Nasrollah Rezaei-Ghaleh1,2, Jaime Agudo-Canalejo3, Christian Griesinger1, Ramin Golestanian3,4. 1. Department of NMR-Based Structural Biology, Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Am Faßberg 11, D-37077 Göttingen, Germany. 2. Institut für Physikalische Biologie, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany. 3. Department of Living Matter Physics, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Am Faßberg 17, D-37077 Göttingen, Germany. 4. Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PU, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Micrometer-sized objects are widely known to exhibit chemically driven motility in systems away from equilibrium. Experimental observation of reaction-induced motility or enhancement in diffusivity at the much shorter length scale of small molecules is, however, still a matter of debate. Here, we investigate the molecular diffusivity of reactants, catalyst, and product of a model reaction, the copper-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition click reaction, and develop new NMR diffusion approaches that allow the probing of reaction-induced diffusion enhancement in nanosized molecular systems with higher accuracy than the state of the art. Following two different approaches that enable the accounting of time-dependent concentration changes during NMR experiments, we closely monitored the diffusion coefficient of reaction components during the reaction. The reaction components showed distinct changes in the diffusivity: while the two reactants underwent a time-dependent decrease in their diffusivity, the diffusion coefficient of the product gradually increased and the catalyst showed only slight diffusion enhancement within the range expected for reaction-induced sample heating. The decrease in diffusion coefficient of the alkyne, one of the two reactants of click reaction, was not reproduced during its copper coordination when the second reactant, azide, was absent. Our results do not support the catalysis-induced diffusion enhancement of the components of the click reaction and, instead, point to the role of a relatively large intermediate species within the reaction cycle with diffusivity lower than that of both the reactants and product molecule.
Micrometer-sized objects are widely known to exhibit chemically driven motility in systems away from equilibrium. Experimental observation of reaction-induced motility or enhancement in diffusivity at the much shorter length scale of small molecules is, however, still a matter of debate. Here, we investigate the molecular diffusivity of reactants, catalyst, and product of a model reaction, the copper-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition click reaction, and develop new NMR diffusion approaches that allow the probing of reaction-induced diffusion enhancement in nanosized molecular systems with higher accuracy than the state of the art. Following two different approaches that enable the accounting of time-dependent concentration changes during NMR experiments, we closely monitored the diffusion coefficient of reaction components during the reaction. The reaction components showed distinct changes in the diffusivity: while the two reactants underwent a time-dependent decrease in their diffusivity, the diffusion coefficient of the product gradually increased and the catalyst showed only slight diffusion enhancement within the range expected for reaction-induced sample heating. The decrease in diffusion coefficient of the alkyne, one of the two reactants of click reaction, was not reproduced during its copper coordination when the second reactant, azide, was absent. Our results do not support the catalysis-induced diffusion enhancement of the components of the click reaction and, instead, point to the role of a relatively large intermediate species within the reaction cycle with diffusivity lower than that of both the reactants and product molecule.
Molecular machines
which convert chemical energy into kinetic energy
or mechanical work are key players in natural and synthetic biology
and nanotechnology.[1−3] Of particular interest to applications such as drug
delivery and nanorobotics is the transduction of chemical energy into
translational motion in the bulk of a fluid.[4,5] Artificial
microscopic particles such as bimetallic rods, Janus particles, and
enzyme-coated beads are known to undergo self-propelled directed motion
powered by their surface catalytic activity, with mechanisms that
are by now well understood.[6,7] Over long time scales,
this ballistic motion is randomized by rotational diffusion, leading
to greatly enhanced diffusive behavior.[8,9] There have
also been theoretical proposals for achieving stochastic swimming
at the nanoscale by breaking the detailed balance, akin to how biological
molecular motors function.[10,11] More recently, experiments
have reported that also single enzymes may experience catalysis-induced
enhanced diffusion,[12−14] although the possible underlying mechanisms and even
the existence of this phenomenon are still under debate.[15−19] Continuing the quest toward translational motion at increasingly
smaller scales, it was later claimed that even molecular-scale systems
(a Grubbs catalyst) exhibit enhanced diffusion during catalysis,[20,21] although this was subsequently shown to be due to a convection artifact
in the measurements.[22]A recent report,
however, has reinvigorated the idea of enhanced
diffusion during molecular catalysis.[23] In these experiments, it was claimed that the mobility of reactant
molecules in a family of organic chemical reactions, including the
Cu(I)-catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC) reaction,
are boosted during catalysis.[23] With the
word “boosted”, it is implied that the underlying mechanism
is an active, propulsive one, akin to stochastic swimming[10,11] associated with the (free) energy released during each catalytic
event. From a theoretical perspective, however, propulsive motion
can only be observed over a very short period of time, as the negligible
inertial effects will lead to rapid dissipation of the kinetic energy
from sudden “kicks” into the environment, leading to
a randomization of the propulsion by rapid rotational diffusion.[15,17−19,24] In addition to theoretical
concerns, this report has been hotly debated from a technical perspective,
especially with regard to the challenges of diffusion measurement
by NMR.[25−31]Pulse field gradient (PFG) NMR is the only technique that
can enable
the monitoring of molecular diffusivity at atomic scale. Here, molecular
“diffusivity” is the rate of (mass) diffusion under
a concentration gradient, as defined through Fick’s equations
of diffusion, and is equivalent to “diffusion coefficient”
at equilibrium, as implicated by the fluctuation–dissipation
theorem. The technique allows us to determine the diffusion coefficients
for the various molecular components of a reaction mixture, including
reactants, catalysts, intermediate species, products, and solvent
molecules. The PFG-NMR technique relies on spatial encoding of molecules
via application of a magnetic field gradient along the z-axis of an NMR tube, through which the frequency of nuclear spins
sitting on the molecules would carry z-coordinate
information.[32] After a diffusion delay,
during which the molecules undergo diffusion in different directions,
including the z-axis, the spatial information is
decoded through application of another field gradient pulse with the
same magnitude but the opposite sign. The NMR signals of nondiffusing
molecules would therefore be completely recovered after the second
gradient pulse and its consequent reversing of nuclear spin frequencies,
while the diffusing molecules will undergo NMR signal attenuation
dependent on their displacement along the z-axis
and the strength of the magnetic field gradient. The NMR signal intensity
versus gradient field strength data will then allow determining diffusion
coefficients separately for each NMR-resolved signal and its underlying
molecular species. Furthermore, when a chemical reaction takes place
in the NMR sample, the real-time PFG-NMR experiments enable monitoring
of molecular diffusion over the course of the reaction. However, in
such cases, proper technical adjustments in NMR diffusion experiments
and data analysis should be made to account for NMR signal intensity
changes due to the kinetics of the reaction and consequent changes
in the concentration, NMR relaxation properties, etc.[33]Here, we investigate molecular diffusion during the
CuAAC reaction
using the adjusted NMR diffusion experiments and introduce two ways
in which artifacts due to time-dependent signal intensities in NMR
diffusion experiments can be identified and corrected, hence enabling
detection and quantification of potential reaction-induced diffusion
enhancements in nanosized molecular systems. It is demonstrated that
the two reactants, catalyst, and product of this reaction experience
distinct reaction-dependent alterations in their diffusivity. Our
results do not support the uniform catalysis-induced diffusion enhancement
in CuAAC reaction, as suggested in ref (23), but instead point to the role of intermediate
species in the CuAAC reaction cycle as the primary cause of reaction-dependent
molecular mobility alterations.The CuAAC reaction is one of
the primary examples of click reactions
which transforms organic azides and terminal alkynes into the corresponding
1,2,3-triazoles (Scheme a).[34,35] Since Cu(I) is the least thermodynamically
stable oxidation state of copper, a combination of Cu(II) salt and
ascorbate, a mild reducing agent, is often used as a source of Cu(I)
in CuAAC reactions performed in aqueous solutions.[35] Unlike the uncatalyzed reaction, which requires much higher
temperatures and produces mixtures of 1,4- and 1,5-disubstituted triazole
regioisomers, the copper-catalyzed reaction is fast at room temperature
and produces nearly pure 1,4-disubstituted triazoles. This is because
catalysis by copper converts the mechanism of the cycloaddition reaction
into a sequence of discrete steps, where the activation energy barrier
for the key rate-determining C–N bond formation is reduced
compared to that in the uncatalyzed reaction.[36,37] Much remains to be understood about the complex mechanism of the
CuAAC reaction, but several lines of experimental evidence and DFT
calculations propose that the reaction begins with the recruitment
of a π-bound copper ion to the alkyne molecule, which acidifies
its terminal proton and therefore facilitates its replacement with
a second copper ion, hence forming of a σ-bond copper acetylide
(Scheme b, steps I
and II). Then, the reversible coordination of the dinuclear copper
intermediate with the azide molecule leads to the synergistic nucleophilic
activation of the alkyne and electrophilic activation of the azide
and drives the formation of the first C–N bond within a strained
copper metallacycle (Scheme b, steps III and IV). The subsequent energetically favorable
steps of copper triazolide formation (step V) and copper substitution
by proton (step VI) will then culminate in the formation of the triazole
molecule as the reaction product.[36−41] Notably, the unique catalytic activity of a copper ion is rooted
in its combined propensity of engaging in π- and σ-interactions
with terminal alkynes and rapid exchange of these
and other ligand molecules (including solvent molecules), especially
in aqueous solutions, in its coordination sphere.[36]
Scheme 1
(a) Copper-Catalyzed Azide–Alkyne Cycloaddition
Click Reaction,
with Numbers (1)–(9) Corresponding to the NMR Signals Studied
Here, and (b) Schematic Depiction of the Catalytic Cycle, Proceeding
through Steps I–VI, Involving Chemical Species 1–7
Results
and Discussion
The 1D 1H NMR spectrum of the sample
containing 0.2
M prop-2-ynol (henceforth, alkyne or reactant 1) in D2O
is shown in Figure a. The two resonances of the alkyne molecule were observed at 4.238
and 2.838 ppm, respectively corresponding to the two methylene protons
(−CH2, signal #4) and one terminal proton (≡CH,
signal #1). Then, the diffusion coefficient of the alkyne molecule
was measured via the PFG-NMR method. In general, the excellent linearity
of the NMR signal intensity vs gradient field strength in log-quadratic
scale, as illustrated in the insets of Figure and Figure S1 in the Supporting Information (SI)), allowed precise determination
of the diffusion coefficient of alkyne (and other) molecules. In addition,
the convection-compensated PFG-NMR experiments confirmed that the
contribution of convection to molecular mobility was negligible (see
the Experimental Section in the SI).[42] The NMR diffusion measurement yielded the same
diffusion coefficient (D0, where the subscript
0 denotes diffusion coefficient at equilibrium, i.e., in the absence
of chemical reaction) of 11.1 × 10–10 m2·s–1 for signals #1 and #4, as expected
for them sitting on the same diffusing molecule.
Figure 1
1D 1H NMR
spectra of the two reactants (a: alkyne, blue;
azide, red) and single product (b: triazole) of the click reaction
measured in isolation (for reactants) or after completion of reaction
(for product). The NMR signals are assigned according to the 2D chemical
structures shown. The gradient-dependent NMR intensity attenuations
of different NMR signals in log-quadratic scale are shown as insets,
in which the linear slopes represent diffusion coefficients of reactants
and product molecules (D0) used as reference
in this study.
1D 1H NMR
spectra of the two reactants (a: alkyne, blue;
azide, red) and single product (b: triazole) of the click reaction
measured in isolation (for reactants) or after completion of reaction
(for product). The NMR signals are assigned according to the 2D chemical
structures shown. The gradient-dependent NMR intensity attenuations
of different NMR signals in log-quadratic scale are shown as insets,
in which the linear slopes represent diffusion coefficients of reactants
and product molecules (D0) used as reference
in this study.Figure a, shows
the 1D 1H NMR spectrum of the sample containing 0.2 M 2-azidoacetic
acid (henceforth, azide or reactant 2) in D2O. The resonance
corresponding to the two methylene protons (−CH2, signal #3) of the azide molecule was observed at 4.097 ppm, and
the associated D0 was 8.4 × 10–10 m2·s–1. The absolute D0 values of alkyne and azide molecules obtained
here were slightly larger than the previously reported values (ca.
7 and 9%, respectively),[28] which is probably
caused by small differences in temperature, imperfect compensation
for convection artifacts, and/or gradient calibration errors; however,
the ratio between D0 of alkyne and azide
molecules was 1.32, in close agreement with the previously obtained
value of 1.35.[28] The sample containing
alkyne and azide molecules each at 0.2 M concentration in the absence
of any catalyst did not show any considerable change in the chemical
shifts of the three signals belonging to the two reactants or their
associated diffusion coefficients. In addition, the NMR spectrum of
the mixed sample did not change during an overnight incubation at
298 K, indicating that the rate of uncatalyzed click reaction was
negligible at this temperature.The 1D 1H NMR spectrum
of the sample containing 64 mM
sodium ascorbate (henceforth, ascorbate or catalyst) in D2O is shown in SI, Figure S1a, where three
signals were observed, at 4.529, 4.036, and 3.762 ppm, respectively
corresponding to the methine proton (−CH) of the ring (signal
#7) and the side chain (signal #3*) and the two methylene protons
(−CH2, signal #2) of the side chain of ascorbate
molecules. The hydroxyl (−OH) protons are not expected to appear
as separate resonances, as they are in rapid exchange with the solvent
at this pH. The same D0 of 5.8 ×
10–10 m2·s–1 was
observed for all three signals (Figure S1a, inset). Addition of 16 mM CuSO4 led to a slight downfield
displacement of peaks #2 and #3* and alterations in their line width
and splitting pattern, while peak #7 disappeared and four new peaks
at chemical shifts of 4.707, 4.623, 4.308, and 4.202 ppm emerged (Figure S1b). The peak at 4.707 ppm underwent
gradual downfield displacement, indicating a chemical reaction occurring
on the time scale of minutes (Figure S1b, inset). The newly emerged peaks belonged to the oxidation products
of ascorbate, such as dehydroascorbic acid, induced in the presence
of Cu(II) ions. After completion of reaction, signals #2 and #3* exhibited
the same diffusion coefficient of 5.9 × 10–10 m2·s–1, very close to the D0 value obtained for the ascorbate molecule
before addition of CuSO4. The newly emerged signals, however,
showed slightly larger diffusion coefficients in the range of (6.0–6.4)
× 10–10 m2·s–1, consistent with them belonging to different molecular species generated
through oxidation of ascorbate to smaller molecules.Next, to
obtain the diffusion coefficient of the 1,4-disubstituted
1,2,3-triazole molecule produced by the CuAAC reaction (henceforth,
triazole or product), we started the reaction by adding 16 mM CuSO4 and 64 mM sodium ascorbate to the mixture of alkyne and azide
molecules, each at 200 mM concentration, and let the catalyzed reaction
proceed to completion during overnight incubation at 298 K. The 1D 1H NMR spectrum of the sample after reaction completion shows
three signals at 8.050 (signal #9), 5.268 (signal #8), and 4.709 ppm
(signal #5) belonging to the product triazole molecule (Figure b). The diffusion coefficients
associated with the three product signals were all approximately 5.9
× 10–10 m2·s–1. Overall, the diffusion coefficients of the four molecules studied
here followed the order Dalkyne (1.1 ×
10–9) > Dazide (0.84
× 10–9) > Dtriazole (0.59 × 10–9) ≈ Dascorbate (0.58 × 10–9), in qualitative
agreement with the molecular-mass-based estimation of their diffusion
coefficients (their molecular masses are 56.06, 101.06, 157.13, and
176.12 Da, respectively). Next, we monitored through real-time 1D 1H NMR experiments how the three proton signals of the alkyne
and azide reactant molecules varied over the course of the CuAAC reaction
triggered by addition of CuSO4 and sodium ascorbate. As
shown in Figure a,
signal #1, belonging to the terminal proton of the alkyne molecule,
underwent a time-dependent chemical shift displacement downfield,
along with a drastic decrease in signal intensity. These changes are
induced by π-coordination of alkyne to copper ion, which leads
to acidification of the terminal alkyne proton and increases the exchange
rate with deuterium ions in solvent.[31]
Figure 2
Kinetics
of reactant consumption during click reaction monitored
through real-time 1D 1H NMR spectra. Time-dependent changes
in signals #1 (terminal proton of alkyne), #3 (methylene protons of
azide), and #4 (methylene protons of alkyne) are shown in panels (a)–(c),
along with 2D chemical structures of the reactant molecules. Time-dependent
changes in NMR signal intensities are shown in (d). Note the difference
in the kinetic profiles of the three signals, reflecting their different
entry points to the click reaction catalytic cycle. In (d), time-dependent
changes in the temperature of the NMR sample during the click reaction
are shown with respect to the equilibrium temperature.
Kinetics
of reactant consumption during click reaction monitored
through real-time 1D 1H NMR spectra. Time-dependent changes
in signals #1 (terminal proton of alkyne), #3 (methylene protons of
azide), and #4 (methylene protons of alkyne) are shown in panels (a)–(c),
along with 2D chemical structures of the reactant molecules. Time-dependent
changes in NMR signal intensities are shown in (d). Note the difference
in the kinetic profiles of the three signals, reflecting their different
entry points to the click reaction catalytic cycle. In (d), time-dependent
changes in the temperature of the NMR sample during the click reaction
are shown with respect to the equilibrium temperature.Signals #4 and #3, belonging to the methylene protons of
the alkyne
and azide molecules, respectively, experienced similar albeit smaller
downfield chemical shift displacement, as well as intensity loss (Figure b–d). On the
other hand, signals #5, #8, and #9, belonging to the product molecule,
showed time-dependent intensity gains, which in the case of signals
#5 and #9 was accompanied by upfield chemical shift displacements,
while a downfield chemical shift displacement was observed for signal
#8 (Figure a–d).
Interestingly, the upfield chemical shift displacement of signal #9
was partially reversed before the completion of reaction, suggesting
the presence of multiple, i.e., more than two, chemical species underlying
this signal. In general, the presence of single NMR signals per proton
species of the reactant and product molecules indicates that the related
exchange processes along the reversible steps of the reaction cycle
are fast with respect to the relevant NMR chemical shift time scales.
In addition, the NMR evidence for the presence of multiple species
underlying signal #9 indicates that the reaction mechanism is more
complex than what is shown in Scheme b.
Figure 3
Kinetics of product formation during the click reaction
monitored
through real-time 1D 1H NMR spectra. Time-dependent changes
in signals #5, #8, and #9, belonging to the product molecule (triazole),
are shown in panels (a)–(c), along with its 2D chemical structure.
In (a), note that the direction of chemical shift displacement is
reversed after ca. 120 min of reaction. Time-dependent changes in
NMR signal intensities are shown in (d).
Kinetics of product formation during the click reaction
monitored
through real-time 1D 1H NMR spectra. Time-dependent changes
in signals #5, #8, and #9, belonging to the product molecule (triazole),
are shown in panels (a)–(c), along with its 2D chemical structure.
In (a), note that the direction of chemical shift displacement is
reversed after ca. 120 min of reaction. Time-dependent changes in
NMR signal intensities are shown in (d).Subsequently, we monitored how the temperature of the NMR sample
changes along the CuAAC reaction. As estimated through the chemical
shift difference between the reference tetramethylsilane (TMS) and
residual water (HDO) proton signals and its temperature dependence,[43] the (average) temperature of the NMR sample
was higher by around 1.4 °C in the beginning of the click reaction
and gradually decreased during the first steps of reaction cycle,
as shown previously,[36−38] which implies that the heat generated within the
NMR tube could not be dissipated instantaneously. Based on the temperature
dependence of water viscosity, the average rise of 1.4 °C in
the temperature reduces the sample viscosity by 3.1% and is therefore
expected to increase the diffusion coefficients by ca. 3.6%.Next, we employed real-time PFG-NMR diffusion measurements in order
to monitor how the CuAAC reaction influences the molecular mobility
of reactants, product, and catalyst molecules. Since the NMR signals
of reactants and product molecules underwent considerable intensity
changes during NMR diffusion measurements, as illustrated in Figures and 3, we needed to account for the reaction-time-dependent signal
intensity changes in addition to the gradient-field-dependent intensity
changes. Otherwise, it would lead to a systematic over- or under-estimation
of diffusion coefficients derived through the standard Stejskal–Tanner
(ST) eq (SI, eq S1), depending on the decreasing
or increasing trend of signal intensities, respectively.[33] To avoid such artifacts, we employed an approach
in which, unlike the standard PFG-NMR diffusion experiment in which
the gradients are ordered in increasing strength, the order of gradient
strengths was shuffled in a way that the correlation between reaction
time (and its consequent signal intensity changes) and gradient strength
approached zero. This approach eliminates the systematic error in
diffusion coefficients due to kinetic effects, although it may enhance
the scattering of intensity vs gradient field strength data and therefore
increase the random error. To reduce the potential random error caused
by gradient shuffling, we utilized the scan-interleaved NMR experimental
scheme so that the time interval between two consecutive gradient
fields was decreased by a factor of 8 or 16 (depending on the number
of scans used in NMR diffusion experiments).First, we monitored
how the effective diffusion coefficient (Deff) of reactants 1 (alkyne) and 2 (azide)
changed over the course of the CuAAC reaction. Both
of the signals belonging to the alkyne molecule, i.e., signals #1
and #4, started with a Deff around 8%
lower than the reference D0 of 11.1 ×
10–10 m2·s–1 measured
in the absence of reaction (Figure a). Along with the progress of the reaction, the two
signals exhibited a further time-dependent drop in their Deff values, albeit with different patterns: the Deff associated with signal #1, i.e., the terminal
alkyne proton, underwent two phases of rapid decay intervened by a
phase of relative stability, while signal #4 exhibited an initial
slow decrease in Deff followed by a more
rapid drop. The time-dependent decay in mobility is in line with the
formation of Cu-alkyne and 2Cu-alkyne complexes (species 2 and 3, respectively, in Scheme b), which are significantly larger than the
uncomplexed alkyne molecule (species 1), especially when
we consider the (dynamic) network of ligand (e.g., water) molecules
in the coordination sphere of copper ions.
Figure 4
Diffusion of the reactants
and product molecules during the click
reaction monitored through real-time PFG-NMR experiments. Both the
alkyne (a) and azide (b) molecules begin with an effective diffusion
coefficient (Deff) smaller than their
reference diffusion coefficients (D0,
average ± std dev, shown as dashed lines) and exhibit further
decay during the reaction. The product molecule triazole (c), however,
shows a time-dependent rise in Deff. The
time-dependent changes in signal intensity are shown as lines.
Diffusion of the reactants
and product molecules during the click
reaction monitored through real-time PFG-NMR experiments. Both the
alkyne (a) and azide (b) molecules begin with an effective diffusion
coefficient (Deff) smaller than their
reference diffusion coefficients (D0,
average ± std dev, shown as dashed lines) and exhibit further
decay during the reaction. The product molecule triazole (c), however,
shows a time-dependent rise in Deff. The
time-dependent changes in signal intensity are shown as lines.Furthermore, as suggested by the reaction mechanism
depicted in Scheme b, the Deff of signal #1 represents the
population-weighted average
of the diffusion coefficients of species 1 and 2, while the Deff of signal #4
is the corresponding average for species 1, 2, and 3. Consequently, it is not surprising that the
two signals of the alkyne molecule followed distinct time-dependent
changes in their Deff during the reaction.
Similar to the signals of alkyne molecules, the azide signal #3 started
with a Deff around 6% lower than the reference D0 of 8.4 × 10–10 m2·s–1. However, in line with the later
entry of azide to the reaction cycle, its Deff remained nearly constant during the first 60–90 min of reaction
(Figure b). It was
then followed by a clear time-dependent decay in mobility, as expected
for reversible coordination of azide with the 2Cu-alkyne complex (species 4). The initial drop in Deff of
azide is likely due to its known, albeit weak, coordination with copper
ions.[36]Next, the Deff of the product triazole
molecule was probed through its well-resolved signals #8 and #9 (Figure c and SI, Figure S2). Interestingly, and in contrast
with the two reactants, the triazole molecule exhibited a clear time-dependent
increase in Deff, so that the limiting
value of Deff was ca. 9–10% larger
than its starting value. The apparent diffusion enhancement toward
the end of reaction can be explained considering the larger size of
copper triazolide (species 6) and especially copper metallacycle
(species 5) compared to the product triazole molecule.Finally, we monitored the time dependence of the Deff of the catalyst ascorbate molecule using the well-resolved
signal #2 (SI, Figure S3). Unlike the reactant
alkyne and azide and product triazole molecules, the starting Deff of ascorbate molecule was slightly (ca.
2%) larger than the reference D0 of 5.8
× 10–10 m2·s–1; however, with the progress of the reaction, its Deff slowly returned to the reference value. The initial
increase in the mobility of the ascorbate molecule is probably caused
by the small increase in the temperature and the resultant decrease
in sample viscosity. It may also be caused, at least partially, by
a signal overlap between ascorbate and its faster diffusing oxidation
products generated after addition of Cu(II) ions. It is also notable
that no considerable change in the diffusion of solvent molecules
was detected.To investigate whether the mobility alterations
of alkyne are caused
by copper π-coordination and/or σ-bond formation alone
or further progression into reaction cycle underlies it, we studied
a mixture of alkyne and catalyst (copper sulfate and sodium ascorbate),
as in the original reaction mixture, but without azide. Consequent
to the absence of azide, the reaction cycle would be stopped at step
II, where 2Cu-alkyne complex is formed. As shown in Figure , signal #1 underwent a gradual
displacement toward upfield chemical shifts along with narrowing of
the signal, which was later followed by intensity loss. Interestingly,
the upfield direction of signal displacement was opposite to the downfield
displacement observed during the full reaction (Figure a), indicating that the chemical species
underlying signal #1 in the dissected and full reactions were different.
Signal #4, however, exhibited time-dependent chemical shift changes
toward downfield, similar to those observed in the full reaction.
The Deff values associated with signals
#1 and #4 were ca. 3% lower than the reference D0 of alkyne; however, in contrast with the full reaction, they
remained nearly constant along the reaction and did not show further
drop. Taken together, our data point to the presence of multiple alkyne–copper
species in rapid equilibrium with each other and propose that an intermediate
species other than copper alkyne complexes makes a significant contribution
to alkyne mobility decay during the click reaction.
Figure 5
Cu(I) coordination of
alkyne in the absence of azide. In (a), time-dependent
changes in the chemical shift and intensity of signal #1, belonging
to the terminal proton, are shown. As shown in (b), the effective
diffusion coefficient of alkyne (Deff)
determined through its signals #1 and #4 is smaller than the reference D0 value (average ± std dev, dashed line)
and remains nearly constant during the coordination process.
Cu(I) coordination of
alkyne in the absence of azide. In (a), time-dependent
changes in the chemical shift and intensity of signal #1, belonging
to the terminal proton, are shown. As shown in (b), the effective
diffusion coefficient of alkyne (Deff)
determined through its signals #1 and #4 is smaller than the reference D0 value (average ± std dev, dashed line)
and remains nearly constant during the coordination process.To verify the importance of using shuffled gradients
in the presence
of signal intensity changes, we also performed experiments in which
gradients were ordered in increasing strength, as in the standard
NMR diffusion experiments. The diffusion coefficients obtained from
a fit of the signal intensity vs gradient field strength data to the
standard ST equation showed significant departures from those obtained
using shuffled gradients. One may thus wonder whether it is possible
to detect, and potentially correct for, the presence of the systematic
artifacts due to signal intensity changes in an experiment that uses
increasing gradient strengths. To this end, we devised two modified
ST equations that account for the time dependence of signal intensities
via two independent methods, which we call the “difference”
and “two-parameter” methods. In the difference method,
we keep track of the order (n = 1, 2, 3, ...) in
which the gradients Q are applied, and consider only the difference between consecutive
gradients, resulting in the modified ST equation,which will not suffer from artifacts as long
as that the signal intensity changes are negligible during the short
interval between two consecutive gradient strengths, rather than during
the whole measurement as with the standard ST equation. In the two-parameter
method, we use a first-order Taylor, i.e., linear, approximation of
kinetics for the signal intensity changes during a full measurement
starting at time t, so that I0(t + Δt) ≈ I0(t) + I0′(t)Δt ≡ I0, + I0,′Δt, and thus consider the modified ST equation,which, besides the diffusion coefficient,
gives information on the average rate I0,′ of signal intensity changes during the measurement. The linear approximation
of the reaction kinetics is justified, considering the short duration
of the NMR diffusion experiment compared to the time scale of reaction
kinetics. Our results confirm that it is indeed possible to detect
and correct for such artifacts (Figure and SI, Figures S4 and
S5). Whereas the standard ST and the two modified ST equations produced
compatible results (in the sense of having overlapping 95% confidence
intervals) when applied to the shuffled-gradient data, the results
of the standard ST and the two modified ST equations for the increasing-gradient
data were incompatible with each other, particularly in the early
stages of the experiment (first few minutes for signal #4 and first
∼100 min for signal #3). On the other hand, the two modified
ST equations gave results compatible with each other and with those
obtained from the shuffled-gradients data.
Figure 6
Comparison of PFG-NMR
diffusion measurements performed using ascending
(standard) and shuffled gradients, each of them analyzed using the
“classic ST” equation (see eq S1 in the SI), as well as the two modified ST equations
(“difference” and “two-parameter”) described
in the main text (see eqs and 2). The signals correspond to the reactants
alkyne (a) and azide (b). Notice how, when shuffled gradients are
used (red symbols), all three ST equations give identical results.
However, when ascending gradients are used (blue symbols), the classic
ST equation overestimates the diffusion coefficient relative to the
two modified ST equations, which in turn agree with each other and
with the shuffled gradient data. The 95% confidence intervals for
all data in (a) and (b) are shown in the SI, Figures S4 and S5, respectively.
Comparison of PFG-NMR
diffusion measurements performed using ascending
(standard) and shuffled gradients, each of them analyzed using the
“classic ST” equation (see eq S1 in the SI), as well as the two modified ST equations
(“difference” and “two-parameter”) described
in the main text (see eqs and 2). The signals correspond to the reactants
alkyne (a) and azide (b). Notice how, when shuffled gradients are
used (red symbols), all three ST equations give identical results.
However, when ascending gradients are used (blue symbols), the classic
ST equation overestimates the diffusion coefficient relative to the
two modified ST equations, which in turn agree with each other and
with the shuffled gradient data. The 95% confidence intervals for
all data in (a) and (b) are shown in the SI, Figures S4 and S5, respectively.
Conclusion
Taken together, our results do not show evidence of boosted or
active diffusion in the context of the click reaction. The observed
diffusion coefficients for the reactants and product of the studied
reaction are all smaller during the reaction when compared to theirs
in the free form. The changes in the measured diffusion coefficients
over the course of the reaction for the NMR signals associated with
reactants and products can be explained by the presence of relatively
large intermediate species within the reaction cycle with lower diffusivities
than both the reactants and the product molecules. The slight transient
increase in diffusion observed for the catalyst can be explained as
arising from changes in sample viscosity associated with a small temperature
increase in the initial stages of the reaction. Moreover, we showed
that is possible to detect and correct artifacts arising from signal
intensity changes during a diffusion NMR experiment, even a posteriori, without the use of shuffled gradients.The conclusions reached here for the molecular-scale click reaction
mirror those that have been reached for a number of nanoscale catalytic
enzymes, for which an initial claim of active enhanced diffusion was
later shown to be a consequence of passive mechanisms such as conformational
changes or subunit dissociation induced by substrate binding and/or
catalysis, or even measurement artifacts.[16,18,19,44,45] From a theoretical perspective, it is important to
bear in mind that the momentum imparted by any sudden impulse is dissipated
almost instantaneously into the surrounding viscous medium and that
any directed motion is randomized quickly by rotational Brownian motion.[15,17−19]Nevertheless, even in cases where the mechanism
behind the diffusion
changes is a passive one, unexpected effects can still arise in an
out-of-equilibrium setting. For example, diffusion changes due to
conformational changes or dissociation can cause directed motion and
inhomogeneous steady states in the presence of gradients, and dissociating
enzymes may reach and react faster with distant catalytic targets.[46,47] In this regard, it is also worth noting that during a chemical reaction
(even one maintained in a steady state) the populations of reaction
intermediates, and therefore the effective diffusion coefficient of
the participating molecules, are no longer bound to the constraints
of thermodynamic equilibrium and may be influenced by, e.g., the relative
kinetic rates of different reactions in the cycle, rather than by
free energy differences only. Accounting for the different diffusivities
of the various reaction intermediates will thus be important in any
setting in which chemical reactions occur inhomogeneously in space,
as is certainly the case in biological cells.
Authors: Jonathan R Howse; Richard A L Jones; Anthony J Ryan; Tim Gough; Reza Vafabakhsh; Ramin Golestanian Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2007-07-27 Impact factor: 9.161
Authors: Gerhard Gompper; Roland G Winkler; Thomas Speck; Alexandre Solon; Cesare Nardini; Fernando Peruani; Hartmut Löwen; Ramin Golestanian; U Benjamin Kaupp; Luis Alvarez; Thomas Kiørboe; Eric Lauga; Wilson C K Poon; Antonio DeSimone; Santiago Muiños-Landin; Alexander Fischer; Nicola A Söker; Frank Cichos; Raymond Kapral; Pierre Gaspard; Marisol Ripoll; Francesc Sagues; Amin Doostmohammadi; Julia M Yeomans; Igor S Aranson; Clemens Bechinger; Holger Stark; Charlotte K Hemelrijk; François J Nedelec; Trinish Sarkar; Thibault Aryaksama; Mathilde Lacroix; Guillaume Duclos; Victor Yashunsky; Pascal Silberzan; Marino Arroyo; Sohan Kale Journal: J Phys Condens Matter Date: 2020-05-08 Impact factor: 2.333
Authors: Thomas S C MacDonald; William S Price; R Dean Astumian; Jonathon E Beves Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 15.336