have observed previously that the amplification drops when very large equivalents (> 10) of hydrazides are used, as under those conditions the intermolecular recognition event may become competitive with respect to the intramolecular interaction. In these simulations we have ignored this competition, because this approach gives an optimal response when the concentration of the excess hydrazides is small.
24. For example, the use of 10 equivalents of A and B (25 mM of each) will lead to a maximum difference in concentration of 1A of 2.44 mM between 100-fold and no stabilization with respect to 1B (equilibrium concentrations of 1A are 4.94 mM and 2.50 mM, respectively). Correspondingly, the difference in 'leftover' concentration of hydrazide B (and thus 2B after scavenging) will vary between 24.94, and 22.50 mM, however, implying a change in signal intensity of only 10%.
25. P. T. Corbett, J. K. M. Sanders, S. Otto, Angew. Chem. 2007. 779, 9014-9017;
26. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 8858-8861.
27. The concentration of aldehyde 1 is below the detection limits and is therefore not considered as a library member.
28. Theoretical simulations have illustrated the advantages of having a substoichiometric amount of a common building block in a dynamic system: K. Severin, Chem. Eur. J. 2004. 10, 2565-2580.
29. This is not trivial as additional equilibria may be present in the system that are not possible in the individual equilibrium reactions (as in the case of dimerization between two hydrazones). Such 'systems behavior', however, would emerge from a study of the system composition as a function of concentration.
30. T. Bunyapaiboonsri, O. Ramstrom, S. Lohmann, J. M. Lehn, L. Peng, M. Goeldner, ChemBioChem 2001,2,438-444.
31. To allow comparison, all mixture values had to be normalized with respect to a value of 0.18, resulting from an increased background noise caused by the larger amount of 2 and hydrazides added.