2-chlorotrityl protecting group instead.15 The appropriate
monomer, Fmoc-Tyr(2-ClTrt)-OH, is available from Nova-
biochem. The asparagine residue was incorporated as its
amide-unprotected form via use of Fmoc-asparagine pen-
tafluorophenyl ester to avoid side reactions resulting from
carboxylic activation. The rest of the amino acids were
coupled via the HATU/DIEA/DMF in situ activation protocol
and Fmoc groups were removed throughout by use of 20%
piperidine/DMF.14 The NLS sequence contains aspartic acid
of which the â-carboxy group requires protection. Here, we
found the recently described base-labile Dmab ester16 to be
a good solution to this problem.
complished in a machine-assisted way by using the condi-
tions for normal Fmoc-amino acid coupling, as was dem-
onstrated by the synthesis of peptide 2 on PS200 support.
Finally, 2% CF3CO2H-CH2Cl2 (v/v) was used to remove
the trityl group.
Then, peptide-loaded resins were subjected to standard
oligonucleotide chain assembly on a ABI 394 DNA/RNA
Synthesizer with either 2′-deoxyribonucleoside or 2′-O-
methyl ribonucleoside phosphoramidites and manufacturer’s
protocols. Beaucage’s reagent (Glen Research) was used for
phosphorothioate synthesis. Conjugates were cleaved from
the resin and deprotected by concentrated aqueous ammonia
treatment at 55 °C overnight, conditions we have found to
be safe for a range of peptides.6,17 The resulting products
were isolated in good to moderate yield and analyzed by
reversed-phase HPLC, and their respective molecular masses
checked by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry (Table 3).
For initial trials, manual peptide assemblies were carried
out on 500 Å long-chain alkylamine controlled pore glass
(LCAA-CPG) support functionalized by sarcosine followed
by an aminohexyl succinate linker as described previously.6
Peptide 1 was assembled by fragment coupling with tripep-
tides Fmoc-AAG-OH and Fmoc-FLG-OH, and dipeptides
Fmoc-IG-OH and Fmoc-VG-OH. For peptide 4, all monomer
couplings were used. For both peptides, coupling steps were
followed by acetic anhydride/N-methylimidazole/2,4,6-col-
lidine capping. Synthesis efficiency was monitored by
measurement of N-(9-fluorenylmethyl)piperidine absorbance
values14 and double couplings were used when yields
dropped below 95%. The average stepwise yield was >96%.
Then, we explored two alternative polymer supports that are
based on macroporous polystyrene beads: PS200 resin
(Amersham Biosciences), 30 µm particle size, and ArgoPore
low loading resin obtained from Aldrich, >100 µm bead size.
To our knowledge, the latter has not been tested previously
in oligonucleotide synthesis. Peptide sequence 2 was as-
sembled first on ArgoPore resin manually to check its
performance, using two dipeptide blocks Fmoc-AP-OH and
Fmoc-LP-OH, the rest being monomer couplings. Again,
Fmoc deprotection yields were carefully checked, and double
couplings were used when appropriate. PS200 resin was used
for Transportan (3) synthesis. The first two amino acids were
introduced manually to test the support under peptide
synthesis conditions. Then, the resin was subjected to
automated peptide assembly on a Pioneer Peptide Synthesizer
(Applied Biosystems), except for the asparagine residue
which was coupled manually. Double couplings with Fmoc-
amino acid monomers and manufacturer’s standard protocols
were used throughout the automated syntheses. Acetic
anhydride capping steps were omitted, except before and after
all manual coupling steps. In the case of peptide 3, after
assembly the 2-chlorotrityl group on the tyrosine residue was
removed by treatment with 2% CF3CO2H-CH2Cl2 (v/v) for
2 min, and the resin was capped, but using isobutyric
anhydride instead of acetic anhydride, to protect the phenolic
group of tyrosine with a base-labile isobutyryl group.
After all peptide assemblies, Fmoc deprotection was
followed by Fmoc-Hse(Trt)-OH manual coupling and an
optional fluorescein label could then be introduced by further
Fmoc deprotection and coupling with 6-carboxyfluorescein
diacetate. Homoserine incorporation also could be ac-
Table 3. Properties of Oligonucleotide-(3′fN)-peptide
Conjugates
MALDI-TOF, RP-HPLC retention purity,
c
no.a
I.1
FAMb
calcd/found
time, min
%
no
5591.5/5591.3
5961.8/5958.7
6741.3/6739.3
5117.5/5118.6
6548.8/6545.8
6201.9/6198.6
6981.3/6984.2
5715.6/5711.5
6073.6/6073.4
6226.9/6225.3
7006.3/7002.5
7006.3/7003.6
7944.9/7943.7
8724.4/8720.8
7944.9/7944.4
8724.4/8722.6
7303.0/7297.7
8082.5/8078.7
6996.9/6992.9
25.2
57.3
56.3
16.5
27.7
54.3
57.8
11.4
18.2
30.7
58.0
33.0
30.7
31.0
30.6
31.0
30.8
31.2
27.5
69.4
22.5
26.9
79.0
54.7
90.6
17.7
73.9
70.4
54.7
11.6
20.0
50.5
19.2
48.9
18.5
59.4
35.6
45.8
I.2
I.3
I.4
yes
yes
no
yes
no
no
no
yes
no
no
II.1
II.2
II.3
II.4
II.4
III.2
III.3
IV.3
V.2
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
V.3
VI.2
VI.3
VII.2
VII.3
VIII.1
a Oligonucleotides are designated by Roman numbers, peptides by Arabic.
b 6-Carboxyfluorescein label. c Integrated from HPLC traces of crude
conjugates.
Examples of typical RP-HPLC traces are shown in Figure
1.
Comparison of the results of conjugate synthesis on the
different supports showed unequal performance in peptide
and oligonucleotide assemblies. The PS200 support (Amer-
sham Biosciences) gave the best overall purity/yield balance
in both oligonucleotide and peptide synthesis. CPG-500
(conjugates I.1, I.4, II.1, II.4, and VIII.1) showed compa-
rable or slightly better results in oligonucleotide synthesis,
(16) Chan, W. C.; Bycroft, B. W.; Evans, D. J.; White, P. D. J. Chem.
Soc., Chem. Commun. 1995, 2209.
(15) Athanassopoulos, P.; Barlos, K.; Gatos, D.; Hatzi, O.; Tsavara, C.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 5645.
(17) Stetsenko, D. A.; Williams, D.; Gait, M. J. Nucl. Acids Res. Suppl.
2001, 1, 153.
Org. Lett., Vol. 4, No. 19, 2002
3261