Scheme 2 Possible pre-organization of luminol and oxidant by the
catalyst.
constant value about 5 min after the mixing of the individual
Ce(IV) and 6 solutions, which further evidenced the catalytic
importance of complex formation.
Many metal cations are well-known to catalyze this reaction,
increasing the light emission or at least speeding up the
oxidation to produce the emitter and therefore the onset of light
production.7 It has also been reported that the binding of
luminol to hydrophobic regions could strongly enhance the
Fig. 2 CL emission versus catalyst concentrations.
of the primary side near the Ce(IV) center. Indeed the
permethylated dual CD 7–Ce(IV) showed a catalytic activity
only one fourth that of 6–Ce(IV).
We also examined the influence of catalyst concentration on
the CL intensity. Upon varying [6–Ce(IV)] from 0 to 0.4 mM,
the CL intensity increased proportionally at first and then
showed increasing downward deviation (Fig. 2).
8
luminol CL. However, the present system is different from
those cases in that it combines both a hydrophobic binding site
and the catalytic metal complex center in one single molecule
just as most metalloenzymes do. It is therefore the covalent
conjugation and cooperation of b-CD and EDTA-Ce(IV
)
In conclusion, the present research demonstrated the first
enzyme model that has both substrate-binding and catalytic sites
to catalyze the luminol chemiluminescent reaction. The coop-
components that are essential for the catalytic ability since
neither the component individuals nor their mechanical combi-
nation resulted in obvious CL changes.
eration of the hydrophobic binding site and the catalytic Ce(IV
)
Based on the above results we tentatively propose a pre-
organization of the two reactants by the catalyst (Scheme 2) for
center was proved to be of pivotal importance for getting high
efficacy in amplifying the luminol CL. The idea of pre-
organizing the chemiluminescent ‘fuels’ and oxidants by
enzyme models may offer many opportunities to improve the
CL as well as a promising approach to develop high efficacy but
low cost CL systems.
the 6–Ce(IV) catalyzed chemiluminescent reaction: the Ce(IV
)
–
center binds the HOO while the CD hydrophobic cavity brings
2
luminol close to the bound HOO , thus the local concentrations
of both luminol and oxidant are greatly increased. The CL is
switched on only when the metal center and the hydrophobic
cavity can efficiently cooperate, which means the geometry of
the dual cyclodextrin would be very important, and this was
proved to be the case. When the dual CD 8 was used instead of
Notes and references
† Freshly prepared Ce solution should be used to prepare the Ce complexes,
otherwise the activity will be greatly lost. The Ce complexes were stable,
and did not show obvious loss of activity even after being stored for a few
weeks. Even so, the complex solutions were all freshly prepared and used
within one hour.
6
, no enhancement of luminol CL was observed. It is worthy of
note that compounds 8 and 6 differ only in the positions at
which the EDTA linkage is attached to CD moieties. Dual CD
8
has CD cavities of the same shape as, but opposite
arrangement to those of compound 6. CL measurements
indicated that this difference in cavity arrangement in 8 resulted
a dramatic loss of catalytic ability. The remarkable difference in
catalytic ability of the two dual CDs can be rationalized as
follows. The secondary side of CD is less hydrophobic but more
acidic. Under the experimental condition (pH ≈ 11.5), it will
ionize and become even worse for accommodating luminol. On
the other hand, the primary side is more hydrophobic and will
remain un-ionized at the experimental pH and, therefore, is
preferential for binding luminol. Based on this consideration,
dual CD 6 is expected to locate luminol towards the center of the
molecule where the oxidant is bound, whereas 8 directs luminol
outwards to either terminals of the molecule. In addition, the
1 W. B. Motherwell, M. J. Bingham and Y. Six, Tetrahedron, 2001, 57,
4663–4686; R. Breslow, The Chemical Record, 2000, 1, 3–11; R.
Breslow and S. D. Dong, Chem. Rev., 1998, 98, 1997–2012.
2
T. Kuwabara, H. Nakajima, M. Nanasawa and A. Ueno, Anal. Chem.,
999, 71, 2844–2849; A. Ueno, Supramol. Sci., 1996, 3, 31–36.
M. Mitani, S. Sakaki, Y. Koinuma, Y. Toya and M. Kosugi, Anal. Sci.,
995, 11, 1013–1015; S. Kojo, S. Tokumaru, E. Kishida and I.
1
3
1
Tsukamoto, Clin. Chem., 1992, 38, 788; E. J. Woolf and M. L. Grayeski,
J. Lumin., 1987, 39, 19–27; H. Karatani, Chem. Lett., 1986, 377–80.
R. R. French, P. Holzer, M. G. Leuenberger and W.-D. Woggon, Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed., 2000, 39, 1267–1269.
4
5 J.-Q. Liu, G.-M. Luo, X.-J. Ren, Y. Mu, Y. Bai and J.-C. Shen, Biochim.
Biophys. Acta, 2000, 1481, 222–228.
6
W.-H. Chen, S. Hayashi, T. Tahara, Y. Nogami, T. Koga, M. Yamaguchi
and K. Fujita, Chem. Pharm. Bull., 1999, 47, 588–589; D.-Q. Yuan, S. D.
Dong and R. Breslow, Tetrahedron Lett., 1998, 39, 7673–7676; D.-Q.
Yuan, K. Ohta and K. Fujita, Chem. Commun., 1996, 821–822.
Chemiluminescence in Analytical Chemistry, ed. A. M. G. Campana and
W. R. G. Baeyens, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2001.
2
ionized secondary OH groups of 8 may compete with HOO in
coordinating to the Ce(IV) on the same side. Breslow demon-
strated that in heptakis(6-methylamino)–CD, the methyl groups
7
8
9
were inserted inwards to the CD cavity forming a floor. It is
reasonable to deduce that permethylation of the dual CD 6
would inverse the orientation of luminol, that is, the luminol
molecule would be accommodated at the secondary side instead
H. Karatani, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn., 1987, 60, 2023–2039.
9 R. Breslow, M. F. Czarniecki, J. Emert and H. Hamaguchi, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 1980, 102, 762–769.
CHEM. COMMUN., 2002, 730–731
731