Cyclen substitution with urea-containing dendrimeric branches. Theoretical study considering the concept of collectivity
- 80 Downloads
- 2 Citations
Abstract
Equilibrium structures of novel dendrimeric compounds consisting of 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane (cyclen) mono- to tetra-substituted with four different dendrimeric branches have been studied. It has been shown using molecular dynamics (MD) that, even in the presence of the macrocycle cyclen, the most stable conformations are those with a globular shape due to close contact interactions between poly-functional branches. No collapse of cyclen occurred, making this cavity available for metal complexation. Terminal branches A=NHCOOtBu, B=OSi(Me)2tBu, C=Imidazole and D=CN have different molecular volumes in the decreasing order: B>A>C>D. This conclusion is in accord with the long range interaction energies, showing that the larger the volume the less the steric hindrance. Considering these energy values, the stability of the systems follows exactly the same tendency as observed for the molecular volume. More polar groups like A=NHCOOtBu and D=CN impart extra stability due to long range interactions between atoms separated by exactly three chemical bonds. The negative charge inside the cyclen cavity increases with the volume of the branches. Besides cyclen, urea groups located at the middle of the branches represent another independent point of negative charge for eventual interaction with small molecules. These compounds show a sum of small contributions of the functionalities in a collective fashion.
Figure Dendrimeric branches from A to D attached to cyclen
Keywords
Cooperative effects Dendrimers Macrocycles Molecular dynamics Molecular mechanicsNotes
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a Grant from CONACyT with contract 137005U.
References
- 1.Menger FM (1991) Angew Chem Int Ed 30:1086–1099Google Scholar
- 2.Bradshaw JS, Krakowiak KE, Izatt RM (1993) Aza-Crown Macrocycles. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 3.(a) Newkome GR, Weis CD, Moorefield CN, Baker GR, Childs BJ, Epperson J (1998) Angew Chem Int Ed 37:307–310; (b) Newkome GR, Weis CD, Childs BJ (1998) Designed Monomers and Polymers 1:3-14Google Scholar
- 4.Chem3D Ultra version 7.0 (2002) CambridgeSoft Corporation, 1986–2002Google Scholar
- 5.Burkert U, Allinger NL (1982) Molecular Mechanics ACS Monograph 177. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- 6.Breneman CM, Wiberg KB (1990) J Comput Chem 11:361–373Google Scholar
- 7.Frisch MJ, Trucks GW, Schlegel HB, Scuseria GE, Robb MA, Cheeseman JR, Zakrzewski VG, Montgomery JA, Stratmann RE, Burant JC, Dapprich S, Millam JM, Daniels AD, Kudin KN, Strain MC, Farkas O, Tomasi J, Barone V, Cossi M, Cammi R, Mennucci B, Pomelli C, Adamo C, Clifford S, Ochterski J, Petersson GA, Ayala PY, Cui Q, Morokuma K, Malick DK, Rabuck AD, Raghavachari K, Foresman JB, Cioslowski J, Ortiz JV, Baboul AG, Stefanov BB, Liu G, Liashenko A, Piskorz P, Komaromi I, Gomperts R, Martin RL, Fox DJ, Keith T, Al-Laham MA, Peng CY, Nanayakkara A, Challacombe M, Gill PMW, Johnson B, Chen W, Wong MW, Andres JL, Gonzalez C, Head-Gordon M, Replogle ES, and Pople JA (1998) Gaussian 98, Revision A.9. Gaussian, Pittsburgh, Pa.Google Scholar
- 8.(a) Connolly ML (1983) Science 221:709–713; (b) Connolly ML (1985) J Am Chem Soc 107:1118–1124Google Scholar
- 9.(a) Tam I, Folkers K, Shunk C, Horofall FL (1953) J Exp Med 98:219–227; (b) Hall LH, Mohney BK, Kier LB (1991) J Chem Inf Comput Sci 31:76–82Google Scholar
- 10.Hunter L, Marriott JA (1941) J Chem Soc, Abstracts 777–786Google Scholar
- 11.Bencini A, Bianchi E, García-Espana MM, Paoletti P (1989) Inorg Chem 28:2480-2482Google Scholar