Loading…
Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants
The formation of inclusion complexes of the water-soluble -sulfonatocalix[ ]arenes, where = 4 or 6, with the Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) GD, or Soman, and commonly used dialkyl methylphosphonate simulants has been studied by experimental solution NMR methods and by Molecular Mechanics (MMFF) and se...
Saved in:
Published in: | Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2018-01, Vol.23 (1), p.207 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 207 |
container_title | Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) |
container_volume | 23 |
creator | Ede, Jayne A Cragg, Peter J Sambrook, Mark R |
description | The formation of inclusion complexes of the water-soluble
-sulfonatocalix[
]arenes, where
= 4 or 6, with the Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) GD, or Soman, and commonly used dialkyl methylphosphonate simulants has been studied by experimental solution NMR methods and by Molecular Mechanics (MMFF) and semi-empirical (PM6) calculations. Complex formation in non-buffered and buffered solutions is driven by the hydrophobic effect, and complex stoichiometry determined as 1:1 for all host:guest pairs. Low affinity complexes (
< 100 M
) are observed for all guests, attributed to poor host-guest complementarity and the role of buffer cation species accounts for the low affinity of the complexes. Comparison of CWA and simulant behavior adds to understanding of CWA-simulant correlations and the challenges of simulant selection. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/molecules23010207 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_16f8bbea524e4866854ec9fc681f2620</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_16f8bbea524e4866854ec9fc681f2620</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2002822124</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplks9u1DAQxiMEoqXwAFyQJS7lEPC_OPEFaVmgVKrooVQcLccZ73rl2Fs7KfRFeF5ctlRdOFi2Zr752TP-quolwW8Zk_jdGD2Y2UOmDBNMcfuoOiSc4pphLh8_OB9Uz3LeYEwJJ83T6oBK1hDa0MPq1zKOW51cjgFFiz64MLiwQgtrXXCTg3wb_a4nSPVF9HPvAS21dz91glCSP9y0RtMa0Hla6RC365jLSnNGXyFdA1qsIEzoIo46oOOTj2-QDgMqV44x-Jv6MsOwL3Tj7HWY8vPqidU-w4u7_ai6_Pzp2_JLfXZ-crpcnNWGSzbVYLhuARvaSGOEZIIwLIkU2hpbeifa9q0YZE81HUiHcdc3pu2EtNY0utfAjqrTHXeIeqO2yY063aionfoTiGmldJqc8aCIsF3fg24oB94J0TUcjLRGdMRSQXFhvd-xtnM_wmBKQ0n7Peh-Jri1WsVrJTBpedMVwPEdIMWrGfKkRpcN-DIRiHNWRHaykVhiVqSv_5Fu4pxCGZWi5Zs7SgnlRUV2KpNizgns_WMIVrcOUv85qNS8etjFfcVfy7DfssDGLQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2002822124</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Ede, Jayne A ; Cragg, Peter J ; Sambrook, Mark R</creator><creatorcontrib>Ede, Jayne A ; Cragg, Peter J ; Sambrook, Mark R</creatorcontrib><description>The formation of inclusion complexes of the water-soluble
-sulfonatocalix[
]arenes, where
= 4 or 6, with the Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) GD, or Soman, and commonly used dialkyl methylphosphonate simulants has been studied by experimental solution NMR methods and by Molecular Mechanics (MMFF) and semi-empirical (PM6) calculations. Complex formation in non-buffered and buffered solutions is driven by the hydrophobic effect, and complex stoichiometry determined as 1:1 for all host:guest pairs. Low affinity complexes (
< 100 M
) are observed for all guests, attributed to poor host-guest complementarity and the role of buffer cation species accounts for the low affinity of the complexes. Comparison of CWA and simulant behavior adds to understanding of CWA-simulant correlations and the challenges of simulant selection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1420-3049</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1420-3049</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/molecules23010207</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29351252</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Affinity ; Aromatic compounds ; Biological & chemical weapons ; Calixarenes ; Chemical warfare ; chemical warfare agent ; Complementarity ; Complex formation ; complexation ; computational ; hydrophobic effect ; Hydrophobicity ; inclusion complex ; Inclusion complexes ; nerve agent ; Stoichiometry ; supramolecular ; Water chemistry</subject><ispartof>Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2018-01, Vol.23 (1), p.207</ispartof><rights>Copyright MDPI AG 2018</rights><rights>2018 by the authors. 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6134-2093</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2002822124/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2002822124?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,74998</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29351252$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ede, Jayne A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cragg, Peter J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sambrook, Mark R</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants</title><title>Molecules (Basel, Switzerland)</title><addtitle>Molecules</addtitle><description>The formation of inclusion complexes of the water-soluble
-sulfonatocalix[
]arenes, where
= 4 or 6, with the Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) GD, or Soman, and commonly used dialkyl methylphosphonate simulants has been studied by experimental solution NMR methods and by Molecular Mechanics (MMFF) and semi-empirical (PM6) calculations. Complex formation in non-buffered and buffered solutions is driven by the hydrophobic effect, and complex stoichiometry determined as 1:1 for all host:guest pairs. Low affinity complexes (
< 100 M
) are observed for all guests, attributed to poor host-guest complementarity and the role of buffer cation species accounts for the low affinity of the complexes. Comparison of CWA and simulant behavior adds to understanding of CWA-simulant correlations and the challenges of simulant selection.</description><subject>Affinity</subject><subject>Aromatic compounds</subject><subject>Biological & chemical weapons</subject><subject>Calixarenes</subject><subject>Chemical warfare</subject><subject>chemical warfare agent</subject><subject>Complementarity</subject><subject>Complex formation</subject><subject>complexation</subject><subject>computational</subject><subject>hydrophobic effect</subject><subject>Hydrophobicity</subject><subject>inclusion complex</subject><subject>Inclusion complexes</subject><subject>nerve agent</subject><subject>Stoichiometry</subject><subject>supramolecular</subject><subject>Water chemistry</subject><issn>1420-3049</issn><issn>1420-3049</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNplks9u1DAQxiMEoqXwAFyQJS7lEPC_OPEFaVmgVKrooVQcLccZ73rl2Fs7KfRFeF5ctlRdOFi2Zr752TP-quolwW8Zk_jdGD2Y2UOmDBNMcfuoOiSc4pphLh8_OB9Uz3LeYEwJJ83T6oBK1hDa0MPq1zKOW51cjgFFiz64MLiwQgtrXXCTg3wb_a4nSPVF9HPvAS21dz91glCSP9y0RtMa0Hla6RC365jLSnNGXyFdA1qsIEzoIo46oOOTj2-QDgMqV44x-Jv6MsOwL3Tj7HWY8vPqidU-w4u7_ai6_Pzp2_JLfXZ-crpcnNWGSzbVYLhuARvaSGOEZIIwLIkU2hpbeifa9q0YZE81HUiHcdc3pu2EtNY0utfAjqrTHXeIeqO2yY063aionfoTiGmldJqc8aCIsF3fg24oB94J0TUcjLRGdMRSQXFhvd-xtnM_wmBKQ0n7Peh-Jri1WsVrJTBpedMVwPEdIMWrGfKkRpcN-DIRiHNWRHaykVhiVqSv_5Fu4pxCGZWi5Zs7SgnlRUV2KpNizgns_WMIVrcOUv85qNS8etjFfcVfy7DfssDGLQ</recordid><startdate>20180119</startdate><enddate>20180119</enddate><creator>Ede, Jayne A</creator><creator>Cragg, Peter J</creator><creator>Sambrook, Mark R</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6134-2093</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180119</creationdate><title>Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants</title><author>Ede, Jayne A ; Cragg, Peter J ; Sambrook, Mark R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Affinity</topic><topic>Aromatic compounds</topic><topic>Biological & chemical weapons</topic><topic>Calixarenes</topic><topic>Chemical warfare</topic><topic>chemical warfare agent</topic><topic>Complementarity</topic><topic>Complex formation</topic><topic>complexation</topic><topic>computational</topic><topic>hydrophobic effect</topic><topic>Hydrophobicity</topic><topic>inclusion complex</topic><topic>Inclusion complexes</topic><topic>nerve agent</topic><topic>Stoichiometry</topic><topic>supramolecular</topic><topic>Water chemistry</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ede, Jayne A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cragg, Peter J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sambrook, Mark R</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest - Health & Medical Complete保健、医学与药学数据库</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Molecules (Basel, Switzerland)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ede, Jayne A</au><au>Cragg, Peter J</au><au>Sambrook, Mark R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants</atitle><jtitle>Molecules (Basel, Switzerland)</jtitle><addtitle>Molecules</addtitle><date>2018-01-19</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>207</spage><pages>207-</pages><issn>1420-3049</issn><eissn>1420-3049</eissn><abstract>The formation of inclusion complexes of the water-soluble
-sulfonatocalix[
]arenes, where
= 4 or 6, with the Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) GD, or Soman, and commonly used dialkyl methylphosphonate simulants has been studied by experimental solution NMR methods and by Molecular Mechanics (MMFF) and semi-empirical (PM6) calculations. Complex formation in non-buffered and buffered solutions is driven by the hydrophobic effect, and complex stoichiometry determined as 1:1 for all host:guest pairs. Low affinity complexes (
< 100 M
) are observed for all guests, attributed to poor host-guest complementarity and the role of buffer cation species accounts for the low affinity of the complexes. Comparison of CWA and simulant behavior adds to understanding of CWA-simulant correlations and the challenges of simulant selection.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>29351252</pmid><doi>10.3390/molecules23010207</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6134-2093</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1420-3049 |
ispartof | Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2018-01, Vol.23 (1), p.207 |
issn | 1420-3049 1420-3049 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_16f8bbea524e4866854ec9fc681f2620 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central |
subjects | Affinity Aromatic compounds Biological & chemical weapons Calixarenes Chemical warfare chemical warfare agent Complementarity Complex formation complexation computational hydrophobic effect Hydrophobicity inclusion complex Inclusion complexes nerve agent Stoichiometry supramolecular Water chemistry |
title | Comparison of Binding Affinities of Water-Soluble Calixarenes with the Organophosphorus Nerve Agent Soman (GD) and Commonly-Used Nerve Agent Simulants |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T14%3A05%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Binding%20Affinities%20of%20Water-Soluble%20Calixarenes%20with%20the%20Organophosphorus%20Nerve%20Agent%20Soman%20(GD)%20and%20Commonly-Used%20Nerve%20Agent%20Simulants&rft.jtitle=Molecules%20(Basel,%20Switzerland)&rft.au=Ede,%20Jayne%20A&rft.date=2018-01-19&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=207&rft.pages=207-&rft.issn=1420-3049&rft.eissn=1420-3049&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/molecules23010207&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2002822124%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c493t-ec4a7e0c259cc69361309196afcf4201afb76d9b2a2d18008b5c7869ffc5abae3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2002822124&rft_id=info:pmid/29351252&rfr_iscdi=true |