or nonfluorescent. The dialkylamino group is located for the
intramolecular hydroarylation reaction in the para position of 1 with
a Michael acceptor, and the phenyl ester functionality is introduced
to cause a proper push-pull electronic effect on the fluorophore
2. Therefore, the latent fluorophore (1) can be rearranged into the
fluorescent 2 with strong fluorescence by a gold ion-mediated
hydroarylation reaction (Scheme 1).7
analogue (3) show any detectable transformation in the
presence of Au(III) ions (Figure S5, Supporting Information).
These control experiments indicate that both the alkyne and
the diethylamino groups of 1 are important for the gold(III)-
catalyzed hydroarylation.
Probe 1 has a UV absorption maximum centered at 263
nm (ε ) 4.29 × 104 M-1 cm-1) and exhibits negligible
fluorescence. The addition of the Au(III) ion triggers a
prominent bathochromic shift (ca. 130 nm) to λmax 390 nm
(ε ) 1.98 × 104 M-1 cm-1) with an apparent isosbestic point
at 333 nm (Figure 2). The rate constant for the conversion
of 1 (30 µM) to 2 in ethanol was measured in the presence
Scheme 1. Latent Fluorophore (1) and Control Compounds
of the gold(III) ion (10 equiv) and estimated to be kobs
)
(3.31 ( 0.62) × 10-5 s-1, whereas other metal ions such as
Hg(II), Pd(II), Pt(II), Cd(II), Cu(II), Zn(II), Cu(I), Ag(I), and
Au(I) did not induce any significant spectral changes even
in the presence of 100 equiv of metal ions.
The syntheses of 1 and its analogues (3 and 4) were
accomplished through EDC coupling reactions of each acid
and the corresponding phenols (see the Supporting Informa-
tion). The hydroarylation of 1 was monitored in ethanol8 by
applying a catalytic amount of Au(III) ion under a hand-
held UV-vis lamp. A new thin-layer chromatography (TLC)
spot at Rf 0.30 (EtOAc/Hex, 1:4, v/v) below that of 1 (Rf
0.57) appeared upon the addition of 10 mol % of Au(III)
ion to 1 (Figure 1A). The TLC chromatogram displayed
Figure 2. UV-vis spectral changes and its kinetics (inset) upon
addition of 10 equiv of Au(III) to 1 (30 µM) in EtOH.
The fluorescence responses of the latent fluorophore 1 (30
µM in EtOH) were examined after each addition of various
metal ions. The fluorescence spectra have shown a large
Stokes shift (∼100 nm), enough to block the spectral cross
talk between 1 and 2.9 Fluorescence intensity at 488 nm was
dramatically increased ca. 60 times by the Au(III) ion and
4.6 times by the Ag(I) ion, whereas other metal ions did not
induce any significant fluorescence changes (Figure 3).
Competitive fluorescence experiments have also corroborated
the selectivity of 1 toward the Au(III) ion. The fluorescence
was turned on again when the gold(III) ions were added to
the nonfluorescent mixtures of 1 and other metal ions (Figure
S7, Supporting Information). It is noticeable that 1 is inert
to the Lewis acids like copper(II) or zinc(II) ions as well as
other electrophilic metal ions such as Pd(II), Pt(II), and Cu(I).
To our surprise, the Au(I) ion did not turn on the fluorescence
of 1 even though 10 equiv of PPh3AuCl was added to 1 in
ethanol. This suggests the latent fluorophore 1 can be a useful
probe for the gold(III) chloride without any activation of gold
ions10 because there is possibly a significant interaction
between the more highly charged gold(III) ion and the alkyne
Figure 1. Time-dependent UV-vis (A) and fluorescence (B)
chromatograms of 1 (0.20 M) in ethanol with 10 mol % of Au(III)
ions: (a) 0 min, (b) 10 min, (c) 30 min, and (d) 2.
bright fluorescence under the UV-vis light at λex365 nm
(Figure 1B). After the reaction was complete, the fluorescent
compound was separated by column chromatography and
proven to be a hydroarylation product (2), whose structure
1
was confirmed by H and 13C NMR and mass spectral
analyses (Figure S2 in the Supporting Information). Notice-
ably, the hydroarylation reaction was not undergone with
compound 4 with an alkene moiety, nor did the alkyne ester
(7) (a) Balamurugan, R.; Gudla, V. Org. Lett. 2009, 11, 3116. (b)
Me´zailles, N.; Ricard, L.; Gagosz, F. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 4133. (c) Hashmi,
A. S. K. Gold Bull. 2004, 37, 51. (d) Weber, D.; Tarselli, M. A.; Gagne,
M. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 5733. (e) Reetz, M. T.; Sommer,
K. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 3485. (f) Shi, Z.; He, C. J. Org. Chem. 2004,
69, 3669. (g) Song, C. E.; Jung, D.-u.; Choung, S. Y.; Roh, E. J.; Lee,
S.-g. Angew. Chem. Int.Ed. 2004, 43, 6183. (h) Yoon, M. Y.; Kim, J. H.;
Choi, D. S.; Shin, U. S.; Lee, J. Y.; Song, C. E. AdV. Synth. Catal. 2007,
349, 1725.
(8) The Au(III)-catalyzed reaction was dependent on solvents. The initial
rate analysis showed that the rate in dichloromethane was about 2-fold
slower than ethanol (Figure S6 in the Supporting Information).
(9) Anslyn, E. V.; Dougherty, D. A. Modern Physical Organic Chem-
istry; University Science Books: Sausalito, 2006.
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 5, 2010
933