A R T I C L E S
Wang et al.
cence resonance energy transfer (FRET) between pyrene and
naphthalene chromophores to obtain further characterization on
these dendrimer-based self-assemblies. FRET is known to
32
depend on the following three factors: (1) the extent of spectral
overlap of acceptor absorption and donor emission, (2) the
quantum yields of the donor, and (3) the distance between the
donor and acceptor. FRET is a long-range and through-space
interaction, which is independent of the intervening medium
between donor and acceptor, such as solvents, chemical bonds,
50-52
and polymer backbones.
The distance dependence of FRET
has been employed as a “spectroscopic ruler” for a variety of
applications, such as distance measurement between donor and
5
1a,b
51c,d
51e,f
acceptor,
macromolecular associations,
protein folding,
conformational changes,
5
1g
membrane fusion, and lipid
Figure 9. Representative TEM image of PAMAM-MNp G0 aggregates in
water. Concentration: 0.5 mg/mL.
51h
exchange. The photophysical phenomenon of FRET between
donor and acceptor covalently attached to a polymer has been
termed “photo harvesting” by Webber and the “antenna effect”
by Guillet. The naphthalene/pyrene energy transfer pair has
been employed to study the compatibility, thermo-reversible
52
given amphiphilic dendritic structure. According to Israelach-
vili,47 bilayer vesicular structures can be generated only if 0.5
e Pc e 1. If Pc < 0.33, spherical micelles can be formed. If
5
3
54a
phase transition, and steric hindrance of polymers by Morawetz,
0
.33e Pc e 0.5, one can predict the formation of cylindrical or
5
4b
52b
Winnik, and Webber. In our previous work, we attempted
to employ FRET to measure the bilayer thickness of vesicles
made from amphiphilic copolymers. But, it is unsuccessful. The
reason for this is that the bilayer thickness of vesicles from
amphiphilic copolymer is generally in the range of 100-200
Å, which exceeds the effective range measured by FRET (20-
disk-shaped micelles. If Pc > 1.0, reversed or inverted micelles
can be formed. These packing parameters provide the detailed
aggregate characteristics of dendrimers as listed in Table 3. The
Pc values for PAMAM-MNp G0-3 were found to be in the
range of 0.5-1.0 and tend to decrease with increasing genera-
tion, suggesting that the aggregates possess bilayer vesicular
structures. The theoretical prediction is in agreement with the
actual observation from TEM. The same trend was observed
for PAMAM-BNp aggregates.
9
0 Å).
In the present study, we have designed a control experiment
in an effort to determine the bilayer thickness of dendrimer-
based vesicles by changing the ratio of PAMAM-Py to
PAMAM-MNp aggregates in the mixture for FRET measure-
For PAMAM-MNp aggregates, their average aggregation
4
3
numbers (〈N〉) decrease from 7.9 × 10 for G0 to 4.0 × 10 for
-
4
4
ment. Thus, 9.0 mL of PAMAM-Py aggregates (1.5 × 10
G3, which is close to the aggregation number (∼1.2 × 10 ) of
M) was mixed with 1.0 mL of PAMAM-MNp aggregates (1.5
bilayer vesicles made from C60 fullerene bearing hydrophilic
-
4
groups reported by Zhou and Chu.41a The aggregation numbers
× 10 M). At the excitation wavelength of 290 nm where the
radiation is mostly absorbed by the naphthalene moiety, the
fluorescence of the mixed aggregates was observed mostly from
the pyrene chromophore with a relatively weak residual
fluorescence of the naphthalene chromophore as shown in the
inset (A and B) of Figure 12. This indicates that FRET occurs
from the naphthalene to pyrene chromophore.
of these dendrimer- and C60-based vesicles are considerably
larger than those of the vesicles derived from traditional ionic
〈N〉 )50-100)4
factants as well as diblock copolymers (〈N〉 ) 50-1000).
9a,b
49c,d
(
and nonionic (〈N〉 ) 100-1000)
sur-
4
9e-g
This is understandable because of their common features:
instead of the flexible hydrophobic tails of traditional am-
phiphilic surfactants and diblock copolymers, both dendrimer-
and C60-based amphiphilic compounds possess rigid and bulky
hydrophobic moieties with a dominant intrinsic geometric
constraint. At the same generation, PAMAM-MNp aggregates
show the larger aggregation numbers and Pc value than
PAMAM-BNp aggregates. This is attributed to the relative size
of hydrophobic and hydrophilic portions of individual den-
drimer. The hydrophobic headgroups of PAMAM-BNp are
bulky and more crowded as compared to that of PAMAM-MNp.
For PAMAM-Py aggregates, these packing parameters are
difficult to be assessed reliably because they are nonspherical.
Dendrimer Exchanges and Fluorescence Resonance En-
ergy Transfer. As an in-depth study, we utilized the fluores-
Figure 12 shows the time-resolved fluorescence spectra of
-
4
the mixed aggregates of PAMAM-MNp G1 (1.5 × 10 M,
.0 mL) and PAMAM-Py G1 (1.5 × 10 M, 9.0 mL). At the
excitation wavelength of 295 nm and emission wavelength of
45 nm, the fluorescence decay was fitted by a single-
-
4
1
3
(50) Calzaferri, G.; Huber, S.; Maas, H.; Minkowski, C. Angew Chem., Int. Ed.
2003, 42, 3732-3758.
(51) (a) Brogan, A. P.; Widger, W. R.; Kohn, H. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 5575-
5587. (b) Cha, A.; Snyder, G. E.; Selvin, P. R.; Bezanilla, F. Nature 1999,
402, 809-813. (c) Lipman, E. A.; Schuler, B.; Bakajin, O.; Eaton, W. A.
Science 2003, 301, 1233-1235. (d) Schuler, B.; Lipman, E. A.; Eaton, W.
A. Nature 2002, 419, 743-747. (e) Rice, S.; Lin, A. W.; Safer, D.; Hart,
C. L.; Naber, N.; Carragher, B. O.; Cain, S. M.; Pechatnikova, E.; Wilson-
Kubalek, E. M.; Whittaker, M.; Pate, E.; Cooke, R.; Taylor, E. W.; Milligan,
R. A.; Vale, R. D. Nature 1999, 402, 778-784. (f) Remy, I.; Wilson, I.
A.; Michnick, S. W. Science 1999, 283, 990-993. (g) Varma, R.; Mayor,
S. Nature 1998, 394, 798-801.(h) Mochizuki, N.; Yamashita, S.; Kuroka-
wa, K.; Ohba, Y.; Nagai, T.; Miyawaki, A.; Matsuda, M. Nature 2001,
411, 1065-1068.
(
49) (a) Benrraou, M.; Bales, B. L.; Zana, R. J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107,
1
3432-13440. (b) Srinivasan, V.; Blankschtein, D. Langmuir 2003, 19,
(52) (a) Webber, S. E. Chem. ReV. 1990, 90, 1469-1482. (b) Fox, S. L.; Chan,
J. C.; Kiserow, D. J.; Ramireddy, C.; Munk, P.; Webber, S. E. AdV. Chem.
Ser. 1996, 248, 141-162.
(53) Guillet, J. E.; Rendall, W. A. Macromolecules 1986, 19, 224-230.
(54) (a) Morawetz, H. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 1999, 37, 1725-
1735. (b) Mizusaki, M.; Morishima, Y.; Winnik, F. M. Macromolecules
1999, 32, 4317-4326. (c) Zhao, C. L.; Wang, Y.; Hruska, Z.; Winnik, M.
A. Macromolecules 1990, 23, 4082-4087. (d) Winnik, F. M. Macromol-
ecules 1989, 22, 734-742, 55.
9
932-9945. (c) Li, Y.; McMillan, C. A.; Bloor, D. M.; Penfold, J.; Warr,
J.; Holzwarth, J. F.; Wyn-Jones, E. Langmuir 2000, 16, 7999-8004. (d)
Kamenka, N.; Chevalier, Y.; Zana, R. Langmuir 1995, 11, 3351-3355.
(
e) Alexandridis, P.; Hatton, T. A. Colloid Surf., A 1995, 96, 1-46. (f)
Yusa, S.; Sakakibara, A.; Yamamoto, T.; Morishima, Y. Macromolecules
002, 35, 10182-10188. (g) Lysenko, E. A.; Bronich, T. K.; Slonkina, E.
V.; Eisenberg, A.; Kabanov, V. A.; Kabanov, A. V. Macromolecules 2002,
5, 6344-6350.
2
3
15190 J. AM. CHEM. SOC.
9
VOL. 126, NO. 46, 2004