ChemComm
Communication
solvent these additional processes are suppressed. Such solvent together with effective shielding of the guest from the solvent. The
dependent behaviour has also been observed with indole-based development of receptors of this type with increased water solubility,
sulfate receptors.4 While receptors 2 and 3 were soluble in up to yet still capable of shielding guests from the surrounding solvent will
20% v/v H2O–DMSO-d6 mixtures, receptor 1 was not soluble in enable the full potential of these compounds to be realised and is
mixtures containing >10% H2O. To prepare an analogue of 1 with currently underway in our laboratories.
increased water solubility, compound 5 was prepared in the same
manner as described above, replacing the para-tbutylphenyl isothio-
cyanate with para-(trifluoromethyl)-phenyl isothiocyanate. Receptor
5 had improved solubility in aqueous mixtures and was found to
bind sulfate in a similar manner to 1 with Ka > 104 MÀ1 in 25% v/v
H2O–DMSO-d6. No apparent stability constants could be obtained
for any of the receptors in solvent mixtures containing >25% v/v H2O
as result of their low solubility. However, the observed high affinity
and selectivity for sulfate are particularly remarkable when com-
pared to those of the related cryptand-like receptor 4 (in 25% v/v
H2O–DMSO-d6 Ka for SO42À = 141 MÀ1; Ka for ClÀ = 83 MÀ1).9 While
the additional preorganisation of cryptand-type receptors is well-
established to provide improved binding affinities and selectivities,13
for these cyclic peptide derivatives the opposite is true. This may be a
result of better shielding of the anionic guest from the solvent by the
tripodal receptors as a result of hydrophobic interactions between
the aromatic substituents in 1–3 and 5, as suggested by the
significant and complex changes in the chemical shifts of the
aromatic protons of these receptors, which are observed upon
We thank the Australian Research Council for financial support.
Notes and references
‡ The methyl groups on the scaffold were omitted to enhance water
solubility.
1 For recent reviews see: P. A. Gale, Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 82; P. A. Gale,
Chem. Soc. Rev., 2010, 39, 3746; C. Caltagirone and P. A. Gale, Chem. Soc.
Rev., 2009, 38, 520; J. L. Sessler, P. A. Gale and W.-S. Cho, Anion
Receptor Chemistry, Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, 2006.
2 S. Kubik, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2010, 39, 3648; S. Kubik, C. Reyheller and
S. Stu¨we, J. Inclusion Phenom. Macrocyclic Chem., 2005, 52, 137.
3 I. Ravikumar and P. Ghosh, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2012, 41, 3077; P. A. Gale,
J. R. Hiscock, S. J. Moore, C. Caltagirone, M. B. Hursthouse and
M. E. Light, Chem.–Asian J., 2010, 5, 555; D.-W. Yoon, D. E. Gross,
V. M. Lynch, C.-H. Lee, P. C. Bennett and J. L. Sessler, Chem. Commun.,
2009, 1109; P. Dydio, T. Zielinski and J. Jurczak, Chem. Commun., 2009,
4560; C.-D. Jia, B. Wu, S.-G. Li, X.-J. Huang and X.-J. Yang, Org. Lett.,
2010, 12, 5612; C. Jia, B. Wu, S. Li, Z. Yang, Q. Zhao, J. Liang, Q.-S. Li and
X.-J. Yang, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46, 5376; C. Jia, B. Wu, S. Li, X. Huang,
Q. Zhao, Q.-S. Li and X.-J. Yang, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2010, 50, 486;
R. Custelcean, J. Bosano, P. V. Bonnesen, V. Kertesz and B. P. Hay,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 4025.
4 P. A. Gale, J. R. Hiscock, C. Z. Jie, M. B. Hursthouse and M. E. Light,
Chem. Sci., 2010, 1, 215.
2À
addition of SO4 (Fig. 3) Such interactions are not possible in the
5 T. Fiehn, R. Goddard, R. W. Seidel and S. Kubik, Chem.–Eur. J., 2010,
16, 7241; C. Reyheller and S. Kubik, Org. Lett., 2007, 9, 5271; S. Kubik
and R. Goddard, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2002, 99, 5127;
S. Kubik, R. Goddard, R. Kirchner, D. Nolting and J. Seidel, Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed., 2001, 40, 2648; S. I. Pascu, S. Kubik and S. Otto,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006, 128, 11206; S. Otto and S. Kubik, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2003, 12, 7804; S. Kubik, R. Kirchner, D. Nolting and
J. Seidel, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2002, 124, 12752.
tren-capped cryptand 4. Similar hydrophobic effects have been
observed to play a role in the strong sulfate binding observed for
Kubik’s cyclic peptide receptors in aqueous solutions.4
In preliminary experiments to probe this effect, receptors 6 and 7,
in which the aryl substituents were replaced by benzyl moieties to
provide additional flexibility, were prepared and their sulfate binding
6 W. Pflugrath and F. A. Quiocho, Nature, 1985, 314, 257; W. Pflugrath
and F. A. Quiocho, J. Mol. Biol., 1988, 200, 163.
2À
ability evaluated.‡ Both compounds were found to bind SO4 with
1 : 1 stoichiometry, although in 0.5% v/v H2O–DMSO-d6, 6 displayed
more complex behaviour at high sulfate concentrations, as described
above for 1. Notably, while the affinity of 4 for SO42À decreases by an
order of magnitude on increasing the water content of the DMSO-d6
solution from 20% to 25% (Table 2),9 the apparent binding affinity
of tripodal 6 for SO42À under the same conditions remains constant
and in 25% v/v H2O–DMSO-d6 is of a similar magnitude to that of
the cryptand derivative, suggesting improved shielding from the
solvent by the tripodal receptor. For compound 7, in which the
thiourea binding sites are closer to the scaffold than those of 6,
affinity for SO42À (Ka > 104 MÀ1) remains too high to quantify in this
solvent mixture, confirming that reducing the space between the
sidechain and backbone hydrogen-bond donors results in increased
binding affinity in more polar solvent mixtures. Significant upfield
shifts (for 7, maximum Dd = 0.22 ppm in 10% v/v H2O–DMSO-d6) of
the aromatic protons of both 6 and 7 were observed upon addition
of sulfate suggesting that interactions are maintained between the
aromatic groups in the benzyl derivatives.
7 R. Custelcean, B. A. Moyer and B. P. Hay, Chem. Commun., 2005, 5971;
R. Custelcean, P. Remy, P. V. Bonnesen, D.-E. Jiang and B. A. Moyer,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2008, 47, 1866; B. Wu, J. Liang, J. Yang, C. Jia,
X.-J. Yang, H. Zhang, N. Tang and C. Janiak, Chem. Commun., 2008, 1762;
Y. Li, K. M. Mullen, T. D. W. Claridge, P. J. Costa, V. Felix and P. D. Beer,
Chem. Commun., 2009, 7134; I. Ravikumar, P. S. Lakshminarayanan,
M. Arunachalam, E. Suresh and P. Ghosh, Dalton Trans., 2009, 4160;
R. Custelcean, A. Bock and B. A. Moyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2010, 132, 7177;
S. K. Dey and G. Das, Dalton Trans., 2011, 40, 12048; M. Li, Y. Hao, B. Wu,
C. Jia, X. Huang and X.-J. Yang, Org. Biomol. Chem., 2011, 9, 5637; Y. Hao,
C. Jia, S. Li, X. Huang, X.-J. Yang, C. Janiak and B. Wu, Supramol. Chem.,
2012, 24, 88–94; C. Jia, B. Wu, S. Li, X. Huang, Q. Zhao, Q.-S. Li and
X.-J. Yang, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2011, 50, 486; C. M. Gomes dos Santos,
E. M. Boyle, S. De Solis, P. E. Kruger and T. Gunnlaugsson, Chem.
Commun., 2011, 47, 12176; I. Ravikumar and P. Ghosh, Chem. Commun.,
2010, 46, 6741.
8 D. Mink, S. Mecozzi and J. Rebek Jr., Tetrahedron Lett., 1998,
39, 5709; A. J. Lucke, J. D. A. Tyndall, Y. Singh and D. P. Fairlie,
J. Mol. Graphics Modell., 2003, 21, 341; Y. Singh, M. J. Stoermer,
A. J. Lucke, T. Guthrie and D. P. Fairlie, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2005,
´
127, 6563; K. A. Jolliffe, Supramol. Chem., 2005, 17, 81; A. Pinter and
G. Haberhauer, Synlett, 2009, 3082.
9 P. G. Young and K. A. Jolliffe, Org. Biomol. Chem, 2012, 10, 2664.
10 P. G. Young, J. K. Clegg and K. A. Jolliffe, Supramol. Chem., 2012,
24, 77; P. G. Young, J. K. Clegg, M. Bhadbhade and K. A. Jolliffe,
Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 463.
11 R. J. G. Black, V. J. Dungan, R. Y. T. Li, P. G. Young and K. A. Jolliffe,
Synlett, 2010, 551.
In summary, reducing the distance between the thiourea and
cyclic peptide backbone hydrogen bond donors results in increased
affinity for a range of anions for this class of receptor. Notably, in
mixtures of water and DMSO all six compounds exhibit remarkably 12 All curve fitting was performed using the Equilibria program, C. E.
Marjo, University of New South Wales Analytical Centre, Sydney,
1
high selectivity and affinity for sulfate ions with apparent stability
constants too high to quantify by H NMR (Ka > 104 MÀ1). This is
13 J. W. Steed and J. L. Atwood, Supramolecular Chemistry, John Wiley &
attributed to a good fit between the host and guest geometries
Sons, Ltd, Chichester, 2000.
c
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Chem. Commun.