The use of an achiral metal-organic framework for structure determination of chiral compounds is demonstrated for camphene and pinene. The structure of enantiopure β-pinene can be resolved using the crystalline sponge method. However, α-pinene cannot be resolved using enantiopure material alone because no ordering of guest molecules takes place in that case. Interestingly, enantiomeric pairs order inside the channels of the host framework when impure (+)-camphene is offered to the host, which is also the case when a racemic mixture of α-pinene is used. A mixture of (+)-α-pinene and (-)-β-pinene also leads to ordered incorporation in the host, showing the influence of the presence of an inversion center in the host framework. We further show that powder X-ray diffraction provides a direct view on incorporation of ordered guest molecules. This technique, therefore, provides a way to determine the optimal and/or minimal soaking time. In contrast, color change of the crystal only demonstrates guest uptake, not ordering. Moreover, we show that color change can also be caused by guest-induced host degradation.
The use of an achiral metal-organic framework for structure determination of chiral compounds is demonstrated for camphene and pinene. The structure of enantiopure β-pinene can be resolved using the crystalline sponge method. However, α-pinene cannot be resolved using enantiopure material alone because no ordering of guest molecules takes place in that case. Interestingly, enantiomeric pairs order inside the channels of the host framework when impure (+)-camphene is offered to the host, which is also the case when a racemic mixture of α-pinene is used. A mixture of (+)-α-pinene and (-)-β-pinene also leads to ordered incorporation in the host, showing the influence of the presence of an inversion center in the host framework. We further show that powder X-ray diffraction provides a direct view on incorporation of ordered guest molecules. This technique, therefore, provides a way to determine the optimal and/or minimal soaking time. In contrast, color change of the crystal only demonstrates guest uptake, not ordering. Moreover, we show that color change can also be caused by guest-induced host degradation.
Single-crystal X-ray diffraction is the
most effective way to obtain
the absolute configuration of molecules. However, the preparation
of well-defined crystals suitable for X-ray analysis can be a severe
bottleneck. The “crystalline sponge method” was introduced
by Fujita et al.[1] for cases where conventional
crystallization and subsequent structure elucidation proves difficult
(e.g., in the case of liquids, oils, or plastic crystals). In the
crystalline sponge method the compound of interest is included as
a guest into a porous metal–organic framework (MOF), e.g.,
consisting of ZnI2 and 2,4,6-tri(pyridin-4-yl)-1,3,5-triazine,[1,2] after which a single-crystal X-ray diffraction experiment can be
performed. The term “crystalline sponge” was originally
coined for clathrate systems, where a guest is crystallized in the
presence of a porphyrin, yielding a cocrystal. Hundreds of molecular
structures have thus been obtained using this clathrate system approach.[3−7] Inclusion of molecular guests into MOFs during synthesis was already
shown in the 1990s,[8,9] but with the crystalline sponge
method they can be included after MOF synthesis by
simply soaking the MOF host crystal in a solution containing the guest.
The possibility to elucidate molecular structures,[10−22] as well as observing reaction mechanisms,[23] and reaction intermediates[24] makes the
crystalline sponge method a unique tool for structure analysis, including
absolute structure determination.Molecular compounds are often
chiral and the use of the crystalline
sponge method for this class of materials is highly desirable. The
porous framework introduced by Fujita and responsible for most of
the crystalline sponge applications up to now has a space group that
in principle is incompatible with chiral compounds. Nevertheless,
successful structure determinations of several chiral compounds have
been reported,[2,25−27] but only after
guest ordering resulted in the breaking of the inversion/mirror symmetry
of the host–guest system. Such symmetry breaking will not always
occur, and the problems encountered during the determination of the
chirality of miyakosyne A[1] demonstrate
that the interplay between chiral guests and the nonchiral host is
not yet sufficiently understood. We have therefore systematically
investigated the role of chirality in the crystalline sponge method
by studying the incorporation of three chiral compounds. We have selected
camphene, α-pinene, and β-pinene (Figure ) and introduced these compounds into the
MOF host crystal, using either enantiopure or racemic mixtures. Camphene
is a chiral hydrocarbon that crystallizes as a “plastic crystal”,
meaning that molecules have (rotational) freedom to move within the
crystal lattice.[28,29] This means that the structure
of camphene could not be resolved using “classical”
X-ray diffraction methods, and therefore, it has only been investigated
using other methods.[30,31] Pinene is also a chiral hydrocarbon
and is a liquid at room temperature. The structure of pinene has been
resolved only for enantiomerically pure α-pinene using X-ray
analysis. Therefore, camphene and pinene are interesting candidates
for the crystalline sponge method, and we will show that their chiral
form determines whether the crystalline sponge method is successful
or not. Powder diffraction proved to be a crucial method to support
this observation. By employing time-resolved powder X-ray diffraction,
we can directly observe that only the racemic mixture of α-pinene
results in ordered structures of enantiomeric pairs that can be fully
resolved using single-crystal X-ray diffraction.
Figure 1
Molecular structure of
(−)-camphene (A), (+)-α-pinene
(B), and (−)-β-pinene (C).
Molecular structure of
(−)-camphene (A), (+)-α-pinene
(B), and (−)-β-pinene (C).
Methods and Materials
Materials
were purchased from commercial sources and were used
without further purification. Single crystals of the MOF host crystal
were synthesized following the improved protocol described by Ramadhar
et al.[2] In short, 1 mL of 0.03 M ZnI2 was layered on top of 4 mL of 0.05 M tpt (2,4,6-tri(pyridin-4-yl)-1,3,5-triazine)
in a glass test tube (5 mL), yielding suitable crystals after 2 days.
Guest inclusion was established by exposing the crystals to a 106
M (7 g of camphene in 0.5 mL of chloroform) solution of kosher camphene
(purity 90%) in chloroform or saturated camphene in a cyclohexane
solution, or by exposing the MOF to pure liquid (+)-α-pinene
(purity 98%) for 1 day. We used a mixture of RR-(+)-α-pinene
and SS-(−)-α-pinene 1:1 v/v to study
the uptake of the racemic compound in the host crystal (purity of
(−)-α-pinene 97%). Note that other stereoisomers for
α-pinene are impossible because of the ring structure. (−)-β-Pinene
was included in the host crystal by soaking the MOF host crystal for
1 day in pure (−)-β-pinene (purity 99%). The structural
isomers (+)-α-pinene and (−)-β-pinene were included
by soaking the MOF host crystal for 1 day in a 1:1 v/v mixture of
both compounds.The crystalline sponge method in some cases
requires only nanograms
of material for successful guest inclusion and subsequent structure
elucidation.[1] It has since been noted that
the method works best when working in neat solutions (i.e., pure liquid
guest molecules).[2] We studied the required
concentration for successful camphene uptake and found that in the
case of camphene no guest was included at concentrations of 10 M or
lower, meaning that micrograms of material are required.Fujita
et al. exchanged the nitrobenzene solvent, present in the
MOF, with cyclohexane, to enhance guest uptake.[1] In our case chloroform was exchanged for cyclohexane to
investigate whether this would lower the required camphene concentration,
however, to no effect. This shows that very high concentrations are
required for successful ordered camphene uptake and that both chloroform
and cyclohexane exchange comparably well for camphene.For the
purpose of investigating the structures we used single-crystal
X-ray diffraction (SCD). In addition we have used powder X-ray diffraction
(PXRD) in order to monitor guest exchange. When a PXRD pattern of
the MOF harboring a guest is simulated, diffraction peaks at low 2θ
angles are predicted. The emergence of such peaks in a diffraction
experiment could shed light on ordered guest inclusion and can potentially
be used as a first indication of successful ordering of a guest inside
the MOF, before applying SCD. Therefore, PXRD was used to study the
potential ordering of both racemic and enantiomerically pure camphene
and α-pinene.
X-ray Crystal Structure Determinations
Reflections
were measured on a Bruker D8 Quest diffractometer with sealed tube
and a Triumph monochromator (λ = 0.71073 Å) at a temperature
of 150 K. The software package used for the intensity integration
was Saint.[32] Absorption correction and
scaling were performed with SADABS.[33] The
structures were solved using SHELXT.[34] Least-squares
refinements were performed with SHELXL-2014[35] against F2 of all reflections. Hydrogen atoms were placed
at calculated positions and were subsequently refined using a riding
model. Geometry calculations and checking for higher symmetry were
performed with the PLATON program.[36] For
all structures the SQUEEZE procedure within PLATON[36] was applied for handling unordered solvent. Table summarizes the most important
crystal data and SQUEEZE details for the four crystal structures described
in the main text.
R1 =
∑||F0| – |Fc||/∑|F0|. wR2 = {∑[w(F02 – Fc2)2]/∑[w(F02)2]}1/2.Powder diffractograms
were measured on a Panalytical Empyrean diffractometer
in transmission mode with fine-focus sealed tube, focusing mirror
and PIXcel3D detector using Cu–K(α) radiation.
The samples were measured in between two 6 μm Mylar foils. Some
images were created using the CCDC Mercury software.[37]
Results and Discussion
First, we
investigated the uptake of enantiopure (−)-β-pinene
(purity 99%) into the MOF host crystal, consisting of ZnI2 and 2,4,6-tri(pyridin-4-yl)-1,3,5-triazine,[1,2] to
see if a loss of the inversion symmetry was observed and if the structure
of the guest compound could be resolved. SCD did indeed indicate a
loss of symmetry (transition from space group C2/c to C2) and revealed three (−)-β-pinene molecules
in the asymmetric unit. The Flack parameter was refined to a value
of 0.13(3), and this is not as close to zero as one would expect.
This perhaps indicates that some inclusion of the opposite enantiomer
in different twin zones has taken place (purity is 99%).Second,
we investigated the uptake of enantiopure (+)-α-pinene
(purity 98%) into the MOF host crystal, to see if a loss of the inversion
symmetry was again observed and if the structure of the guest compound
could be resolved. SCD did not indicate a loss of symmetry and did
not reveal any identifiable (+)-α-pinene molecules. Only unidentifiable
small fragments of unordered solvent and/or (+)-α-pinene molecules
were found inside the channels. This result is in agreement with the
observation of the group of Fujita[22] for
α-pinene. The absence of the original chloroform solvent molecules
in the structure indicated, however, that guest exchange had occurred.Third, we investigated the uptake of nearly enantiopure (+)-camphene
into the MOF host crystal, to see if a loss of the inversion symmetry
was observed and if the structure of the guest compound could be resolved.
The obtained crystal structure reveals a single molecule of (+)-camphene
in the asymmetric unit (Figure ). Surprisingly, the symmetry of the system (C2/c) remained unchanged compared to the MOF host
crystal. Therefore, eight camphene molecules are present inside a
unit cell, four of which consist of (+)-camphene, and four of (−)-camphene.
(−)-Camphene is a known impurity of commercial (+)-camphene,
which in this case was only 90% pure. Therefore, the system preferred
to extract and order sets of (+)-camphene and (−)-camphene
molecules and keep the inversion symmetry intact, instead of only
incorporating ordered (+)-camphene molecules and losing its inversion
symmetry. The MOF crystals can therefore, in principle, be used to
perform chiral purification. We were, however, unable to investigate
this because racemic mixtures of camphene and α-pinene did not
separate on chiral HPLC. The MOF is not completely filled with ordered
camphene, which is more or less the case for α-pinene, and the
channels also contain unordered camphene and solvent molecules which
show up as diffuse electron density. Furthermore, we found that camphene
could only be resolved when a concentration of 37 M or higher was
used.
Figure 2
Structure of racemic camphene in the MOF channels viewed along
the crystallographic c-direction. Red and green axes
are the crystallographic a- and b-direction, respectively. The host network is represented as a wireframe,
while the guest is shown in a ball-and-stick fashion. The channels
inside the MOF are indicated with yellow/ochre, and hydrogen atoms
are omitted for clarity.
Structure of racemic camphene in the MOF channels viewed along
the crystallographic c-direction. Red and green axes
are the crystallographic a- and b-direction, respectively. The host network is represented as a wireframe,
while the guest is shown in a ball-and-stick fashion. The channels
inside the MOF are indicated with yellow/ochre, and hydrogen atoms
are omitted for clarity.The presence of channels in all three crystallographic directions
makes it possible for the (−)-camphene and (+)-camphene to
easily move around and optimize their ordering inside the host channels.
This explains why ordering of enantiomeric pairs is possible in this
MOF host crystal, although an excess of one enantiomer is present
in solution. However, one could expect that other types of MOF host
crystals with a similar symmetry but with channels in only one or
two directions will not give any usable results for enantiomeric pairs.Inspired by the result for camphene, we exposed an MOF host crystal
to racemic (±)-α-pinene for 24 h. The obtained crystal
structure revealed three molecules in the asymmetric unit, leading
to 24 molecules in the unit cell, 12 of which are (+)-α-pinene,
and 12 (−)-α-pinene (Figure ). Apparently, the system again prefers to
order sets of α-pinene molecules according to the space group
symmetry of the host, which includes an inversion center. We found
that long exposure of the MOF to racemic α-pinene leads to more
disorder in the guest structure, and eventually only diffuse electron
density inside the channels and partial degradation of the host structure.
Consequently, an MOF crystal that was exposed to racemic α-pinene
for 22 days did not reveal any identifiable α-pinene guest molecules
anymore.
Figure 3
Structure of racemic α-pinene in the MOF channels viewed
along the crystallographic c-direction. Red and green
axes are the crystallographic a- and b-direction, respectively. The host network is represented as a wireframe,
while the guest is shown in a ball-and-stick fashion. The channels
inside the MOF are indicated with yellow/ochre, and hydrogen atoms
are omitted for clarity.
Structure of racemic α-pinene in the MOF channels viewed
along the crystallographic c-direction. Red and green
axes are the crystallographic a- and b-direction, respectively. The host network is represented as a wireframe,
while the guest is shown in a ball-and-stick fashion. The channels
inside the MOF are indicated with yellow/ochre, and hydrogen atoms
are omitted for clarity.To further illustrate that the host framework has a preference
for racemic mixtures, we also studied the combination of (+)-α-pinene,
and (−)-β-pinene, which can almost be considered as mirror
images (Figure ).
The combination is interesting because in this case the inversion
symmetry of the host can almost be retained when these two isomers
are present. With some difficulty the structure of pinene could indeed
be established from SCD, and these structures once more showed ordering
of the isomeric pairs around an inversion center, with disorder around
the double bonds of the pinene structure, as one would expect. This
experiment again demonstrates the selectivity of the host for racemic
mixtures.Others observed that enantiopure compounds can be
ordered inside
the host channels and give rise to loss of inversion symmetry, possibly
aided by solvents.[2,22,25−27] This is indeed the case for β-pinene but we
did not observe this for camphene and α-pinene. It is not clear
if ordering of enantiopure compounds or of enantiomeric pairs is most
common. In any case, these examples show that resolving the chirality
of a compound using the crystalline sponge method is not always straightforward.
This may also explain why the structure of miyakosyne A could not
be resolved straightforwardly using the crystalline sponge method,
because miyakosyne A is not racemic and might not order properly due
to a nonoptimal match of symmetry between guest and host system. Resolving
the structure of enantiopure compounds may therefore benefit from
a chiral MOF host, which does not impose a centrosymmetric ordering
on guest molecules.A fast method that determines whether ordered
guest uptake has
been established or not can save time by preventing measurement of
MOF crystals only filled with solvent or unordered guest molecules
giving only diffuse electron density. Previously it has been reported
by Fujita et al.[1] that the color change
of the crystal can indicate whether guests have successfully been
included, when colored guests are introduced into the MOF crystals.
We observed a color change toward red in all our guest exchange experiments,
while the investigated guest compounds are colorless. We also observed
that resolution of the structures of guest molecules was more difficult
or impossible when “older” red crystals were used. In
the case of MOFs exposed to (+)-α-pinene and (−)-β-pinene,
crystals changed color from the inside out (Figure ), instead of homogeneously throughout the
whole crystal. This shows that the coloring in this case is an indication
for guest-induced degradation of the host framework, which is confirmed
by the poorer quality of the crystal structure from diffraction experiments.
Figure 4
MOF crystals
after exposure to racemic (+)-α-pinene and (−)-β-pinene.
The scale bar represents 500 μm.
MOF crystals
after exposure to racemic (+)-α-pinene and (−)-β-pinene.
The scale bar represents 500 μm.Color change may indicate that guest molecules have been
included
inside the MOF, but does not give information regarding the ordering
of guests inside the MOF host crystal. We found that PXRD patterns
simulated from related MOF structures in the CSD, which include ordered
guest molecules, show intensity at low 2θ angles, while the
MOF host crystal containing solvent does not. If such a diffraction
peak does emerge during MOF-host soaking experiments, it could help
establishing the required or optimal time for guest uptake, although
there may be a significant spread in optimal soaking time between
different crystals, and different host–guest systems.A sample of MOF crystals was continually scanned using PXRD while
exposed to a camphene solution (Figure A). A diffraction peak clearly emerged at an angle
of 2θ = 6.4° and stabilized after 3 days. This suggests
that the guest uptake/ordering is completed not until this stabilization
appears. A structure that was measured after 1 day, however, did not
differ from the one obtained from a MOF crystal that was soaked in
the same camphene solution for a period of 8 days. Therefore, it is
the emergence of a PXRD peak that indicates that ordered guest uptake
has sufficiently taken place to perform a single-crystal diffraction
experiment.
Figure 5
(A–D) PXRD pattern of the MOF as a function of time. The y-axis depicts the diffraction intensity (10 to the power n counts, where n is the number depicted
on the axis), and the horizontal axes depict the diffraction angle
(2θ), and the elapsed time (hours).
(A–D) PXRD pattern of the MOF as a function of time. The y-axis depicts the diffraction intensity (10 to the power n counts, where n is the number depicted
on the axis), and the horizontal axes depict the diffraction angle
(2θ), and the elapsed time (hours).From the results of SCD, PXRD peaks are also expected in
the cases
of racemic α-pinene and the mixture of (+)-α-pinene and
(−)-β-pinene, while no diffraction intensity is expected
in the case of enantiopure (+)-α-pinene. This was confirmed
with our in situ PXRD experiments (Figure B–D). In the case of racemic α-pinene,
however, the signal dropped and stabilized to within noise level after
3 days. On the basis of these findings, a PXRD pattern should be measured
already after several hours of guest introduction to establish whether
ordered uptake takes place or not.
Conclusion
In
summary, the MOF that was introduced by Fujita et al.[1] was used to resolve enantiopure β-pinene
and racemic camphene and α-pinene. For camphene and α-pinene,
the host compound of Fujita shows a selectivity for enantiomeric pairs
and at the same time no ordering of the enantiopure compounds. This
means that the crystalline sponge method can also successfully be
applied to racemic mixtures, which enlarges the scope of this method
for synthetic chemists. We suggest that new MOF hosts with a chiral
space group, such as the one introduced by Yaghi et al.,[14] or MOF hosts containing chiral components, as
recently reported by Fujita et al.,[38] could
simplify the resolution of chiral enantiopure compounds using the
crystalline sponge method.We showed that PXRD is a tool to
investigate whether ordered guest
inclusion takes place or not, and moreover, PXRD can also shed light
on the kinetics of guest inclusion.
Authors: Franck Millange; Christian Serre; Nathalie Guillou; Gérard Férey; Richard I Walton Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2008 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Sergey A Sapchenko; Denis G Samsonenko; Danil N Dybtsev; Maxim S Melgunov; Vladimir P Fedin Journal: Dalton Trans Date: 2010-11-22 Impact factor: 4.390
Authors: Ana B Cuenca; Nicolas Zigon; Vincent Duplan; Manabu Hoshino; Makoto Fujita; Elena Fernández Journal: Chemistry Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Richard D J Lunn; Derek A Tocher; Philip J Sidebottom; Mark G Montgomery; Adam C Keates; Claire J Carmalt Journal: Cryst Growth Des Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 4.076