cyclodextrins6 and cucurbiturils.7 In all these cases not
only a single macrocycle exists, but there are families of
macrocycles having the same structural motif but differing
in the size or in their substitution. The reasons for the
popularity of these receptors are not only their supramo-
lecular properties but also rather simple preparation of at
least some of the members within each macrocyclic family.
Recently, we have prepared a new macrocyclic com-
pound, bambus[6]uril (Figure 1), which acts as an anion
receptor with high affinity and selectivity for various
anions in both organic solvent mixtures and aqueous
media.8
deprotected, which would allow further derivatization of
the bambusuril skeleton. The starting material, 2,4-diben-
zylglycoluril, was prepared by acid catalyzed condensation
of 4,5-dihydroxyimidazolidin-2-one9 with 1,3-dibenzylur-
ea in methanol in 81% yield. The reaction between 2,4-
dibenzylglycoluril and formaldehyde, which was expected
to give the bambusuril compound, appeared to be very
sensitive to the reaction conditions. When the reaction was
carried out in the mixture of methanol and 35% HClaq (1:1),
glycoluril selectively rearranged into dibenzylhydantoin
1.10 On the other hand, in the mixture of methanesulfonic
acid and 35% HClaq (4:1), the reaction gave clip-shape-like
molecule 2 (see Scheme 1) in very good yield (85%). It
should be noted that although the crystal structure of this
molecule was reported in the literature,11 the experimental
details of its preparation are missing.
Scheme 1. Reaction between 2,4-Dibenzylglycoluril and
Formaldehyde under Different Conditions
Figure 1. Dodecamethylbambus[6]uril (Me12BU[6]).
The starting materials for the synthesis are inexpensive
ureas, glyoxal, and formaldehyde. The bambus[6]uril
synthesis is simple, as the macrocycle precipitates out from
the reaction solution as the only product. Here we show
that bambus[6]uril is not the only macrocycle of its kind
but there are related molecules consisting of the same
building block and differing in their number within the
macrocycle as well as in the substitution on the nitro-
gen atom of glycoluril units. To differentiate the original
bambus[6]uril from the new derivatives we will, from now
on, name it dodecamethylbambus[6]uril (Me12BU[6]). This
trivial name reflects the presence of 12 methyl groups and 6
glycoluril units in the macrocycle. New derivatives will be
named accordingly.
We decided to test the preparation of dodecabenzyl-
bambus[6]uril (Bn12BU[6]) (see Scheme 1) in which the 12
methyl groups of Me12BU[6] are substituted by benzyl
groups. We envisioned that the macrocycle should be
soluble in single nonpolar solvents compared to the
Me12BU[6], which dissolved only in mixtures of solvents
when complexed to anions and does not dissolve in any
organic solvent in the absence of an anion inside its cavity.
Furthermore, benzyl groups would be subsequently
We then tested the reaction of 2,4-dibenzylglycoluril
with paraformaldehyde in chloroform in the presence of
a catalytic amount of p-toluenesulfonic acid. This reaction
finally gave the macrocyclic compound, but it was surpris-
ingly octabenzylbambus[4]uril (Bn8BU[4]) containing
four glycoluril units connected by four methylene bridges
(Scheme 1). We were able to obtain the crystal structure of
Bn8BU[4]. Figure 2A clearly shows that the methine carbon
atoms of the glycoluril units point to the center of the
macrocycle and the glycoluril units adopt an alternate
conformation. Clearly the structural features of Bn8BU[4]
are similar to those of previously published Me12BU[6].
Thus Bn8BU[4] represents the first bambusuril derivative
of its older relative differing in (a) the number of glycoluril
units and (b) the 2,4-substituents on glycoluril units.
(6) (a) Cyclodextrins and Their Complexes: Chemistry, Analytical
Methods; Dodziuk, H., Ed.; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2009. (b) Szejtli, J.
Chem. Rev. 1998, 98, 1743–1753. (c) Takahashi, K. Chem. Rev. 1998, 98,
2013–2033. (d) Connors, K. A. Chem. Rev. 1997, 97, 1325–1357.
(7) (a) Lee, J.; Samal, S.; Selvapalam, N.; Kim, H.; Kim, K. Acc.
Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 621–630. (b) Lagona, J.; Mukhopadhyay, P.;
Chakrabarti, S.; Isaacs, L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 4844–
4870. (c) Modern Supramolecular Chemistry: Strategies for Macrocycle
Synthesis; Diederich, F., Stang, P. J., Tykwinski, R. R., Eds.; Wiley-VCH:
Weinheim, 2008.
(9) (a) Vail, S. L.; Barker, R. H.; Mennitt, P. G. J. Org. Chem. 1965,
30, 2179–2182. (b) Grillon, E.; Gallo, R.; Pierrot, M.; Boileau, J.;
Wimmer, E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1988, 29, 1015–1016.
(10) (a) Ulgheri, F.; Giunta, D.; Spanu, P. Tetrahedron 2008, 64,
11768–11775. (b) Ulgheri, F.; Orru, G.; Crisma, M.; Spanu, P. Tetra-
hedron Lett. 2004, 45, 1047–1050.
(8) (a) Svec, J.; Necas, M.; Sindelar, V. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2010,
49, 2378–2381. (b) Svec, J.; Dusek, M.; Fejfarova, K.; Stacko, P.; Klan,
P.; Kaifer, A. E.; Li, W.; Hudeckova, E.; Sindelar, V. Chem.;Eur. J.
2011, 17, 5605–5612.
ꢀ
(11) Hu, Y.; Zhou, B.; Cao, L. Acta Crystallogr. 2007, E63, o4480.
Org. Lett., Vol. 13, No. 15, 2011
4001