mised by limited resolution. Fortunately, the amide-I band
is very sensitive to isotopic substitution at the carbonyl
carbon and carbonyl oxygen, since the band can, to a first
approximation, be viewed as the sum of individual carbonyl
stretching modes. Thus, isotopic substitution will result in a
shift of the amide-I band of a labeled site to lower
frequencies, opening the door to isotope-edited IR studies.
Initial experiments made use of 13C substitution which results
in a ca. 40 cm-1 shift.4,5 While useful for the study of small
to midsize peptides, the approach suffers from serious
drawbacks when applied to proteins or even large peptides.
The modest shift induced by a 13C substitution coupled with
the 1.1% natural abundance of 13C means that the shifted
peak will normally not be baseline resolved and will appear
as a shoulder on a large broad band. Recently, 13Cd18O
labeling of proteins and peptides has been used to partially
circumvent these problems.6-10 The larger isotope shift
induced by the double label, expected to be on the order of
75 cm-1 for a purely local oscillator, leads to significantly
improved resolution provided that derivatives with a high
level of 13C and 18O enrichment are used. This allows true
isotope-edited IR studies and allows the full power of 2DIR
methods to be exploited. The approach obviously requires
13C,18O-labeled amino acids. While, 13C carbonyl-labeled
amino acids are commercially available, the required 13C,18O-
labeled variants are not, and less than optimum 18O enrich-
ment can cause major problems.7 Consider, for example, the
results of 75% enrichment with 18O, a typical value obtained
using current methods. In this case, a sample of a 13C,18O-
labeled 45-residue polypeptide would have a 13C-16O peak
of comparable integrated intensity to the double-labeled peak,
resulting in spectral overlap and a significant loss of
resolution. Protocols now in use to prepare double-labeled
amino acids lead to 18O enrichments on the order of 75 to
80% or less, depending upon the amino acid. Cost is also a
critical issue given the expense of H218O and the large amount
of material needed for solid-phase peptide synthesis.
Here we report a simple and economical method for pre-
paring 13C,18O-double-labeled N-(9-fluorenylmethoxycarbo-
nyl) (FMOC)-amino acids with high levels of 18O enrichment
for residues that do not require acid-labile side-chain
protecting groups, i.e., Gly, Ala, Val, Ile, Leu, Phe, Trp, and
Pro. We demonstrate the utility of the method by preparing
13C,18O-double-labeled FMOC-Ala, -Val, -Ile, -Leu, and
-Phe.
water (1 M in HCl) at elevated temperatures for about 24
h.11,12 We were concerned about loss of label during the
preparation of the desired FMOC derivatives from a doubly
labeled amino acid since we planned to use 9-fluorenyl-
methylchloroformate as the reagent for the incorporation of
the Fmoc group with water/dioxane as the solvent and
sodium carbonate as the base.13,14 In our hands, we have also
found that there are more byproducts generated in these
reactions, and the yields are frequently lower (80-90%) than
in the case of the preparation of t-BOC derivatives. For these
reasons, we prepared the FMOC derivative of the 13C-labeled
amino acid first and then ran the exchange reaction with 18O-
enriched water. Preliminary control experiments indicated
that the protected FMOC amino acid was reasonably stable
for at least 24 h at 100° in mixtures of dioxane and water
which were 0.1 M in HCl. Although there was a slight loss
in overall enrichment, we found it more convenient to
generate the HCl in situ by reacting acetyl chloride with the
18O-enriched water. This allowed preparation of a precise
acid titer without the need for titration and subsequent
adjustments. The acetic acid hydrolysis byproduct was
innocuous. 18O-Enriched water is quite expensive; thus, the
labeling was done in a two-step process. In the first
equilibration step the 18O content was raised to about 75-
85%, depending on the enrichment level of the medium. A
second equilibration brought the final enrichment level to
90-96% as judged by mass spectroscopy. The enrichment
medium was usually 3:2 dioxane/H218O water which was 0.1
M in HCl. The enrichment medium after the second
equilibration step was always recovered by a vacuum
distillation and recycled back to the first stage since its 18
O
content is g90%. The rate of 18O incorporation was very
sensitive to the steric bulk of the amino acid side chain. The
reaction was very fast for alanine which required 3 h for
complete equilibration and was very slow for valine and
isoleucine which required 20-30 h or more for equilibration
(Table 1). Recovery after this two-stage 18O-enrichment
process, except for isoleucine, was usually 90% of the
starting FMOC-amino acid. The recovery for isoleucine was
80%, the losses being caused by decomposition during the
exchange reaction. The final level of incorporation after the
two-step procedure, was between 93 and 96% except for
isoleucine at 90%.
The basic experimental protocol is outlined below. More
detailed information is provided in the Supporting Informa-
tion. A 0.25 M solution of HCl in the 18O-enriched water
was prepared by reacting acetyl chloride (196 mg, 2.5 mmol,
180 uL) with 10.0 mL of the water. The 13C-enriched FMOC
L-amino acid (10 mmol) was mixed with 15 mL of dioxane
in a 100-mL three-neck flask equipped with a reflux
condenser and a nitrogen inlet, and the mixture was heated
to 100° (bath temperature) at which point the solution was
homogeneous. The 18O-enriched water was slowly added.
A homogeneous solution usually resulted although partial
The usual approach for the preparation of labeled amino
acid derivatives is to incorporate the 18O label into the amino
acid, and then perform further manipulations. A number of
labeling protocols have been developed, but the most
common one is equilibration of the amino acid with enriched
(4) Tadesse, L.; Nazarbaghi, R.; Walters, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991,
113, 7036.
(5) Decatur, S. Acc. Chem. Res. 2006, 39, 169.
(6) Torres, J.; Adams, P. D.; Arkin, I. T. J. Mol. Biol. 2000, 300, 677.
(7) Torres, J.; Kukol, A.; Goodman, J. M.; Arkin, I. T. Biopolymers 2001,
59, 396.
(8) Torres, J.; Briggs, J. A. G.; Arkin, I. T. J. Mol. Biol. 2002, 316, 365.
(9) Fang, C.; Wang, J.; Charnley, A. K.; Smith, A. B., III; Decatur, S.
M.; Hochstrasser, R. M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2003, 382, 586.
(10) Brewer, S. H.; Song, B.; Raleigh, D. P.; Dyer, R. B. Biochemistry
2007, 46, 3279.
(11) Murphy, R. C.; Clay, K. L. Methods Enzymol. 1990, 193, 338.
(12) Ponnusamy, E.; Jones, C. R.; Fiat, D. J. Labelled Compd. Radiop-
harm. 1987, 24, 773.
(13) Carpino, L. A.; Han, G. Y. J. Org. Chem. 1972, 37, 3404.
(14) Carpino, L. A. Acc. Chem. Res. 1987, 20, 401.
4936
Org. Lett., Vol. 9, No. 24, 2007