Nathan J Van Zee1,2, Mathijs F J Mabesoone1, Beatrice Adelizzi1, Anja R A Palmans1, E W Meijer1. 1. Institute for Complex Molecular Systems and Laboratory of Macromolecular and Organic Chemistry, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 2. Chimie Moléculaire, Macromoléculaire, Matériaux, ESPCI Paris, Université PSL, CNRS, 75005 Paris, France.
Abstract
By enchaining a small fraction of chiral monomer units, the helical sense of a dynamic polymer constructed from achiral monomer units can be disproportionately biased. This phenomenon, known as the sergeants-and-soldiers (S&S) effect, has been found to be widely applicable to dynamic covalent and supramolecular polymers. However, it has not been exemplified with a supramolecular polymer that features multiple helical states. Herein, we demonstrate the S&S effect in the context of the temperature-controlled supramolecular copolymerization of chiral and achiral biphenyl tetracarboxamides in alkanes. The one-dimensional helical structures presented in this study are unique because they exhibit three distinct helical states, two of which are triggered by coassembling with monomeric water that is codissolved in the solvent. The self-assembly pathways are rationalized using a combination of mathematical fitting and simulations with a thermodynamic mass-balance model. We observe an unprecedented case of an "abnormal" S&S effect by changing the side chains of the achiral soldier. Although the molecular structure of these aggregates remains elusive, the coassembly of water is found to have a profound impact on the helical excess.
By enchaining a small fraction of chiral monomer units, the helical sense of a dynamic polymer constructed from achiral monomer units can be disproportionately biased. This phenomenon, known as the sergeants-and-soldiers (S&S) effect, has been found to be widely applicable to dynamic covalent and supramolecularpolymers. However, it has not been exemplified with a supramolecularpolymer that features multiple helical states. Herein, we demonstrate the S&S effect in the context of the temperature-controlled supramolecularcopolymerization of chiral and achiral biphenyl tetracarboxamides in alkanes. The one-dimensional helical structures presented in this study are unique because they exhibit three distinct helical states, two of which are triggered by coassembling with monomeric water that is codissolved in the solvent. The self-assembly pathways are rationalized using a combination of mathematical fitting and simulations with a thermodynamic mass-balance model. We observe an unprecedented case of an "abnormal" S&S effect by changing the side chains of the achiral soldier. Although the molecular structure of these aggregates remains elusive, the coassembly of water is found to have a profound impact on the helical excess.
The handedness of a
helical macromolecule is intricately tied to
the structure of its constituent monomer units. Understanding this
relationship is important not only for developing design principles
of functional macromolecular systems but also for gaining insight
into the origin of homochirality in Nature.[1] Early model studies aimed to elucidate the subtleties of this relationship
were conducted on polyisocyanates, a well-studied class of helical
covalent polymers.[2] Polyisocyantes are
equally likely to adopt either a P- or M-helical structure when prepared from achiral isocyanates, but those
synthesized from chiral analogues exhibit a preferred helical sense
dictated by the absolute configuration of the monomer unit. In 1989,
Green and co-workers[3] reported that copolymers
of an achiral isocyanate with a small fraction of a chiral isocyanate
exhibit a disproportionate helical bias. This phenomenon is called
the sergeants-and-soldiers (S&S) effect,[4−6] and numerous
subsequent studies have shown that it is applicable to both covalent[7−17] and supramolecular[18−28] polymers.To quantify the degree of helical bias, it is necessary
to have
a clear understanding of the polymer composition to allow for the
fraction of chiral monomer units to be unambiguously correlated to
the net helicity. In the case of covalent helical copolymers, well-defined
compositions are readily accessed via controlled polymerization protocols,
and numerous analytical techniques are routinely available to confirm
the structure after synthesis. These considerations are especially
useful in understanding the S&S effect in systems that feature
multiple helical states. Suginome and co-workers,[29−31] for example,
showed that certain homochiral poly(quinoxaline-2,3-diyl)s form helices
of one sense in chloroform and helices of the opposite sense in 1,1,2-trichloroethane.
They discovered that the transition is a result of the solvent-dependent
extension and contraction of the side chains along the polymer backbone.[32] Copolymers of achiral and chiral units exhibit
strong helical bias that can be predicted on the basis of the absolute
configuration of the chiral monomer, the copolymer composition, and
the solvent composition.[31] Intriguingly,
certain copolymers with a low sergeant fraction exhibit an “abnormal”
S&S effect, in which a chiral unit exhibits one helical sense
in a homopolymer and the opposite helical sense in a copolymer with
achiral units.[11,33−41]In stark contrast, the composition of supramolecular helical
copolymers
is challenging to characterize because of the dynamic, noncovalent
nature of the interactions that hold the monomer units together. Supramolecularcopolymers generally do not terminate, and thus they feature a fluxional
composition that responds to changes in environmental conditions,
such as temperature, solvent, and light. For some supramolecularcopolymers,
kinetic traps[26,42] and pathway complexity[43] cause a given set of monomers to form multiple
kinds of aggregates depending on the conditions of synthesis. Such
complexity demands that multiple experimental and theoretical techniques
be combined to generate a comprehensive picture of the supramolecular
structure.[44]It is in this context
that our group became intrigued by the supramolecular
coassembly of enantiopure biphenyl tetracarboxamide ()-1 (Figure A) and water molecules.[45] At micromolar concentrations in methylcyclohexane
(MCH), ()-1 supramolecularly polymerizes via a nucleation–elongation
mechanism into helical, one-dimensional fibers assigned as (+)-A, which has a positive Cotton effect at 258 nm by circular dichroism
(CD) spectroscopy. Depending on the temperature and concentration
of codissolved water, (+)-A undergoes sharp transitions
to form two other kinds of aggregates, (+)-B and (−)-C, that exhibit distinct helicities. The aggregate (+)-B has a positive Cotton effect at 250 nm, and (−)-C has a negative Cotton effect at 238 nm. On the basis of spectroscopic,
calorimetric, and light-scattering measurements, (+)-B and (−)-C form as a result of the coassembly
of ()-1 with
water molecules under thermodynamic control. Using a modified version
of the thermodynamic mass-balance model developed by ten Eikelder
and Markvoort,[46] the stoichiometry of (+)-B and (−)-C was estimated to be 0.5
and 2.0 molecules of water per molecule of ()-1, respectively (Figure B).
Figure 1
(A) Chemical structures
of biphenyl tetracarboxamides 1. (B) Schematic mechanism
for the assembly of ()-1 (red units) in the presence
of codissolved water [blue spheres; stoichiometries are given relative
to 1 equiv of ()-1 monomer]. (C) Proposed mechanism for the assembly of achiral biphenyl
tetracarboxamides (gray units) with water (blue spheres) into racemic
aggregates (middle structures). Incorporation of ()-1 (red units) biases the helicity
of each respective aggregate.
(A) Chemical structures
of biphenyl tetracarboxamides 1. (B) Schematic mechanism
for the assembly of ()-1 (red units) in the presence
of codissolved water [blue spheres; stoichiometries are given relative
to 1 equiv of ()-1 monomer]. (C) Proposed mechanism for the assembly of achiral biphenyl
tetracarboxamides (gray units) with water (blue spheres) into racemic
aggregates (middle structures). Incorporation of ()-1 (red units) biases the helicity
of each respective aggregate.We envisioned that the chiral monomer ()-1 could act as a sergeant in S&S
experiments, directing the helicity of supramolecularcopolymers with
achiral biphenyl tetracarboxamides in concert with codissolved water
as schematically represented in Figure C. In this framework, the helical state is putatively
controlled by a balance of the following parameters: the temperature,
the total concentration of biphenyl tetracarboxamide, the water content,
and the ratio between the chiral sergeant ()-1 and the achiral soldier. To the
best of our knowledge, the S&S effect has not yet been demonstrated
with a supramolecularcopolymer featuring multiple helical states.
Moreover, determining the composition of the system as a function
of temperature presents a formidable challenge in calculating the
net helicity for each state.Herein, we demonstrate the S&S
effect in this system and qualitatively
deconvolute the temperature-dependent, multistate behavior using a
combination of mathematical fitting and simulations of spectroscopic
data using an expanded version of the mass-balance model.[46] This approach allows us to rationally calculate
net helicities and compare the degree of helical bias as a function
of composition. Interestingly, introducing a small structural change
to the achiral soldier gives rise to an “abnormal” S&S
effect in one of the helical states, representing the first example
of this effect for a supramolecularcopolymer. Finally, the coassembly
of water is found to play a profound role in dictating the strength
and selectivity of the helical bias induced by the chiral sergeant.
Results
and Discussion
Evaluation of as an Achiral
Soldier
In line with our previous S&S studies,[47]n-octylcarboxamide groups were
initially chosen as achiral side chains for the biphenyl tetracarboxamide
soldier -1 (Figure A). The bulk properties of , characterized by Fourier transform infrared
spectroscopy (FTIR), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and
polarized optical microscopy (POM) [Figures S1, S2A, and S3, respectively, of the Supporting Information (SI)],
resemble those of ()-1 in the bulk.[45] In the course
of preparing samples for spectroscopic studies in solution, we found
that -1 is poorly soluble
in MCH and other lower alkanes, even with vigorous heating, stirring,
and sonication. Surprisingly, the addition of 1 mol % of ()-1 to suspensions of -1 in MCH permits the formation
of homogeneous solutions, which qualitatively indicates that these
molecules interact with each other. In attempts to visualize aggregates
formed under these conditions by atomic force microscopy (AFM), only
large amorphous deposits were observed (Figure S5A,B, SI). We suspect that the fibers collapse upon depositing
onto the substrate surface.We proceeded to study -1 with 1 mol % ()-1 with a total concentration
of 30 μM in MCH by variable-temperature (VT) CD and UV spectroscopy
(Figure A,B). Spectra
were acquired at 2 °C intervals as the sample was cooled from
95 to 5 °C, and the sample was equilibrated for 5 min prior to
each measurement. The UV absorbance maximum hypsochromically shifts
from 225 nm to less than 215 nm as the temperature is decreased (Figure A, bottom left).
Following the UV absorbance maximum at 225 nm (Figure B, solid red triangles), the signal intensity
nonsigmoidally decreases between 95 and 49 °C, indicating a cooperative
supramolecularpolymerization. However, the absence of a plateau before
this transition suggests that the elongation temperature for this
initial species is above 95 °C at this concentration. The corresponding
CD spectra within this temperature range show only a modest helical
bias (Figure A, left
top, and Figure B,
solid blue circles). Cooling between 49 and 21 °C initiates a
transition to another species based on UV absorbance (Figure A, center bottom, and Figure B, solid red triangles).
The low intensity of the CD signal exhibited between 95 and 21 °C
prevents structural assignment (Figure A, center top). However, cooling below 21 °C results
in a sharp transition evident in both the CD and UV channels (Figure A, right). The CD
spectrum of this final species matches that of (−)-C, although comparing the intensity of the signal to that of 100 mol
% ()-1 at
the same concentration (Figure B, open blue circles) suggests incomplete biasing of the helical
sense.
Figure 2
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom) spectra of -1 with 1 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM
in MCH. Water content was measured to be 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra
were acquired in 2 °C intervals as the sample was cooled between
95 and 5 °C. Arrows indicate spectra changes within the indicated
temperature window. (B) Comparison of traces of CD at 258 nm (blue
circles) and UV absorption at 225 nm (red triangles) for -1 with 1 mol % ()-1 (solid symbols) and 100 mol
% ()-1 (open
symbols).
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom) spectra of -1 with 1 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM
in MCH. Water content was measured to be 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra
were acquired in 2 °C intervals as the sample was cooled between
95 and 5 °C. Arrows indicate spectra changes within the indicated
temperature window. (B) Comparison of traces of CD at 258 nm (blue
circles) and UV absorption at 225 nm (red triangles) for -1 with 1 mol % ()-1 (solid symbols) and 100 mol
% ()-1 (open
symbols).The formation of (−)-C at low temperature even
with only 1 mol % ()-1 is promising preliminary evidence that ()-1 and -1 act as a sergeant and soldier, respectively.
This point can be further illuminated by comparing the intensity of
the CD effect in each state as a function of sergeant content, which
is most conveniently discussed in terms of net helicity (i.e., the
ratio of the CD signal of the S&S copolymer to that of the enantiopure
homopolymer in a given state). Reflecting upon previous S&S studies,[47] an important consideration is that temperature
can strongly influence net helicity. Furthermore, the calculation
of net helicity assumes that the monomers are fully assembled and
that they form a mixture of P- and M-helices of a single state; thus, understanding the population of
each state as a function of temperature is also essential.These
issues are addressed in the subsequent sections using a combination
of experiments and theoretical modeling. To gain insight into the
relationship between temperature and the net helicity within different
states, the concentration of codissolved water is modulated to shift
the transition temperatures. These data are then fitted or simulated
using a thermodynamic mass-balance model to provide insight into the
speciation of the S&S experiments as a function of temperature.
These analyses allow net helicities for each state to be rationally
calculated and compared.
Coassembly of Soldier with
Sergeant ( under Dry Conditions
The transition temperatures of (+)-A → (+)-B and (+)-B → (−)-C for the homopolymer of ()-1 depend on the concentration of water.[45] Similar behavior was predicted for the coassembly
of -1 and ()-1. A series of samples
with 40, 60, 75, 90, and 100 mol % ()-1 (total concentration of 30 μM) was
thus prepared and dried in a desiccator charged with phosphorus pentoxide
(see Figure S6A, SI). These samples contained
20 ± 2 ppm water based on Karl Fischer titration. They were then
analyzed by VT-CD and -UV spectroscopy using the same protocol as
described above (see Figures S7–S12, SI). The CD (top, circles) and UV (bottom) traces in Figure show that the transitions
of (+)-A → (+)-B and (+)-B → (−)-C are shifted to lower temperatures
compared to those observed for the experiment displayed in Figure , which was performed
under ambient conditions. Decreasing the concentration of water effectively
pushes these transitions outside the temperature window in this experiment.
The CD and UV traces both show that the elongation temperature of M (molecularly dissolved monomers) → (+)-A slightly increases as the fraction of ()-1 is increased on the basis of both
the CD and UV traces. The intensity of the CD signal is diminished
as the fraction of ()-1 is decreased—this is particularly evident at temperatures
below 70 °C.
Figure 3
Variable-temperature (VT) CD (top) and UV absorbance (bottom)
experiments
with varying amounts of sergeant ()-1 and a water concentration of 20 ±
2 ppm. In the plot of CD data, the solid line corresponds to the fit
using the thermodynamic mass-balance model. For clarity, each experimental
CD curve and corresponding fit are vertically offset by increments
of 20 mdeg.
Variable-temperature (VT) CD (top) and UV absorbance (bottom)
experiments
with varying amounts of sergeant ()-1 and a water concentration of 20 ±
2 ppm. In the plot of CD data, the solid line corresponds to the fit
using the thermodynamic mass-balance model. For clarity, each experimental
CD curve and corresponding fit are vertically offset by increments
of 20 mdeg.The thermodynamic mass-balance
model for supramolecularcopolymerizations
recently reported by ten Eikelder and colleagues[48] was used to gain further insight into the nature of the
initial coassembly of ()-1 and -1. We specifically aimed to fit the experimental CD data in the region
of the M → (+)-A transition to calculate
the enthalpy of the heterointeraction between ()-1 and -1, which is critical for developing a reasonable
simulation of the entire system (vida infra). Accurate
thermodynamic parameters for the homopolymerization of ()-1 are required. Thus,
as a preliminary step, the previously reported VT-CD data[45] were fitted using this model (see Figure S36 and associated discussion in the SI).Several challenges in this system required the simplification of
assumptions to make the fits feasible. Because of the insolubility
of -1 in MCH (vide supra), it was not possible to experimentally determine
the thermodynamic parameters for the homopolymerization of -1. We therefore estimated on
the basis of the VT-UV data presented in Figure B that the elongation temperature of 30 μM
solutions of -1 is 108
°C, corresponding to an enthalpy of elongation of −92
kJ·mol–1. Additionally, since the mass-balance
models for supramolecularcopolymerizations are computationally intensive,
the number of fit parameters had to be minimized. The entropy of elongation
and the nucleation penalty of the copolymerization of ()-1 and -1 were assumed to be equal to those
of the homopolymerization of ()-1, and the heterointeraction between ()-1 and -1 was assumed to be symmetric with
the heterointeraction of -1 and ()-1. These assumptions are in line with those made in previous uses
of this model.[49,50]The resulting fits of the
CD data are represented as solid lines
in Figure (top).
The CD effect and elongation temperatures of samples containing 75
mol % or more of ()-1 is accurately fitted, but the helical bias of the samples
containing 40 and 60 mol % ()-1 is overestimated. The mismatch penalty (i.e., the
energetic penalty for ()-1 to aggregate into polymers of disfavored helicity)
could thus not be determined accurately (Figure S37, SI). Nevertheless, the model accurately describes the
elongation temperatures of all mixtures, which directly correspond
to the enthalpies of the homo- and heterointeractions.[48] We calculated the enthalpy of the heterointeraction
between ()-1 and -1 to be −83
kJ·mol–1, which is slightly different than
that of the homointeractions of ()-1 (ΔHe =
−86 kJ·mol–1), agreeing with observations
for similar systems.[49−52]
Coassembly of Soldier -1 with Sergeant ( under Wet Conditions
The transition temperatures of (+)-A → (+)-B and (+)-B → (−)-C are shifted back into the temperature window of interest by increasing
the water content. Eleven mixtures of -1 and ()-1 with ratios ranging from 1 to 100 mol % in 10 mol
% intervals were prepared, all with a total monomer concentration
of 30 μM in MCH. To ensure that the samples contained approximately
the same concentration of water, they were simultaneously conditioned
in a humidifying chamber that was charged with brine and MCH (Figure S6B, SI). On the basis of Karl Fischer
titrations, these samples contained 31 ± 2 ppm of water. After
conditioning, the samples were sealed and analyzed by VT-CD and -UV
spectroscopy again using the same protocol described above.To understand the complete data set, it is instructive to first evaluate
the CD spectra of the aggregation of -1 with 60 mol % ()-1 (Figure A,B). The species at 95 °C designated as M exhibits no CD signal and a UV response that is similar
to that observed for solutions of pure ()-1 at high temperature.[45] Upon cooling, the CD signal slightly increases
until reaching 85 °C, below which the CD signal undergoes a nonsigmoidal
increase in intensity. The resulting aggregate is characterized by
a positive Cotton effect at 258 nm, consistent with the formation
of (+)-A. Cooling further to 29 °C causes a sharp
transition to a new species with a positive Cotton effect at 250 nm,
matching the previously reported spectrum of (+)-B. Cooling
below 19 °C results in a final species with a negative Cotton
effect at 238 nm that matches the expected spectrum of (−)-C. This sequence of transitions closely matches the assembly pathway
reported[45] for the homopolymerization of ()-1 and conforms
to the predicted mechanism outlined in Figure C. An analogous set of CD spectra for all
compositions along with corresponding UV spectra and cooling curves
are presented in Figures S13–S21 (SI).
Figure 4
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom) spectra of -1 with 60 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM
in MCH. The water concentration is 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra were acquired
in 2 °C intervals as the sample was cooled between 95 and 5 °C.
Arrows indicate spectra changes within the indicated temperature window.
(B) Traces of CD at 258 nm (blue circles) and UV absorption at 225
nm (red triangles).
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom) spectra of -1 with 60 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM
in MCH. The water concentration is 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra were acquired
in 2 °C intervals as the sample was cooled between 95 and 5 °C.
Arrows indicate spectra changes within the indicated temperature window.
(B) Traces of CD at 258 nm (blue circles) and UV absorption at 225
nm (red triangles).To facilitate making
comparisons between the different compositions,
the CD intensities at 258 nm across all temperatures and compositions
are represented as a heat map (Figure B). A plot of annotated cooling curves of 100 mol % ()-1 and 60% ()-1 with 40% -1 is positioned above the heat
plot to serve as a visual reference for the expected temperature ranges
of (+)-A, (+)-B, and (−)-C. The aggregation pathway of compositions with at least 30 mol % ()-1 closely follows
that of 100 mol % ()-1. That is, the CD spectra of each state matches well with
those of (+)-A, (+)-B, and (−)-C in the expected temperature ranges (Figures S14–S19, SI). At ()-1 content below 30 mol %, the CD spectra
in the temperature range expected for (+)-A do not match
well with the reference spectrum for (+)-A (Figures S20 and S21, SI), nor do they appear
to be linear combinations of (+)-A and (+)-B. The helical structure of these coassemblies thus is not the same
as that of (+)-A.
Figure 5
(A) Annotated CD cooling curves (top)
for 30 μM samples of
100% ()-1 (black filled circles) and 60% ()-1 with 40% -1 (gray open triangles). (B) Heat plot of the CD intensity
at 258 nm for S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1 (M = molecularly dissolved monomers,
[H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm).
(A) Annotated CD cooling curves (top)
for 30 μM samples of
100% ()-1 (black filled circles) and 60% ()-1 with 40% -1 (gray open triangles). (B) Heat plot of the CD intensity
at 258 nm for S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1 (M = molecularly dissolved monomers,
[H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm).On the basis of CD, the transition temperature of M → (+)-A increases as the sergeant fraction is
decreased from 100 to 50 mol %, reaching a maximum of about 87 °C.
However, as the sergeant content is decreased from 50 to 1 mol % sergeant,
the transition temperature decreases. Interestingly, the VT-UV measurements
show that the M → (+)-A transition
temperature consistently increases from 83 °C to above 95 °C
as the ()-1 content is decreased from 100 to 1 mol %, contrasting the behavior
observed in the VT-CD traces. Most likely, aggregates formed at these
high temperatures are rich in -1 with an insufficient fraction of copolymerized ()-1 to bias the helicity.
In addition to a change in elongation temperature, across all compositions,
the width of the transitions M → (+)-A and (+)-A → (+)-B increases, and
the CD intensity of both (+)-A and (+)-B decreases as the sergeant content decreases. In contrast, the (+)-B → (−)-C transition is sharp
at all composition ratios studied, and a strong CD effect for (−)-C is observed even at low sergeant fractions. The
shape of the CD spectrum below approximately 20 °C is consistent
with that of (−)-C across all compositions investigated
[Figures S14–S21 (SI) and 2A].
Simulation of Sergeants-and-Soldiers Experiments
We
attempted to fit the experiments presented in Figures and 5 using the same
routine that was applied to the experimental data presented in Figure . However, as a result
of the experimental uncertainty in the water content measurements,
no satisfactory fit could be obtained (see the Supporting Information). Nonetheless, by simulating rather
than fitting the data, several insights into this multicomponent assembly
can be obtained. In these simulations, we start with the known thermodynamic
parameters for ()-1 homointeractions and the heterointeraction for (+)-A determined above, and we made estimates for the unknown values for
the homopolymerization of -1 and the other heterointeractions. Both the enthalpies and entropies
of the homo- and heterointeractions of ()-1 and -1 in states (+)-B and (−)-C had to be independently selected (Table ). With this set of parameters, we were able
to obtain satisfactory reproduction of the experimental curves (Figure A,B). The only slightly
less favorable heterointeractions that were necessary to obtain the
satisfactory reproduction suggest that the supramolecularcopolymers
all form “blocky” structures, with alternating regions
enriched in either monomer.[45,47]
Table 1
Thermodynamic Parameters
Used to Simulate
the S&S Experiments
parameter
state A
state B
state C
ΔHe,(S)-1–(S)-1 (kJ·mol–1)
–86a
–101a
–131a
ΔS(S)-1–(S)-1 (J·mol–1·K–1)
–155b
–167c
–204c
ΔHe,(S)-1–n-1 (kJ·mol–1)
–83c
–96d
–129d
ΔS(S)-1–n-1 (J·mol–1·K–1)
–155b
–156e
–200e
ΔHe,n-1–n-1 (kJ·mol–1)
–92d
–100d
–134d
ΔSn-1–n-1 (J·mol–1·K–1)
–155d
–145d
–198d
mismatch penalty (kJ·mol–1)
85c,f
0.5d
0.2d
Experimental value based on calorimetry
and Van’t Hoff analyses.
Value calculated using free energy
relationships.
Value determined
through fitting
of experimental VT-CD curves using a thermodynamic mass-balance model.
Estimated values.
Calculated as the average of ΔS( and ΔS
The mismatch penalty for state A could not be determined accurately; see Figure S37 (SI).
Figure 6
(A) Experimental CD traces
of S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1 (total [1] = 30 μM
and [H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm water). The traces are vertically
offset in increments of 25 mdeg for clarity. (B) Simulated CD traces
of S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1. The traces are vertically offset in increments of 25 mdeg for clarity.
(C) Speciation plots for each state observed in the simulated S&S
experiments.
(A) Experimental CD traces
of S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1 (total [1] = 30 μM
and [H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm water). The traces are vertically
offset in increments of 25 mdeg for clarity. (B) Simulated CD traces
of S&S mixtures with -1 and ()-1. The traces are vertically offset in increments of 25 mdeg for clarity.
(C) Speciation plots for each state observed in the simulated S&S
experiments.Experimental value based on calorimetry
and Van’t Hoff analyses.Value calculated using free energy
relationships.Value determined
through fitting
of experimental VT-CD curves using a thermodynamic mass-balance model.Estimated values.Calculated as the average of ΔS( and ΔSThe mismatch penalty for state A could not be determined accurately; see Figure S37 (SI).The simulations closely follow the trends of the CD effect for
all polymer states as well as the transition temperatures observed
in the experimental data. For example, in the case of S&S experiments
under both wet and dry conditions, the (+)-A → (+)-B transition broadens and the transition temperature increases
as the sergeant content is decreased. This behavior is in contrast
to the supramolecular homopolymerization of ()-1, in which (+)-A → (+)-B is sharp and independent of the monomer
concentration. To replicate this behavior in the simulations, -1 is assigned with thermodynamic
parameters that are independent of those of ()-1. The parameters of -1 were selected so that the
free energies of (+)-A and (+)-B become
closer together as the sergeant content is decreased. As can be seen
in the simulated speciation plots (Figure C), the (+)-B state is populated
at increasingly higher temperatures as the fraction of ()-1 sergeant is decreased.
The formation of (+)-A and (+)-B is thus
increasingly competitive as sergeant content is decreased, resulting
in a wider temperature window in which these two aggregates coexist.
Indeed, we observe mixtures of (+)-A and (+)-B over broad temperature ranges in the experimental CD spectra presented
in Figures S10, S11, and S16–S18 (SI).In contrast, the (+)-B → (−)-C transition takes place over a narrow and constant temperature range
across all compositions, and the transition temperature is essentially
independent of the sergeant content. However, the transition temperature
remains dependent on the water concentration, regardless of the sergeant
content. To realize this behavior in the simulations, the enthalpies
and entropies of the homo- and heterointeractions of ()-1 and -1 were set to be similar in value.
An interesting feature of (−)-C is that its entropy
of elongation is much more negative than those of (+)-A and (+)-B. We attribute this disparity to the incorporation
of water molecules, as (−)-C contains more water
in its structure than either (+)-A or (+)-B. The large entropic penalty gives rise to the characteristic dependence
on water concentration observed in the formation of (−)-C.One feature that is not well-captured in the simulation is
the
gradual decrease in the CD intensity of (+)-B as the
temperature is decreased. This behavior is observed both in the homopolymerization
of ()-1 and
in the coassembly of ()-1 and -1. A disparity in cooperativity is likely responsible for the putative
coexistence of (−)-C with (+)-B.
The fitting of the homopolymerization of ()-1 (see the Supporting Information) indicates that the nucleation penalty for (+)-B is greater than that of (−)-C, suggesting
that (+)-B is more cooperative than (−)-C.[48] The asymmetry of the (+)-A → (+)-B transition further supports this hypothesis.[53] The more isodesmic nature of (−)-C allows it to nucleate relatively easily and form with the small
amount of free monomer that is not assembled into (+)-B; thus, (−)-C can coexist with (+)-B even at a temperature at which (−)-C is less
thermodynamically stable than (+)-B. Although the nucleation
penalties were not optimized in the simulation to reflect this behavior,
it is important to note the coexistence of (−)-C with (+)-B when considering net helicity calculations.
Calculation of Net Helicities
On the basis of the speciation
plot (Figure C), over
97% of monomer is consumed at 45 °C, which allows for comparisons
of net helicities to be made at and below this temperature. On the
basis of the experiments in Figure , the transition temperature for (+)-A → (+)-B increases and the transition becomes
broader as the sergeant content is decreased. In Figure , net helicities for (+)-A are plotted for experiments performed at 9, 19, and
45 °C under dry (red triangles) and wet (blue triangles) conditions.
Since net helicities can only be reliably calculated when only a single
polymer state is present, the net helicities with respect to the formation
of (+)-A can only be calculated at temperatures and sergeant
contents at which there is no coexisting (+)-B. For this
reason, some points are excluded from this plot at low temperature
and low sergeant content (see the Supporting Information for details).
Figure 7
Comparison of net helicity as a function of ()-1 content for aggregates
in
states (+)-A and (−)-C at varying
temperature and water content.
Comparison of net helicity as a function of ()-1 content for aggregates
in
states (+)-A and (−)-C at varying
temperature and water content.The bias of the screw-sense as a function of ()-1 content in (+)-A is not strong, exhibiting only modest amplification beyond a linear
response. The net helicity is not strongly dependent on temperature
between 9 and 45 °C, which contrasts with the temperature sensitivity
reported for benzene tricarboxamides in S&S experiments.[47] The helical bias is also not strongly affected
by changes in water concentration within this temperature range, which
is expected because water is not a comonomer for (+)-A.The calculation of net helicities for (+)-B is
complicated
by three factors: the experimental uncertainty of the water content
measurements, the broadening of the (+)-A → (+)-B transition with decreasing sergeant content, and the competition
with the more isodesmic (−)-C. These factors preclude
the quantitative comparison of the net helicities calculated for (+)-B with that observed in the other states. However, at
sergeant fractions below 30 mol %, (+)-B is detected
but (+)-A is not clearly detected (see Figures S20 and S21, SI), which suggests that ()-1 is a stronger sergeant
in (+)-B than in (+)-A.Most strikingly,
strong biasing of the screw-sense is observed
in the formation of (−)-C at low temperature (Figure , dark blue squares).
Even at 1 mol % ()-1, the coassembly clearly forms (−)-C, as evidenced by the negative Cotton effect at 238 nm and the characteristic
shoulder at 257 nm (Figure A), exhibiting a net helicity of 0.42. At 10 mol % ()-1, the net helicity
is over 0.90, and it approaches unity as the sergeant content is further
increased. Using data sets for both wet and dry samples acquired at
9 °C, we can compare the net helicities of (+)-A and (−)-C. Although the net helicities for (+)-A cannot be calculated at low sergeant content (vida supra), at 60% ()-1 the net helicity observed for (−)-C is significantly higher than that of (+)-A (0.98 vs
0.78, respectively). Since there is only a weak temperature dependence
for net helicities calculated for (+)-A, it is reasonable
to compare the net helicities for (+)-A determined at
higher temperatures with the net helicities of (−)-C acquired at 9 °C. At 20 mol % ()-1, the net helicity for (−)-C at 9 °C is 0.93, while the net helicity for (+)-A at 45 °C is only 0.42. Although the molecular packing of these
aggregates remains elusive, the coassembled water molecules play a
direct role in amplifying the expression of the chiral sergeant within
the helical aggregate.
Distal Structural Changes to the Achiral
Soldier Highlight Subtle
Energy Balances
In an attempt to address the poor solubility
of -1, we synthesized
and studied an alternative achiral soldier, iso-1, that features four isononylcarboxamide groups (Figure A). The bulk properties
of iso-1 were characterized by FTIR spectroscopy,
DSC, and POM (Figures S1, S2B, and S4,
respectively, SI); its bulk properties are similar to those of -1 and ()-1. Solutions of iso-1 in MCH are readily prepared, and individual fibers
with lengths on the order of microns were visualized by AFM (Figure S5C,D, SI).A VT-CD and -UV study
was performed using iso-1 as the soldier
and ()-1 as
the sergeant under both wet and dry conditions (Figures S22–S35, SI). In striking contrast to the results
presented above using -1 as the soldier, the use of iso-1 gives
rise to an assembly pathway that does not conform to the mechanism
presented in Figure C. We first consider in detail the S&S experiment with 40 mol
% iso-1 and 60 mol % ()-1 (Figure ). Upon cooling below 79 °C, the monomers
copolymerize to form a previously unobserved species that exhibits
a negative Cotton effect at 258 nm and a UV spectrum that is nearly
identical to that of (+)-A. In fact, the shape of the
CD spectrum is the negative of that of (+)-A (Figure F), and thus, this
structure is assigned as (−)-A. Cooling below
33 °C results in the sharp transformation of (−)-A into (+)-B, and cooling below 17 °C results in
the formation of (−)-C. The aggregate (−)-A is a thermodynamically stable structure and not a result of pathway
complexity or kinetic traps, because the temperature was equilibrated
prior to each measurement. Additionally, (−)-A can be formed not only by cooling the solution from monomers but
also by heating (+)-B above the (+)-B → (−)-A transition temperature.
Figure 8
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom)
spectra of iso-1 with
60 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM in MCH. The water concentration
is 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra were acquired in 2 °C intervals as
the sample was cooled between 95 and 5 °C. Arrows indicate spectra
changes within the indicated temperature window. (B) Traces of CD
at 258 nm (blue circles) and UV absorption at 225 nm (red triangles).
(A) CD (top) and UV (bottom)
spectra of iso-1 with
60 mol % ()-1 and a total concentration of 30 μM in MCH. The water concentration
is 31 ± 2 ppm. Spectra were acquired in 2 °C intervals as
the sample was cooled between 95 and 5 °C. Arrows indicate spectra
changes within the indicated temperature window. (B) Traces of CD
at 258 nm (blue circles) and UV absorption at 225 nm (red triangles).The full set of results of the VT-CD experiments
under wet conditions
are represented as a heat map in Figure B with a visual reference positioned above
it in Figure A. With
90 mol % ()-1, the mixture forms the expected (+)-A → (+)-B → (−)-C transitions as the
mixture is cooled from the molecularly dissolved state M. However, at 80 mol % sergeant, the system remarkably exhibits a
preferred helicity assigned to four different structures as it is
cooled from 95 to 5 °C, proceeding through the sequence of M → (+)-A → (−)-A → (+)-B → (−)-C.
At lower levels of ()-1 content, the system preferentially forms (−)-A over (+)-A within the expected temperature window,
depending on the water content. The elongation temperature of (+)-A (at high sergeant fractions) and (−)-A (at low sergeant fractions) consistently decreases as the sergeant
fraction is decreased. The VT-UV absorption traces closely match the
shape of the CD traces (Figures S27–S35, SI). Thus, given the decreasing elongation temperature of (+)-A → (+)-B and (−)-A → (+)-B as the sergeant content is reduced from
90 to 10%, copolymerization is less thermodynamically favorable than
the homopolymerization of ()-1 or iso-1. Nevertheless,
the transitions (−)-A → (+)-B and (+)-B → (−)-C are sharp
at all sergeant compositions, and the CD effect of the chirality of (−)-C is strong even at low sergeant ratios.
Figure 9
(A) Annotated
CD cooling curves for 30 μM samples of 100% ()-1 (black solid
circles) and 60% ()-1 with 40% iso-1 (gray open triangles).
(B) Heat plot of the CD intensity at 258 nm for S&S mixtures with iso-1 and ()-1 ([H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm).
(A) Annotated
CD cooling curves for 30 μM samples of 100% ()-1 (black solid
circles) and 60% ()-1 with 40% iso-1 (gray open triangles).
(B) Heat plot of the CD intensity at 258 nm for S&S mixtures with iso-1 and ()-1 ([H2O] = 31 ± 2 ppm).It is clear that the subtle difference in molecular
structure between -1 and iso-1 leads to minute changes in thermodynamic
stabilities that
dramatically impact the polymer structure. The emergence of (−)-A in the S&S experiments with iso-1 resembles earlier reports of the “abnormal”
S&S effect observed in covalent polymers.[11,33−41] To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of this effect
in a helical supramolecularpolymer. Interestingly, the distal substitution
appears to only affect the copolymer structure of A,
while the copolymers of ()-1 with both -1 and iso-1 both form (+)-B and (−)-C. We propose that the tighter packing
of the monomers in the polymers amplifies changes in the steric repulsion
between monomers, as the A copolymers do not incorporate
water as a structural comonomer. In contrast, due to the strong enthalpic
release in the water-associated (+)-B and (−)-C, steric factors account for a smaller fraction of the stability
of these polymers. The incorporation of iso-1 imparts a different structure to the copolymers in state A, while the steric difference between iso-1 and -1 is not sufficient
to overcome the enthalpic stabilization in (+)-B and (−)-C to revert their helicities. This balance highlights
the intriguing consequences of binding water to these supramolecular
structures.
Conclusion
We have demonstrated
the S&S effect across multiple helical
states in the supramolecularcopolymers of ()-1 with achiral comonomers and water
molecules. These copolymers show similar water-dependent helical structures
as those observed for the ()-1 homopolymers. Computational techniques were essential
for rationalizing the heterogeneous energy landscape evident in the
S&S experiments with ()-1 with -1. Despite the challenge of accurately quantifying the water concentration,
we qualitatively explain the S&S results as a competition between
the different helical states. This competitive nature can cause the
sharpness and transition temperatures of the helical transitions to
be dependent on the molar sergeant–soldier ratio. We also report
an unprecedented example of the “abnormal” S&S effect
in experiments using iso-1 as the achiral
soldier. The flip in preferred helical orientation of state A indicates that a delicate interplay between monomer structure
and polymer morphology dominates supramolecularcopolymerizations.
Although the molecular structure of these coassemblies remains elusive,
it is evident that water has a profound impact on biasing their respective
helicities. We hope that the phenomena and methodology outlined here
will inspire the development of more structurally diverse monomers
and copolymers, ultimately leading to control over the structure and
function of dynamic macromolecular systems.
Authors: Beatrice Adelizzi; Nathan J Van Zee; Lafayette N J de Windt; Anja R A Palmans; E W Meijer Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Beatrice Adelizzi; Antonio Aloi; Albert J Markvoort; Huub M M Ten Eikelder; Ilja K Voets; Anja R A Palmans; E W Meijer Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-05-18 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Lafayette N J de Windt; Chidambar Kulkarni; Huub M M Ten Eikelder; Albert J Markvoort; E W Meijer; Anja R A Palmans Journal: Macromolecules Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 5.985