C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
(Scheme 1). Typically, such a band is observed if the pyrene and
dimethylaniline chromophores are in molecular contact.11
U6U micelles (98 and 94%, respectively), whereas the mixture of
U4U and U3U showed moderate self-sorting (55%).
Finally, a mixture of three bisurea amphiphiles U4U-U6U-U7U
was used to probe the possibility of creating more than two
coexisting micellar compartments in a single solution by self-sorting.
For these measurements, one Py-UnU probe and two nonmatching
DMA-UnU probes were added to the ternary mixture of micelles.
Py-U4U exhibited the highest self-sorting (97%), while Py-U6U
and Py-U7U showed 83% and 73% self-sorting respectively (see
SI, Figure S14).
Scheme 1. Cartoon of the Use of Exciplex Fluorescence To Probe
Self-Sorting in the Bisurea Rod-Like Micelles
In summary, oligoethyleneglycol-bisurea bolaamphiphiles, dif-
fering only in the spacing between urea groups, show remarkably
effective self-sorting in aqueous solution, leading to coexisting rod-
like micelles with up to 98% demixing of probes in binary solution.
The high specificity of the self-sorting even allows the formation
of more than two coexisting micellar phases in a single solution. It
holds great potential for chiral self-sorting, in keeping apart
incompatible catalysts or reagents, and for the suppression of
backfolding in supramolecularly cross-linked gels.
In 4 mM aqueous solutions of U4U containing either 0.01 equiv
of Py-U4U or 0.15 equiv of DMA-U4U and 2% of DMSO or DMF
used to add the probes,13 an exciplex band was absent. However,
upon mixing these solutions, a band at 520 nm appeared and grew
over time with a first-order rate constant of 1.8 × 10-3 s-1 (Figure
2a, black line), demonstrating the dynamic nature of the micelles.
Interestingly, when the same experiment was performed with a
solution in which the DMA-U4U probe was taken up in U6U
micelles, the rate constant of exciplex formation was the same, but
the final emission intensity was twice as high (Figure 2a, red line),
showing that the probes are confined to half the micellar space.
However, when nonmatching micelles U4U (containing 0.01 equiv
of Py-U4U) and U6U (containing 0.15 equiv of DMA-U6U) were
mixed, hardly any exciplex formation was observed (blue line).
These observations suggest that U4U and U6U bolaamphiphiles
form separate rod-like micelles and that the probes are confined to
their matching micelles.
Acknowledgment. The authors thank Laura Brylka and Dr.
Nico Sommerdijk for their kind help with cryo-TEM measurements.
This research forms part of the Project P1.04 SMARTCARE of
the research program of the BioMedical Materials Institute,
cofunded by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs. The financial
contributionoftheNederlandseHartstichtingisgratefullyacknowledged.
Supporting Information Available: All the experimental proce-
dures, compound characterization data, TEM images, and fluorescence
data. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://
pubs.acs.org.
References
(1) (a) Taribagil, R. R.; Hillmyer, M. A.; Lodge, T. P. Macromolecules 2009,
42, 1796–1800. (b) Saito, N.; Liu, C.; Lodge, T. P.; Hillmyer, M. A.
Macromolecules 2008, 41, 8815–8822. (c) Laschewsky, A. Curr. Opin.
Colloid Interface Sci. 2003, 8, 274–281.
(2) (a) Asakawa, T.; Ishino, S.; Hansson, P.; Almgren, M.; Ohta, A.; Miyagishi,
S. Langmuir 2004, 20, 6998–7003. (b) Dong, S.; Xu, G.; Hoffmann, H. J.
Phys. Chem. B 2008, 112, 9371–9378.
(3) (a) Mukhopadhyay, P.; Wu, A.; Isaacs, L. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 6157–
6164. (b) South, C. R.; Burd, C.; Weck, M. Acc. Chem. Res. 2007, 40,
63–74.
(4) (a) Ikkala, O.; ten Brinke, G. Science 2002, 295, 2407–2409. (b) Pollino,
J. M.; Weck, M. Chem. Soc. ReV. 2005, 34, 193–207.
(5) (a) Heeres, A.; van der Pol, C.; Stuart, M.; Friggeri, A.; Feringa, B. L.;
van Esch, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14252–14253. (b) Brizard, A.;
Stuart, M.; van Bommel, K.; Friggeri, A.; de Jong, M.; van Esch, J. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 120, 2093–2096.
(6) (a) Moffat, J. R.; Smith, D. K. Chem. Commun. 2009, 316. (b) Cicchi, S.;
Ghini, G.; Lascialfari, L.; Brandi, A.; Betti, F.; Berti, D.; Baglioni, P.; Bari,
L. D.; Pescitelli, G.; Mannini, M.; Canneschi, A. Soft Matter 2010, 6, 1655–
1661.
(7) (a) de Loos, M.; van Esch, J.; Stokroos, I.; Kellogg, R. M.; Feringa, B. L.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 12675–12676. (b) Estroff, L. A.; Hamilton,
A. D. Chem. ReV. 2004, 104, 1201–1218. (c) Dankers, P. Y. W.; Harmsen,
M. C.; Brouwer, L. A.; Van Luyn, M. J. A.; Meijer, E. W. Nat. Mater.
2005, 4, 568–574.
Figure 2. (a) Intensity of the exciplex band at 520 nm as a function of
time upon mixing of micellar solutions containing Py-U4U with micellar
solutions containing DMA-U4U or DMA-U6U. Data have been fitted with
first-order kinetics (see text). (b) Bar diagram indicating extent of self-
sorting in binary mixtures of UnU micelles.
Formation of separate micelles by self-sorting was corroborated
with binary mixtures of amphiphiles and their corresponding probes.
For example, on adding DMA-U4U (0.15 equiv relative to total
amphiphile) to the binary mixture of U4U and U6U (2 mM each)
containing Py-U4U (0.01 equiv), an exciplex band was observed,
whereas addition of 0.15 equiv of DMA-U6U to the mixture did
not result in exciplex formation (see Supporting Information (SI)).
Therefore we conclude that the probes recognize their matching
amphiphiles which are self-sorted to form separate micelles. The
extent of probe self-sorting was quantified by analyzing the exciplex
band intensities in different binary mixtures and is given on a scale
of 0% for the exciplex intensity in a fully mixed system of matching
probes to 100% when the exciplex band is absent. Figure 2b shows
that self-sorting was most pronounced between U4U and U7U or
(8) (a) De Feyter, S.; Larsson, M.; Schuurmans, N.; Verkuijl, B.; Zoriniants,
G.; Gesquiere, A.; Abdel-Mottaleb, M. M.; van Esch, J.; Feringa, B. L.;
van Stam, J.; De Schryver, F. Chem.sEur. J. 2003, 9, 1198–1206. (b) Isare,
B.; Linares, M.; Lazzaroni, R.; Bouteiller, L. J. Phys. Chem. B 2009, 113,
3360–3364. (c) Xu, H.; Hong, R.; Lu, T. X.; Uzun, O.; Rotello, V. M.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 3162–3163.
(9) Obert, E.; Bellot, M.; Bouteiller, L.; Andrioletti, F.; Lehen-Ferrenbach, C.;
Boue, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 15601–15605.
(10) Koevoets, R. A.; Versteegen, R. M.; Kooijman, H.; Spek, A. L.; Sijbesma,
R. P.; Meijer, E. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 2999–3003.
(11) (a) Botterhuis, N. E.; Karthikeyan, S.; Veldman, D.; Meskers, S. C. J.;
Sijbesma, R. P. Chem. Commun. 2008, 3915–3917. (b) Papen-Botterhuis,
N.; Kartikeyan, S.; Spiering, J.; Sijbesma, R. P. Macromolecules 2010,
48, 745–751.
(12) Chebotareva, N.; Bomans, P. H. H.; Frederik, P. M.; Sommerdijk,
N. A. J. M.; Sijbesma, R. P. Chem. Commun. 2005, 4967–4969.
(13) The presence of these solvents does not influence dynamics up to 3% (see
SI).
JA101872X
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 132, NO. 23, 2010 7843