G Model
CCLET-3662; No. of Pages 4
2
X.-M. Li et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
2
+
2+
2+
available, and were put into use without further purification.
Deionized water was used throughout. HEPES buffer solutions
buffer (0.02 mol/L, pH 7.4, v/v = 6:4) solutions. Cd , Ni , Zn ,
3
+
3+
3+
+
2+
2+
2+
Fe , Cr , Al , Ag , Co , Cu , and Hg were used to measure the
selectivity of probe 1. All spectra were recorded after three minutes
upon addition of 25 equiv. of each of these ions. As shown in Fig. 1,
compound 1 exhibits no major absorption band. Upon addition of
different metal ions, only the presence of Hg could lead to an
obvious absorption increase at 533 and 662 nm (Fig. 1). It revealed
(
0.02 mol/L, pH 7.4) were prepared in deionized water. Analyte
3+
+
2+
2+
2+
2+
2+
solutions of the perchlorate of Al , Na , Co , Ni , Cu , Zn , Pb
Cd , Ag , Fe , Hg and Cr were prepared by dissolving the salts
in distilled water to final concentrations of 0.1 mol/L.
,
2+
+
3+
2+
3+
2
+
2
+
2.2. Synthesis of probe 1
that 1 had a good selectivity toward Hg in the absorption among
2+
the tested ions. In the titration tests, with the addition of Hg , the
absorbance at 533 and 662 nm increased sharply, which induced a
color change from colorless to pink (Fig. 2c).
Compound 2 was synthesized from 2-methyloxine by the
procedure published in literature [3]. Compound 3, as a known
rhodamine 6G derivative, was synthesized as described previously
2
+
2+
2+
+
3+
3+
3+
2+
+
2+
2+
Then, Cd , Ni , Zn , Na , Fe , Cr , Al , Pb , Ag , Co , Cu
2
+
[
4]. Compounds 2 (210 mg, 1.2 mmol) and 3 (0.307 mg, 0.8 mmol)
were mixed in boiling ethanol with three drops of acetic acid
Scheme 1). After 8 h of stirring, the pink precipitate formed was
and Hg
compound
v/v = 6:4) solutions. From the fluorescence experiments (Fig. 3a),
were used to evaluate fluorescent selectivity of
1
in DMSO–HEPES buffer (0.02 mol/L, pH 7.4,
(
2
+
removed by filtration, washed with ethanol/diethyl ether (1:1),
and purified by silica gel column chromatography to afford
clear ‘‘off-on’’ fluorescence changes of 1 to Hg were observed.
Among the tested metal ions (30 equiv.), 1 showed a selective
fluorescence enhancement only with Hg , indicating that 1
1
2+
orange–yellow solid product 1 (230 mg, 55%). H NMR (400 MHz,
2
+
DMSO-d
.98–7.96 (d, 1H, J = 7.2 Hz), 7.87–7.85 (d, 1H, J = 8.8 Hz), 7.62–7.57
m, 2H), 7.40–7.38 (d, 2H, J = 7.6 Hz), 7.33–7.31 (d, 1H, J = 8.0 Hz),
6
):
d
9.87 (s, 1H), 8.69 (s, 1H), 8.24–8.22 (d, 1H, J = 8.8 Hz),
displayed a high Hg selectivity (Fig. 3b).
2
+
7
(
Compound 1 displays almost no fluorescence. When Hg was
added to the solution, a significant increase of the fluorescence
2
+
7
.09–7.05 (t, 2H, J = 7.2 Hz), 6.40 (s, 2H), 6.27 (s, 2H), 5.10 (s, 2H),
intensity of 556 nm, which was attributed to the Hg -induced ring
1
3
2+
3
.17–3.12 (m, 4H), 1.85 (s, 6H), 1.23–1.19 (t, 6H, J = 7.0 Hz);
): 168.87, 153.90, 152.51, 152.39,
51.26, 148.35, 145.98, 138.54, 137.00, 134.80, 129.29, 129.24,
C
opening of the spirolactam moiety, was observed. Hg generated a
NMR (100 MHz, DMSO-d
6
d
significant fluorescence enhancement of up to 300-fold, with a
bright yellow–green emission (Fig. 4). These results suggested that
1 has high fluorescence selectivity for Hg compared to the other
1
2
+
1
28.71, 127.96, 126.93, 124.16, 123.82, 118.86, 118.26, 117.46,
1
12.79, 105.10, 96.58, 66.02, 32.00, 17.44, 14.64. HRMS (ESI, m/z):
ions.
+
+
2+
calcd. for C36
5
H
33
N
5
O
3
584.2583 [M+H] , 606.2476 [M+Na] , found
The proposed binding mechanism of compound 1 with Hg is
shown in the Scheme 2. The spirolactam moiety of the rhodamine
group acts as
fluorescence-off state of 1 converts to the Hg -promoted ring-
opened amide form with a fluorescence-on state. Moreover, 1 is
most likely to bind Hg via the imide N and quinoline O atoms like
+
+
84.2650 [M+H] ; 606.2477 [M+Na] .
2+
a signal switcher, when 1 binds Hg , the
2
+
3
. Results and discussion
2
+
In order to clarify the interaction of 1 with metal ions, the UV–
vis absorption spectra of 1 were first studied in DMSO–HEPES
other reported researches [5]. The detection limit was calculated
Scheme 1. Synthetic route of probe 1.
(
a) 0.8
(
b) 0.8
2
+
Hg
0
0
.4
.0
0
.4
2+
Ni
1
4
00
500
600
700
800
0.0
1
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
Wavelength (nm)
À5
3+
3+
2+
2+
+
3+
2+
2+
2+
Fig. 1. (a) Absorption spectra of 1 (2.0 Â 10 mol/L) in DMSO–HEPES buffer (0.02 mol/L, pH 7.4, v/v = 6:4) with 25 equiv. of Fe , Cr , Co , Ni , Na , Al , Cd , Zn , Hg ; (b)
À5
2+
2+
2+
3+
3+
+
2+
3+
2+
Absorbances of 1 (2.0 Â 10 mol/L) at 533 nm after addition of 25 equiv. selected ions (1: blank, a: Zn , b: Ni , c: Cd , d: Fe , e: Al , f: Na , g: Hg , h: Cr , i: Co ).
2
+