8220
M. K. Chae et al. / Tetrahedron Letters 47 (2006) 8217–8220
(1.16 g, 1.1 mmol) in dry CHCl3 (25 mL) and a solution of 5. Sammakia, T.; Hurley, T. B. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65,
6 (0.22 g, 1.1 mmol) and NEt3 (0.3 mL, 2.2 mmol) in dry
CHCl3 (25 mL) were prepared separately. Two solutions
were simultaneously added via a motor driven syringe
pump to a flask containing only dry CHCl3 (800 mL) over
9 h. The reaction mixture was then stirred for additional
2–3 h. The solvent was removed under reduced pressure.
The solution was washed with saturated NaHCO3 and
brine, dried over anhydrous MgSO4 and concentrated
under reduced pressure. The residue was sequentially
washed with minimum amount of CHCl3, MeOH and
diethyl ether to give 7a (0.8 g, 82%) as a white solid.
Physical and spectroscopic properties. Compound 7a:
mp >300 °C; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) d (ppm) 9.12 (s,
8H, NH), 8.58 (d, 8H, J = 7.6 Hz), 8.22 (t, 4H,
J = 7.6 Hz), 2.28 (s, 48H); MALD-TOF (m/z) [MH]+
calcd for C68H69N12O8 1181.54; found 1181.68.
974.
6. The modelling study was carried out using MM2* force
field implemented in MacroModel 7.1 program on a
Silicon Graphics Indigo IMPACT workstation.
7. (a) Macomber, R. S. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 375–378; (b)
Chang, S.-Y.; Jang, H.-Y.; Jeong, K.-S. Chem. Eur. J.
2003, 9, 1535–1541.
8. (a) Connors, K. A. Binding Constants; John Wiley & Sons:
New York, 1987; (b) Schneider, H.-J.; Yatsimirsky, A. K.
Principles and Methods in Supramolecular Chemistry; John
Wiley & Sons: New York, 2000.
9. Chang, S.-Y.; Kim, H. S.; Chang, K.-J.; Jeong, K.-S. Org.
Lett. 2004, 6, 181–184, and also see Ref. 3b.
10. The relative population of each binding mode was
calculated as follows. Let us assume two complexes C1
and C2 between 7d (7e) and 8.
Compound 7b: mp >300 °C; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3)
d (ppm) 9.03 (s, 8H, NH), 8.56 (s, 8H), 2.26 (s, 48H);
MALD-TOF (m/z) [MH]+ calcd for C68H65Cl4N12O8
1319.38 (three as 35Cl and one as 37Cl); found 1319.52.
Compound 7c: mp >300 °C; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3)
d (ppm) 9.28 (s, 8H, NH), 7.57 (s, 8H), 3.52 (m, 16H), 2.25
(s, 48H), 2.10 (m, 16H); MALD-TOF (m/z) [MH]+ calcd
for C84H97N16O8 1457.77; found 1457.95.
Percentage of C1 ¼ f½C1ꢃ=ð½C1ꢃ þ ½C2ꢃÞg ꢄ 100
½C1ꢃ ¼ ½Hꢃ0 ꢄ fðd1 ꢀ d1freeÞ=ðd1comp ꢀ d1freeÞg
¼ Dd1=Dd1max
½C2ꢃ ¼ ½Hꢃ0 ꢄ fðd2 ꢀ d2freeÞ=ðd2comp ꢀ d2freeÞg
¼ Dd2=Dd2max
Compound 7d: mp >300 °C; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3)
d (ppm) 9.13 (s, 2H, NH), 9.05 (s, 2H, NH), 8.59 (s, 4H),
8.57 (s, 4H), 8.56 (s, 8H), 8.23 (t, 2H, J = 7.8), 2.27 (s,
24H), 2.26 (s, 24H); MALD-TOF (m/z) [MH]+ calcd for
C68H67Cl2N12O8 1249.46; found 1249.60.
Here, [H]0 is the initial concentration of a macrocycle (7d
or 7e), and d1 and d2 are observed NH chemical shifts for
the substituted and unsubstituted sites, respectively, when
8 was added. Dd1max and Dd2max were deduced from the
Ddmaxvalues obtained with 7a, 7b and 7c in Table 1. Com-
pounds 7a, 7b and 7c have four identical pyridinedicarb-
oxamide units, only two of them being hydrogen-bonded
upon complexation. Consequently, in the calculation of
[C1] and [C2], Dd1max and Dd2max were assumed equal
to 2Ddmax. Errors in the relative population are within
2%, regardless of the amount of added guest 8.
Compound 7e: mp >300 °C; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3)
d (ppm) 9.29 (s, 4H, NH), 9.11 (s, 4H, NH), 8.57 (d, 4H,
J = 8 Hz), 8.21 (t, 2H, J = 8 Hz), 7.58 (s, 4H), 3.52
(m, 8H), 2.27 (s, 48H), 2.11 (m, 8H); MALD-TOF
(m/z) [MH]+ calcd for C76H83N14O8 1319.65; found
1319.80.