results suggest that 1·Co has a high selectivity for cyanide
over other anions.
moiety enough to block the donor-excited PeT and
enhance the fluorescence of 1·Co. However, weak or
noncoordinating anions do not complex with the cobalt
ion and thus cannot block the donor-excited PeT pathway
in 1·Co. Therefore, the selectivity of 1·Co plausibly comes
from the stronger coordination ability of the cyanide anion
over other anions.
As expected, a Job’s plot for binding between 1·Co and
cyanide has shown a 1:2 binding stoichiometry (Support-
ing Information).13 To calculate the binding constants for
the 1:2 binding system from the spectral data without
assumptions,14 we have introduced a simple regression
program using C language, which is generally applicable
to any “one-to-two” binding system (Supporting Informa-
tion).
Using the program, K1 and K2 for cyanide binding to
1·Co were determined to be K1 g 107 M-1 and K2 ) 4.0
× 105 M-1 by fluorescence titration in acetonitrile.15 It is
remarkable that the simple cobalt(II)-salen complex
shows such a tight binding toward cyanide anions with
micromolar dissociation constants. The calculation pro-
gram shows satisfactory results. The fluorescence intensity
constants for HG and HG2 were calculated to be 166 and
235, respectively, which are very similar to the observed
intensities (Figure 4).
To address the origin of the fluorescence enhancement
of 1·Co by the coordination of cyanide anions, the HOMO
and LUMO energy levels of the cobalt-salen complex in
the absence and in the prescence of cyanide anions were
measured through cyclic voltammetric and UV-vis spec-
troscopic measurements by using the method of Nagano
and co-workers.12 The energy diagrams indicate that a
donor-excited PeT could occur in the absence of cyanide
anions, and therefore an electron transfer takes place from
the excited coumarin fluorophore to the LUMO of the
cobalt-salen complex. The PeT is, however, prohibited
in the presence of cyanide anions by the raised LUMO
level of the cobalt-salen complex, which can enhance
the fluorescence of 1·Co upon the addition of cyanide
(Figure 3). The fluorescence enhancement possibly comes
Figure 3. Energy diagrams (in eV) of coumarin and Co(II)-salen
without and with cyanide anion, which was measured from
cyclovoltametry and UV-vis spectroscopy.
from the strong coordination ability of the cyanide anion
to 1·Co.5 This strong coordination of cyanide will alter
the energy levels in the cobalt(II)-salen complex, espe-
cially raising the LUMO level of the cobalt(II)-salen
Figure 4. Fluorescence titration curve by the addition of cyanide
(0-21.9 µM) to 1·Co (5 µM) in acetonitrile. Calculated (line) and
observed data (dot).
(7) Stryer, L. Biochemistry, 4th ed.; W. H. Freeman and Company: New
York, 1998; pp 60-61 and pp 364-369.
(8) For S100 protein and calcium ion: (a) Marenholz, I.; Heizmann,
C. W.; Fritz, G. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2004, 322, 1111–1122.
For cAMP and the regulatory subunit of protein kinase A: (b) Weber, I. T.;
Takio, K.; Titani, K.; Steitz, T. A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1982, 79,
7679–7683. For transferrin and iron ion: (c) Emerit, J.; Beaumont, C.; Trivin,
F. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2001, 55, 333–339.
In summary, we have developed a Co(II)-salen com-
plex (1·Co) which exhibited selective and tight binding
to a cyanide anion. 1·Co displayed a significant fluores-
cence enhancement upon the addition of cyanide owing
to the interruption of photoinduced electron transfer from
the coumarin fluorophore to the cobalt(II)-salen moiety.
We also developed a general regression method to estimate
(9) (a) Kim, H.-J.; Kim, W.; Lough, A. J.; Kim, B. M.; Chin, J. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16776. (b) Kim, H.-J.; Kim, H.; Alhakimi, G.; Jeong,
E. J.; Thavarajah, N.; Studnicki, L.; Koprianiuk, A.; Lough, A. J.; Suh, J.;
Chin, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16370. (c) Kim, H.; Yen, C.; Preston,
P.; Chin, J. Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 5239. (d) Kim, H.-J.; Chin, J.; Lough, A. J.
Acta Crystallogr. 2007, E63, o3901. (e) Kim, H.; Yen, C.; Preston, P.; Chin,
J. Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 5239. (f) Kim, H.; Nguyen, Y.; Yen, C. P.-H.; Chagal,
L.; Lough, A. J.; Kim, B. M.; Chin, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 12184.
(10) See the Supporting Information.
(13) Connors, K. A. Binding Constants, 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons:
New York, 1987; pp 24-28.
(14) (a) Kavallieratos, K.; Bertao, C. M.; Crabtree, R. H. J. Org. Chem.
1999, 64, 1675. (b) Hynes, M. J. J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. 1993, 311.
(c) Nishizawa, S.; Kaneda, H.; Kato, Y.; Teramae, N. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1999, 121, 9463.
(11) Bordwell, F. G. Acc. Chem. Res. 1988, 21, 456.
(12) (a) Tanaka, K.; Miuram, T.; Umezawa, N.; Urano, Y.; Kikuchi,
K.; Higuchi, T.; Nagano, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 2530–2536. (b)
Ueno, T.; Urano, Y.; Setsukinai, K.; Takakusa, H.; Kojima, H.; Kikuchi,
K.; Ohkubo, K.; Fukuzumi, S.; Nagano, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126,
14079–14085.
(15) Using the program, K1 was calculated over 107 M-1 in acetonitrile,
which is above the limit of detection. Detailed programming for the
calculation of K1 and K2 is described in the Supporting Information.
766
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 4, 2010