(1)H NMR signal amplification by reversible exchange (SABRE) was observed for pyridine and pyridine-d5 at 9.4 T, a field that is orders of magnitude higher than what is typically utilized to achieve the conventional low-field SABRE effect. In addition to emissive peaks for the hydrogen spins at the ortho positions of the pyridine substrate (both free and bound to the metal center), absorptive signals are observed from hyperpolarized orthohydrogen and Ir-complex dihydride. Real-time kinetics studies show that the polarization build-up rates for these three species are in close agreement with their respective (1)H T1 relaxation rates at 9.4 T. The results suggest that the mechanism of the substrate polarization involves cross-relaxation with hyperpolarized species in a manner similar to the spin-polarization induced nuclear Overhauser effect. Experiments utilizing pyridine-d5 as the substrate exhibited larger enhancements as well as partial H/D exchange for the hydrogen atom in the ortho position of pyridine and concomitant formation of HD molecules. While the mechanism of polarization enhancement does not explicitly require chemical exchange of hydrogen atoms of parahydrogen and the substrate, the partial chemical modification of the substrate via hydrogen exchange means that SABRE under these conditions cannot rigorously be referred to as a non-hydrogenative parahydrogen induced polarization process.
(1)H NMR signal amplification by reversible exchange (SABRE) was observed for pyridine and pyridine-d5 at 9.4 T, a field that is orders of magnitude higher than what is typically utilized to achieve the conventional low-field SABRE effect. In addition to emissive peaks for the hydrogen spins at the ortho positions of the pyridine substrate (both free and bound to the metal center), absorptive signals are observed from hyperpolarized orthohydrogen and Ir-complex dihydride. Real-time kinetics studies show that the polarization build-up rates for these three species are in close agreement with their respective (1)H T1 relaxation rates at 9.4 T. The results suggest that the mechanism of the substrate polarization involves cross-relaxation with hyperpolarized species in a manner similar to the spin-polarization induced nuclear Overhauser effect. Experiments utilizing pyridine-d5 as the substrate exhibited larger enhancements as well as partial H/D exchange for the hydrogen atom in the ortho position of pyridine and concomitant formation of HD molecules. While the mechanism of polarization enhancement does not explicitly require chemical exchange of hydrogen atoms of parahydrogen and the substrate, the partial chemical modification of the substrate via hydrogen exchange means that SABRE under these conditions cannot rigorously be referred to as a non-hydrogenative parahydrogen induced polarization process.
NMR hyperpolarization techniques
increase nuclear spin polarization by several orders of magnitude,[1−3] which leads to the corresponding increase in NMR signal enabling
an array of applications including studies of catalytic processes[4] and biomedical use of hyperpolarized substrates
as MRI contrast agents.[5−8] There are several hyperpolarization methods, including dynamic nuclear
polarization (DNP),[9] spin-exchange optical
pumping,[10] parahydrogen-induced polarization
(PHIP)[11] using parahydrogen and synthesis
allow dramatically enhanced nuclear alignment (PASADENA),[12] and others. One of the newest methods is signal
amplification by reversible exchange (SABRE),[13,14] with the experiments conducted by shaking the solutions of an Ir
catalyst (i.e., Crabtree’s catalyst[15] or N-heterocycliccarbene complex[16])
with parahydrogen and a polarizable substrate at a relatively low
magnetic field of a few mT, followed by physical transfer of the sample
to the high-field NMR spectrometer. Alternatively, the in
situ detection of SABRE effects at low magnetic fields has
been demonstrated.[17] However, the latter
approach does not provide sufficient chemical shift resolution, and
therefore interpretation of the low-field NMR studies of SABRE often
relies on the previous reports of ex situ high-field
detection.[13,14,18] Furthermore, high-field SABRE is commonly thought to be unobservable,
because of the expectation that canonical SABRE[13] would be quenched by the fact that the J-coupling mediated flip-flops would no longer be energy conserving.
The control experiments in the early SABRE studies seemingly confirm
these expectations.[13] In addition, a common
misconception is that SABRE is not a chemical process since the polarized
substrate appears to be chemically identical to its thermally polarized
counterpart. Here, we show that generation of SABRE in high magnetic
fields is possible and that the substrate is clearly involved in a
chemical (hydrogen exchange) process while coordinated to a metal
center. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time the SABRE
effects are generated and detected in situ in a high
magnetic field.The in situ SABRE studies of
pyridine-h5 (Py-h5) and pyridine-d5 (Py-d5) at high
field (9.4 T) were performed using methanol-d4 solutions of N-heterocycliccarbene complex-based Ir catalyst,
which shows the highest efficiency in low-field SABRE studies reported
to date.[19] Parahydrogen gas (>90% para-state)[20] was bubbled through ∼7 mM solutions of
[IrCl(COD)(IMes)][16] (IMes =1,3-bis(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)imidazol-2-ylidene;
COD = cyclooctadiene) in perdeuterated methanol, solution (1), using 100 mM concentration of substrate, Py-h5 or Py-d5 (see Supporting Information (SI) for details). The 1H NMR spectra were acquired immediately after the bubbling
was stopped (∼3 ± 2 s). This experimental approach allowed
for in situ detection of hyperpolarized species that
exist during the high-field SABRE process. All NMR spectra presented
here were obtained using this approach unless otherwise noted.Figure 1c shows the 1H NMR spectrum
of Py-h5 in the catalyst solution (1) using the above experimental approach after 2 min of parahydrogen
bubbling. For comparison, the canonical SABRE NMR spectrum of hyperpolarized
Py-h5, wherein the sample is first polarized
by bubbling parahydrogen in the NMR magnet’s fringe field prior
to sample transfer to 9.4 T for signal acquisition, is shown in Figure 1b and demonstrates that all protons of Py-h5 are polarized. In contrast, only the signals
from the ortho-protons of Py-h5 exhibit
significant enhancement in the in situ high-field
experiment. The observation of hyperpolarized ortho-H-Py is unexpected for two reasons: First, because SABRE was previously
reported to be exclusively generated by parahydrogen exchange at low
magnetic fields[13,14] and explained by level anticrossings
which should be quenched at high fields;[21] and second, the strong selectivity for the ortho position of Py
is itself counter to previous observations. Moreover, NMR spectra
acquired over a conventional range of proton chemical shifts (see
Figure 1c) also revealed other species with
nonequilibrium polarizations: hyperpolarized orthohydrogen manifesting
as a strong absorptive peak at ∼4.5 ppm and a weak emissive
peak at ∼2 ppm for the ortho methyl groups of the IMes moiety
of the metal complex. While hyperpolarized H-D was recently reported
by Appelt et al.,[17] observation of hyperpolarized
orthohydrogen in SABRE experiments is reported here for the first
time. In retrospect, the absence of previous reports is not surprising
because T1 of dissolved orthohydrogen
(see below) is only 2 s or less. Thus, most studies with ex
situ detection would likely miss the presence of hyperpolarized
orthohydrogen as it would largely relax back to equilibrium level
during sample transfer from the low polarizing field to the high detection
field. Because of these concerns, the hydride spectral region was
also investigated, and hyperpolarized signal of the dihydride complex
at ∼ –23 ppm was detected with signal enhancement
ε ∼ 200 (calculated as the ratio of the hyperpolarized
signal and the thermally induced signal) and T1 = 3.0 ± 0.3 s (Figure S2).
In the previous reports, an antiphase hyperpolarization pattern was
observed for the dihydride complex, but only when 15N-labeled
pyridine was used to eliminate magnetic equivalence of the two hydride
ligands.[13,14] In contrast, here the hyperpolarized hydride
resonance is purely absorptive and is observed despite the fact that
the two hydride ligands are essentially magnetically equivalent. Most
published SABRE studies present only the region of NMR spectra corresponding
to substrate aromatic protons,[18,21] which may obscure the
possible presence of other hyperpolarized species. Moreover, low-field in situ NMR studies lacking chemical shift resolution often
assume that the entire signal is due to hyperpolarized substrate,
while both orthohydrogen and Ir dihydride were polarized here by more
than 100-fold (corresponding to nuclear spin polarizations of >0.3%),
suggesting that previously published low-field hyperpolarized spectra
may have been significantly impacted by the presence of hyperpolarized
dihydride, orthohydrogen, or other species[17,23] rather than detecting only hyperpolarized substrate molecules.[24]
Figure 1
(a) Schematics of the SABRE exchange process, with asterisk
to
represent a potential intermediate state. (b) 1H NMR spectrum
of catalyst solution (1) containing Py-h5 bubbled with parahydrogen in the fringe field of a 9.4
T magnet followed by rapid transfer to 9.4 T for high-field NMR acquisition.
(c) in situ NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling
with parahydrogen at 9.4 T, and (d) thermal NMR spectrum of solution
(1) containing Py-h5 after
2 min of parahydrogen bubbling. NMR peak assignments[25] are also provided in SI.
(a) Schematics of the SABRE exchange process, with asterisk
to
represent a potential intermediate state. (b) 1H NMR spectrum
of catalyst solution (1) containing Py-h5 bubbled with parahydrogen in the fringe field of a 9.4
T magnet followed by rapid transfer to 9.4 T for high-field NMR acquisition.
(c) in situ NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling
with parahydrogen at 9.4 T, and (d) thermal NMR spectrum of solution
(1) containing Py-h5 after
2 min of parahydrogen bubbling. NMR peak assignments[25] are also provided in SI.The in situ detection
enabled the measurement
of relaxation parameters as well as the kinetics of hyperpolarization
build-up. The former was measured using a series of time-resolved
NMR spectra acquired using small angle excitation RF pulses (Figures 2b,d,f and 3b,d,f). The T1 values of hyperpolarized hydride and orthohydrogen
could be overestimated, because residual dissolved parahydrogen may
continue to react after the bubbling was stopped. The polarization
dynamics was studied by varying the bubbling time of parahydrogen
gas through solution (1) at 9.4 T (Figures 2c,e,g and 3c,e,g). The time constants
for exponential polarization build-up for both Py-h5 and Py-d4-h[26] are in good quantitative agreement
with their T1 values to within experimental
error (Figures 2 and 3). The extrapolated values for ε (time→∞) of
hyperpolarized ortho protons of pyridine were −4.9 and −14.7
for Py-h5 and Py-d4-h (Figures 2c and 3c, respectively). These results are in a qualitative
agreement with the significantly increased value for T1(Py-d4-h) compared to T1(Py-h5). It should also be noted that these T1 values significantly exceed the characteristic exchange
times of Py and H2 with the Ir complex of ∼0.1 s.[25] Taken together, these results are consistent
with substrate (Py) polarization mechanism that is different from
what is typically observed with canonical (low-field) SABRE—one
that instead relies on nuclear spin cross-relaxation with another
species with highly nonequilibrium spin order in a manner akin to
the spin polarization-induced nuclear Overhauser effect (SPINOE).[2,24,27] In addition to the fact that
the enhanced signal of the substrate would be expected to grow with
a time constant similar to its autorelaxation rate, the low value
expected for nuclear spin cross-relaxation rates would explain the
much lower values of ε compared to low-field SABRE (Figure 1b,c). Moreover, when the decay process is reduced
via extending T1 (Py-d4-h vs Py-h5), the ε value increases significantly.
Figure 2
In situ SABRE 1H NMR spectroscopy of
Py-h5 in catalyst solution (1) at 9.4 T. (a) NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling of parahydrogen
at 9.4 T. (b,d,f) T1 measurements of hyperpolarized ortho-H of Py-h5, orthohydrogen,
and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively. (c,e,g)
Hyperpolarization build-up curves of ortho-H of Py-h5, orthohydrogen, and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively as a function of reaction/bubbling
time. ε values are calculated by comparing hyperpolarized spectral
integrals with those obtained with “normal” (thermally
equilibrated) signals.
Figure 3
In situ SABRE 1H NMR spectroscopy of
Py-d5 (99.96% D) at 9.4 T using catalyst
solution (1). (a) NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling
of parahydrogen at 9.4 T; the inset shows a close-up of a portion
of the main figure, along with that of a corresponding thermal spectrum.
(b,d,f) T1 measurements of hyperpolarized ortho-H of Py-d4-h, orthohydrogen,
and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively. (c,e,g)
Hyperpolarization build-up curves of ortho-H of Py-d4-h, orthohydrogen, and ortho-CH3 of IMes as a function of reaction time.
Motivated by
the previous report of H-D formation[17] during
SABRE hyperpolarization and the lack of H-D signatures
in the present Py-h5 studies performed
in methanol-d4 (Figure 2), Py-d5 was used as a SABRE substrate (Figure 3) as well as the substrate in H/D exchange studies
with “normal” (thermally equilibrated) hydrogen gas.
During the latter experiments, a low-pressure NMR tube containing
solution (1) and Py-d5 (99.96%
D) was allowed to react with “normal” hydrogen in the
NMR magnet and monitored in situ with NMR spectroscopy.
Although the Ir-catalyzed exchange is slow because there is no sample
agitation and the reaction is diffusion limited, H-D was formed as
confirmed by the observation of the characteristic splitting JHD = 42.8 Hz in the 1H NMR spectrum,
Figure 4c.[17,28] Moreover,
the signal from the ortho-proton of Py-d4-h was increasing steadily during the extended reaction
period (Figure 4b,d). Furthermore, the presence
of H-D was also detected in the thermal spectra after bubbling parahydrogen
through solution (1) containing 100 mM Py-d5, Figure S3, but not in solution
(1) containing 100 mM Py-h5, confirming that the source of deuterium in the formed H-D is indeed
the substrate Py-d5 rather than the deuterated
solvent methanol-d4. This result is not
consistent with the observation by Appelt et al.,[17] who concluded that H-D was formed with deuterium atoms
coming from the solvent. This discrepancy is likely explained by their
use of a different, i.e., Crabtree’s, catalyst[17] compared to the [IrCl(COD)(IMes)][16] catalyst used here. Similar H/D exchange with H2/D2[29] and alcohols[30] was described earlier.
Figure 4
Deuterium exchange studies using Py-d5 (99.96%D) at 1 atm. (a) Scheme of deuterium
exchange of Py-d5 and H2 (note
that only the ortho-
position exhibits exchange). (b) The build-up curve of the ortho-H
signal of Py-d4-h. (c)
H2 region of NMR spectra of the Ir catalyst mixed with
Py-d5 and “normal” H2[33] in a sealed NMR tube at room
temperature at the start and finish of ∼56 h exchange process
during NMR experiments monitoring this exchange process. Note the
characteristic JH-D = 42.8 Hz.[28] (d) ortho-H-Py region of NMR
spectra of the Ir catalyst mixed with Py-d5 and “normal” H2 in a sealed NMR tube at
room temperature at the start and finish of NMR experiments monitoring
the exchange process.
In situ SABRE 1H NMR spectroscopy of
Py-h5 in catalyst solution (1) at 9.4 T. (a) NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling of parahydrogen
at 9.4 T. (b,d,f) T1 measurements of hyperpolarized ortho-H of Py-h5, orthohydrogen,
and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively. (c,e,g)
Hyperpolarization build-up curves of ortho-H of Py-h5, orthohydrogen, and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively as a function of reaction/bubbling
time. ε values are calculated by comparing hyperpolarized spectral
integrals with those obtained with “normal” (thermally
equilibrated) signals.In situ SABRE 1H NMR spectroscopy of
Py-d5 (99.96% D) at 9.4 T using catalyst
solution (1). (a) NMR spectrum acquired after bubbling
of parahydrogen at 9.4 T; the inset shows a close-up of a portion
of the main figure, along with that of a corresponding thermal spectrum.
(b,d,f) T1 measurements of hyperpolarized ortho-H of Py-d4-h, orthohydrogen,
and ortho-CH3 of IMes respectively. (c,e,g)
Hyperpolarization build-up curves of ortho-H of Py-d4-h, orthohydrogen, and ortho-CH3 of IMes as a function of reaction time.While the H/D exchange described here is unlikely
to contribute
substantially to the hyperpolarization process, it is happening concurrently
with SABRE. These exchange studies (Figure 4) clearly demonstrate that the Py-d5 substrate
is being modified as a result of this chemical exchange process. Therefore,
this process cannot rigorously be referred to as an exclusively non-hydrogenative
(NH)-PHIP,[31] because at least some fraction
of the substrate undergoes chemical modification when parahydrogen
is used as a source of hyperpolarization. The contribution of this
process may crucially depend on the nature of the metal complex, the
substrate, and experimental conditions and thus should not be dismissed
without careful consideration.Deuterium exchange studies using Py-d5 (99.96%D) at 1 atm. (a) Scheme of deuterium
exchange of Py-d5 and H2 (note
that only the ortho-
position exhibits exchange). (b) The build-up curve of the ortho-H
signal of Py-d4-h. (c)
H2 region of NMR spectra of the Ir catalyst mixed with
Py-d5 and “normal” H2[33] in a sealed NMR tube at room
temperature at the start and finish of ∼56 h exchange process
during NMR experiments monitoring this exchange process. Note the
characteristic JH-D = 42.8 Hz.[28] (d) ortho-H-Py region of NMR
spectra of the Ir catalyst mixed with Py-d5 and “normal” H2 in a sealed NMR tube at
room temperature at the start and finish of NMR experiments monitoring
the exchange process.The observations of SABRE formed in a high field, hyperpolarized
(absorptive) orthohydrogen and hydride signals, and the deuterium-proton
exchange process differ with previously published studies.[13,18] The discrepancy may be explained in part by the limitations of the
design of the typical control experiments, for instance, where high-field in situ detection was not available or the deuterium exchange
was not studied thoroughly.In conclusion, the formation of
high-field SABRE is reported allowing
real-time in situ studies of polarization kinetics
to be performed. The effect is consistent with a SPINOE-type[2,24,27] mechanism of nuclear spin cross-relaxation
and polarization transfer to the Py substrate, although this conclusion
is tentative and would certainly require further studies in the future.
The mechanism is clearly different from that of the low-field SABRE.
Furthermore, because at least a small fraction of the substrate undergoes
chemical modification in the reaction with parahydrogen under our
conditions, this process cannot rigorously be referred to as an exclusively
non-hydrogenative PHIP. While the magnitude of the enhancement factors
of high-field SABRE shown here is significantly smaller (up to 14.7
for pyridine and >100 for orthohydrogen and metal dihydride) than
those typically observed with low-field SABRE (e.g., Figure 1), it is still quite pronounced, and optimization
of this high-field effect may allow NMR signal enhancements without
field cycling for some applications. Finally, hyperpolarized orthohydrogen
and Ir hydride are likely intimately involved in the high-field SABRE
mechanism; more generally, the presence of such highly polarized species
in addition to the substrate should be accounted for in low-field
detection, where chemical shift dispersion is negligible.[17,32]
Authors: Andrey N Pravdivtsev; Alexandra V Yurkovskaya; Hans-Martin Vieth; Konstantin L Ivanov; Robert Kaptein Journal: Chemphyschem Date: 2013-08-20 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: John Kurhanewicz; Daniel B Vigneron; Kevin Brindle; Eduard Y Chekmenev; Arnaud Comment; Charles H Cunningham; Ralph J Deberardinis; Gary G Green; Martin O Leach; Sunder S Rajan; Rahim R Rizi; Brian D Ross; Warren S Warren; Craig R Malloy Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Thomas Theis; Micah P Ledbetter; Gwendal Kervern; John W Blanchard; Paul J Ganssle; Mark C Butler; Hyun D Shin; Dmitry Budker; Alexander Pines Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Ferdia A Gallagher; Mikko I Kettunen; De-En Hu; Pernille R Jensen; René In 't Zandt; Magnus Karlsson; Anna Gisselsson; Sarah K Nelson; Timothy H Witney; Sarah E Bohndiek; Georg Hansson; Torben Peitersen; Mathilde H Lerche; Kevin M Brindle Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2009-11-10 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Kevin D Atkinson; Michael J Cowley; Paul I P Elliott; Simon B Duckett; Gary G R Green; Joaquín López-Serrano; Adrian C Whitwood Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2009-09-23 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Sam E Day; Mikko I Kettunen; Ferdia A Gallagher; De-En Hu; Mathilde Lerche; Jan Wolber; Klaes Golman; Jan Henrik Ardenkjaer-Larsen; Kevin M Brindle Journal: Nat Med Date: 2007-10-28 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Haifeng Zeng; Jiadi Xu; Joseph Gillen; Michael T McMahon; Dmitri Artemov; Jean-Max Tyburn; Joost A B Lohman; Ryan E Mewis; Kevin D Atkinson; Gary G R Green; Simon B Duckett; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: J Magn Reson Date: 2013-09-29 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Danila A Barskiy; Kirill V Kovtunov; Igor V Koptyug; Ping He; Kirsten A Groome; Quinn A Best; Fan Shi; Boyd M Goodson; Roman V Shchepin; Milton L Truong; Aaron M Coffey; Kevin W Waddell; Eduard Y Chekmenev Journal: Chemphyschem Date: 2014-11-03 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: Roman V Shchepin; Jonathan R Birchall; Nikita V Chukanov; Kirill V Kovtunov; Igor V Koptyug; Thomas Theis; Warren S Warren; Juri G Gelovani; Boyd M Goodson; Sepideh Shokouhi; Matthew S Rosen; Yi-Fen Yen; Wellington Pham; Eduard Y Chekmenev Journal: Chemistry Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Roman V Shchepin; Lamya Jaigirdar; Thomas Theis; Warren S Warren; Boyd M Goodson; Eduard Y Chekmenev Journal: J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Nikita V Chukanov; Bryce E Kidd; Larisa M Kovtunova; Valerii I Bukhtiyarov; Roman V Shchepin; Eduard Y Chekmenev; Boyd M Goodson; Kirill V Kovtunov; Igor V Koptyug Journal: J Labelled Comp Radiopharm Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 1.921
Authors: Kirill V Kovtunov; Ekaterina V Pokochueva; Oleg G Salnikov; Samuel F Cousin; Dennis Kurzbach; Basile Vuichoud; Sami Jannin; Eduard Y Chekmenev; Boyd M Goodson; Danila A Barskiy; Igor V Koptyug Journal: Chem Asian J Date: 2018-05-23
Authors: Jason Graham Skinner; Luca Menichetti; Alessandra Flori; Anna Dost; Andreas Benjamin Schmidt; Markus Plaumann; Ferdia Aiden Gallagher; Jan-Bernd Hövener Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Kirill V Kovtunov; Bryce E Kidd; Oleg G Salnikov; Liana B Bales; Max E Gemeinhardt; Jonathan Gesiorski; Roman V Shchepin; Eduard Y Chekmenev; Boyd M Goodson; Igor V Koptyug Journal: J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 4.126