results verified that APQ favors Cd2+ over Zn2+, consistent with
the binding experiments. Specifically, as shown in Fig. S3 in the
ESI,† APQ is fully converted to the APQ–Cd2+ complex in the
presence of Cd2+ and Zn2+. On the other hand, the binding
between APQ and Zn2+ is relatively weak when only Zn2+ is
added (Fig. S4†).
6 M. Mameli, M. C. Aragoni, M. Arca, C. Caltagirone, F. Demartin,
G. Farruggia, G. De Filippo, F. A. Devillanova, A. Garau, F. Isaia,
V. Lippolis, S. Murgia, L. Prodi, A. Pintus and N. Zaccheroni,
Chem.–Eur. J., 2010, 16, 919.
7 N. Saleh, A. M. Rawashdeh, Y. A. Yousef and Y. A. Al-Soud, Spectro-
chim. Acta, Part A, 2007, 68, 728.
8 A. N. Anthemidis and C. P. Karapatouchas, Microchim. Acta, 2008, 160,
455.
To further understand the ion selectivity, we have synthesized
another compound APPQ with an identical lumophore coupled
to a more flexible binding group. As shown in Fig. 9b, APPQ
can bind to Ag2+ the most strongly. Cd2+ and Zn2+ can also bind
to APPQ, but both with lower strengths. Therefore, the structure
of the binding group indeed exerts a strong influence on ion
selectivity.
9 G. Kaya and M. Yaman, Talanta, 2008, 75, 1127.
10 A. C. Davis, C. P. Calloway Jr. and B. T. Jones, Talanta, 2007, 71, 1144.
11 E. Tomat and S. J. Lippard, Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol., 2010, 14, 225.
12 J. W. Lichtman and J. A. Conchello, Nat. Methods, 2005, 2, 910.
13 R. McRae, P. Bagchi, S. Sumalekshmy and C. J. Fahrni, Chem. Rev.,
2009, 109, 4780.
14 G. M. Cockrell, G. Zhang, D. G. VanDerveer, R. P. Thummel and
R. D. Hancock, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 1420.
15 H. Tian, B. Li, J. Zhu, H. Wang, Y. Li, J. Xu, J. Wang, W. Wang, Z. Sun,
W. Liu, X. Huang, X. Yan, Q. Wang, X. Yao and Y. Tang, Dalton Trans.,
2012, 41, 2060.
16 J. X. Peng, J. Du, J. Wang, Y. Wu, J. Zhao, S. Sun and T. Xu, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 1500.
17 T. Cheng, Y. Xu, S. Zhang, W. Zhu, X. Qian and L. Duan, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2008, 130, 16160.
18 M. Taki, M. Desaki, A. Ojida, S. Iyoshi, T. Hirayama, I. Hamachi and
Y. Yamamoto, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 12564.
19 E. M. Nolan, J. W. Ryu, J. Jaworski, R. P. Feazell, M. Sheng and
S. J. Lippard, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006, 128, 15517.
20 K. Komatsu, K. Kikuchi, H. Kojima, Y. Urano and T. Nagano, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2005, 127, 10197.
In theory, the atomic radius of Zn2+ is smaller than that of
Cd2+ and therefore, Cd2+ is more sensitive to the steric effect
than Zn2+. On the other hand, the d orbitals of Cd2+ are more
diffused than those of Zn2+, making Cd2+ more electron-
deficient and more sensitive to the electronic effects than Zn2+.
Thus, Zn2+ tends to coordinate with a rigid ligand like 6-MPQ,
whereas Cd2+ favors the coordination with the more electron-
donating and more flexible APQ ligand.
Conclusion
21 S. Aoki, D. Kagata, M. Shiro, K. Takeda and E. Kimura, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2004, 126, 13377.
In conclusion, we have designed and developed a 6-substituted
quinoline-based two-photon Cd2+ probe (APQ) and investigated
its two-photon activities in vitro and in vivo. The new probe
shows a large red shift upon Cd2+ binding with 8-fold emission
enhancement. Importantly, APQ exhibits high ion selectivity and
sensitivity for Cd2+, especially to discriminate Cd2+ from Zn2+.
Compared with previous reported Cd2+ probes, APQ exhibits a
large two-photon cross section of ca. 400 GM. Finally, in vivo
two-photon microscopy imaging demonstrates that the new
probe is cell permeable and can act as a good tool to monitor the
Cd2+ flux in living cells.
22 N. J. Williams, W. Gan, J. H. Reibenspies and R. D. Hancock, Inorg.
Chem., 2009, 48, 1407.
23 W. Denk, J. H. Strickler and W. W. Webb, Science, 1990, 248, 73.
24 W. R. Zipfel, R. M. Williams and W. W. Webb, Nat. Biotechnol., 2003,
21, 1369.
25 F. Helmchen and W. Denk, Nat. Methods, 2005, 2, 932.
26 H. M. Kim and B. R. Cho, Acc. Chem. Res., 2009, 42, 863.
27 M. Taki, J. L. Wolford and T. V. O’Halloran, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2004,
126, 712.
28 Y. Zhang, X. Guo, W. Si, L. Jia and X. H. Qian, Org. Lett., 2008, 10,
473.
29 L. Xue, Z. J. Fang, G. P. Li, H. H. Wang and H. Jiang, Sens. Actuators,
B, 2011, 156, 410.
30 X. Y. Chen, J. Shi, Y. M. Li, F. L. Wang, X. Wu, Q. X. Guo and L. Liu,
Org. Lett., 2009, 11, 4426.
31 L. Xue, H. H. Wang and H. Jiang, Inorg. Chem., 2008, 47, 43108.
32 L. Xue, C. Liu and H. Jiang, Org. Lett., 2009, 11, 1655.
33 H. Y. Zhao, Y. M. Li, T. J. Gong and Q. X. Guo, Chin. Chem. Lett., 2011,
22, 1013.
34 L. Xue, C. Liu and H. Jiang, Chem. Commun., 2009, 1061.
35 A. P. de Silva, H. Q. Nimal Gunaratne, T. Gunnlaugsson,
A. J. M. Huxley, C. P. McCoy, J. T. Rademacher and T. E. Rice, Chem.
Rev., 1997, 97, 1515.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by NSFC (21102002, 20932006 and
21102083), Natural Science Foundation of Education Depart-
ment of Anhui Province (KJ2010A028, KJ2011A018), and 211
Project of Anhui University.
36 Z. R. Grabowski and K. Rotkiewicz, Chem. Rev., 2003, 103, 3899.
37 O. Varnavski, T. Goodson, L. Sukhomlinova and R. Twieg, J. Phys.
Chem. B, 2004, 108, 10484.
38 W. Lin, B. Mohandas, C. P. Fontaine and R. A. Colvin, BioMetals, 2006,
20, 891.
Notes and references
1 N. D. Lyn Patrick, Altern. Med. Rev., 2003, 8, 106.
2 L. Pari, P. Murugavel, S. L. Sitasawad and K. S. Kumar, Life Sci., 2007,
80, 650.
39 X. J. Peng, Y. Q. Yu, S. G. Sun, Y. K. Wu and J. L. Fan, Org. Biomol.
Chem., 2007, 5, 226.
3 Q. Zhao, R. F. Li, S. K. Xing, X. M. Liu, T. L. Hu and X. H. Bu, Inorg.
Chem., 2011, 50, 10041.
40 F. Qian, C. L. Zhang, Y. M. Zhang, W. J. He, X. Gao, P. Hu and
Z. J. Guo, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2009, 131, 1460.
4 S. Satarug and M. R. Moore, Environ. Health Perspect., 2004, 112, 1099.
5 M. Waisberg, P. Joseph and B. Hale, Toxicology, 2003, 192, 95.
41 X. M. Meng, S. X. Wang, Y. M. Li, M. Z. Zhu and Q. X. Guo, Chem.
Commun., 2012, 48, 4196.
6194 | Dalton Trans., 2012, 41, 6189–6194
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012