Maryam Emami Khansari1, Mohammad H Hasan2, Corey R Johnson1, Nya A Williams1, Bryan M Wong3, Douglas R Powell4, Ritesh Tandon2, Md Alamgir Hossain1. 1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Jackson State University, Jackson, Mississippi 39217, United States. 2. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi 39216, United States. 3. Department of Chemical & Environmental Engineering and Materials Science & Engineering Program, University of California-Riverside, Riverside, California 92521, United States. 4. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, United States.
Abstract
A thiourea-based tripodal receptor L substituted with 3-nitrophenyl groups has been synthesized, and the binding affinity for a variety of anions has been studied by 1H NMR titrations and nuclear Overhauser enhancement spectroscopy experiments in dimethyl sulfoxide-d6. As investigated by 1H NMR titrations, the receptor binds an anion in a 1:1 binding mode, showing the highest binding and strong selectivity for sulfate anion. A competitive colorimetric assay in the presence of fluoride suggests that the sulfate is capable of displacing the bound fluoride, showing a sharp visible color change. The strong affinity of L for sulfate was further supported by UV-vis titrations and density functional theory (DFT) calculations. Time-dependent DFT calculations indicate that the fluoride complex possesses a different optical absorption spectrum (due to charge transfer between the fluoride and the surrounding ligand) than the sulfate complex, reflecting the observed colorimetric change in these two complexes. The receptor was further tested for its biocompatibility on primary human foreskin fibroblasts and HeLa cells, exhibiting an excellent cell viability up to 100 μM concentration.
A thiourea-based tripodal receptor L substituted with 3-nitrophenyl groups has been synthesized, and the binding affinity for a variety of anions has been studied by 1H NMR titrations and nuclear Overhauser enhancement spectroscopy experiments indimethyl sulfoxide-d6. As investigated by 1H NMR titrations, the receptor binds an anion in a 1:1 binding mode, showing the highest binding and strong selectivity for sulfate anion. A competitive colorimetric assay in the presence offluoride suggests that the sulfateis capable of displacing the bound fluoride, showing a sharp visible color change. The strong affinity of L for sulfate was further supported by UV-vis titrations and density functional theory (DFT) calculations. Time-dependent DFT calculations indicate that the fluoridecomplex possesses a different optical absorption spectrum (due to charge transfer between the fluoride and the surrounding ligand) than the sulfatecomplex, reflecting the observed colorimetricchange in these two complexes. The receptor was further tested for its biocompatibility on primary humanforeskinfibroblasts and HeLacells, exhibiting an excellent cell viability up to 100 μM concentration.
Anions play an important
role in many environmental and biological
systems,[1] and the mechanistic understanding
of selective anion recognition by synthetic receptors is critical
in the field of supramolecularchemistry.[2,3] Although
polyamine-based receptors are known to bind anions strongly, their
binding occurs only at a certain pH, hampering their practical application
under neutral conditions.[4] On the other
hand, neutral receptors such as amides,[5−7] ureas,[8,9] thioureas,[10−12] pyrroles,[13,14] and indoles[15,16] are suitable for binding anions with their H-bond donor groups regardless
of the solution pH. Recently, tren-based receptors bearing urea or
thioureafunctional groups have been an area offocus for anion recognition
due to the directional conformation and enhanced chelation effect
of the NH groups.[17−23] In particular, the electron-withdrawing nature ofsulfur on thioureafunctionalities increases the acidity of NH for H-bonding interactions
with an anionic guest.[23] For example, a
chlorosubstituted tris(thiourea) receptor reported by Das et al. was
shown to encapsulate a thiosulfate anion with a dimericcapsular assembly.[20] A tris(4-nitrophenyl)thiourea receptor was reported
to exhibit selective complexation offluoride and phosphate.[21] A naphthyl-substituted tripodal thiourea synthesized
by Wu et al. was shown to bind H2PO4– and HSO4– anions indimethylformamide
(DMF).[19] Furthermore, attaching chromophore
groups to receptors often leads to a spectroscopic or color change,
allowing them to serve as sensors for target analytes.[10,11] In our previous study, we have shown that a dipodal thiourea-based
receptor containing 4-nitrophenyl groups as chromophores displays
a visible color change upon the addition offluoride or dihydrogenphosphateindimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO).[11] Herein, we report a thiourea-based tripodal receptor L substituted with 3-nitrophenyl groups, which shows a strong selectivity
for sulfate. The selectivity was further supported by competitive
colorimetric studies, displaying a sharp visible color change upon
the addition ofsulfate to the fluoridecomplex of L.
First-principles calculations, including both density functional theory
(DFT) and time-dependent DFT (TD-DFT), are carried out to support
and provide a mechanisticinsight into our experimental results.
Results
and Discussion
Synthesis
In an effort to design
suitable chromogenicthiourea receptors for anion binding, we synthesized a 3-nitrophenyl-based
tripodal tris-thiourea (L) by reacting tris(2-aminoethyl)amine
and 3-nitrophenylisothiocyanateinCH2Cl2 (Scheme ). A 3-nitrophenyl
substituent was attached to the thiourea moiety due to its electron-withdrawing
nature, which can provide enhanced H-bonding and chromogenic properties
of the receptor,[22] making it suitable for
the naked-eye detection of anions.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of L
(i) CH2Cl2 and (ii) refluxing, 75 °C, 6 h.
Synthesis of L
(i) CH2Cl2 and (ii) refluxing, 75 °C, 6 h.
X-ray Analysis
Single crystals of[L(DMF)2] were obtained
from the slow evaporation of a DMF solution
of L with an excess amount ofHIin a vial at room temperature.
The needle-shaped yellow crystals were isolated by a simple decantation
technique. Although the initial goal was to obtain an iodidecomplex,
crystallographic analysis showed that, instead ofiodide anions, two
solvent molecules are bonded to L through hydrogen-bonding
interactions (Figure ). The formation of[L(DMF)2] crystals in
the presence ofHIcan be described by a low association constant
of the receptor for iodide, as confirmed by solution-binding studies.
X-ray structural analysis of the crystal reveals that the complex
crystallizes in the triclinic space group P-1 to
give a molecularformula, [L(DMF)2], in which
two solvent molecules bonded to thiourea NH groups are attached to
two different arms of the tripodal host. Attempts to grow X-ray-quality
crystals of L with anions were unsuccessful.
Figure 1
X-ray crystal
structure of [L(DMF)2].
X-ray crystal
structure of[L(DMF)2].
NMR Titration Studies
1H NMR titrations
of L were performed to evaluate its binding affinity
for a variety of anions (F–, Cl–, Br–, I–, ClO4–, NO3–, H2PO4–, HSO4–, and
SO42–) using their tetrabutyl ammonium
salts inDMSO-d6. Figure shows the stacking of1H NMR
spectra as obtained from the titration of L with SO42– (0–10 equiv). In the 1H NMR spectrum of L, one NH proton is observed at 10.01
(H1) ppm and the other one at 7.95 (H2) ppm. The addition ofSO42– to L resulted in a significant
downfield shift of both NH signals (Δδ = 1.49 ppm for
H1 and Δδ = 1.81 ppm for H2) with a sharp saturation at
a 1:1 ratio (Figure ), demonstrating strong interactions of the receptor and sulfate.
Similar downfield shifts in the NH signals, but to a lesser extent,
were also observed for HSO4– (Δδ
= 0.72 ppm for H1 and Δδ = 0.71 ppm for H2), Cl– (Δδ = 0.61 ppm for H1 and Δδ = 0.38 ppm
for H2), and Br– (Δδ = 0.09 ppm for
H1 and Δδ = 0.06 ppm for H2) at the end of titrations.
The NH signals of L were shown to be broadened and eventually
disappeared upon the addition ofH2PO4–. In this case, CH signals were used to calculate the binding constant.
However, for I–, NO3–, and ClO4–, a negligible change in
the NMR signals was observed. The binding constants of L for these anions were determined from a nonlinear regression analysis
of the progressive changes in NH or CH signals with a 1:1 binding
model.[24] The binding data are listed in Table , showing that the
receptor binds strongly to SO42–, with
an association constant larger than 104 M–1 (Table ).
Figure 2
Partial 1H NMR spectra of L (2 mM) showing
changes in the NH chemical shifts with an increasing amount of SO42– (20 mM) in DMSO-d6. (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS).
Figure 3
1H NMR titration plot of L showing
changes
in the NH chemical shifts of the receptor with an increasing amount
of SO42– in DMSO-d6. (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS).
Table 1
Binding Constants (log K) and Binding Energies (E) of the Anions
Complexes of L
anion
log Ka
log Kb
E (kcal/mol)
F–
>4.0c
5.1
182
Cl–
3.1
3.2
107
Br–
1.9
1.7
116
I–
<1d
<1e
f
SO42–
>4.0
6.4
217
HSO4–
2.9
2.8
97
H2PO4–
3.0
3.1
112
NO3–
<1d
<1e
107
ClO4–
<1d
<1e
87
Determined by 1H NMR
titrations in DMSO-d6.
Determined by UV titrations in DMSO.
Slow proton exchange.
No appreciable change was observed
in 1H NMR spectra.
No appreciable change was observed
in UV spectra.
The 6-31+G(d,p)
basis set is not
available for iodide.
Partial 1H NMR spectra of L (2 mM) showing
changes in the NH chemical shifts with an increasing amount ofSO42– (20 mM) inDMSO-d6. (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS).1H NMR titration plot of L showing
changes
in the NH chemical shifts of the receptor with an increasing amount
ofSO42– inDMSO-d6. (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS).Determined by 1H NMR
titrations inDMSO-d6.Determined by UV titrations inDMSO.Slow proton exchange.No appreciable change was observed
in1H NMR spectra.No appreciable change was observed
in UV spectra.The 6-31+G(d,p)
basis set is not
available for iodide.Incontrast, upon the addition offluoride to L, a
new set of NMR signals appeared downfield as a result of a slow proton
exchange between the free receptor and the complex (Figure S6). The signals of the free receptor disappeared completely
upon the addition of 1 equiv offluoride (Figure ). There is some evidence that highly basic
anions can abstract acidic protons from NH ofurea/thiourea-based
compounds.[25,26] A detailed study on the deprotonation
and hydrogen-bonding aspects between anions and urea/thiourea-based
receptors reported by Pérez-Casas and Yatsimirsky suggested
that the deprotonation is accompanied by the disappearance of NMR
signals of the abstracted protons, whereas the binding event results
in the downfield shift of NMR signals of NH groups in a receptor.[26] The distinct downfield shift of NH signals in
our receptor is consistent with the formation of a hydrogen-bonded
complex (instead of deprotonation). This assumption is further supported
by two-dimensional (2D) nuclear Overhauser enhancement spectroscopy
(NOESY), exhibiting cross-peaksfor both NH1 and NH2 after the addition
of 1 equiv offluoride to L (Figure S16). For further clarification, a control experiment was carried
out using OH–, showing the complete disappearance
of NH signals due to the deprotonation of NH by highly basichydroxideions (E, Figure ).
Figure 4
Partial 1H NMR spectra of L showing changes
in the chemical shifts after the addition of 1 equiv of different
anions in DMSO-d6.
Partial 1H NMR spectra of L showing changes
in the chemical shifts after the addition of 1 equiv of different
anions inDMSO-d6.The binding constant for fluoride was calculated from the
relative
changes in the integrated intensity of NH signals for the free receptor
and the complex,[22] yielding a binding constant
larger than 104 M–1. To determine the
selectivity of the receptor, competition experiments were performed
in which sulfate was added to the receptor containing 1 equiv offluoride
(C, Figure ) or hydroxide
(E, Figure ) inDMSO-d6. As shown inFigure , the 1H NMR spectrum of L containing an equivalent amount offluoride and sulfate
(D), or hydroxide and sulfate (F), resembles the spectrum of L containing 1 equiv ofsulfate (B), thus demonstrating the
selectivity of the receptor for sulfate. The receptor also exhibits
good interactions for Cl–, HSO4–, and H2PO4–, with association
constants of 3.1, 2.9, and 3.0 (in log K),
respectively. However, it does not show any appreciable affinity for
I–, NO3–, or ClO4–.
NOESY NMR Studies
Two-dimensional
NOESY NMR experiments
were performed to illustrate the structures and conformational changes
of the anion complexes in the solution, following the methods reported
earlier.[23,27] To this aim, the 2D NOESY spectra were recorded
for free L (2 mM) and its mixture containing 1 equiv
of the respective anions inDMSO-d6 (Figures and S15–S23). Figure a shows the NOESY NMR offree L, exhibiting a strong H1···H2 NOESY contact. After
the addition of 1 equiv ofsulfate, the NOESY contacts completely
disappeared (Figure b), indicating an interaction of NHs with the added anion and a possible
anion-induced conformational change of the receptor.[23] Indeed, the receptor shows significant affinity for SO42–, as observed from the 1H NMR
titrations (Table ). We also observed a similar loss of NOESY contacts for L in the presence ofHSO4– (Figure c) and F– (Figure S16). In particular, we observed
both cross-peaksfor NH1 and NH2for L after the addition
offluoride, indicating that these protons are present on the receptor
and involved in the binding process. The addition ofchloride to the
receptor results in the weakening of the H1···H2contact,
suggesting a weak interaction, which is in agreement with the results
obtained from the NMR titrations. Incontrast, the corresponding signals
were almost unchanged after the addition of 1 equiv ofBr–, I–, NO3–, or ClO4– (Figure d and the Supporting Information), suggesting the lack ofinteractions between the receptor and the
added anion.
Figure 5
Two-dimensional NOESY NMR of (a) free L,
(b) L + SO42–, (c) L + HSO4–, and (d) L + ClO4– in DMSO-d6 (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS). In each case, a stock solution of an anion (20 mM)
was added
to L (2 mM) to maintain a 1:1 molar ratio of receptor
to anion.
Two-dimensional NOESY NMR of (a) free L,
(b) L + SO42–, (c) L + HSO4–, and (d) L + ClO4– inDMSO-d6 (H1 = CSNHAr and H2 = CH2NHCS). In each case, a stock solution of an anion (20 mM)
was added
to L (2 mM) to maintain a 1:1 molar ratio of receptor
to anion.
Colorimetric Studies
The receptor was further investigated
by naked-eye colorimetric studies for anions inDMSO. As shown inFigure , a visible color
change from pale yellow to orange was observed after the addition
of 1 equiv offluoride to L (2 mM), indicating a different
optical absorption spectrum of the [LF]− complex, as also confirmed by TD-DFT calculations (discussed later).
However, the color remained almost unchanged for other anions. A similarcolor change was reported previously due to the addition offluoride
to related receptors.[11] To examine the
visual selectivity, 1 equiv of different anions was added separately
to an orange solution offluoridecomplex inDMSO. Interestingly,
the color of [LF]− was sharply changed
to a pale yellow color (original color of the receptor) after the
addition ofsulfate (Figure ). This observation suggests that sulfatecan compete with
fluoridefor hydrogen bonding with NH groups and displace the bound
fluoridefrom the complex [LF]− into
the solution (Figure ), which is in agreement with the NMR competition experiments (Figure ). However, other
anions are not strong enough to displace the bound fluoride, supporting
the results of NMR and UV–vis titrations. Thus, the fluoride–receptor
complex serves as a colorimetric probe for visual identification ofsulfate through fluoride displacement assay, a principle that is known
as an indicator displacement assay widely used for the optical sensing
of analytes.[28−30]
Figure 6
Colorimetric studies of the receptor L (2
mM) with
1 equiv of different anions in DMSO.
Figure 7
Colorimetric studies of [LF]− after
the addition of 1 equiv of different anions in DMSO, showing a visual
color change for sulfate.
Figure 8
Mechanism of fluoride displacement assay of [LF]− with SO42– from the receptor’s
cavity, showing a visible color change in DMSO.
Colorimetric studies of the receptor L (2
mM) with
1 equiv of different anions inDMSO.Colorimetric studies of [LF]− after
the addition of 1 equiv of different anions inDMSO, showing a visual
color change for sulfate.Mechanism offluoride displacement assay of [LF]− with SO42– from the receptor’s
cavity, showing a visible color change inDMSO.
UV–Vis Titration Studies
UV–vis titrations
were also performed to investigate the interactions of the receptor
with anions inDMSO. As shown inFigure , the addition ofsulfate to a solution of L results in a systematic decrease in the absorbance with
a red shift of the peak at 335 nm, suggesting the formation of a [L(SO4)]2– complex.[22] The relative absorbance I/I0 of L (where I0 and I represent the absorbance of L before and after the addition of an anion, respectively)
upon the gradual addition ofSO42– gave
the best fit to a 1:1 binding mode (Figure , inset),[24] yielding
a binding constant of 6.40 (in log K). The
host showed a similar spectral change when it was titrated with dihydrogenphosphate (Figure S30). The addition offluoride anion to L also showed a decrease in the absorption
at 335 nm, but no appreciable shift was observed as compared to that
for sulfate or phosphate. However, the naked-eye colorimetric study
shows an orange color after the addition of just 1 equiv offluoride
to the receptor in which the concentration of L was different
(2 mM) than that used in UV titrations (0.15 mM).
Figure 9
UV–vis titration
spectra showing the changes in absorption
spectra of L (1.5 × 10–4 M) with
an increasing amount of SO42– (1.5 ×
10–2 M) in DMSO (inset showing the titration plot).
UV–vis titration
spectra showing the changes in absorption
spectra of L (1.5 × 10–4 M) with
an increasing amount ofSO42– (1.5 ×
10–2 M) inDMSO (inset showing the titration plot).To confirm if the color originated
from the binding with fluoride
(instead of deprotonation), the receptor was deprotonated by adding
1 equiv ofhydroxide. The resulting intense red color of the deprotonated
receptor is distinctly different than that developed for the fluoridecomplex (Figure S34), suggesting that the
observed orange color (for the receptor containing fluoride) originated
from the binding event. Further justification of this assumption is
provided by control experiments from UV studies of the receptor containing
1 equiv ofhydroxide or fluorideinDMSO (Figure S33). In the UV spectrum, a new absorption band appeared at
about 485 nm for the solution of L containing hydroxide
anion, indicating an anion-induced deprotonation of L due to the removal of NH protons by a highly basic OH–.[26] However, such a band is absent for
the solution of L containing fluoride (Figure S33). The addition of 1 equiv sulfate to L mixed with fluoride (or hydroxide) shows a nearly similar spectrum
to that obtained from the sulfatecomplex. This further supports the
displacement of the bound fluoride by sulfate, which is in accordance
with the NMR results discussed previously. On the other hand, the
addition of other anions to L solution does not induce
an appreciable change in the absorption spectrum (Supporting Information). This observation is fully consistent
with colorimetric observations, showing no visible color change for
Cl–, Br–, I–, ClO4–, NO3–, and HSO4–.
Computational Studies
To quantitatively understand
the interactions of the various anions with the receptor, theoretical
calculations using both ground-state density functional theory (DFT)
and excited-state time-dependent DFT (TD-DFT) were carried out. For
the ground-state binding energies, an all-electron, polarized 6-31G(d,p)
basis set was used inconjunction with the M06-2X functional. Extensive
previous work by us has shown that the M06-2X functional accurately
predicts the binding energy trends for noncovalent interactions between
anions and organic receptors.[31,32] Fully unconstrained
geometry optimizations were carried out on both the isolated receptor
as well as the various molecular-bound complexes. With the optimized
geometry, the binding energy was calculated with the expression Ebinding = E + Ereceptor – Ecomplex, where X represents an anion (described further
below). The calculated binding energies of the complexes are listed
in Table . Notably,
we find that the magnitudes of the binding energies are proportional
to the charge and electronegativity of anions, with fluorine and sulfate
having the largest binding energy, in agreement with the experimental
binding constants (Table ).The optimized structures of L complexes
with F– and SO42– are
shown inFigures and 11, respectively. In the fluoridecomplex
of L, one fluorideis encapsulated within the cavity
via a total six NH···F bonds, exhibiting a 1:1 binding
mode. Such a binding mode is consistent with that observed in solution
binding studies inDMSO-d6. In the optimized
structure of the sulfatecomplex, three oxygen atoms of the anion
are H-bonded with two NHs from two different arms of the receptor,
forming a total of six hydrogen bonds. However, the other oxygen atom
is uncoordinated. The corresponding hydrogen bonding distances are
listed in Table .
Figure 10
Optimized
structures of [LF]− showing
perspective view (left) and space filling model (right). All of the
hydrogens on the carbon atoms are omitted for clarity.
Figure 11
Optimized structures of [L(SO4)]2– showing perspective view (left) and space
filling model (right).
All of the hydrogens on the carbon atoms are omitted for clarity.
Table 2
Hydrogen-Bonding
Interactions (Å)
for the Complexes of L with Fluoride and Sulfate Calculated
with DFT at the M06-2X/6-31G(d,p) Level of Theory
[LF]−
[L(SO4)]2–
D–H···A
D···A (Å)
D–H···A
D···A (Å)
N20–H···F
2.831
N22–H···O78
2.906
N31–H···F
2.710
N31–H···O78
2.729
N22–H···F
2.817
N20–H···O79
2.899
N33–H···F
2.720
N29–H···O79
2.729
N24–H···F
2.852
N24–H···O80
2.903
N29–H···F
2.692
N33–H···O80
2.728
Optimized
structures of [LF]− showing
perspective view (left) and space filling model (right). All of the
hydrogens on the carbon atoms are omitted for clarity.Optimized structures of[L(SO4)]2– showing perspective view (left) and space
filling model (right).
All of the hydrogens on the carbon atoms are omitted for clarity.To give further support to
the observed colorimetric solution experiments,
we also carried out high-level time-dependent density functional theory
(TD-DFT) calculations. To account for charge-transfer effects in these
complexes, we used a customized LC-ωPBE range-separated functional,
which incorporates 20% Hartree–Fock exchange over the entire
range with a full 100% exchange at asymptotic distances. In our previous
work on range-separated functionals, we have shown that maintaining
a full 100% contribution of asymptotic Hartree–Fock exchange
is essential for accurately describing valence excitations in even
relatively simple molecular systems.[33−35]Figure depicts the calculated TD-DFT absorption
spectra for the F– and SO42– complexes obtained by solving for the lowest 20 excited states in
the presence of a dimethyl sulfoxide polarizable continuum solvent.
Our TD-DFT calculations indicate that the fluoridecomplex has a different
optical absorption spectrum whereas all of the other anions are fairly
similar, in agreement with experiment. In particular, Figure indicates that the spectrum
for the F– complex is more blue-shifted than the
SO42– complex. To understand this further,
we also carried out a charge-density difference analysis for the first
electronic excited state of the fluoride, and sulfatecomplexes (Figure ). The charge-density
differences show that the first allowed excited state in each complex
is due to charge being transferred between the benzene ring and the
NO2functional group. Moreover, due to the higher charge
of the sulfatecomplex, a larger surrounding positive charge (light
blue) can be seen inFigure b compared to the positive charge in the fluoridecomplex
(Figure a).
Figure 12
Absorption
spectra obtained from TD-DFT calculations for the lowest
20 excited states for the fluoride and sulfate complexes in a DMSO
polarizable continuum solvent.
Figure 13
Charge-density difference for the first excited state of the (a)
fluoride and (b) sulfate complexes.
Absorption
spectra obtained from TD-DFT calculations for the lowest
20 excited states for the fluoride and sulfatecomplexes in a DMSO
polarizable continuum solvent.Charge-density difference for the first excited state of the (a)
fluoride and (b) sulfatecomplexes.
Cytotoxicity Assessment
The biocompatibility of L as a receptor was tested by analyzing the viability of two
types of living cells, including primary humanforeskinfibroblasts
(HF) and HeLacells. Each type ofcell was treated with L at concentrations ranging from 10 to 500 μM for 24 h, and
the cell viability was quantified using trypan blue exclusion assay.
As a control, cells were treated with 0.1% DMSO. The results from
the exclusion assay revealed that the cell viability of HF or HeLacells was almost unaffected up to 100 μM concentration of the
receptor (Figure ). However, the cell cytotoxicity was observed at a higher concentration
(500 μM). Live cell imaging was also performed on both types
ofcells at 24 h after treatment, showing no cytotoxic effects up
to 100 μM (Figures S35 and S36).
These results are in accord with the cell viability data, further
demonstrating an excellent biocompatibility of the receptor on living
cells.
Figure 14
Effect of L on cell viability. Confluent HF (A) and
HeLa (B) cells were either mock treated (0.1% DMSO-treated control)
or treated with L (10–500 μM) for 24 h.
Triplicate samples were used, and error bars represent the standard
error of mean.
Effect of L on cell viability. Confluent HF (A) and
HeLa (B) cells were either mock treated (0.1% DMSO-treated control)
or treated with L (10–500 μM) for 24 h.
Triplicate samples were used, and error bars represent the standard
error of mean.
Conclusions
Inconclusion, we have synthesized and structurally characterized
a thiourea-based tripodal receptor L, showing strong
binding and selectivity for sulfate over other anions inDMSO. The
selectivity of L for sulfate was further confirmed by
the competitive colorimetric studies, displaying a sharp color change
of [LF]−, whereas other anions showed
no change incolor. This observation suggests that the added sulfateis capable of displacing the bound fluoridein [LF]−, and this compound can be used as a colorimetric probe
to detect sulfatein the solution via a fluoride displacement assay.
The strong selectivity of L for sulfate was further supported
by UV–vis titrations inDMSO. First-principles calculations
including both DFT and TD-DFT indicate that the fluoridecomplex has
a different optical absorption spectrum, whereas all of the other
anions are almost similar, in agreement with the experiment. The receptor
also shows an excellent biocompatibility in the humanforeskinfibroblasts
or HeLacells. The strong selectivity for sulfate and excellent biocompatibility
toward living cells demonstrates that this receptor can be used as
a potential sensing probe for the detection ofsulfate anions for
various biological and chemical applications.
Experimental Section
General
All of the reagents and solvents were purchased
as reagent grade and used without further purification. Nuclear magnetic
resonance (NMR) spectra were recorded on a Varian Unity INOVA 500
FT-NMR. Chemical shifts for the samples were measured inDMSO-d6 and calibrated against the sodium salt of3-(trimethylsilyl)propionic-2,2,3,3-d4 acid (TSP) as an external reference in a sealed capillary tube.
NMR data were processed and analyzed with MestReNova version 6.1.1-6384.
The IR spectra were recorded on a Perkin Elmer-Spectrum One Fourier
transform infrared spectrometer with KBr disksin the range of 4000–400
cm–1. The melting point was determined on a Mel-Temp
(Electrothermal 120 VAC 50/60 Hz) melting point apparatus and was
uncorrected. Mass spectral data were obtained at electrospray ionization
mass spectrometry (ESI-MS) positive mode on a TSQ Quantum GC (Thermo
Scientific). Elemental analysis was carried out using an ECS 4010
Analytical Platform (Costech Instrument) at Jackson State University.
L
Tris(2-aminoethyl) amine (520 μL, 3.34 mmol)
was added to 3-nitrophenylisothiocyanate (1.843 g, 10.03 mmol) indichloromethane (400 mL) at room temperature under constant stirring.
The mixture was refluxed for 6 h. A pale yellow precipitate was formed,
and the precipitate collected by filtration was washed by dichloromethane
and dried under vacuum overnight to give the neutral tripodal host
(L). Yield: 2.25 g, 98%. 1H NMR (500 MHz,
DMSO-d6, TSP): δ 10.01 (s, 3H, Ar-NH), 8.55 (s, 3H, ArH), 7.95 (s, 3H, CH2NH), 7.88 (d, J = 7.90 Hz,
3H, ArH), 7.81 (d, J = 7.80 Hz,
3H, ArH), 7.54 (t, J = 8.15 Hz,
3H, ArH), 3.64 (br, 6H, NHCH2), 2.80 (t, J = 6.10 Hz, 6H, NCH2). 13C NMR (125 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 180.31 (C=S), 147.5
(Ar-C), 140.9 (ArC-NO2), 129.7 (Ar-CH), 128.2 (Ar-CH),
117.8 (Ar-CH), 116.1 (Ar-CH), 51.7
(NHCH2), 41.7 (NCH2). Mp 135 °C. Anal. Calcd for C27H30N10O6S3: C, 47.22; H, 4.40; N, 20.39.
Found: C, 47.68; H, 4.42; N, 20.45. ESI-MS (+ve): m/z 686.7. IR (KBr): ν(N–H) 3342, 3268
cm–1; ν(C=S) 740 cm–1; ν(NO2) 1518, 1342 cm–1.
L(DMF)2
In an attempt to get
the iodidecomplex, 25 mg (0.05 mmol) of L was mixed
with a few drops ofHIin 15 mL DMF at room temperature, and the mixture
was kept in an open vial. X-ray-quality crystals ofL(DMF)2 were grown after 7 days and collected by filtration.
NMR Studies
Binding constants were obtained by 1H NMR titrations of L with the oxoanions (NO3–, ClO4–, H2PO4–, HSO4–, and SO42–) and halides (F–, Cl–, Br–, and I–) using their tetrabutyl ammonium saltsinDMSO-d6. Initial concentrations were [L]0 = 2 mM and [anion]0 = 20 mM. Each titration was performed
by 13 measurements at room temperature. The association constant K was calculated by fitting several independent NMR signals
with a 1:1 association model using Sigma Plot software, from the following
equationswhere L is the receptor and A
is the anion. The error limit in K was less than
10%.Two-dimensional NOESY NMR experiments were performed for
free L and L containing 1 equiv of respective
anions inDMSO-d6, using the initial concentration
of the receptor as 2 mM. A stock solution of an anion (20 mM) was
added to the solution of L to keep a 1:1 molar ratio
of receptor to anion.
UV–Vis Binding Studies
UV–vis
titration
studies were performed by titrating L with anions inDMSO at 25 °C. In this case, initial concentrations of L and the anions were 1.5 × 10–4 and
1.5 × 10–2 M, respectively. Each titration
was performed by 15 measurements ([A–]0/[L]0 = 0–35 equiv), and the binding
constant K was calculated by fitting the relative
UV–vis absorbance (I/I0) with a 1:1 association model using the following equationwhere L is the ligand and A is
the anion. The error limit in K was less than 15%.
DFT Calculations
Binding energies and structural optimization
offluoride and sulfatecomplexes were evaluated with density functional
theory (DFT) calculations,[36] and optical
properties were calculated using time-dependent density functional
theory (TD-DFT) calculations. All of the calculations were carried
out using the Gaussian 09 package of programs.[37]
Cytotoxicity Assay
Primary humanforeskin-derived fibroblasts
(HF) and HeLacells were grown in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s
medium (Cellgro, Manassas, VA) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine
serum (SAFC, Lenexa, KS), 1 mM sodium pyruvate, 2 mM l-glutamine,
and 100 U/mL penicillin-streptomycin (Cellgro) at 37 °C with
5% CO2.[38] Cells were seeded
in 12-well plates and grown until they became confluent (approximately
24 h). The media was removed, and fresh complete medium was added.
A stock solution of L was made in 100% DMSO at 500 mM
concentration. Cells were treated with L at a final concentration
of 10–500 μM in different wells for 24 h for cytotoxic
assessment. In this experiment, 0.1% was the highest concentration
ofDMSO that the cells received. As a mock control, cells were treated
with 0.1% DMSO without L. At the end point, cells were
observed under an inverted Evos-FL microscope (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
Waltham, MA), and bright-field images of living cells were captured.
After imaging, the viability ofcells was determined using trypan
blue exclusion assay,[39] as previously described.[40]
Authors: Jonathan L Sessler; Dustin E Gross; Won-Seob Cho; Vincent M Lynch; Franz P Schmidtchen; Gareth W Bates; Mark E Light; Philip A Gale Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 15.419