The application of chiroptical spectroscopy (circular dichroism) in quantifying binding events in lanthanide directed synthesis of chiral luminescent self-assembly structures

Article abstract of DOI:10.1039/c4sc02474e

The binding of asymmetrical and optically pure tridentate ligands (L = 1(S) and 1(R)) containing one carboxylic group and 2-naphthyl as an antenna to lanthanide ions (M = La(iii) and Eu(iii)) was studied in CH₃CN, showing the successive formati

Full text of DOI:10.1039/c4sc02474e

Chemical
Science
View Article Online
View Journal | View Issue
EDGE ARTICLE
The application of chiroptical spectroscopy
(circular dichroism) in quantifying binding events in
Cite this: Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457
lanthanide directed synthesis of chiral luminescent
self-assembly structures†
a
Oxana Kotova, Salvador Blasco,a Brendan Twamley,a John O'Brien,a
*
Robert D. Peacock,b Jonathan A. Kitchen,ac Miguel Martınez-Calvoa
´
a
*
and Thorfinnur Gunnlaugsson
The binding of asymmetrical and optically pure tridentate ligands (L ¼ 1(S) and 1(R)) containing one
carboxylic group and 2-naphthyl as an antenna to lanthanide ions (M ¼ La(III) and Eu(III)) was studied in
CH3CN, showing the successive formation of M:L, M:L2 and M:L3 stoichiometric species in solution. The
europium complexes EuL3 were also synthesised, structurally characterised and their photophysical
properties probed in CH3OH and CH3CN. The changes in the chiroptical properties of both 1(S) and 1(R)
were used (by circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy) to monitor the formation of these chiral self-
assemblies in solution. While circularly polarised luminescence (CPL) showed the formation of Eu(1(S))3
and Eu(1(R))3 as enantiomers, with high luminescence dissymmetry factors (glum), fitting the CD changes
allowed for binding constants to be determined that were comparable to those seen in the analyses of
absorbance and luminescence changes.
Received 14th August 2014
Accepted 10th October 2014
DOI: 10.1039/c4sc02474e
www.rsc.org/chemicalscience
modied easily with various chiral or achiral antennae to give
Introduction
cationic lanthanide complexes.7–12 In related work, both Bunzli
¨
and De Cola have recently demonstrated that mono-anionic
asymmetrical ligands containing three donor atoms can form
stable charge neutral complexes with various lanthanides.13
Herein we present ligands 1(S) and 1(R) (Scheme 1) based on
the H2dpa core, each ligand possessing a single chiral (S)- and
Due to the many unique spectroscopic properties that the
lanthanides (Ln) possess, such as long-lived excited states and
long emission wavelength, the synthesis of novel luminescent
lanthanide based self-assemblies has led to the development of
various novel optical and functional materials in recent times.1
Examples of such developments are the formation of supra-
molecular self-assembly structures, such as helicates and
interlocked lanthanide-based catenanes,1e,f luminescent
sensors for ions and molecules, probes for cellular imaging and
for observing biological process and as supramolecular poly-
mers.2 Chiral lanthanide complexes have been developed
increasingly for such applications.3,4 We have developed
numerous examples of chiral ligands that have been employed
in lanthanide directed synthesis of self-assembled architec-
tures. These have been based on the dipicolinic acid motive
(H2dpa)5 which has been shown to be an efficient sensitiser for
Eu(III) and Tb(III) luminescence.6 Moreover, as we and others
have demonstrated, the carboxylic groups can be synthetically
aSchool of Chemistry, Trinity Biomedical Sciences Institute, Trinity College Dublin,
Dublin 2, Ireland. E-mail: kotovao@tcd.ie; gunnlaut@tcd.ie
bSchool of Chemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, Scotland, UK
cChemistry, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. CCDC 999267–999270
and 1026036. For ESI and crystallographic data in CIF or other electronic
format see DOI: 10.1039/c4sc02474e
Scheme 1 Synthesis of the ligands 1(S) and 1(R), and their corre-
sponding complexes Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 synthesized under
microwave irradiation.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 457

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
(R)-1-(2-naphthyl)-ethylamine antenna, respectively. Both Eu(III)
complexes were formed from these ligands using a synthesis
under microwave irradiation and the photophysical properties
of the resulting complexes Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 studied in
CH3CN and CH3OH solutions. Self-assembly of these ligands
with Ln(III) was studied in CH3CN solution by monitoring the
changes in both ground and excited states (Ln ¼ Eu(III)) as well
as by NMR spectroscopy (Ln ¼ La(III)). Due to the chiral nature
of the ligands and concomitant formation of chiral Ln-
complexes in solution upon titration with Ln(III), we studied
their chiroptical properties using both CD and CPL spectros-
copies. The crystallographic analysis of Eu(1(R))3 conrmed
that the chirality of the ligand was transferred to the Eu(III)
centre. Adequately, the changes in CD spectra of either 1(S) and
1(R) were drastically affected upon binding to Eu(III); being
equal magnitude but of opposite signs. This allowed us to
identify both the different Lnx:Ly stoichiometries in solution
and to quantify their binding affinities using non-linear
regression analysis, in a similar manner to that used to quantify
the same in both the absorption and the luminescence titra-
tions. While CD spectroscopy is commonly used to monitor the
interaction, formation or folding of larger self-assembly struc-
tures in solution,14 to the best of our knowledge, carrying out CD
titrations to assess the different equilibrium processes for the
formation of chiral self-assembly metal ion complexes and
determination of the affinity constants for such processes is
relatively unexplored in supramolecular chemistry. Here we
demonstrate that indeed such analysis gives greater under-
standing of the different stoichiometric speciation in solution
and that the binding constants determined for these matched
comfortably well with that determined by traditional spectro-
scopic methods.
Fig. 1 1H NMR of 1(S) (600 MHz, CD3OD).
1(R) corresponding to [M ꢀ H+]ꢀ, while the IR spectra revealed
the presence of characteristic C–H, N–H and C]O vibrations.
The results of the elemental analysis also conrmed the
formation of the pure compounds. We were also able to grow
single crystals suitable for X-ray crystal structure analysis of
both 4(S) and 4(R) by recrystallization of powder samples from
methanol. Similarly, single crystals of 1(S) and 1(R) were grown
from a mixture of CH3OH and CH3CN and the low temperature
(100(2) K) X-ray structures collected. These will be discussed in
the next section.
Having obtained both 1(S) and 1(R) we next synthesised the
Eu(III) complexes Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 from these, where each
of the ligand is expected to coordinate to the lanthanide via the
central pyridine nitrogen, the carboxylic acid and the carboxylic
amide, in a tri-dentate manner. Three of these ligands therefore
full the high coordination requirements of the lanthanide.
This was achieved by reacting Eu(CF3SO3)3 with 1(S) and 1(R) in
a 1 : 3 metal to ligand stoichiometry in CH3CN solution under
microwave irradiation at 95 ꢁC for 30 minutes. The resulting
complexes were isolated as white powders by slow diffusion of
diethyl ether into the CH3CN solutions, yielding the desired
complexes in ca. 35% yields. High resolution matrix-assisted
laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) mass-spectrometry
conrmed the formation of both tris-chelates with the presence
of m/z ¼ 1147.2034 which was assigned to [Eu(1(S)–H+)3 + K+]+
and 1147.2039, assigned to [Eu(1(R)–H+)3 + K+]+ (see ESI†). The
1H NMR (CD3CN, 600 MHz) spectra for both Eu(III) complexes
were different to that of the free ligands showing signicant
broadening and shi of the proton resonances (see ESI†), due to
the paramagnetic nature of the lanthanide ion. Similarly, in the
IR spectra, the C]O vibronic transitions were signicantly
shied by 126 cmꢀ1 upon complexation to Eu(III), further con-
rming the complex formation. Elemental analysis also
conrmed the formation of the desired products. However, the
latter, along with the MALDI results, suggests that partial
deprotonation of the ligands upon complexation occurs, which
is not surprising since the carboxylic acid is directly bound to
the lanthanide, making it more acidic. Both complexes were
Results and discussion
Synthesis of the ligands and Eu(III) complexes
The tridentate ligands 1(S) and 1(R) were synthesised in three
steps starting from commercially available H2dpa. First the
dipicolinic acid was monoprotected with benzylbromide to give
2 in 38% yields (see ESI†).15 This was further coupled, Scheme 1,
with either (S)- or (R)-1-(2-naphthyl)-ethylamine (3(S) or 3(R),
respectively) using standard peptide-coupling methodology9b in
presence of 1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide
hydrochloride (EDCI$HCl) and 1-hydroxybenzotriazole hydrate
(HOBt) to give the intermediates 4(S) and 4(R) in ca. 80% yield
for both. The deprotection of the benzyl esters 4(S) and 4(R) was
rst attempted by catalytic hydrogenation using 10% Pd/C
catalyst. However, this resulted in the product containing
impurities that were difficult to isolate from the desired prod-
ucts. For this reason we turned to the use of Pd–C-induced
catalytic transfer hydrogenation using triethylsilane16 which
gave desired products 1(S) and 1(R) in ca. 78% yield for both.
The 1H NMR spectrum of 1(S) is shown in Fig. 1, demonstrating
the successful deprotection of the benzyl ester (the same result
observed for 1(R); see ESI†). High resolution electrospray mass-
spectrometry (see ESI†) also conrmed the successful formation
of both ligands with of m/z ¼ 319.1075 for 1(S) and 319.1080 for
458 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
also shown to be luminescent, as upon placing a solution of naphthyl group around the C13–C15 (C37–39) bond (torsion
both under a UV light irradiation red emission characteristic of angle C14–C13–C15–C16, C38–C37–C39–C40; 1(R) ¼ ꢀ19.5(2),
Eu(III) was observed, conrming that the ligands functions as 9.3(2): 1(S) ¼ 19.84(17), ꢀ9.50(17)ꢁ). The structures of 4(S) and
sensitising antennae for the 5D0 excited state of Eu(III). Clear 4(R), again in the chiral space group P21, were obtained from
colourless crystals of Eu(1(R))3 were obtained as described enantiopure crystals grown from methanol solutions, see
13a–c
¨
previously by Bunzli et al.
Fig. 2C and D, respectively. Here the asymmetric unit consists of
The coordination geometry of the Eu(III) centres was rst a single molecule. The additional substitution on the carboxyl
evaluated in solution by measuring the decay of the lanthanide group leads to a planar pyridine–C(O)O–CH2–Ph unit (4(S), 4(R)
˚
excited state in both H2O and D2O, upon excitation at the ¼ 0.04 A deviation from plane). The chiral centre is C11 and was
naphthalene antennae (lex ¼ 281 nm) allowing for the deter- conrmed by the Flack parameter. The naphthyl groups are
mination of the Eu(III) hydration state (q, the number of metal- rotated about the C10–C11 bond with C9–C10–C11–C12 torsion
bound water molecules).17 The Eu(III) 5D0 excited state life-times angles of 4(R): ꢀ62.7(2) and 4(S): 62.8(2)ꢁ. The chiral subunit
of Eu(1(S))3 were best-tted to monoexponential decay with sH O (R–C(O)NHCMe–naphthyl) seen in 1(R), 1(S), 4(S) and 4(R) has
2
¼ 1.54 ꢂ 0.01 ms and sD O ¼ 2.57 ꢂ 0.01 ms giving a q value of been structurally characterized previously and displays a wide
2
zero. This is to be expected as the lanthanides have coordina- range of naphthyl group: chiral centre arrangements.18
tion requirements of 8–10, these being fullled by the 9 coor-
In both 1(S) and 1(R), strong hydrogen bonding was
dination environment of the 1 : 3 Eu:L stoichiometry in observed between the carboxylic acid group and the carbonyl
Eu(1(S))3.11 Similarly, the Eu(III) excited state life-times of group of neighbouring ligand. This orientation results in other
Eu(1(R))3 were best tted to monoexponential decay with sH O
¼
weak inter- and intra- molecular hydrogen bonding between the
2
1.55 ꢂ 0.01 ms and sD O ¼ 2.50 ꢂ 0.04 ms, again conrming that back-to-back molecules (see Table 1) and creates a weakly con-
2
the ions were complexed with saturation of coordination nected supramolecular ribbon motif parallel to the c-axis. In
environment.
4(S) and 4(R) the hydrogen bonding motif is disrupted by the
substitution on the carboxyl group. In this case only weak
C–H/O interactions prevail.
The complex Eu(1(R))3 (Fig. 3, ESI†) crystallized in an
orthorhombic crystal system with chiral space group C2221
Crystal and molecular structures of 4(S), 4(R), 1(S), 1(R) and
Eu(1(R))3
As stated above, crystalline materials of both 1(R) and 1(S) were (Table 1). The asymmetric unit contains two different Eu(1(R))3
obtained that allowed for the X-ray analysis of these enantio- molecules and some water molecules. The ligands are arranged
mers. The resulting structures are shown in Fig. 2A and B, around Eu(III) ion in a manner predicted by us previously for the
respectively. Each enantiomer crystallizes in the chiral space complexes formed from the use of ligands with 1-naphthyl
group P21 and displays two different independent molecules in group as an antenna (assigned here as Eu(5(S))3 and Eu(5(R))3,
the asymmetric unit. The chiral centres are C13 and C37, and see ESI† for structure)11 and observed by others13 with three
although the chirality was known throughout the syntheses, it naphthyl antennae located on the same side (Fig. 3A). As
was conrmed by the rened Flack parameter for each enan- observed previously (q ¼ 0) and conrmed here, the coordina-
tiomer. The two independent molecules differ by rotation of the tion environment of Eu(III) centre in either of the molecules is
Fig. 2 Molecular structures of (A) 1(R) and (B) 1(S) showing both independent molecules in the asymmmetric unit, (C) 4(R) and (D) 4(S) (thermal
displacement 50%).
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 459

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
Table 1 Summary of crystallographic details for compounds 1(S), 1(R), 4(S), 4(R) and Eu(1(R))3
Compound reference
1(R)
1(S)
4(R)
4(S)
Eu(1(R))3
Chemical formula
Formula mass
Crystal system
C19H16N2O3
320.34
C19H16N2O3
320.34
C26H22N2O3
410.45
Monoclinic
5.4249(2)
16.5948(6)
11.4170(4)
98.277(2)
1017.11(6)
100(2)
C26H22N2O3
410.45
C57H49.5EuN6O11.5
1159.49
Orthorhombic
26.0015(12)
26.4029(11)
30.8305(11)
90
Monoclinic
6.8436(4)
26.8023(14)
8.3932(5)
90.9000(13)
1539.33(15)
100(2)
Monoclinic
6.8507(4)
26.7770(17)
8.4103(5)
90.840(2)
1542.63(16)
100(2)
Monoclinic
5.4288(2)
16.6067(6)
11.4114(4)
98.2867(18)
1018.05(6)
100(2)
˚
a/A
˚
b/A
˚
c/A
b/ꢁ
3
˚
Unit cell volume/A
21165.6(15)
100(2)
Temperature/K
Space group
P21
P21
P21
P21
C2221
No. of formula units per unit cell, Z
Radiation type
4
4
2
2
16
CuKa
9.05
36 491
9417
0.0740
0.083
0.262
MoKa
0.095
24 241
6995
0.0171
0.0254
0.0646
0.0268
0.0654
1.039
0.0(2)
999267
MoKa
0.095
47 256
10 624
0.0145
0.0321
0.0861
0.0339
0.0873
1.035
0.31(11)
999268
CuKa
0.710
5614
2414
0.0273
0.0306
0.0806
0.0307
0.0808
1.068
CuKa
0.709
5359
2462
0.0303
0.0309
0.0762
0.0310
Absorption coefficient, m/mmꢀ1
No. of reections measured
No. of independent reections
Rint
Final R1 values (I > 2s(I))
Final wR(F2) values (I > 2s(I))
Final R1 values (all data)
Final wR(F2) values (all data)
Goodness of t on F2
Flack parameter
0.1512
0.2618
1.006
0.0763
1.055
ꢀ0.11(7)
ꢀ0.15(9)
ꢀ0.001(8)
CCDC number
999269
999270
1026036
fully saturated with three molecules of deprotonated 1(R)
The naphthalene moieties interact with each other and with
contributing with three coordination bonds each being the the pyridine groups via p-stacking and they form hydrophobic
pyridine nitrogen anked by the carboxylate oxygen on one side pockets in the structure. Multiple intramolecular and inter-
and the amido oxygen on the other side. Both europium atoms molecular p-stacking interactions can be observed in the frag-
are positioned in a nine-coordinated tri-capped trigonal pris- ment containing the Eu1 atom, the naphthalene C48–C57
matic N3O6 coordination environment formed by the three interacts face to face with pyridine N3–C21–C25 and edge to
pyridine nitrogen atoms located in the equatorial plane face with naphthalene C29–C38 but this pyridine also interacts
arranging in quite regular triangle, and six oxygen atoms where face to face with the naphthalene C10–C19 (Fig. 3B, ESI†).
three are placed above while the other three lay below the Similar interactions can be seen in the other fragment (the one
equatorial plane forming a triangular prism among them. Thus, that contains the Eu2 atom) with the pyridine N9–C78–C82 in
the complex remains C3 symmetry. The average bond distances between the naphthalene group C67–C76 and C116–C125.
˚
˚
are 2.37 A for Eu–O(carboxylate) bonds, 2.44 A for Eu–O(amido) Naphthalene groups have some conformational freedom and
˚
and 2.57 A for Eu–N(pyridine). The chirality of the ligand, they can, at some extent rock and rotate and as a result high
known from the synthesis, is also conrmed in this structure by disorder is found in these moieties. In the case of the naph-
the Flack parameter.
thalene group attached to C(103) it has been found in two
different orientations with occupancy factor 1/2.
Fig. 3 Space filling representation of Eu(1(R))3 complex showing (A) the position of carboxyl oxygen atoms (in red) relatively to naphthyl
antennae and (B) stacking interaction between pyridine and naphthyl groups.
460 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
CH3CN, which we contribute to a dissociation of these
complexes in more competitive protic media, where one of the
ligands is removed from the EuL3 complex to give EuL2 + L. The
latter now being affected by quenching of the lanthanide excited
state by energy matching solvent O–H oscillators. The Eu(III)-
centred emission decays for both groups of complexes were
found to be bi-exponential with the main species being EuL3
(ꢃ80%) for the complexes with 1(S) and 1(R) while in case of 1-
naphthyl derivatives EuL2 species (ꢃ80%) were prevalent (Table
2). Interestingly, the values of Ftot and sobs between symmetrical
“Trinity Sliotar”8 and the asymmetrical Eu(III) complexes
(Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 developed herein and that of Eu(5(S))3
and Eu(5(R))3)11 in CH3CN are found to be very similar.
However, if one compares the ratio between D0 / FJ transi-
tions in the Eu(III)-centred emission spectra of these two sets of
complexes it is possible to identify common differences which
suggest discrepancy in the Eu(III) ion site symmetry within these
two systems. In turn, sR of the symmetrical complexes was
found to be higher as the shielding of the metal centre is better
Photophysical properties of Eu(III) complexes in CH3CN and
CH3OH solutions
Having structurally characterised the ligands and their corre-
sponding complexes, we next investigated their photophysical
properties. The electronic absorption spectra of the ligands in
CH3CN (see ESI†) were dominated by ligand-centred n / p*
and p / p* transitions centred at 222 nm (1(S): 3 ¼ 87 397 ꢂ
230 cmꢀ1 Mꢀ1; 1(R): 3 ¼ 87 158 ꢂ 320 cmꢀ1 Mꢀ1) and 270 nm
(1(S): 3 ¼ 10 964 ꢂ 38 cmꢀ1 Mꢀ1; 1(R): 3 ¼ 11 630 ꢂ 146 cmꢀ1
Mꢀ1). The excitation into the 270 nm transition did not result in
any signicant ligand centred emission. However, upon
complexation to the metal ion signicant Eu(III)-centred emis-
sion was observed due to the energy transfer processes occur-
ring from the 2-naphthyl antennae to the 5D0 excited state
which was followed by deactivation to the 7FJ bands of the
lanthanide. The photophysical properties of Eu(1(S))3 and
Eu(1(R))3 were also studied in CH3OH and compared to that
observed for Eu(5(S))3 and Eu(5(R))3 (ESI†).11 The results are
shown in Table 2 and it was demonstrated that the structure of
Eu(III)-centred emission bands is similar for both, conrming
that these systems have similar coordination environments of
5
7
in this case compared to that seen for the asymmetrical struc-
Ln
Ln
tures. Hence, the values of F were found to be higher for
asymmetrical molecules Eu(1(S))3, Eu(1(R))3 and Eu(5(S))3,
Eu(5(R))3, suggesting the larger inuence of non-radiative
processes in the symmetrical complexes. Finally, hsens was
higher for the symmetrical complexes as the asymmetrical lose
one antenna per ligand. Having probed the photophysical
properties of Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 we next turned our atten-
tion to analysing the role of the Eu(III) ion in the metal directed
synthesis of these complexes under kinetic control at room
temperature.
the metal centre. The photoluminescence quantum yields (Ftot
,
%) were also measured by relative method using
a
Cs3[Eu(dpa)3]$9H2O as a standard.19 In general, the quantum
yields of the 1-naphthyl derivatives were ca. 4 times higher in
CH3CN and 2 times higher in CH3OH than seen for the 2-
naphthyl analogues. Based on our previous work, where we
investigated the symmetrical Eu(III) “Trinity Sliotar” complexes,8
we believe that this difference is due to sensitisation efficiency
of Eu(III) luminescence being more favourable for Eu(5(S))3 and
Eu(5(R))3 than Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3. This is evident from
calculating the antenna-to-ion energy transfer efficiencies
(hsens) for these complexes, which is determined on the basis of
the emission spectrum, the observed luminescence life-time
(sobs) and the experimental overall luminescence quantum yield
(Ftot) upon ligand excitation, Table 2.
Monitoring self-assembly processes between 1(S) and 1(R)
with Eu(III) in CH3CN by absorption and luminescence
spectroscopy
The self-assembly studies between 1(S) or 1(R) and Eu(III) were
rst performed in CH3CN solution. However, the analysis of the
data using non-linear regression analysis program SPECFIT®
did not result in data convergence. As the self-assembly
The quantum yield of the Eu(III) complexes in CH3OH solu-
tion was found to be signicantly lower than that seen in
Table 2 Antenna-to-ion energy transfer efficiencies (hsens) of Eu(III) complexes calculated on the basis of the observed emission spectrum, the
observed luminescence life-time (sobs) and the experimental overall luminescence quantum yield (Ftot) upon ligand excitation (lex ¼ 279 nm). sR
is the radiative life-time calculated using eqn (3) (see EP). FLLnn is found using eqn (4) (see EP) measured in CH3CN and CH3OH
Complex
sobs, ms
Ftot, %
sR, ms
FLLnn, %
hsens, %
Solvent/c, M
Eu(1(R))3
Eu(1(S))3
Eu(5(R))3
Eu(5(S))3
Eu(1(R))3
1.86 ꢂ 0.02
2.1 ꢂ 0.1
1.6 ꢂ 0.5
8.2 ꢂ 0.3
8.4 ꢂ 0.3
0.6 ꢂ 0.1
6.43 ꢂ 0.04
6.39 ꢂ 0.04
7.13 ꢂ 0.02
7.18 ꢂ 0.04
—
28.94 ꢂ 0.01
29.13 ꢂ 0.01
27.22 ꢂ 0.01
27.02 ꢂ 0.03
—
7.26 ꢂ 0.02
5.49 ꢂ 0.02
30.20 ꢂ 0.03
30.90 ꢂ 0.01
—
CH3CN 2.72 ꢄ 10ꢀ5
M
M
1.86 ꢂ 0.02
1.94 ꢂ 0.01
1.94 ꢂ 0.01
0.58 ꢂ 0.01 (18.8%)
1.95 ꢂ 0.01 (81.2%)
0.58 ꢂ 0.01 (18.8%)
1.95 ꢂ 0.01 (81.2%)
0.58 ꢂ 0.01 (79.0%)
1.76 ꢂ 0.03 (21.0%)
0.57 ꢂ 0.01 (81.0%)
1.58 ꢂ 0.01 (19.0%)
0.57 ꢂ 0.01 (81.0%)
CH3OH 5.79 ꢄ 10ꢀ5
Eu(1(S))3
Eu(5(R))3
Eu(5(S))3
0.5 ꢂ 0.1
2.2 ꢂ 0.2
2.3 ꢂ 0.1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 461

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
processes are highly dependent on the solvent and ions in
solution, it was decided to introduce ionic strength into the
system, as it has been shown by Piguet et al.20 that the intro-
duction of tetrabutylammonia perchlorate favours the forma-
tion of highly charged complexes in lanthanide-directed self-
assemblies formations in aprotic solvent systems. Hence, to
overcome the data convergence problem we choose to use 0.05
M tetraethylammonium chloride ((C2H5)4NCl) as ionic strength
in our studies.
The changes observed in the absorption, uorescence and
Eu(III)-centred emission spectra upon titrating 1(S) and 1(R)
with Eu(III) were identical for both enantiomers and as such the
discussion herein will focus only on one of these ligands. The
changes seen upon titrating 1(S) are shown in Fig. 4 (see ESI†
for 1(R)). As described previously, the absorption spectrum of
1(S) possesses two main maxima at 222 and 270 nm (Fig. 4A).
The addition of Eu(III) resulted in hyperchromicity in these
absorption bands, where the main changes were observed in the
bands centred at ꢃ270 nm, as demonstrated in Fig. 5A, where
the changes at three different transitions are plotted against
added Eu(III) equivalents. Here, the absorbance increase was
initially observed until addition of 0.30 equivalents of Eu(III),
signifying the formation of the desired 1 : 3 stoichiometry, aer
which much slower increase occurred until the addition of 1.00
equivalents before beginning to plateau. The experimental
changes were analysed using non-linear regression analysis
program SPECFIT® (ref. 21) where factor analysis conrms the
presence of four absorbing species. These were assigned to the
ligand (L) and the Eu(III) species M:L, M:L2 and M:L3. The data
was satisfactorily tted to the following equilibria and the
associated binding constants, expressed as log bx : y, are sum-
marised in Table 3:
Fig. 5 (A) Experimental binding isotherms and their corresponding fit
obtained using non-linear regression analysis program SPECFIT®, (B)
speciation-distribution diagram obtained from the fit of the changes in
the absorption spectrum of 1(S) upon addition of Eu(CF3SO3)3 in
CH3CN (25 ꢁC, 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl).
that seen for analogues “Trinity Sliotar” complexes.8–12 The
speciation distribution diagram for the titration is shown in
Fig. 5B, which demonstrates the initial formation of 1 : 3 (M:L)
species in ca. 60% yield upon addition of 0.30 equivalents of
Eu(III). However, almost simultaneously the formation of both
the 1 : 2 and 1 : 1 stoichiometries also occurs. All of these
species present in the solution until the end of the titration with
the presence of the 1 : 1 complex in 58% yield, while the 1 : 2
and the 1 : 3 stoichiometry exist in 20% and 22% yield,
respectively.
Eu + L 4 EuL (log b1 : 1
)
Eu + 2L 4 EuL2 (log b1 : 2
Eu + 3L 4 EuL3 (log b1 : 3
)
)
These binding constants are comparable to that seen for
structurally similar self-assemblies,11,22 though not as high as
Fig. 4 The changes in the (A) absorption, (B) fluorescence and (C) Eu(III)-centred emission spectra of 1(S) (c ¼ 1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M) upon addition of
Eu(CF3SO3)3 in CH3CN (25 ꢁC, 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl).
462 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
Table 3 Binding constants obtained by fitting the changes in absorption, fluorescence and Eu(III)-centred emission spectra of 1(S) or 1(R) upon
addition of Eu(CF3SO3)3 in CH3CN solution (25 ꢁC, 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl)
Absorption
Fluorescence
Eu(III)-centred emission
Compound
log b1 : 1
log b1 : 2
log b1 : 3
log b1 : 1
log b1 : 2
log b1 : 3
log b1 : 1
log b1 : 2
log b1 : 3
1(S)
1(R)
5.4 ꢂ 0.3
5.7 ꢂ 0.2
11.1 ꢂ 0.6
17.3 ꢂ 0.4
16.5 ꢂ 0.5
6.2 ꢂ 0.1
6.2 (x)
12.5 ꢂ 0.2
17.9 ꢂ 0.2
18.1 ꢂ 0.2
6.7 ꢂ 0.2
6.9 ꢂ 0.3
—
—
17.4 ꢂ 0.4
16.4 ꢂ 0.4
—
—
The changes in the uorescence emission and Eu(III)-centred where the binding was monitored using diamagnetic
emission were also monitored in parallel and are shown in lanthanum ions as 1H NMR spectra of the Eu(III) complexes were
Fig. 4B and C, respectively. The ligand uorescence was weak too broadened and shied to be fully analysed. The overall
and as such it was not possible to monitor the changes in the changes are seen in Fig. 6, where the 1H NMR of the free ligand
ligand-centred emission accurately over the cause of the titra- can be seen and assigned (i.e. Scheme 1 for assignment and
tion. However, upon addition of the lanthanide to a solution of ESI†).
1(S) the formation of Eu:L assemblies between the two was clear
The changes in 1H NMR spectra of 1(S) or 1(R) were followed
from the appearance of the red Eu(III)-centred emission bands upon addition of La(CF3SO3)3 and identical for both enantio-
due to the deactivation of 5D0 / 7FJ (J ¼ 0–4) upon excitation of mers (Fig. 6 and ESI†). This reected the formation of a single
the ligand at 270 nm, Fig. 4B. Analysis of these uorescence species in solution on the NMR time-scale. Generally, upon
emission changes, showed that the luminescence intensity of addition of La(III) the NMR spectra became both broadened and
the 5D0 / 7F1,3,4 bands increased up until the addition of 0.30 shied indicating complexes formed in the solution. More
equivalents of Eu(III), aer which the emission plateau. In specically, the CH(2) protons were shown to be shied upeld,
5
7
contrast, the changes in the D0 / F2 based transition were while N–H protons (NH(13)) were shied downeld. Clear
more stepwise where an initial increase was observed upon binding of the La(III) to the pyrindine ring can be also conrmed
addition of 0.30 equivalents of Eu(III), followed by slower by broadening of the proton resonances (CH(10–12)). Similarly
increase in the intensity until the addition of 0.50 equivalents the changes in the naphthyl group protons CH(3,4) occurred
where the saturation of the luminescence intensity occurred.
with very minor downeld shi while CH(5–9) experienced
Similar luminescence behaviour was observed in the Eu(III)- much more signicant changes resulting in an upeld shi and
centred emission spectra by recording the delayed emission appearance of the new resonances, which is indicative of the
from the ion in phosphorescence mode. Here, the ne structure recognition process being in slow exchange. Thus, even though
in the emission transitions was more pronounced as is evident the exact mode of binding cannot be established it is possible to
from Fig. 4C, for the splitting of 5D0
/
7F2 band into two conclude that the binding of La(III) to 1(S) or 1(R) occurs
maxima at 612 and 616 nm. The intensity of the band at 616 nm through the pyridine centre with further rearrangement of the
reaches its maximum upon addition of 0.30 equivalents of naphthyl groups around metal centre. The evolution of the
Eu(III) (Fig. 4C, see ESI†) while the intensity of the band at 612 changes in the spectra suggest the possible occurrence of 1 : 1,
nm increases gradually until the addition of 1.00 equivalent of 1 : 2 and 1 : 3 (M:L) species.
Eu(III) aer which the emission saturated (see ESI†). The pres-
ence of 5D0 / 7F0 band suggests the formation of 1 : 3 species
Circular dichroism and circularly polarised luminescence
with the arrangement of the ligands around Eu(III) ion in C3
symmetry conrming the results found in the crystal structure
of Eu(1(R))3 complex (see above). Analysis of the changes in the
Eu(III)-centred emission spectra conrmed the formation of the
expected 1 : 1, 1 : 2 and 1 : 3 species in the solution.
The changes in both the uorescence and the Eu(III)-centred
emission spectra were analysed using non-linear regression
analysis program SPECFIT®. As expected the factor analysis for
the changes in the uorescence emission spectra suggests the
presence of four emissive species, while in the case of Eu(III)-cen-
tred emission three emissive species were identied. The changes
were tted to the same equilibrium used for analysis of the ground
state data, showing similar binding constants as seen in Table 3.
spectroscopy studies
In our previous work,8–12 we have used circular dichorsim and
circularly polarised luminescence to demonstrate the chirality
associated with the formation of lanthanide self-assemblies
such as in “Trinity Sliotar” complexes, as well as triple stranded
dimetallic lanthanide helicates. In these, the Eu(III) CPL emis-
sion was recorded, demonstrating that the complexes and hel-
icates were formed as pairs of enantiomers, where the chirality
of the ligands was transferred to the complexes, giving D and L
absolute stereochemistry. Similarly, we set out to probe the
chiral nature and enantiomeric purity of 1(S) or 1(R) and their
Eu(III) complexes using CD along with CPL spectroscopy. The
CD spectra of both ligands and their corresponding Eu(III)
complexes were recorded in both CH3OH and CH3CN solvent
systems at 1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M and are shown in Fig. 7. All the structures
showed clear Cotton effects and the expected mirror images for
Monitoring self-assembly formation between 1(S) or 1(R) and
1
La(III) in CD3CN solution by H NMR spectroscopy
The interaction between the ligands and lanthanide ions in each pair of ligands (i.e. demonstrating that 1(S) or 1(R) are
CD3CN solution was also studied using NMR spectroscopy synthesised as enantiomers) and complexes in both solvent
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 463

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
Fig. 6 The changes in the 1H NMR spectra (400 MHz) of 1(S) (c ¼ 4.26 ꢄ 10ꢀ4 M) upon gradual addition of La(CF3SO3)3 in CD3CN.
systems. The fact that both Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 give rise to CD spectra of Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 possess very different
equal but opposite dichroism bands is consistent with the structure compared to the ones observed for their correspond-
presence of a single chiral stereoisomer in solution for these ing ligands. However, again the spectra of the complexes are
two complexes. In both CH3OH and CH3CN the CD spectra of very similar between CH3OH and CH3CN with the maxima at
the ligands are very similar with the p / p* transitions 283, 253 and 228 nm and Davydov splitting of 23 and 35 nm. It
resulting in the signals of maxima 273, 231 and 221 nm with the has to be noted that the ratio between the degrees of ellipticity
only difference being the ellipticity of the signals Fig. 7, which is for the maxima in the CD spectra of EuL3 (L ¼ 1(S), 1(R))
signicantly different for the two solvent systems. This clearly recorded in CH3OH and CH3CN are different which can be
demonstrates the role solvent plays herein. Moreover, the related to the solvent effect causing dissociation of EuL3
4
spectra of the ligands can be characterised by Davydov splitting EuL2 + L in presence of protic solvent. This was observed
of 11 and 42 nm and this was observed in both solvents.14,23 The previously while recording the life-times of Eu(III)-centred
Fig. 7 CD spectra of 1(S) (–) and 1(R) (–) along with Eu(1(S))3 (—) and Eu(1(R))3 (—) recorded in (A) CH3CN and (B) CH3OH solvents at
c ¼ 1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M, 25 ꢁC.
464 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
emission in CH3OH, as summarised in Table 1. The presence of indicates the formation of 1 : 1, 1 : 2 and 1 : 3 species. In order
only EuL3 species in aprotic solvent at c ¼ 1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M was to perform more detailed analysis about the equilibria occur-
conrmed by recording the Eu(III) 5D0 excited state life-times ring in the solution here we attempted to t the data obtained
which were best tted to monoexponential decay with s z 1.99 using non-linear regression analysis program SPECFIT® in a
ꢂ 0.06 ms for both enantiomers.
similar manner to that carried out for the changes in the ground
The occurrence of bisignate intense CD Cotton effects state absorption and the emission above. For both of the
suggests possible coupling between naphthyl chromophores as enantiomers, the least square factor analysis of the titration
previously was observed by Parker et al. (exciton coupling).24 In results suggested the presence of four responding species in the
order to elucidate the effect of temperature on the interaction of CD spectra, which was in line with our previous ndings dis-
the aromatic groups we recorded CD spectra of Eu(III) complexes cussed above. Based on our previous results and current data we
ꢁ
in the temperature range varying from ꢀ10 to 60 C. However, anticipated the successive formation of 1 : 1, 1 : 2 and 1 : 3
we did not observe an enhancement in the CD signals or a species. Indeed, our analysis showed the formation of all of
change in Davydov splitting (see ESI†), but the shape of CD these species, which were comparable to those obtained by
spectra suggests the presence of the coupling interactions tting the changes in the absorption and luminescence data.
between aromatic antennas.
Hence, for example, in the case of 1(S) binding constants of
As stated above, CD spectroscopy has been widely used for log b1 : 1 ¼ 6.6 ꢂ 0.5, log b1 : 2 ¼ 12.8 ꢂ 0.6 and log b1 : 3 ¼ 18.3 ꢂ
performing quantitative analysis of various supramolecular 0.6 were determined. Gratifyingly, the tting of the titration of
systems, but mainly focusing on the interaction of biological 1(R) with Eu(III) gave almost indicial results (within experi-
substrates with organic molecules, hydrogen-bonded and salt- mental error) of log b1 : 1 ¼ 6.5 ꢂ 0.5, log b1 : 2 ¼ 12.0 ꢂ 0.8 and
bridged complexes or chirality-sensing systems.14,25 However, to log b1 : 3 ¼ 18.7 ꢂ 0.6. These binding constant results are
the best of our knowledge, only very few reports study the self- slightly higher than determined above, but this can be attrib-
assembly between organic ligands and Ln(III) ions in sol- uted to the presence of (C2H5)4NCl in the solution which did not
ution.12b,26 Consequently, we studied the binding equilibrium allow monitoring the CD changes in the 200–223 nm spectral
processes of Eu(III) to both 1(S) and 1(R) ligands in CH3CN range and as such we were only able to analyse the changes in
solution by monitoring the changes in the main CD bands, 275 and 226 nm bands, both of which possess small amplitude.
following a titration of these ligands with Eu(III) as shown in It is clear from these results that the self-assembly processes can
Fig. 8A (see also ESI†). As the binding constants for Eu:Ln be both monitored and quantied, as well as that the results are
assemblies were previously determined in CH3CN solution in comparable to that observed using more classical tting of
presence of 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl, we monitored the changes in absorbance and emission data. Thus probing the chiroptical
the same ionic media. It should be stated that the observed properties of the lanthanide directed self-assembly process in
changes for one enantiomer are mirror images of the other and real time allows for additional information to be revealed that
this can be clearly seen from the binding isotherms of the main can help us in furthering quantication and revealing more
bands versus equivalents of Eu(III) added into the solution, as understanding of such processes. As the overall changes in the
shown in ESI.† In order to monitor conformational changes that circular dichroism spectra are quite signicant they can also be
can possibly occur in the solution the CD spectra were recorded employed as a ngerprint or signature for each of the stochio-
directly aer each addition and aer 24 hours equilibration. metries in solution. This is commonly done in the treatment of
However, in this particular case, no signicant differences absorption spectra titrations data, where the information from
occurred upon equilibration. Similarly to our previous self- the data tting can also be employed to generate calculated
assembly studies the main changes in the spectra occur upon spectra of each of the species in solution. The changes observed
addition of 0 / 1 equivalents of Eu(III) to the solution and in the CD spectra of 1(S) shown in Fig. 8A cannot be accurately
Fig. 8 (A) Changes in CD spectra of 1(S) (–) (c ¼ 1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M) upon addition of Eu(CF3SO3)3, (B) experimental binding isotherms representing the
changes in the CD bands upon gradual Eu(CF3SO3)3 addition in CH3CN (25 ꢁC, 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl) and (C) recalculated CD spectra obtained with
SPECFIT®.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 465

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
presented as a ‘signature’ for each of the three stochiometries.
Based on our previous work,7,8,9b where we have assigned the
In comparison, the calculated spectra generated for the changes absolute conguration of lanthanide based self-assembly
in the CD titrations in CH3CN are shown in Fig. 8C for 1(S) and complexes and helices, formed from chiral ligands with known
these clearly demonstrate that each of the species can be absolute stereochemistry, as D or L, then from the circularly
assigned. For example, the experimental CD spectrum of polarised emission in Fig. 9, we were able to do the same for
Eu(1(S))3 (Fig. 7A) shows negative band centred at 273 nm Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 by comparison. The CPL spectra of both
similarly to the one observed for the calculated spectrum Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3 were structurally identical to that
(Fig. 8C). Each of these calculated spectra can, therefore, be observed for “Trinity Sliotar” complexes. Hence, the CPL of
employed as a ngerprint, or a signature, for that given species. Eu(1(R))3 consists of a negative CPL signal for the DJ ¼ 1, a
This again, demonstrates the potential use of CD spectroscopy positive band for the DJ ¼ 2, and a split CPL signal for the DJ ¼ 4
in accessing vital information about equilibrium processes in (into a positive and a negative band), and these are identical not
metal directed synthesis of supramolecular structures.
only in their sign, but also in the intensity ratio to that seen for
Having emissive metal centre in a chiral environment we the RR isomer used in the synthesis of the L “Trinity Sliotar”
further investigated the chiroptical properties of our systems complex.7,8 Similarly, the RR isomer used in the formation of
using CPL spectroscopy. As anticipated the excitation into the structurally similar dimetallic Eu(III) triple stranded helicates,9b
ligand absorption bands resulted in energy transfer to Eu(III) ion gave also such identical CPL spectra. Consequently, we can with
and thus generation of mirror-image CPL spectra showing the a degree of condence, assign the absolute stereochemistry of
appearance of 5D0 / 7FJ (J ¼ 0–4) transition bands, as shown in Eu(1(R))3 as L; and consequently the absolute stereochemistry
Fig. 9. The luminescence dissymmetry factors glum, were of the Eu(1(S))3 complex as D. Moreover, we were able to assign
calculated for all of these transitions (see ESI†) and for the conguration of Eu(1(R))3 with absolute certainty since we
5D0 / 7F1 (589 nm) were found to be 0.16 and ꢀ0.15, while for have grown its crystals of good enough quality for crystallo-
7
5D0 / F2 (614 nm) these values were equal to ꢀ0.09 for the graphic determination (see above) and as such clearly relate
Eu(III) complex with 1(S) and 0.10 for 1(R), respectively. These spectroscopical data to known solid state structures of several
correspond well to values that we previously obtained for “Trinity Sliotar” complexes resolved in our laboratory.
similar asymmetrical complexes with 1-naphthyl antennae
complexes11 reecting the similarities in the helical twists,
nature of the ligand eld, donor group solvation and time-
Conclusions
averaged local helicity around Eu(III) of Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3. Chiral asymmetrical R- and S- 6-(1-(naphthalen-2-yl)ethyl-
The values for Eu(III) complexes with asymmetrical ligands are carbamoyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic acids (1(S) and 1(R)) were
lower than these obtained in our group previously7,8,9b as well as obtained in three steps and high yield. These ligands were
these obtained by Muller et al.4c for the complexes with reacted with Eu(III) ions resulting in the formation of red
symmetrical ligands. However, this can be simply explained by emissive complexes, of Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3, respectively,
the decrease in the degree of conformational rigidity of the with ꢃ2% luminescence quantum yields in CH3CN solution.
complex when reducing the symmetry of the ligand. Overall, Crystal structures of 1(S) and 1(R) along with their benzyl pro-
obtained glum values are high as enantiopure Eu(III) and Tb(III) tected forms (4(S) and 4(R)) were obtained from CH3CN–CH3OH
complexes typically possess these values between 0.1 and 0.5 or CH3OH solvent systems and all crystallized in the chiral
and much higher compared to the chiral uorescent organic space group P21, while Eu(1(R))3 crystallized in an ortho-
molecules where glum < 0.01.3a,b
rhombic crystal system with chiral space group C2221. The self-
assembly formation between 1(S) and 1(R) with Eu(CF3SO3)3 in
aprotic CH3CN polar media were analysed using 1H NMR,
absorption, luminescence and CD spectroscopies at room
temperature. In all the cases the changes suggests successive
formation of M:L, M:L2 and M:L3 assemblies with comparable
values of the binding constants. As expected the excitation into
the ligands absorption bands resulted in the transfer of the
chirality from the ligand onto the metal centres showing char-
acteristic Eu(III) CPL bands. This allowed us to tentatively assign
the absolute stereochemistry of the self-assemblies as D and L
for Eu(1(S))3 and Eu(1(R))3, respectively, and absolutely conrm
it for Eu(1(R))3 by comparing to the solid state crystallographic
data obtained. Here, we represent one of the rare examples
where the binding constants of supramolecular self-assemblies
were determined by tting the changes in the chiroptical
spectra (CD) using non-linear regression analysis. This allowed
us to identify three species in solution as the 1 : 1, 1 : 2 and 1 : 3
metal to ligand stoichiometries and quantify their binding
constants, all of which gave good correlation with those
Fig. 9 The CPL spectra for EuL3 in CH3OH (L ¼ 1(S), 1(R)). The total
luminescence is also shown.
466 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
determined by tting the changes in the absorption and lumi-
nescence spectra. Moreover, the analysis of the CD spectra of
the ligands and their Eu(III) complexes allowed us to suggest the
presence of exciton coupling between the aromatic chromo-
phores in these assemblies. Furthermore, using the informa-
tion of the tting of the CD data, allowed us to calculate the CD
spectra of each of the three stoichiometries, which we can use as
ngerprints or signatures for each one. We are actively
employing CD spectroscopy in greater detail for the analysis of
metal-directed synthesis of supramolecular structures.
Crystallographic experimental section
Diffraction data for all compounds were collected on a Bruker
APEX
2
DUO CCD diffractometer using graphite-mono-
˚
chromatized Mo-Ka (l ¼ 0.71073 A) and Incoatec ImS Cu-Ka (l ¼
˚
1.54178 A) radiation. Crystals were mounted in a cryoloop/
MiTeGen micromount and collected at 100(2) K using an Oxford
Cryosystems Cobra low temperature device. Data were collected
using omega and phi scans and were corrected for Lorentz and
polarization effects.27a
The structures 1(R), 1(S), 4(R) and 4(S) were solved by direct
methods and rened by full-matrix least-squares procedures on
F2 using SHELXL-2013 soware.27b All non-hydrogen atoms were
rened anisotropically. Hydrogen atoms were added geometri-
cally in calculated positions and rened using a riding model.
The structure for complex Eu(1(R))3 was solved initially using
SHELXS-97 which was further rened using SHELXL-97. Some
of the aromatic moieties which showed high disorder were
constrained to regular geometry. Low resolution and low data/
parameter ratio prevented in some cases full anisotropic
renement. The thermal parameters were either restrained or
rened isotropically. Hydrogen atoms were placed geometri-
cally using suitable constraints except for water molecules in
which case they were placed to form a coherent hydrogen bond
network and their positions kept xed.
Experimental
Materials and methods
All solvents and chemicals were purchased from commercial
sources and used without further purication. Dichloro-
methane and methanol were freshly distilled under argon
atmosphere prior to use. Water was puried using a Millipore
Milli-Q water purication system (18.2 MU cm). Hydrochloric
acid, sodium bicarbonate, Na2SO4, MgSO4, H2dpa, benzyl
bromide, HOBt, triethylamine (Et3N), triethylsilane (Et3SiH),
palladium on carbon (10 wt% loading), tetraethylammonium
chloride ((C2H5)4NCl), Eu(CF3SO3)3$6H2O were purchased from
Sigma-Aldrich, while N,N-dimethylformamide, (S)- or (R)-1-(1-
naphthyl)-ethylamine and (S)- or (R)-1-(2-naphthyl)-ethylamine
and EDCI$HCl from TCI Europe. Deuterated solvents used for
NMR analysis (CDCl3, CD3OD, (CD3)2SO) were purchased from
Apollo Scientic. The 1H NMR spectra were recorded at 400
Details of the data collection and renement are given in
Table 1.†
MHz using an Agilent Technologies 400-MR NMR Spectrometer. Photophysical measurements
The 13C NMR spectra were recorded at 100 MHz using an Agi-
Unless otherwise stated, all measurements were performed at
lent Technologies 400-MR NMR Spectrometer. NMR spectra
were also recorded using a Bruker AV-600 instrument operating
at 600.1 MHz for 1H NMR and 150.9 MHz for 13C NMR. 1H NMR
titrations were recorded using Bruker Spectrospin DPX-400
instrument operating at 400.1 MHz. The titrations for both
298 K in acetonitrile solutions (spectroscopy grade, Aldrich).
UV-visible absorption spectra were measured in 1 cm quartz
cuvettes on a Varian Cary 50 spectrophotometer. Baseline
correction was applied for all spectra. Emission (uorescence,
phosphorescence and excitation) spectra and life-times were
recorded on a Varian Cary Eclipse Fluorimeter. Quartz cells with
a 1 cm path length from Hellma were used for these measure-
ments. The temperature was kept constant throughout the
measurements at 298 K by using a thermostated unit block.
Phosphorescence life-times of the Eu(5D0) excited state were
measured in both water/deuterated water solutions in time-
resolved mode at 298 K. They are averages of three independent
measurements, which were made by monitoring the emission
decay at 616 nm, which corresponds to the maxima of the Eu(III)
enantiomers were started with the ligands at c ¼ 4.26 ꢄ 10ꢀ4
M
upon gradual addition of La(CF3SO3)3 solution in CD3CN.
Chemical shis are reported in ppm with the deuterated solvent
as the internal reference. All NMR spectra were carried out at
293 K. Mass-spectrometry was carried out using HPLC grade
solvents. Electrospray mass spectra were determined on a
Micromass LCT spectrometer and high resolution mass spectra
were determined relative to a standard of leucine enkephaline.
Maldi-Q-Tof mass spectra were carried out on a MALDI-Q-TOF-
Premier (Waters Corporation, Micromass MS technologies,
Manchester, UK) and high resolution mass spectrometry was
performed using Glu-Fib with an internal reference peak of m/z
1570.6774. Melting points were determined using an Electro-
thermal IA9000 digital melting point apparatus. Infrared
spectra were recorded on a Perkin Elmer Spectrun One FT-IE
spectrometer equipped with universal ATR sampling accessory.
5D0
/
7F2 transition, enforcing a 0.1 ms delay, and were
analyzed using Origin 7.5®. The number of water molecules
directly bonded to Eu(III) center (q value) was determined
according to the equation developed by Parker et al.:17
ꢀ1
ꢀ1
)
q ¼ A(sO–H ꢀ sO–D
(1)
Elemental analysis was conducted at the Microanalytical where sO–H is the life-time water or methanol solutions, sO–D is
Laboratory, School of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, the life-time measured in deuterated water or deuterated
University College Dublin.
methanol solutions.
Complexation reactions were carried out in 2–5 mL Biotage
Microwave Vials in a Biotage Initiator Eight EXP microwave method28,29 using Cs3[Eu(dpa)3]$9H2O complex in 0.1 M Tris
reactor.
The quantum yields (QEreul,L) were measured by relative
Eu
buffer (pH ¼ 7.45) (Q
¼ 24.0 ꢂ 2.5%)19 as a standard with
abs
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 467

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
known quantum yield, to which the absorbance and emission
intensity of the sample are compared according to:
Spectrophotometric titrations and binding constants
The formation of the luminescent 1 : 1, 1 : 2 and 1 : 3 (M:L,
where M ¼ Eu(III) and L ¼ 1(S), 1(R)) species was ascertained by
both UV-visible, luminescence and CD titrations of a solution of
L (1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M) in CH3CN in presence of 0.05 M (C2H5)4NCl
with Eu(CF3SO3)3$6H2O (0 / 4 equivalents). The data were
tted using the non-linear regression analysis program,
SPECFIT®.21
2
Qx
Qr
Ex ArðlrÞ IrðlrÞ nx
Eu;L
rel
Q
¼
¼
ꢄ
ꢄ
ꢄ
(2)
2
Er AxðlxÞ IxðlxÞ nr
where subscript r – reference and x – sample; E – integrated
luminescence intensity; A – absorbance at the excitation wave-
length; I – intensity of the excitation light at the same wave-
length, n – refractive index of the solution. The estimated error
for quantum yields is ꢂ10%.
Synthesis of 6-((benzyloxy)carbonyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic acid (2)
sR life-time was obtained using eqn (3):
ꢀ
ꢁ
Compound 2 was synthesised by stirring 2,6-pyridinedicarboxylic
acid (H2dpa; 6.00 g, 3.59 ꢄ 10ꢀ2 mol, 1 equivalent) with
NaHCO3 (3.62 g, 4.31 ꢄ 10ꢀ2 mol, 1.2 equivalents) in N,N-
dimethylformamide solution (100 mL) at 60 ꢁC under argon for
30 minutes. Benzyl bromide (5 mL, 4.31 ꢄ 10ꢀ2 mol, 1.2
equivalents) was then added to this white suspension and le to
stir under argon at 60 ꢁC overnight. Resulting clear yellow
solution was diluted with water and neutralised with saturated
solution of NaHCO3 (pH ꢃ 8) and extracted with diethyl ether to
remove diester side product. The aqueous layer was acidied
with 2 M HCl and extracted with ethyl acetate. Then, the organic
layer was dried over Na2SO4, ltered and aer the solvent was
evaporated the resulting solid was solubilised in dichlor-
ometane. This solution was washed with water and brine (3 ꢄ
20 mL) aer which the organic layer was dried over MgSO4,
ltered and aer subsequent evaporation of the solvent white
1
Itot
¼ AMD;0n3
(3)
sR
IMD
where n is the refractive index of the solvent, AMD,0 is the
spontaneous emission probability for the 5D0 / 7F1 transition
in vacuo, and Itot/IMD is the ratio of the total area of the corrected
Eu(III) emission spectrum to the area of the 5D0
/
7F1 band
(AMD,0 ¼ 14.65 sꢀ1).30
The quantum yield of the luminescence step (FLLnn) expresses
how well the radiative process complete with non-radiative
processes.
sobs
Ln
Ln
F
¼
(4)
sR
The efficiency of lanthanide sensitization (hsens) is the ratio
between Ftot (determined experimentally) and FLLnn (see eqn (4)):
ꢁ
powder was obtained (3.47 g, 38% yield). M.p. 138 C; HRMS
Ftot
(m/z) (ESꢀ) calculated for C14H10NO4 m/z ¼ 256.0610 [M ꢀ H]ꢀ.
Found m/z ¼ 256.0613; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3, dH) ppm 8.39
(q, J ¼ 8.40 Hz, 2H, CHpy), 8.11 (t, J ¼ 8.10 Hz, 1H, CHpy), 7.49–
7.47 (m, 2H, CHph), 7.44–7.36 (m, 3H, CHph), 5.46 (s, 2H, CH2);
13C NMR (150 MHz, CDCl3, dC) 163.46, 163.39, 146.72, 139.62,
134.96, 128.85, 128.77, 128.59, 126.85, 68.07; IR nmax (cmꢀ1):
3064, 2879, 2560, 1736, 1695, 1609, 1466, 1416, 1376, 1328,
1289, 1244, 1152, 1005, 994, 956, 940, 855, 796, 784, 754, 728,
710, 648; anal. calc. for C14H11NO4, %: C 65.4, H 4.3, N 5.4;
found, %: C 65.1, H 4.2, N 5.3.
hsens
¼
(5)
Ln
Ln
F
CD spectra were recorded in both acetonitrile and methanol
solutions on a Jasco J-810-150S spectropolarimeter. CD titrations
were performed in CH3CN media starting with the ligands at c ¼
1 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 M upon gradual addition from 0 to 4 equivalents of
Eu(CF3SO3)3 to the solution. CPL spectra were recorded by Dr R.
Peacock at the University of Glasgow. Excitation of Eu(III) (560–
581 nm) was accomplished by using a Coherent 599 tunable dye
laser (0.03 nm resolution) with argon ion laser as a pump source.
Calibration of the emission monochromator was accomplished
by passing scattered light from a low power HeNe laser through
the detection system. The optical detection system consisted of a
photoelastic modulator (PEM, Hinds Int.) operating at 50 kHz
and a linear polarizer, which together act as a circular analyzer,
followed by a long pass lter, focusing lens and a 0.22 m double
monochromator. The emitted light was detected by a cooled
EM1-9558QB photomultiplier tube operating in photon counting
mode. The 50 kHz reference signal from the photoelastic
modulator was used to direct the incoming pulses into two
separated counters. An up counter, which counts every photon
pulse and thus is a measure of the total luminescence signal I ¼
Ile + Iright, and an up/down counter, which adds pulses when the
analyzer is transmitting to the le circularly polarized light and
subtracts pulses when the analyzer is transmitting right circularly
polarized light. The second counter provides a measure of the
Preparation of 4(S) and 4(R)
General procedure. To a stirred solution of (S or R)-2-(1-
aminoethyl)naphthalene (3(S) or 3(R), 1.0 equivalent) in 30 mL
of freshly distilled dichloromethane, HOBt (1.0 equivalent)
and 6-((benzyloxy)carbonyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic acid (2, 1.0
equivalent) were added. The solution was stirred for 30
minutes at 0 ꢁC under an inert atmosphere of argon before the
solution of 1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide
hydrochloride (EDCI$HCl, 1.1 equivalents) and triethylamine
(1.1 equivalents) in 30 mL of dichloromethane was added
dropwise. The reaction mixture was then stirred for further 30
minutes at 0 ꢁC under argon atmosphere, then allowed to
reach room temperature and le stirring for 48 hours. The
insoluble residue was removed by suction ltration before
reaction mixture was washed with 1 M HCl, a saturated solu-
tion of NaHCO3, and water (each 2 ꢄ 20 mL). The organic layer
was then dried over MgSO4, ltered, and the solvent removed
differential emission intensity DI ¼ Ile ꢀ Iright
.
468 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
Preparation of 1(S) and 1(R)16
under reduced pressure. The obtained yellow-white powders
where puried using normal phase silica column chromatog-
raphy eluting with 95% dichloromethane and 5% methanol
(Rf ¼ 0.9).
General procedure. To a stirred solution of 4(S) or 4(R) (1
equivalent) and 10 wt% Pd–C (10–20% by weight) in methanol
was added neat triethylsilane (20 equivalents) dropwise from a
pressure-equalizing dropping funnel under an argon-lled
balloon. The completion of the reaction was monitored using
neutral phase silica TLC plates (95% dichloromethane–5%
methanol). Aer the reaction was complete the solvent was
evaporated and resulting oily product was taken into saturated
solution of NaHCO3. The aqueous layer was washed with diethyl
ether in order to remove possible residue of starting material
and triethylsilane and acidied using 2 M HCl until pH ꢃ 2
when a white precipitate occurred in the solution. The solid
product was washed out of the aqueous layer with ethyl acetate
which was then dried over Na2SO4 and ltered. The solvent was
then evaporated under reduced pressure yielding the product as
white polycrystalline precipitate.
(S)-6-(1-(Naphthalen-2-yl)ethylcarbamoyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic
acid (1(S)). Triethylsilane (5.23 mL, 3.27 ꢄ 10ꢀ2 mol, 20 equiva-
lents) solution in 10 mL of methanol was added dropwise to the
solution of 4(S) (0.67 g, 1.64 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol, 1 equivalent) and 10 wt%
Pd–C (0.13 g) in 20 mL of methanol. Aer the workup described in
the general procedure white crystalline powder was obtained (0.40
g, 77% yield). M.p. 115 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (ESꢀ) calculated for
C19H15N2O3 m/z ¼ 319.1083 [M ꢀ H]ꢀ. Found m/z ¼ 319.1075; 1H
NMR (600 MHz, CD3OD, dH) ppm 8.32 (d, J ¼ 8.32 Hz, 2H, CHpy),
8.16 (t, J ¼ 8.17 Hz, 1H, CHpy), 7.89 (s, 1H, CHnaph), 7.83 (m, 3H,
CHnaph), 7.58 (dd, 3JH–H ¼ 7.58 Hz, 4JH–H ¼ 7.59 Hz, 1H, CHnaph),
7.44 (m, 2H, CHnaph), 5.44 (q, J ¼ 5.46 Hz, 1H, CH), 1.73 (d, J ¼
7.04 Hz, 3H, CH3); 13C NMR (150 MHz, CD3OD, dC) 167.89, 164.89,
151.39, 148.35, 142.61, 140.58, 134.84, 134.06, 129.32, 128.91,
128.60, 128.57, 127.15, 126.84, 126.78, 125.86, 125.64, 50.73,
22.09; IR nmax (cmꢀ1): 3291, 3058, 2978, 2930, 1732, 1654, 1527,
1451, 1347, 1243, 1180, 999, 952, 856, 818, 745, 681; anal. calc. for
C19H10N2O3$0.1CH2Cl2, %: C 69.8, H 4.9, N 8.5; found, %: C 69.9,
H 4.8, N 8.4.
(S)-6-(1-(Naphthalen-2-yl)ethylcarbamoyl)pyridine-2-carboxylate
(4(S)). Compound 4(S) was synthesized by stirring solution of (S)-1-
(2-naphthyl)-ethylamine (3(S), 0.67 g, 3.9 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) in 30 mL of
freshly distilled dichloromethane, HOBt (0.53 g, 3.9 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol)
and 6-((benzyloxy)carbonyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic acid (2, 1.00 g, 3.9
ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) for 30 minutes at 0 ꢁC under an inert atmosphere of
argon before EDCI$HCl (0.79 g, 4.1 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) and triethylamine
(0.73 mL, 4.1 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 M) were then added dropwise according to
the general procedure. The obtained light yellow powder was
puried using normal phase silica chromatography using 95%
dichloromethane–5% methanol solvent mixture as eluent (Rf ¼
0.9, 1.23 g, 78% yield). M.p. 130 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (ES+) calculated for
C26H22N2O3Na m/z ¼ 433.1528 [M + Na]+. Found m/z ¼ 433.1548;
1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3, dH) ppm 8.50 (d, J ¼ 8.50 Hz, 1H, NH),
8.39 (d, J ¼ 8.38 Hz, 1H, CH), 8.23 (d, J ¼ 8.23 Hz, 1H, CH), 7.99 (t, J
¼ 8.00 Hz, 1H, CH), 7.85–7.81 (m, 4H, CH), 7.53 (d, J ¼ 7.52 Hz, 1H,
CH), 7.47 (m, 4H, CH), 7.34 (m, 3H, CH), 5.50 (t, J ¼ 5.52 Hz, 1H,
CH), 5.44 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.72 (d, J ¼ 6.92 Hz, 3H, CH3); 13C NMR (100
MHz, CDCl3, dC) 164.34, 162.76, 150.31, 146.67, 140.58, 138.64,
135.55, 133.50, 132.89, 128.78, 128.68, 128.61, 128.34, 128.10,
127.73, 127.44, 126.30, 125.98, 125.60, 124.80, 124.78, 67.64, 49.27,
22.11; IR nmax (cmꢀ1): 3396, 3060, 1732, 1680, 1588, 1504, 1452,
1439, 1381, 1283, 1229, 1182, 1165, 1151, 1083, 991, 959, 928, 897,
862, 770, 714, 689, 663, 649; anal. calc. for C26H22N2O3, %: C 76.1,
H 5.4, N 6.8; found, %: C 75.9, H 5.3, N 6.7.
Benzyl-(R)-6-(1-(naphthalen-2-yl)ethylcarbamoyl)pyridine-2-
carboxylate (4(R)). Compound 4(R) was synthesized by stirring
solution of (R)-1-(2-naphthyl)-ethylamine (3(R), 0.67 g, 3.9 ꢄ
10ꢀ3 mol) in 30 mL of freshly distilled dichloromethane, HOBt
(0.53 g, 3.9 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) and 6-((benzyloxy)carbonyl)pyridine-2-
carboxylic acid (2, 1.00 g, 3.9 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) for 30 minutes at
0
ꢁC under an inert atmosphere of argon before EDCI$HCl
(0.79 g, 4.1 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol) and triethylamine (0.73 mL, 4.1 ꢄ 10ꢀ3
M) were then added dropwise according to the general
procedure. The obtained light yellow powder was puried
using normal phase silica chromatography using 95%
dichloromethane–5% methanol solvent mixture as eluent (Rf
¼ 0.9, 1.30 g, 81% yield). M.p. 130 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (ES+)
calculated for C26H22N2O3Na m/z ¼ 433.1528 [M + Na]+. Found
m/z ¼ 433.1529; 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3, dH) ppm 8.50 (d, J ¼
8.50 Hz, 1H, NH), 8.39 (d, J ¼ 8.39 Hz, 1H, CH), 8.23 (d, J ¼ 8.23
Hz, 1H, CH), 7.99 (t, J ¼ 8.00 Hz, 1H, CH), 7.85–7.80 (m, 4H,
CH), 7.53 (d, J ¼ 7.53 Hz, 1H, CH), 7.47 (m, 4H, CH), 7.34 (m,
3H, CH), 5.50 (t, J ¼ 5.50 Hz, 1H, CH), 5.44 (s, 2H, CH2), 1.72 (d,
J ¼ 7.04 Hz, 3H, CH3); 13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3, dC) 164.37,
162.78, 150.34, 146.69, 140.60, 138.66, 135.56, 133.52, 132.91,
128.80, 128.69, 128.63, 128.35, 128.12, 127.74, 127.45, 126.31,
125.99, 125.63, 124.82, 124.79, 67.66, 49.29, 22.13; IR nmax
(cmꢀ1): 3396, 1732, 1681, 1588, 1501, 1453, 1439, 1381, 1282,
1229, 1165, 1151, 1084, 991, 959, 897, 862, 842, 815, 749, 731,
689, 662, 649; anal. calc. for C26H22N2O3, %: C 76.1, H 5.4, N
6.8; found, %: C 75.8, H 5.4, N 6.5.
(R)-6-(1-(Naphthalen-2-yl)ethylcarbamoyl)pyridine-2-carboxylic
acid (1(R)). Triethylsilane (7.78 mL, 4.87 ꢄ 10ꢀ2 mol, 20 equiva-
lents) solution in 10 mL of methanol was added dropwise to the
solution of 4(R) (1.0 g, 2.44 ꢄ 10ꢀ3 mol, 1 equivalent) and 10 wt%
Pd–C (0.2 g) in 20 mL of methanol. Aer the workup described in
the general procedure white crystalline powder was obtained (0.62
g, 80% yield). M.p. 115 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (ESꢀ) calculated for
C19H15N2O3 m/z ¼ 319.1083 [M ꢀ H]ꢀ. Found m/z ¼ 319.1080; 1H
NMR (600 MHz, CD3OD, dH) ppm 8.32 (dd, 3JH–H ¼ 8.32 Hz, 4JH–H
¼ 8.33 Hz, 2H, CHpy), 8.15 (t, J ¼ 8.16 Hz, 1H, CHpy), 7.88 (s, 1H,
CHnaph), 7.82 (m, 3H, CHnaph), 7.58 (dd, 3JH–H ¼ 7.58 Hz, 4JH–H
¼
7.59 Hz, 1H, CHnaph), 7.44 (m, 2H, CHnaph), 5.45 (q, J ¼ 5.46 Hz,
1H, CH), 1.72 (d, J ¼ 7.06 Hz, 3H, CH3); 13C NMR (150 MHz,
CD3OD, dC) 167.66, 164.93, 151.43, 148.06, 142.39, 140.54, 134.91,
134.21, 129.32, 128.90, 128.60, 128.58, 127.15, 126.87, 126.78,
125.85, 125.64, 50.73, 22.14; IR nmax (cmꢀ1): 3285, 3062, 2980,
2933, 1751, 1650, 1524, 1451, 1334, 1252, 1184, 952, 892, 847, 817,
743, 678, 642; anal. calc. for C19H10N2O3$0.1CH2Cl2, %: C 69.8, H
4.9, N 8.5; found, %: C 69.9, H 4.7, N 8.4.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 469

View Article Online
Chemical Science
Edge Article
Aust. J. Chem., 2011, 64(10), 1315–1326; (e) C. Lincheneau,
B. Jean-Denis and T. Gunnlaugsson, Chem. Commun., 2014,
General synthesis of europium complexes
Eu(III) complexes were prepared by reuxing, under microwave
radiation, the relevant ligand with Eu(CF3SO3)3$6H2O (0.33
equiv.) in acetonitrile (15 mL) for 30 minutes. The solution was
subsequently cooled to room temperature and then precipitated
by slow evaporation of the solvent at ambient conditions. The
resulting white solid was ltered off and dried under vacuum.
Synthesis of Eu(1(S))3. This complex was synthesized
according to general procedure using ligand 1(S) (0.060 g, 1.83
ꢄ 10ꢀ4 mol) and Eu(CF3SO3)3$6H2O (0.037 g, 6.10 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 mol).
A white solid was obtained (0.035 g, 36.7% yield). Compound
decomposed within 140–160 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (MALDI-MS+)
calculated for C57H45N6O9EuK m/z ¼ 1147.2084 [Eu(1(S)–H+)3 +
´
50, 2857–2860; (f) J.-F. Ayme, G. Gil-Ramırez, D. A. Leigh,
J.-F. Lemonnier, A. Markevicius, C. A. Muryn and G. Zhang,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2014, 136, 13142–13145.
´
2 (a) E. Pazos and M. E. Vazquez, Biotechnol. J., 2014, 9(4), 241–
252; (b) N. Sim, S. Gottschalk, R. Pal, J. Engelmann, D. Parker
and A. Mishra, Chem. Sci., 2013, 4, 3148–3153; (c) E. De Luca,
P. Harvey, K. H. Chalmers, A. Mishra, P. K. Senanayake,
J. I. Wilson, M. Botta, M. Fekete, A. M. Blamire and
D. Parker, J. Biol. Inorg. Chem., 2014, 19, 215–227; (d)
A. Mishra, R. Mishra, S. Gottschalk, R. Pal, N. Sim,
J. Engelmann, M. Goldberg and D. Parker, ACS Chem.
Neurosci., 2014, 5, 128–137; (e) N. H. Evans, R. Carr,
M. Delbianco, R. Pal, D. S. Yut and D. Parker, Dalton
Trans., 2013, 42, 15610–15616; (f) S. J. Butler, M. Delbianco,
N. H. Evans, A. T. Frawley, R. Pal, D. Parker, R. S. Puckrin
and D. S. Yut, Dalton Trans., 2014, 5721–5730; (g)
L. E. Buerkle and S. J. Rowan, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2012, 41,
6089–6102.
3 (a) G. Muller, Dalton Trans., 2009, 9692–9707; (b) R. Carr,
N. H. Evans and D. Parker, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2012, 41, 7673–
7686; (c) S. Shinoda, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42, 1825–1835;
(d) A. Indapurkar, B. Henriksen, J. Tolman and J. Fletcher,
J. Pharm. Sci., 2013, 102(8), 2589–2598; (e) M. Ziegler and
A. von Zelewsky, Coord. Chem. Rev., 1998, 177, 257–300; (f)
U. Knof and A. von Zelewsky, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 1999,
38, 308–322.
1
K+]+; found m/z ¼ 1147.2034; H NMR (600 MHz, CD3CN, dH)
ppm 9.19, 8.67, 8.54, 8.30, 8.19, 8.07, 7.87, 7.57, 7.50, 7.33, 7.25,
7.09, 5.43, 5.29, 4.69, 4.56, 4.32, 3.96, 3.50, 3.05, 2.94, 2.73, 1.70,
1.27, 0.88, 0.43, 0.14, ꢀ0.10, ꢀ0.75; IR nmax (cmꢀ1): 3271, 3105,
1626, 1592, 1560, 1451, 1353, 1279, 1241, 1160, 1092, 1028, 905,
860, 820, 751, 707, 661, 635, 570, 547, 532, 523; anal. calc. for 1.0
[EuC60H48F9N6O18S3]$1.3[EuC57H45N6O9] ([Eu(1(S))3(CF3SO3)3]$
1.3[Eu(1(S)–H)3]), %: C 53.8, H 3.2, N 6.4, S 3.2; found, %: C 53.6,
H 3.6, N 6.4, S 3.2.
Synthesis of Eu(1(R))3. This complex was synthesized
according to general procedure using ligand 1(R) (0.061 g, 1.86
ꢄ 10ꢀ4 mol) and Eu(CF3SO3)3$6H2O (0.04 g, 6.18 ꢄ 10ꢀ5 mol). A
white solid was obtained (0.032 g, 33.3% yield). Compound
decomposed within 140–160 ꢁC; HRMS (m/z) (MALDI-MS+)
calculated for C57H45N6O9EuK m/z ¼ 1147.2084 [Eu(1(R)–H+)3 +
4 (a) M. Cantuel, G. Bernardinelli, G. Muller, J. P. Riehl and
C. Piguet, Inorg. Chem., 2004, 43, 1840–1849; (b)
1
K+]+; found m/z ¼ 1147.2039; H NMR (600 MHz, CD3CN, dH)
ppm 9.19, 8.66, 8.32, 8.05, 7.86, 7.55, 7.25, 7.09, 6.30, 5.28, 4.67,
4.53, 4.30, 3.60, 3.08, 2.96, 2.72, 1.94, 1.70, 1.27, 0.88, 0.44, 0.04,
ꢀ0.68, ꢀ1.27; IR nmax (cmꢀ1): 3269, 3098, 1625, 1591, 1560,
1451, 1352, 1279, 1242, 1224, 1158, 1092, 1028, 905, 860, 820,
750, 732, 680, 661, 635, 575, 554, 542, 525; anal. calc. for 1.0
[EuC60H48F9N6O18S3]$1.3[EuC57H45N6O9] ([Eu(1(R))3(CF3SO3)3]$
1.3[Eu(1(R)–H)3]), %: C 53.8, H 3.2, N 6.4, S 3.4; found, %: C
53.6, H 3.6, N 6.4, S 3.2.
´
G. Bozoklu, C. Gateau, D. Imbert, J. Pecaut, K. Robeyns,
Y. Filinchuk, F. Memon, G. Muller and M. Mazzanti, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2012, 134, 8372–8375; (c) S. D. Bonsall,
M. Houcheime, D. A. Straus and G. Muller, Chem.
Commun., 2007, 3676–3678; (d) K. N. T. Hua, J. Xu,
´
E. E. Quiroz, S. Lopez, A. J. Ingram, V. A. Johnson,
A. R. Tisch, A. de Bettencourt-Dias, D. A. Straus and
G. Muller, Inorg. Chem., 2012, 51, 647–660.
´
5 S. J. Bradberry, A. J. Savyasachi, M. Martınez-Calvo and
T. Gunnlaugsson, Coord. Chem. Rev., 2014, 273–274, 226–
241.
Acknowledgements
We thank Dr Martin Feeney for the help with mass spectrometry
studies and Dr Dawn E. Barry for providing Eu(5(R))3 and
Eu(5(S))3 complexes for comparative photophysical analysis and
Mr Samuel J. Bradberry for proofreading the manuscript. We
thank Science Foundation Ireland for nancial support in the
form of a SFI PI 2010 Grant (TG) and The European Union,
Marie Curie Actions for postdoctoral fellowship funding
through the 2012 FP7 IEF (SB).
¨
6 (a) A.-L. Gassner, C. Duhot, J.-C. G. Bunzli and A.-S. Chauvin,
Inorg. Chem., 2008, 47, 7802–7812; (b) J. Andres and
A.-S. Chauvin, Inorg. Chem., 2011, 50, 10082–10090.
7 J. P. Leonard, P. Jensen, T. McCabe, J. E. O'Brien,
R. D. Peacock, P. E. Kruger and T. Gunnlaugsson, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 10986–10987.
8 O. Kotova, J. A. Kitchen, C. Lincheneau, R. D. Peacock and
T. Gunnlaugsson, Chem.–Eur. J., 2013, 19, 16181–16186.
9 (a) S. Comby, F. Stomeo, C. P. McCoy and T. Gunnlaugsson,
Helv. Chim. Acta, 2009, 92, 2461–2473; (b) F. Stomeo,
C. Lincheneau, J. P. Leonard, J. E. O'Brien, R. D. Peacock,
C. P. McCoy and T. Gunnlaugsson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2009,
131, 9636–9637; (c) C. Lincheneau, R. D. Peacock and
T. Gunnlaugsson, Chem.–Asian J., 2010, 5, 500–504.
Notes and references
1 (a) M. C. Heffern, L. M. Matosziuk and T. J. Meade, Chem.
¨
Rev., 2014, 114(8), 4496–4539; (b) J.-C. G. Bunzli, Chem.
Rev., 2010, 110, 2729–2755; (c) S. V. Eliseeva and
¨
J.-C. G. Bunzli, New J. Chem., 2011, 35, 1165–1176; (d) 10 C. Lincheneau, J. P. Leonard, T. McCabe and
C. Lincheneau, F. Stomeo, S. Comby and T. Gunnlaugsson,
T. Gunnlaugsson, Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 7119–7121.
470 | Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015

View Article Online
Edge Article
Chemical Science
¨
11 C. Lincheneau, C. Destribats, D. E. Barry, J. A. Kitchen, 21 (a) H. Gampp, M. Maeder, C. J. Meyer and A. D. Zuberbuhler,
R. D. Peacock and T. Gunnlaugsson, Dalton Trans., 2011,
12056–12059.
Talanta, 1986, 33, 943–951; (b) H. Gampp, M. Maeder,
¨
C. J. Meyer and A. D. Zuberbuhler, Talanta, 1985, 23, 1133–
12 (a) J. A. Kitchen, D. E. Barry, L. Mercs, M. Albrecht,
1139.
´
¨
R. D. Peacock and T. Gunnlaugsson, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 22 T. Le Borgne, P. Altmann, N. Andre, J.-C. G. Bunzli,
2012, 51, 704–708; (b) D. E. Barry, J. A. Kitchen,
M. Albrecht, S. Faulkner and T. Gunnlaugsson, Langmuir,
2013, 29, 11506–11515.
G. Bernardinelli, P.-Y. Morgantini, J. Weber and C. Piguet,
Dalton Trans., 2004, 723–733.
23 (a) N. Berova, L. Di Bari and G. Pescitelli, Chem. Soc. Rev.,
2007, 36, 914–931; (b) G. A. Hembury, V. V. Borovkov and
Y. Inoue, Chem. Rev., 2008, 108, 1–73.
¨
13 (a) N. M. Shavaleev, F. Gumy, R. Scopelliti and J.-C. G. Bunzli,
Inorg. Chem., 2009, 48, 5611–5613; (b) N. M. Shavaleev,
¨
R. Scopelliti, F. Gumy and J.-C. G. Bunzli, Inorg. Chem., 24 (a) R. S. Dickins, J. A. K. Howard, J. M. Moloney, D. Parker,
2009, 48, 6178–6191; (c) N. M. Shavaleev, S. V. Eliseeva,
R. D. Peacock and G. Siligardi, Chem. Commun., 1997,
1747–1748; (b) R. S. Dickens, J. A. K. Howard,
C. L. Maupin, J. M. Moloney, D. Parker, R. D. Peacock,
J. P. Riehl and G. Siligardi, New J. Chem., 1998, 891–899; (c)
¨
R. Scopelliti and J.-C. G. Bunzli, Chem.–Eur. J., 2009, 15,
¨
¨
10790–10802; (d) G. S. Kottas, M. Mehlstaubl, R. Frohlich
and L. De Cola, Eur. J. Inorg. Chem., 2007, 3465–3468.
14 G. Pescitelli, L. Di Bari and N. Berova, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2014,
43, 5211–5233.
`
G. Bobba, Y. Bretonniere, J.-C. Frias and D. Parker, Org.
Biomol. Chem., 2003, 1, 1870–1872.
15 Y. Hamuro, S. J. Geib and A. D. Hamilton, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 25 Comprehensive chiroptical spectroscopy, ed. N. Berova, P. L.
1997, 119(44), 10587–10593.
16 P. K. Mandal and J. S. McMurray, J. Org. Chem., 2007, 72,
6599–6601.
17 A. Beeby, I. M. Clarkson, R. S. Dickins, S. Faulkner, D. Parker,
L. Royle, A. S. de Sousa, J. A. G. Williams and M. Woods, J.
Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, 1999, 493–503.
18 (a) C.-W. Cho and M. J. Krische, Org. Lett., 2006, 8(17), 3873–
3876; (b) J. S. Bryans, D. C. Horwell, G. S. Ratcliffe,
Polavarapu, K. Nakanishi and R. W. Woody, Wiley-VCH,
New York, 2012.
26 (a) S. G. Telfer, N. Tajima, R. Kuroda, M. Cantuel and
C. Piguet, Inorg. Chem., 2004, 43, 5302–5310; (b)
M. Albrecht, O. Osetska, T. Abel, G. Haberhauer and
E. Ziegler, Beilstein J. Org. Chem., 2009, 78, 1–8; (c)
S. Sairenji, S. Akine and T. Nabeshima, Tetrahedron Lett.,
2014, 55, 1987–1990.
J.-M. Receveur and J. R. Rubin, Bioorg. Med. Chem., 1999, 27 (a) Bruker APEX v2012.12–0, Bruker AXS Inc., Madison,
7(5), 715–721; (c) Y.-T. Hong, C.-W. Cho, E. Skucas and
M. J. Krische, Org. Lett., 2007, 9(19), 3745–3748; (d)
Wisconsin, USA, 2012; (b) G. M. Sheldrick, SHELXL-2013,
¨
University of Gottingen, Germany, 2013.
´
J.-R. Kong, M.-Y. Ngai and M. J. Krische, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 28 G. F. de Sa, L. Nunez, Z. M. Wang and G. R. Choppin, J. Alloys
2006, 128(3), 718–719. Compd., 1993, 196, 17–23.
19 A.-S. Chauvin, F. Gumy, D. Imbert and J.-C. G. Bunzli, 29 J. N. Demas and G. A. Crosby, J. Phys. Chem., 1971, 75, 991–
¨
Spectrosc. Lett., 2004, 37(5), 517–532; Spectrosc. Lett., 2007,
40, 193.
20 G. Canard, S. Koeller, G. Bernardinelli and C. Piguet, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 1025–1040.
1024.
30 M. H. V. Werts, R. T. F. Jukes and J. W. Verhoven, Phys. Chem.
Chem. Phys., 2002, 4, 1542–1548.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 457–471 | 471