Journal of the American Chemical Society
COMMUNICATION
spectra (Figure S1b) were shifted to higher frequencies (i.e.,
shorter time scales) as well as lower values of the moduli. From
altered in a way that disfavors growth of worms (i.e., the micelles
14
are induced to shorten). The shorter worms evidently entangle
13
the fits, the new G was determined to be 122 Pa, and the
less and relax faster, which explains the reduction in viscosity.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated a PR system in which
reversible viscosity changes can be induced by light. The system is
based on mixtures of lecithin, the bile salt SDC, and a spiropyran;
notably, all of these components are commercially available. The
viscosity of the solution decreased 10-fold when UV light was
switched on and recovered its initial value when the UV light was
switched off. We suggest that these results are caused by the
differential interaction of the zwitterionic lipid lecithin with the SP
(nonpolar) and MC (zwitterionic) forms of the spiropyran.
p
corresponding t was 22 ms. Finally, we switched off the UV light
R
and collected a frequency spectrum after 30 min, which was
ample time to allow full recovery of the sample. The spectra
(
Figure S1c) reverted to close to their initial ones (G = 380 Pa
p
and t ≈ 65 ms). All in all, the sample was observed to become
R
less viscoelastic upon irradiation with UV and to recover its initial
viscoelasticity after the UV light was switched off. The decrease in
viscoelasticity suggests a UV-induced shortening of the reverse
worms, allowing the worms to become less entangled and relax
1
3,14
faster.
When the UV light was switched off, the worms ap-
peared to regain their initial lengths.
’ ASSOCIATED CONTENT
UVꢀvis spectra (Figure 4) confirmed that the rheological
changes were accompanied by the photoconversion of SP to MC
and back. We used a diluted sample (25 mM lecithin, 8.75 mM
SDC, and 3.75 mM SP) to ensure the proper levels of absor-
bance. The initial sample exhibited weak absorption over the
range of wavelengths shown in Figure 4, which correlates with
the colorless nature of the SP form. When irradiated with UV
light for 3 min, the sample transformed to a red liquid, and
correspondingly, a strong absorption peak appeared at 565 nm.
This indicates the UV-induced conversion of the closed SP form
into the open MC form. The UV light was then switched off, and
we collected spectra after different wait times. Figure 4 reveals
that the peak at 565 nm decreased as time progressed, and the
sample correspondingly showed a transition in color from red to
yellow. This occurred because the MC form in nonpolar solvents
often is thermally unstable and thus reverts to the SP form even
S
Supporting Information. Details of experimental proce-
b
dures, additional rheological and physicochemical data, and a sche-
matic of the proposed mechanism for the PR effect. This material is
available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.
’ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
’
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was partially funded by a CAREER Award from
NSF-CBET.
1
6,17
’
REFERENCES
(1) Wolff, T.; Klaussner, B. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 1995, 59, 31–94.
(2) Paulusse, J. M. J.; Sijbesma, R. P. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006,
in the dark.
In short, the peak increase under UV irradiation
indicates SP to MC conversion, while the peak decrease after the
UV light was switched off indicates a reversion from MC to SP.
We now discuss why the viscosity of lecithin/SDC/SP mi-
celles decreases when the SP is converted to MC. In this context,
we note that the SP form is quite soluble in nonpolar solvents,
whereas the MC form is relatively insoluble because of its
hydrophilic nature. This is shown in Figure S2. First, 5 mM SP
was solubilized in neat cyclohexane. However, upon UV irradia-
tion, the SP was converted to MC, and the latter precipitated out
of the cyclohexane. Next, we performed a variation of the same
experiment for the case where lecithin was present in the
cyclohexane. Once again, the SP was solubilized in the lecithin
organosol, but in this case, upon UV irradiation, the solution
remained homogeneous and took on a violet-red color. The
homogeneity in the latter case shows that the MC must have
been solubilized within lecithin micelles. Because of its hydro-
philic and zwitterionic nature, it is likely that the MC binds to the
4
5, 2334–2337.
3) Wolff, T.; Emming, C. S.; Suck, T. A.; Von Bunau, G. J. Phys.
Chem. 1989, 93, 4894–4898.
4) Ketner, A. M.; Kumar, R.; Davies, T. S.; Elder, P. W.; Raghavan,
S. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 1553–1559.
5) Lee, C. T.; Smith, K. A.; Hatton, T. A. Macromolecules 2004,
7, 5397–5405.
6) Sakai, H.; Orihara, Y.; Kodashima, H.; Matsumura, A.; Ohkubo,
(
(
(
3
(
T.; Tsuchiya, K.; Abe, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 13454–13455.
(7) Eastoe, J.; Vesperinas, A. Soft Matter 2005, 1, 338–347.
(8) Kumar, N. S. S.; Varghese, S.; Narayan, G.; Das, S. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 6317–6321.
(
9) Kuang, G. C.; Ji, Y.; Jia, X. R.; Li, Y.; Chen, E. Q.; Zhang, Z. X.;
Wei, Y. Tetrahedron 2009, 65, 3496–3501.
10) Chen, D.; Liu, H.; Kobayashi, T.; Yu, H. F. J. Mater. Chem.
010, 20, 3610–3614.
11) Sun, K. S.; Kumar, R.; Falvey, D. E.; Raghavan, S. R. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 7135–7141.
12) Kumar, R.; Ketner, A. M.; Raghavan, S. R. Langmuir 2010,
(
2
(
18ꢀ20
zwitterionic phosphocholine headgroups of lecithin.
We can therefore suggest a tentative mechanism to explain the
different interactions of SP and MC with lecithin/SDC reverse
worms. First, when SP is added to lecithin/SDC mixtures, it
probably resides in the nonpolar solvent or next to the tails of
lecithin, as shown in Figure S3. Lecithin and SDC would be
expected to interact via hydrogen bonding between the hydroxyls
(
26, 5405–5411.
(13) Dreiss, C. A. Soft Matter 2007, 3, 956–970.
(14) Tung, S. H.; Huang, Y. E.; Raghavan, S. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2
006, 128, 5751–5756.
15) Tung, S. H.; Huang, Y. E.; Raghavan, S. R. Langmuir 2007,
23, 372–376.
(
14,15
of SDC and the headgroups of lecithin.
It is due to such
(
(
(
(
16) Hirshberg, Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1956, 78, 2304–2312.
17) Minkin, V. I. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 2751–2776.
18) Tanaka, M.; Yonezawa, Y. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 5160–5162.
19) Khairutdinov, R. F.; Hurst, J. K. Langmuir 2001, 17, 6881–
interactions that the net geometry of the amphiphile favors the
growth of reverse worms. Because of its nonpolar nature, SP has
relatively no effect on the lecithinꢀSDC interactions. However,
when SP is converted to MC, the zwitterionic MC is likely to bind
6
886.
(20) Wohl, C. J.; Helms, M. A.; Chung, J. O.; Kuciauskas, D. J. Phys.
Chem. B 2006, 110, 22796–22803.
18ꢀ20
to the lecithin headgroups,
displacing some of the SDC in
the process (Figure S3). This causes the net geometry to be
8
463
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja202412z |J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 8461–8463