transfer reaction that reduces a protecting group which
subsequently initiates release of the attached compound. The
light absorption step is, in essence, uncoupled from the
deprotection step since reduction of the protecting group,
from any source, causes deprotection. This allows for the
individual optimization of each step in the deprotection
process with relatively little consequence to other steps.
However, the introduction of another component into the
system does complicate the deprotection scheme to a certain
extent. Our group has developed the N-alkylpicolinium
would offer an improvement over delicate organic chro-
mophores that decompose over time. AuNPs can be synthe-
sized in a variety of sizes, from one to several hundred
nanometers in diameter, and with various organic stabilizing
ligand shells surrounding them. AuNPs with core diameters
greater than 5 nm exhibit a characteristic strong visible
absorption band centered at approximately 520 nm (for 15
nm AuNPs), respresentative of the suface plasmon band
1
2
(SPB) electron cloud. The position of the λmax of the
plasmon resonance band (PRB) is largely dependent on the
size of the AuNPs, their shape, and the nature of the
(NAP) group for use as a PET-PRPG in order to take
11,13,14
advantage of the benefits of PET-based deprotection to
stabilizing ligands surrounding them.
In addition to the
9
protect carboxylates and carbamates. Simple one-electron
favorable absorption characteristics, several AuNP systems
appear to have favorable reduction potentials as evidenced
by electrochemical experiments performed by Murray et al.
on smaller AuNP systems (1.1 nm diameter). For those
systems, Murray suggests the nanoparticles have one-electron
reduction potentials at ca. -1.5 to -1.7 V, potentials
sufficiently negative to reduce our NAP-esters in a mediated-
reduction by thermal or photochemical means (Ered ) -1.1
V) using a photoexcited donor results in release of the
protected compound. (Scheme 1).
Scheme 1. Reduction of the N-Methyl-picolinium Group
1
5
PET mechanism. Given the aforementioned qualities,
AuNPs seemed to be an interesting candidate for mediated
deprotection experimentation.
The scheme designed for these experiments incorporates
the nanoparticles in the presence of a large excess of a good
electron donor and a NAP-protected ester. Upon absorption
of incident radiation, the AuNPs are expected to act as net
electron shuttles, transferring an electron between the electron
The chromophore or sensitizer often represents a signifi-
cant expense in the deprotection scheme as a stoichiometric
amount or greater (relative to the amount of protected
compound) is needed to fully deprotect a particular system.
However, if a sensitizer is in the presence of a “sacrificial”
electron donor with the appropriate oxidation/reduction
potentials, the sensitizer can act as a mediator or electron
shuttle between the donor and the PRPG. The net effect is
to preserve the original state of the chromophore so that it
can be recycled in multiple deprotection events. Initial
experiments with this system were performed using UV-light-
absorbing sensitizers;10 however, it would be convenient to
use visible light instead. It should even be possible to use a
substoichiometric amount of sensitizer in these systems,
greatly reducing the cost and waste associated with a
deprotection photolysis experiment. This is the focus of the
current work being discussed.
1
6
donor (D) and the NAP ester. (Scheme 2)
Although a staggering variety of AuNPs can be prepared,
our studies began with citrate-stabilized AuNPs (cit-AuNP)
due to their ease of preparation, narrow size distribution, and
aqueous solubility. Synthesis of 16 nm citrate-stabilized
AuNPs (cit-AuNP) was easily achieved using the modified
1
7
citrate reduction method by Frens. The nanoparticles were
prepared in D O to facilitate analysis by proton NMR. Size
2
was confirmed by comparison to reference UV-vis absorp-
tion spectra and by transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
analysis. Although oxidation/reduction potentials of the
cit-AuNPs could not be determined, several aqueous-soluble
donor molecules were surveyed, and dithiothreitol (DTT) was
chosen since irreversible aggregation of the cit-AuNPs was
not observed immediately after addition as it was with other
donors (e.g., ascorbic acid and EDTA). N-Methyl-picolin-
iumphenylacetate (mPPA) was chosen as a representative
NAP-ester to include in these experiments. A major limitation
of the cit-AuNPs is their susceptibility to irreversible
aggregation by a variety of sources. This aggregation is
accompanied by a red-shifting and reduction in intensity of
the PRB, effectively limiting photochemical processes.
Given the success of the mediated systems previously
studied, we are interested in finding new robust high-
wavelength absorbing sensitizers to incorporate into this
design. Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) have recently attracted
a great amount of attention due to their unique optoelectronic
properties that are dissimilar from those of bulk metal
11
materials or molecular compounds. Additionally, they have
proven to be robust under illumination in many cases and
(
12) Mie, G. Ann. Phys. 1908, 25, 377-445.
(13) Brust, M.; Kiely, C. J. Colloids Surf., A 2002, 202, 175-186.
(
8) (a) Banerjee, A.; Falvey, D. E. J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 6245-6251.
b) Banerjee, A.; Lee, K.; Falvey, D. E. Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 12699-
2710. (c) Banerjee, A.; Lee, K.; Yu, Q.; Fang, A. G.; Falvey, D. E.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 4635-4638.
(14) Hostetler, M. J.; Wingate, J. E.; Zhong, C.-J.; Harris, J. E.; Vachet,
R. W.; Clark, M. R.; Londono, J. D.; Green, S. J.; Stokes, J. J.; Wignall,
G. D.; Glish, G. L.; Porter, M. D.; Evans, N. D.; Murray, R. W. Langmuir
1998, 14, 17-30.
(
1
(
9) (a) Sundararajan, C.; Falvey, D. E. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 5547-
(15) Lee, D.; Donkers, R. L.; Wang, G.; Harper, A. S.; Murray, R. W.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 6193-6199.
(16) While our proposed mechanism shows all components free in
solution, it is unclear whether the donor or the NAP-esters are bound to
the surface of the nanoparticle.
5
8
554. (b) Sundararajan, C.; Falvey, D. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127,
000-8001.
(10) Sundararajan, C.; Falvey, D. E. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2006,
5
, 116-121.
(
11) Daniel, M.-C.; Astruc, D. Chem. ReV. 2004, 104, 293-346.
(17) Frens, G. Nature Phys. Sci. 1973, 241, 20-22.
458
Org. Lett., Vol. 10, No. 3, 2008