The Journal of Organic Chemistry
Note
the cation exchange column in the presence of DTNB. Elution with
water was followed by elution with TEAB. FTC was present in TEAB
eluted fractions. These fractions were concentrated and submitted for
IRMS analysis, which showed the 34δ to be unchanged from original
FTC within the precision of analysis. Next, completely hydrolyzed
FTC plus DTNB were applied to the cation exchange column and
eluted first with water, followed by TEAB. The fraction where FTC
normally eluted was concentrated and submitted for IRMS analysis.
After combustion, no SO2 was detected.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
Notes
■
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
■
This work was supported by a grant from the National Science
Foundation (CHE-1049689). We posthumously thank Profes-
sor W. W. Cleland of the University of Wisconsin for use of his
isotope ratio mass spectrometer and for his long-term interest
in our research. We thank Professor Alvan Hengge of Utah
State University for useful comments.
Carbonyl-O and Carbonyl-C KIE Procedures. The carbonyl-C
and carbonyl-O KIEs were measured in a single experiment. (a) Basic
conditions: A solution containing 875 μL of 0.20 M NaCl and 16 mg of
FTC (57 μmol) was prepared. To this solution was added 125 μL of a
solution containing 40 μL of 1.0 M NaOH in 160 μL of water. The
reaction was monitored by the DTNB assay described above, and the
fraction of reaction at quenching was determined. At the appropriate
time, the reaction was quenched by addition of 50 μL of MES buffer at
pH 6.2. The final pH was always greater than 5.0. The reaction mixture
was added to an anion exchange column (acetate form), washed with
30 mL of water. The product, formate was eluted with 0.1 M NaCl in
6 mL fractions. A 1.5 mL aliquot of 1.5 M MES buffer at pH 6.3 was
added to the combined fractions containing formate. This solution was
evaporated to a small volume (∼1 mL) and transferred to a round-
bottom flask that was equipped with two stopcocks. One stopcock was
on a side arm that was capped with a septum. The second stopcock
was for attachment to the high vacuum line. The solution was dried
under high vacuum at 70 °C overnight. While under vacuum, 2 mL of
anhydrous DMSO containing 250 mg of I2 was added through the side
arm to the dried formate, and the resulting CO2 was collected into a
liquid nitrogen trap as previously described.10 Isotopic analysis gave
the δ for both the oxygen and the carbon atoms. The above δ values
and those for formate isolated after complete alkaline hydrolysis were
used in the KIE calculation. (b) Neutral conditions: The reaction
mixture contained 16 mg of FTC (57 μmol) in 1000 μL of 0.050 M
MES buffer at pH 6.8. The final pH was not allowed to drop below pH
5.0. Assay, isolation, and isotopic analysis were performed in the same
as for the alkaline hydrolysis. (c) Acidic conditions: The reaction
solution contained 16 mg of FTC (57 μmol) in 1000 μL of 0.20 M
HCl. Fraction of reaction was determined by the DTNB assay. The
product of the reaction under acidic conditions is formic acid, which
undergoes rapid 18O exchange. To avoid this problem, the substrate,
FTC, must be analyzed by an indirect method. To accomplish this, the
reaction mixture after partial hydrolysis was first applied to an anion
exchange column (acetate form) and the 30 mL water wash containing
unreacted FTC was collected. The FTC (from partial hydrolysis) was
then quantitatively hydrolyzed with NaOH and applied to a second
anion exchange column identical to the first. This column was washed
with water, followed by typical elution of formate with 0.10 M NaCl as
described above. Oxidation of formate and isotopic analysis were as
described above. Next, a sample of FTC was completely hydrolyzed
with aqueous NaOH. For both the partial and the quantitatively
hydrolyzed samples, formate contains one oxygen from the carbonyl-O
of FTC and one oxygen from the nucleophile acquired during alkaline
hydrolysis. The 18δ from the nucleophile is identical for both the
partial and the quantitatively hydrolyzed samples because the solvent
nucleophile is in great excess. This allows the carbonyl-O KIE to be
calculated from the measured 18δ from both samples. Controls:
Formate of known isotopic composition was eluted from the anion
exchange column in the absence of FTC. The known 18δ of formate
did not change. FTC was also passed through the anion exchange
column. FTC was detected in the water wash. However, elution with
0.10 M NaCl did not produce formate, as expected.
REFERENCES
■
(1) Yang, W.; Drueckhammer, D. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
11004.
(2) Castro, E. J. Sulfur Chem. 2007, 28, 401.
(3) Hupe, D. J.; Jencks, W. P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 451.
(4) Bruice, T.; Bruno, J. J.; Chou, W.-S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963, 85,
1659.
(5) Castro, E. A. Chem. Rev. 1999, 99, 3505.
(6) Bruice, T. C.; Fedor, L. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 4886.
(7) Fedor, L. R.; Bruice, T. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1965, 87, 4138.
(8) Hershfield, R.; Schmir, G. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94, 1263.
(9) Hershfield, R.; Schmir, G. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 3994.
(10) Robins, L. I.; Meisenheimer, K. M.; Fogle, E. J.; Chaplan, C. A.;
Redman, R. L.; Vacca, J. T.; Tellier, M. R.; Collins, B. R.; Duong, D.
H.; Schulz, K.; Marlier, J. F. J. Org. Chem. 2013, 78, 12029.
(11) Marlier, J. F. Acc. Chem. Res. 2001, 34, 283.
(12) Hess, R. A.; Hengge, A. C.; Cleland, W. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1998, 120, 2703.
(13) Hengge, A. C.; Hess, R. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 11256.
(14) Bentley, T. W.; Ebdon, D. N.; Kim, E. J.; Koo, I. S. J. Org. Chem.
2005, 70, 1647.
(15) Brown, R. S.; Bennet, A. J.; Slebocka-Tilk, H.; Jodhan, A. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 3092.
(16) Bender, M. L.; Heck, H. d. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1967, 89, 1211.
(17) Hogg, J. L.; Rodgers, J.; Kovach, I.; Schowen, R. L. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1980, 102, 79.
(18) Marlier, J. F.; Frey, T. G.; Mallory, J. A.; Cleland, W. W. J. Org.
Chem. 2005, 70, 1737.
(19) Marlier, J. F.; O’Leary, M. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 5996.
(20) Hargreaves, R. T.; Katz, A. M.; Saunders, W. H. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1976, 98, 2614.
(21) Friedberger, M. P.; Thornton, E. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1976, 98,
2861.
(22) Huskey, W. P. In Enzyme Mechanisms from Isotope Effects; Cook,
P. F., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1991; p 38.
(23) Sawyer, C. B.; Kirsch, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 7375.
(24) Marlier, J. F.; Campbell, E.; Lai, C.; Weber, M.; Reinhardt, L. A.;
Cleland, W. W. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 3829.
(25) Catrina, I. E.; Hengge, A. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 7546.
(26) Venkatasubban, K. S.; Davis, K. R.; Hogg, J. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1978, 100, 6125.
(27) Westaway, K. C. J. Labelled Compd. Radiopharm. 2007, 50, 989.
(28) Hengge, A. C. In Secondary Isotope Effects; Kohen, A., Limbach,
H.-H., Eds.; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, 2006.
(29) Marlier, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 5953.
(30) Bilkadi, Z.; De Lorimier, R.; Kirsch, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975,
97, 4317.
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
■
(31) Ellman, G. L.; Courtney, K. D.; Andres, V., Jr.; Feather-Stone, R.
M. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1961, 7, 88.
S
* Supporting Information
The equations for calculating the KIEs from substrate analysis
and product analysis and the relationship between δ notation
and isotope ratios are included. This material is available free of
1908
J. Org. Chem. 2015, 80, 1905−1908