C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
Figure 3. (a) Fluorescence quenching of DAP nanotubes by thymidine
(0.16 mM nanotube based on concentration of 1). The thymidine concentra-
tions ranged from (top to bottom) 0 to 10 mM, emission λmax ) 535 nm.
(b) Schematic representation of the possible interaction between nanotubes
of 1 and thymidine.
less effective in quenching fluorescence. The interaction of the
nanotubes from 1 with thymidine was extended to polyT (Mw
8
kDa; up to 0.16 mM and giving an apparent binding constant of
1.7 × 105 M-1), which quenched fluorescence similar to that of
thymidine itself.
Figure 2. Proposed self-assembled nanostructures from 1 and 2. The
unsaturation in 1 results in a kink and a slightly less layered interdigitation.
The planarity of DAP is shown (as a side view) in the bottom picture.
On the basis of these results, the structural requirements for self-
assembly of amphiphilic monomers into highly organized nanotubes
have begun to be elucidated. These include the combination of
strongly hydrophobic and hydrophilic moieties, hydrogen bonding
interactions of hydrophilic groups that are favored in sugars with
equatorial anomers at the 2 and 4 positions of a pyranose ring, and
potentially a linker with suitable planarity. In addition, substantial
bending of the monomers is required, which arises from the meta
orientation of the linker, along with unsaturation of the alkyl chain.
This information can be used to design single-chain amphiphiles
that form high-axial-ratio nanostructures starting from simple
molecules, which also contain molecular recognition groups that
can be used to monitor the chemical selectivity of supramolecular
aggregates toward guest binding.
smaller than twice the extended molecular length of 1 (d-spacing
of 3.03 nm by the CPK molecular modeling).
These results strongly suggest that the nanotubes from 1 form a
bilayer structure with interdigitated alkyl chains associated through
hydrophobic interactions (Figure 2). Moreover, according to powder
X-ray diffraction analysis (see Supporting Information), the gluco-
pyranoside moieties of the bilayer participate in strong inter-
molecular hydrogen bonding, which results in a highly ordered
chiral packing structure. This combination of hydrophobic and
hydrogen bonding interactions appears to favor the formation of
the nanotubular structure. Conversely, the diffraction pattern of the
nanofibers from 2 (molecular length of 3.2 nm) indicated a shorter
d-spacing of 3.3 nm, which translates into a greater degree of
interdigitation of the bilayer structure (Figure 2). The “kink” in
self-assembled structures from 1 appears to reduce the crystallinity
of the nanostructure, enabling more facile formation of a nanotube.
Further differences between nanostructures from 1 and 2 were
revealed by FT-IR spectroscopy. The C-H stretching peaks were
slightly shifted between 1 and 2 (2854 vs 2850 cm-1, respectively)
and the CdO (amide I) stretching patterns were shifted (1651 and
1654 cm-1, respectively), which are consistent with a more
crystalline structure for the nanofibers derived from 2.5a,c
Acknowledgment. This work was supported by an NSF-
Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center (DMR-0117792).
Supporting Information Available: Synthesis of a set of am-
phiphiles and the self-assembly procedure, optical microscopy images
of the fluorescent nanotubes, and TEM images of nanotubes and
fibers. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at
References
Aminopyridine derivatives are known to function as artificial
receptors that can bind various ligands through complementary
multipoint H-bonding.11 Hence, we reasoned that the DAP residue
could serve as a functional recognition element, and in the process,
its intrinsic fluorescence would be affected by selective interaction
with external ligands. To test this hypothesis, we added water-
soluble compounds that can undergo H-bonding to the nanotube
from 1. Addition of up to 10 mM thymidine caused the nearly
immediate quenching of fluorescence (Figure 3a), with an apparent
binding constant of ∼2.5 × 103 M-1. In addition, thymidine
analogues such as uracil and the anticancer compounds 5-fluoro-
uracil and its prodrug derivative Tegafur also quenched fluores-
cence. The fluorescence quenching was selective for nucleosides;
â-D-glucose and urea, while capable of undergoing extensive
H-bonding, did not quench the fluorescence of the nanotubes from
1, even at concentrations as high as 16 mM (100 fold higher than
the nanotube concentration, based on the concentration of 1). These
results suggest that the interaction between the nanotubes and
thymidine may occur through a three-point hydrogen bonded
network11 (Figure 3b). Consistent with this hypothesis, adenosine,
which cannot bind in this three-point manner, was at least 2-fold
(1) (a) Nakashima, N.; Asakuma, S.; Kunitake, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985,
107, 509. (b) Yager, P.; Schoen, P. E. Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 1984, 106,
371. (c) Thomas, B. N.; Safinya, C. R.; Plano, R. J.; Clark, N. A. Science
1995, 267, 1635.
(2) (a) Schnur, J. M. Science 1993, 262, 1669. (b) Hartgerink, J. D.; Beniash,
E.; Stupp, S. I. Science 2001, 294, 1684. (c) Kunitake, T. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. Engl. 1992, 31, 709.
(3) (a) Fuhrhop, J.-H.; Helfrich, W. Chem. ReV. 1993, 93, 1565. (b) Shimizu
T.; Kogiso, M.; Masuda, M. Nature 1996, 383, 487. (c) Oda, R.; Huc, I.;
Schmutz, M.; Candau, S. J.; MacKintosh, F. C. Nature 1999, 399, 566-
569. (d) Matsui, H.; Gologan, B. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104, 3383.
(4) (a) O’Brien, D. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 10057. (b) Engelkamp,
H.; Middlebeck, S.; Nolte, R. J. M. Science 1999, 284, 785.
(5) (a) John, G.; Masuda, M.; Okada, Y.; Yase, K.; Shimizu, T. AdV. Mater.
2001, 13, 715. (b) John, G.; Jung, J. H.; Minamikawa, H.; Yoshida, K.;
Shimizu, T. Chem. Eur. J. 2002, 8, 5494. (c) Jung, J. H.; John, G.; Yoshida,
K.; Shimizu, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 10674.
(6) (a) Selinger, J. V.; Spector, M. S.; Schnur, J. M. J. Phys. Chem. B, 2001,
105, 7157. (b) Berthier, D.; Buffeteau, T.; Leger, J.-M.; Oda, R.; Huc, I.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 13486.
(7) Guo, X.; Szoka, F. C., Jr. Acc. Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 335.
(8) (a) Cullum, B. M.; Vo-Dinh, T. TIBTECH 2000, 18, 388. (b) Rothenberg,
B. E.; Hayes, B. K.; Toomre, D.; Manzi, A. E.; Varki, A. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90, 11939.
(9) Vilkner, T.; Janasek, D.; Manz, A. Anal. Chem. 2004, 76, 3373.
(10) Ernst, J.; Sheldrick, W. S.; Fuhrhop, J.-H. Z. Naturforsch. 1979, 34b, 706.
(11) Shenhar, R.; Rotello, V. M. Acc. Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 549.
JA0446449
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 126, NO. 46, 2004 15013