5000 J. Phys. Chem. B, Vol. 113, No. 15, 2009
Letters
ꢀ-CD and SA, and the comparison experiments of R-CD also
supported the viewpoint. The observation provided important
insight into the distinction between an adduct and an inclusion
complex. It can be expected that the advanced decomposition
behavior of SA in the presence of ꢀ-CD as well as the
unpredictable decomposition of adducted ꢀ-CD in the presence
of SA has important value in the application of CD in industrial
production.
Figure 5. A schematic sketch illustrating the proposed molecule-ion
interactions between SA and ꢀ-CD.
Acknowledgment. We would like to acknowledge the
assistance of H. Yin in the GC-TOF-MS measurements of this
investigation and useful discussions.
of 653 K, and just at the end of the sharp decomposition of
ꢀ-CD. The fastest liberation process of As4 to the gaseous phase
was at 31.49 min, with the temperature just reaching 773 K. It
should be noted that all of these release temperatures were below
the melting point of SA as well as the sublimation temperature
(886 K) of arsenic, implying that without the decomposition
and carbonization of ꢀ-CD, arsenic would not be released from
the sample 4.
Supporting Information Available: UV-vis absorption
spectra and 1H nuclear magnetic resonance titration data for the
system of ꢀ-CD and SA in solution, as well as the preparation,
FTIR spectra, and PXRD data of solid adducts 3 and 4. This
material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://
pubs.acs.org.
Furthermore, according to eq 1, it was reasonable that the
thermal decomposition of sodium arsenite and the release of
arsenic would be observed in the presence of not only CDs such
as R- and ꢀ-CD but also many other oligosaccharides. The
release process of arsenic should be associated with the
molecule-ion interactions occurring between SA and ꢀ-CD,
which was in agreement with the result of TG measurements.
The interactions between inorganic guests and ꢀ-CD were
considerably weak in solution17,18 and in the solid state.19 As
shown in Figure 5 and in the formation process of the adduct
4, the effects of the interactions on electrostatic forces between
References and Notes
(1) Rekharsky, M. V.; Inoue, Y. Chem. ReV. 1998, 98, 1875–1917.
(2) Xu, P.; Song, L. X. Acta Phys. Chim. Sin. 2008, 24, 729–736.
(3) Song, L. X.; Wang, H. M.; Guo, X. Q.; Bai, L. J. Org. Chem.
2008, 73, 8305–8316.
(4) Lysik, M. A.; Wu, P. S. J. Pharm. Sci. 2003, 92, 1559–1573.
(5) Marquesa, J.; Anjoa, L.; Marquesb, M. P. M.; Santosa, T. M.;
Almeida Paza, F. A.; Braga, S. S. J. Organomet. Chem. 2008, 693, 3021–
3028.
(6) Niu, C.; Yan, H.; Yu, T.; Sun, H. P.; Liu, J. X.; Li, X. S.; Wu, W.;
Zhang, F. Q.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, L.; Li, J. M.; Zeng, X. Y.; Ou Yang, R. R.;
Yuan, M. M.; Ren, M. Y.; Gu, F. Y.; Cao, Q.; Gu, B. W.; Su, X. Y.; Chen,
G. Q.; Xiong, S. M.; Zhang, T. d.; Waxman, S.; Wang, Z. Y.; Chen, Z.;
Hu, J.; Shen, Z. X.; Chen, S. J. Blood 1999, 94, 3315–3324.
(7) Davis, M. E.; Brewster, M. E. Nat. ReV. Drug DiscoVery 2004, 3,
1023–1035.
(8) Machut-Binkowski, C.; Hapiot, F.; Cecchelli, R.; Martin, P.;
Monflier, E. J. Inclusion Phenom. Macrocyclic Chem. 2007, 57, 567–572.
(9) Song, L. X.; Xu, P. J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 11341–11348.
(10) Denicourt-Nowicki, A.; Roucoux, A.; Wyrwalski, F.; Kania, N.;
Monflier, E.; Ponchel, A. Chem.sEur. J. 2008, 14, 8090–8093.
(11) See Supporting Information.
(12) Yoshikiyo, K.; Matsui, Y.; Yamamoto, T.; Okabe, Y. Bull. Chem.
Soc. Jpn. 2007, 80, 1124–1128.
(13) Magyar, A.; Szendi, Z.; Kiss, J. T.; linko, I. P. J. Mol. Struct.:
THEOCHEM 2003, 666, 163–168.
(14) Petrovski, Z.; de Matos, M. R. P. N.; Braga, S. S.; Pereira, C. C. L.;
Matos, M. L.; Goncalves, I. S.; Pillinger, M.; Alves, P. M.; Romao, C. C.
J. Organomet. Chem. 2008, 693, 675–684.
(15) Xu, P.; Song, L. X.; Wang, H. M. Thermochim. Acta 2008, 469,
36–42.
Na+ and AsO2 were different from one another. We thought
-
that it was the different interactions in the adduct of ꢀ-CD that
resulted in different environments around SA20 as well as ꢀ-CD
molecules, which is considered the fundamental cause of the
difference between a supramolecular inclusion complex and a
molecule-ion adduct.
GC-TOF-MS measurements of the adduct of R-CD and SA
were performed as comparison experiments, and the release of
arsenic in four forms was also observed. However, the release
temperature of the arsenic forms was greatly changed when
compared with those of sample 4. The largest release of As4 to
a gaseous phase was delayed to 36.45 min. The result is ascribed
to different interaction intensities between the adducts of SA
with R-CD and ꢀ-CD.
Conclusions
The molecule-ion interaction between ꢀ-CD and SA in
aqueous solution was proven by UV-vis absorption spectra and
1H nuclear magnetic resonance titration. The adduct interaction
was also characterized by the aid of FTIR and PXRD in the
solid state. TG, especially TOF-GC-MS, confirmed that the ther-
mal behaviors of ꢀ-CD and SA were affected by the formation
of the adduct between them. This effect could be ascribed to
different molecule-ion interactions existing in the adduct of
(16) Lynch, D. C. Metall. Trans. B 1980, 11B, 623–629.
(17) Matsui, Y.; Ono, M.; Tokunaga, S. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1997,
70, 535–541.
(18) Yamashoji, Y.; Fujiwara, M.; Tanaka, M. Chem. Lett. 1993, 1029–
1032.
(19) Chierotti, M. R.; Gobetto, R. Chem. Commun. 2008, 1621–1634.
(20) Yan, X. L.; Chen, T. B.; Liao, X. Y.; Huang, Z. C.; Pan, J. R.; Hu,
T. D.; Nie, C. J.; Xie, H. EnViron. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 1479–1484.
JP900550D