Seyma Alcicek1, Piotr Put1, Danila Barskiy2,3, Vladimir Kontul1, Szymon Pustelny1. 1. Institute of Physics, Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, 30-348 Kraków, Poland. 2. Helmholtz Institute Mainz, GSI Helmholtz Center for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, 55128 Mainz, Germany. 3. Institute of Physics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, 55128 Mainz, Germany.
Abstract
Well-resolved and information-rich J-spectra are the foundation for chemical detection in zero-field NMR. However, even for relatively small molecules, spectra exhibit complexity, hindering the analysis. To address this problem, we investigate an example biomolecule with a complex J-coupling network─urea, a key metabolite in protein catabolism─and demonstrate ways of simplifying its zero-field spectra by modifying spin topology. This goal is achieved by controlling pH-dependent chemical exchange rates of 1H nuclei and varying the composition of the D2O/H2O mixture used as a solvent. Specifically, we demonstrate that by increasing the proton exchange rate in the [13C,15N2]-urea solution, the spin system simplifies, manifesting through a single narrow spectral peak. Additionally, we show that the spectra of 1H/D isotopologues of [15N2]-urea can be understood easily by analyzing isolated spin subsystems. This study paves the way for zero-field NMR detection of complex biomolecules, particularly in biofluids with a high concentration of water.
Well-resolved and information-rich J-spectra are the foundation for chemical detection in zero-field NMR. However, even for relatively small molecules, spectra exhibit complexity, hindering the analysis. To address this problem, we investigate an example biomolecule with a complex J-coupling network─urea, a key metabolite in protein catabolism─and demonstrate ways of simplifying its zero-field spectra by modifying spin topology. This goal is achieved by controlling pH-dependent chemical exchange rates of 1H nuclei and varying the composition of the D2O/H2O mixture used as a solvent. Specifically, we demonstrate that by increasing the proton exchange rate in the [13C,15N2]-urea solution, the spin system simplifies, manifesting through a single narrow spectral peak. Additionally, we show that the spectra of 1H/D isotopologues of [15N2]-urea can be understood easily by analyzing isolated spin subsystems. This study paves the way for zero-field NMR detection of complex biomolecules, particularly in biofluids with a high concentration of water.
Zero- and
ultralow-field (ZULF)
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is a novel, portable, and cost-effective
technique that enables high-precision chemical analysis through direct
observation of intramolecular spin interactions at ultralow (typically
<100 nT) external magnetic field.[1−6] Because in isotropic liquids direct magnetic dipolar and quadrupolar
interactions average out to zero, under the zero-field regime, an
electron-mediated, indirect spin–spin coupling (also known
as J-coupling) becomes the dominant interaction.[7] This allows the use of zero-field NMR for the
determination of a whole J-coupling network in the
molecule and hence chemical fingerprinting.[8,9] Because
chemical exchange alters spin–spin couplings and NMR relaxation
rates, ZULF NMR is capable of monitoring this process, involving chemical
reactions (bond-breaking and bond-making) or conformational modifications
(bond rotation), as was shown in a recent study.[10] The application of ZULF NMR was recently demonstrated in
the context of biomolecules consisting of 2–5 coupled nuclear
spins.[6,11] However, for larger spin systems, ZULF NMR
spectra become complicated because of the increased number of coupled
nuclei, making the spectral analysis challenging. Here, we present
various approaches for modifying and simplifying zero-field spectra
of molecules containing a large number of spins, some of which undergo
a chemical exchange. For this purpose, we use ZULF NMR J-spectroscopy to investigate solutions of urea, a molecule with a
large coupling network and exchangeable protons.Urea is an
important biomolecule, which plays a vital role in amino
acid and protein metabolism, enabling 80–90% of nitrogen excretion
from the human body. It is produced in the liver through the urea
cycle, transported via the bloodstream, and excreted into urine by
the kidneys.[12] Therefore, measuring the
urea level in urine and blood is a routinely used medical diagnostic
technique to evaluate liver and kidney function.[13−15] Moreover, [13C]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea
have recently become attractive contrast agents for hyperpolarized
magnetic resonance imaging studies, as urea is a highly biocompatible
and valuable marker for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion and
renal physiology.[16−18] Finally, the interest in urea is also stimulated
by a growing demand for robust and reliable compound detection in
fields such as environmental monitoring,agricultural and food chemistry.[19]In our work, we investigate [15N2]-urea and
[13C,15N2]-urea in various solution
environments by observing changes in the zero-field NMR J-spectra. First, we demonstrate the influence of the proton exchange
process on spectra by measuring [15N2]-urea
and [13C,15N2]-urea in an aprotic
solvent, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and a protic solvent, water (H2O). Because the proton exchange rate in urea is both acid-
and base-catalyzed, we then investigate aqueous solutions of urea
at various pH levels. The results are explained by zero-field NMR
simulations, considering the combined effect of chemical exchange
and nuclear spin dynamics using a simple theoretical model. [15N2]-urea was also measured in the mixtures of
H2O and D2O to study the effect of deuterium
nuclei on the zero-field J-spectra. The experimental
results are supported by simulations taking into account the proportion
of 1H/D isotopologues of urea in solution. All spectral
peaks, arising from J-coupling interactions (15N–1H, 15N–D, and 1H–D) in spin subsystems, are identified by analyzing
the energy-level structures of isotopologues using perturbation theory.
On the basis of the presented results, we show straightforward ways
to study complex biomolecules with ZULF NMR by taking advantage of
the chemical exchange process.The urea molecule contains two
−NH2 groups joined
by a carbonyl (C=O) functional group. To analyze the general structure
of J-spectra of [15N]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea, first, numerical simulations
are performed using J-coupling constants shown in Figure .[20,21] Because one-bond 1H–15N coupling in
the −NH2 group is the strongest interaction in this
system, the main features in the J-spectra of both
forms of urea are centered around (3/2)|1JNH| ≈ 133.65 Hz (marked by a dashed line in Figure ), as expected for
an XA2 nuclear spin system corresponding to the transitions
in the manifold with the total proton spin 1 (see, for example, refs (8) and (22)). Hereafter, we refer
to this group of peaks as high-frequency peaks. Other (weaker) homonuclear
and heteronuclear interactions result in the appearance of low-frequency
peaks (<10 Hz) as well as further modifications (splitting and
shifting) of the high-frequency peaks. Specifically, the presence
of an additional, relatively strong 13C–15N interaction in [13C,15N2]-urea
increases the shifts in corresponding energy manifolds, giving rise
to a wider span of low- and high-frequency peaks compared to the spectrum
of [15N2]-urea.
Figure 1
Simulated and experimental ZULF NMR spectra
of [15N2]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea
in aprotic (DMSO) and protic (H2O) solvents. The structural
formulas are shown with J-coupling values used in
the simulation.
Simulated and experimental ZULF NMR spectra
of [15N2]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea
in aprotic (DMSO) and protic (H2O) solvents. The structural
formulas are shown with J-coupling values used in
the simulation.In Figure , J-spectra of [15N]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea in dimethyl
sulfoxide and water are compared.
The experimental spectra of urea in DMSO agree well with the simulation,
especially in terms of peak positions. The lines become substantially
broader (approximately 3 times) when water is used as a solvent (Figure ). This effect is
expected because amide protons are known to undergo chemical exchange
with water protons, and this process contributes to the nuclear-spin
relaxation rate.[23] However, the mere fact
of being able to observe these multiplets in J-spectra
indicates that the proton exchange rate in urea at a neutral pH level
is slow enough for ZULF NMR measurements, compared to the spin evolution
originating from J-couplings. This is also confirmed
by examining the chemical exchange rate for urea in neutral pH, being
equal to approximately 1.9 s–1, which is significantly
slower than the dominant interaction in the system (1JNH).[23] Furthermore,
because of the absence of heteronuclear spin–spin coupling,
the water signal contributes only to a peak at 0 Hz at truly zero
magnetic field, which does not overlap with J-spectra
of target molecules. This feature makes zero-field NMR a promising
modality for the analysis of biological samples with a high concentration
of water (e.g., blood, urine, or cell cultures) because there is no
need for solvent suppression.[24]The
proton exchange process in aqueous solutions of urea is pH-dependent
and both acid- and base-catalyzed. Here, we distinguish two exchange
processes:[25−28]In this part of the work, the effect of the
proton exchange rate on J-spectra is studied by varying
pH of the solution while maintaining the same concentration of urea
(8 M). As shown in Figure , because of the increased proton exchange rate in urea solutions,
the amplitudes of high-frequency peaks (120–150 Hz) gradually
decrease without considerable line broadening at both low and high
pH values. It is clear that, when the proton exchange rate is much
higher than the J-coupling (kex ≫ JNH), 1H
nuclei are effectively decoupled from the rest of the spin system
and the JNH-coupling does not contribute
to the observed zero-field spectra. Therefore, high-frequency peaks
vanish in the spectra of highly acidic (pH 1.4) and highly basic (pH
14) solutions, which is also supported by simulations of the urea
spin system (Figure ; see also Methods). The disappearance of
the high-frequency peaks under highly acidic/basic conditions also
bears a resemblance to the results shown in a recent study on zero-field
NMR of ammonium in highly acidic conditions.[10] The authors of ref (10) reported that an increase in the proton exchange rate causes the
zero-field NMR signals of ammonium to vanish. This is explained by
the nature of the experiment: after prepolarization in a strong field,
a sample spends a significant amount of time (1 s) in a low-field
region (tens of μT) before being detected in zero field. In
our experiment, we are limited to a shuttling time (time between prepolarization
and signal acquisition) of 1 s, because for the shorter transfer times,
vibration noise, stemming from a NMR-tube transport, disrupts the
structure of the spectra. For such a delay, water protons depolarize
despite a guiding field of 10 μT. In the case of a faster proton
exchange, unpolarized protons are more often involved in the exchange
process. This affects the “memory” of nuclear spin orders,
resulting in the reduction of amplitudes of peaks. To verify the influence
of the guiding field strength on the peaks’ amplitudes, the
field was increased by an order of magnitude, which, because of the
increased proton relaxation time T1, resulted
in an up to 25% signal enhancement (Figure S1).[29] The increase of the signal amplitude
in the stronger guiding field is predicted to be universal for molecules
under the rapid chemical exchange and can be exploited in measuring
zero-field spectra of such molecules. The boost in the signal, stemming
from stronger transfer field, may not only be beneficial for remote
prepolarization experiments but also find use in ZULF hyperpolarization
techniques, which rely on the chemical exchange;[30,31] stronger magnetic field slows down relaxation of protons in solution,
which yields higher signal amplitudes of zero-field NMR signals.
Figure 2
Experimental
(top) and simulated (bottom) zero-field J-spectra
of [15N2]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea in aqueous solutions at various pH values.
The peaks arising from one-bond, strong J-coupling
interaction between 15N and 1H are green shaded
(120–150 Hz), while the narrow peaks (around 30 Hz), originating
from one-bond J-coupling between 13C and 15N, are highlighted in red.
Experimental
(top) and simulated (bottom) zero-field J-spectra
of [15N2]-urea and [13C,15N2]-urea in aqueous solutions at various pH values.
The peaks arising from one-bond, strong J-coupling
interaction between 15N and 1H are green shaded
(120–150 Hz), while the narrow peaks (around 30 Hz), originating
from one-bond J-coupling between 13C and 15N, are highlighted in red.On the other hand, a rapid proton exchange leads to the modification
of the effective spin system, which can greatly simplify the observed
spectra. This is demonstrated in the spectra of [13C,15N2]-urea in highly acidic and basic solutions
(red boxes in Figure ), where a narrow peak appears close to 30 Hz. This signal arises
at (3/2)JCN and originates from the J-coupling between 13C and 15N nuclei
in the CN2 spin system, where, because of the rapid exchange,
the protons are effectively decoupled from the rest of the nuclei.
The emergence of the low-frequency peak is also supported by the numerical
simulations for the spin system under rapid chemical exchange (shown
in the bottom of Figure ). It should be stressed that, by taking advantage of the accelerated
chemical exchange, a narrower single peak (1 Hz width) with higher
amplitude arises in the zero-field spectrum because of a modification
of the spin topology from the complex XAB2A′B′2 system to the simple XA2 system. This simplified
spectrum, however, still depends on the molecule-specific combination
of J-coupling strength and coupling pattern, enabling
the chemical fingerprinting.Next, we investigate 1H/D isotopologues of urea. For
this study, we modify the spin coupling network, replacing 1H (spin-1/2) with deuterium (spin-1), by dissolving urea in D2O/H2O mixture. To simulate J-spectra
of urea solutions with various D2O/H2O ratios,
the proportion of each isotopologue in solution is calculated using
a binomial distribution. Because a probability of an amide-proton
site being occupied by deuterium depends on the fraction p of deuterium in the solution, the molar fraction x of each isotopologue is given by:where n is the number of
possible sites where deuterium nuclei can reside and k is the number of deuterium nuclei that each isotopologue contains.
Simulated spectra of all isotopologues are next summed after weighing
each spectrum with an appropriate binomial coefficient. The D–15N coupling constants are estimated using the appropriate JNH constants and the gyromagnetic ratios of
deuterium and proton, where the JND coupling
constant is equal to JND ≈ (γD/γH)JNH. This
approach neglects secondary isotope effects.[32] As a result, we obtain a good agreement between the experimental
spectra of urea solutions with the various ratios of D2O/H2O and their simulated counterparts (Figure ).
Figure 3
Experimental and simulated
zero-field J-spectra
of [15N2]-urea in aqueous solutions with various 1H/D ratios. J-coupling values used in simulations
are shown with chemical structures of an example 1H/D isotopologue
of urea. All isotopologues’ structures and corresponding simulated
zero-field J-spectra are shown in the Supporting Information.
Experimental and simulated
zero-field J-spectra
of [15N2]-urea in aqueous solutions with various 1H/D ratios. J-coupling values used in simulations
are shown with chemical structures of an example 1H/D isotopologue
of urea. All isotopologues’ structures and corresponding simulated
zero-field J-spectra are shown in the Supporting Information.In the analysis of J-spectra of urea 1H/D isotopologues, two nitrogen atoms are treated as equivalent.
Hence, the isotopologues consist of three different spin subsystems:
−NH2, an XA2 spin system; −NHD,
an (XA)B spin system; and −ND2, an XB2 spin system. As shown in Figure , the peaks arising from −NH2 and
−NHD groups are predicted using the first-order perturbation
theory. It should be also noted that signals from the −ND2 group are not observed in the spectra. This results from
the fact that the relative amplitude of the ZULF NMR signal is proportional
to the square of the difference between gyromagnetic ratios of J-coupled nuclei,[7] which equals ≈ 0.0025
(see the Supporting Information for the
detailed energy-level analysis).
Figure 4
Left and right: Energy-level structures
for XA, (XA)B, and XA2 spin subsystems. High and low-frequency
transitions in (XA)B
spin system are denoted by v1–3 and ,
respectively. The transition in XA2 spin system is represented
as v4 which corresponds
to 3/2JXA. The manifolds are grouped by
the quantum numbers IA and IB that denote the spin number of A nuclei and B nuclei,
respectively. Each manifold is labeled by its total spin quantum number F or FT (see Supporting Information for detailed energy level analysis).[5,9] Only a single sublevel in each manifold and a single transition
at each frequency are shown for clarity. Middle: Experimental spectra
of [15N2]-urea in the mixture of D2O/H2O (1:1). For all peaks in the spectrum, the corresponding
transitions (v1–4, )
are determined by the first-order perturbation
theory.
Left and right: Energy-level structures
for XA, (XA)B, and XA2 spin subsystems. High and low-frequency
transitions in (XA)B
spin system are denoted by v1–3 and ,
respectively. The transition in XA2 spin system is represented
as v4 which corresponds
to 3/2JXA. The manifolds are grouped by
the quantum numbers IA and IB that denote the spin number of A nuclei and B nuclei,
respectively. Each manifold is labeled by its total spin quantum number F or FT (see Supporting Information for detailed energy level analysis).[5,9] Only a single sublevel in each manifold and a single transition
at each frequency are shown for clarity. Middle: Experimental spectra
of [15N2]-urea in the mixture of D2O/H2O (1:1). For all peaks in the spectrum, the corresponding
transitions (v1–4, )
are determined by the first-order perturbation
theory.The observation of quadrupolar
nuclei (spin > 1/2) in zero-field
NMR is challenging because of their additional electric influence
on reorientation of nuclei that can cause fast relaxation.[29] Previous studies show that even though the J-couplings to deuterium, 14N, and 35/37Cl nuclei may not be directly visible as peaks in zero-field spectra,
they may cause additional line-broadening.[5,33] Conversely,
in the study on zero-field NMR of quadrupolar nuclei, peaks originating
from J-coupling interactions of 1H–D
and 1H–14N are shown in J-spectra of ammonium isotopologues.[34] Because
of a relatively small electric moment of deuterium and a high local
symmetry of 14N-ammonium resulting in small nuclear quadrupolar
interactions, the detection of J-coupling interactions
of such nuclei in zero-field NMR is feasible.[29]Our results demonstrate that zero-field NMR is able to detect 1H/D isotopologues of urea molecules as well as provide information
on 1H/D ratio in solution through simulation of J-spectrum. We also show that J-spectra
for the complex molecules with more than two heteronuclei can be interpreted
clearly by analyzing the energy structure of each small spin subgroup
separately.To summarize, we investigated urea, one of the crucial
biomolecules,
under various solution conditions using ZULF NMR. We demonstrate that
the compound can be readily detected in water by modifying spin topology
under the chemical exchange process. Our results can be extrapolated
to other biomolecules with similar structures (e.g., amino acids),
facilitating various biochemical research. We also report that the J-spectra of complex molecules, such as urea isotopologues,
can be clearly interpreted by identifying simple subgroups in the
system and analyzing their energy structures independently. All the
experimental results are congruent with simulations, confirming our
theoretical interpretation. This work could enable future in vivo/in vitro investigations of complex
biomolecules. Such studies might be possible in biofluids (e.g., blood,
urine, etc.) with a high concentration of water.
Specifically, one of the significant clinical analysis methods, the
quantification of urea in urine and blood, will be a subject of our
future research. However, in the presented study, we worked with highly
concentrated (5–8 M), isotopically enriched urea solutions.
Even with such high concentrations, low thermal prepolarization, provided
by the 1.8 T magnet, results in weak ZULF NMR signals. To overcome
this limitation, zero-field NMR can be combined with hyperpolarization
methods such as parahydrogen-induced polarization (PHIP),[35,36] signal amplification by reversible exchange (SABRE),[37] dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP),[10]etc. However, because these
methods are limited to just a selection of molecules, the more universal
exchange-based polarization methods such as SABRE-RELAY and PHIP-X
may be preferable for a diverse set of biomolecules.[30,31]
Methods
All chemicals were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
and used without
further purification. [13C,15N2]-urea
(CAS# 58069-83-3) and [15N2]-urea (CAS# 2067-80-3)
solutions at various pH values were prepared in an 8 M concentration
by dissolving in sodium hydroxide (CAS# 1310-73-2) or hydrochloric
acid (CAS# 7647-01-0). The pH of each sample was measured at room
temperature using a portable pH meter (Mettler Toledo Seven2Go) with
a micro electrode (Mettler-Toledo InLab Pro-ISM). For the study of
the 1H–D exchange, 8 M [15N2]-urea solutions were prepared by dissolving urea in distilled water,
D2O (CAS# 7789-20-0), and 25%, 50%, and 75% distilled water–D2O (CAS# 7789-20-0) mixtures. For preparation of urea solutions
in an aprotic solvent, [13C,15N2]-urea
(CAS# 58069-83-3) and [15N2]-urea were dissolved
in DMSO (CAS# 67-68-5) with a final concentration of 5.4 M. Each sample
(0.15 mL) was placed inside a standard 5 mm NMR tube and then flame-sealed
under vacuum (<10–4 mbar) following degassing
by several freeze–pump–thaw cycles.The NMR samples
are thermally polarized for 20 s using a 1.8 T
magnet placed above the magnetic shield and mechanically shuttled
into the zero-field detection region (inside a magnetic shield), where
the magnetic field of the nuclear spins is measured using a home-built
alkali-vapor atomic magnetometer. During the transfer, lasting roughly
300 ms (plus an additional 700 ms delay), a guiding field of 10 μT
is applied by a solenoid wrapped along the whole length of the shuttling
path. When the sample reaches the detection area, the guiding field
is turned off suddenly to generate an oscillating NMR signal.[7] Each zero-field NMR spectrum is the result of
averaging 2048 transients. The entire data processing is performed
using Python. A comprehensive description of the experimental setup
and a detailed explanation of data processing can be found in ref (5).A high-performance
spin simulation library Spintrum is employed
to simulate zero-field NMR spectra through numerical diagonalization
of density matrices describing the spin systems.[3,38] The J-coupling values in the simulations are taken directly
from the literature or estimated using the gyromagnetic ratios of
nuclei (see discussion above). Simulations of chemical exchange effects
on the zero-field spectra of urea were obtained using an approach
presented in ref (10). Details of the calculations as well as a discussion of possible
shortcomings of the used exchange model are discussed in the Supporting Information.
Authors: John W Blanchard; Micah P Ledbetter; Thomas Theis; Mark C Butler; Dmitry Budker; Alexander Pines Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Mark C Butler; Micah P Ledbetter; Thomas Theis; John W Blanchard; Dmitry Budker; Alexander Pines Journal: J Chem Phys Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Mark C Butler; Gwendal Kervern; Thomas Theis; Micah P Ledbetter; Paul J Ganssle; John W Blanchard; Dmitry Budker; Alexander Pines Journal: J Chem Phys Date: 2013-06-21 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Michael C D Tayler; Thomas Theis; Tobias F Sjolander; John W Blanchard; Arne Kentner; Szymon Pustelny; Alexander Pines; Dmitry Budker Journal: Rev Sci Instrum Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 1.523
Authors: Danila A Barskiy; Michael C D Tayler; Irene Marco-Rius; John Kurhanewicz; Daniel B Vigneron; Sevil Cikrikci; Ayca Aydogdu; Moritz Reh; Andrey N Pravdivtsev; Jan-Bernd Hövener; John W Blanchard; Teng Wu; Dmitry Budker; Alexander Pines Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Erik T Van Dyke; James Eills; Román Picazo-Frutos; Kirill F Sheberstov; Yinan Hu; Dmitry Budker; Danila A Barskiy Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 14.957