Abstract
The deceptively simple act of molecular recognition is the result of a balancing act between a variety of intermolecular interactions. Through the use of structural chemistry, interpreted against a background of calculated molecular electrostatic potential surfaces it is possible to identify binding preferences supramolecular patterns of behavior of discrete molecular species. The outcome is robust supramolecular synthetic strategies based on tunable site-specific intermolecular interactions that facilitate the preparation of co-crystals and specific solid-state motifs via selective and hierarchical self-assembly.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Effective and successful synthetic crystal engineering demands an ability to organize and connect discrete molecular or ionic blocks into desired solid-state architectures with well-defined topologies and metrics. Such endeavors rely on relatively weak and reversible intermolecular interactions that facilitate the preparation of co-crystals and heteromeric constructions through selective and hierarchical self-assembly. This type of synthesis requires reliable structural information regarding the relative importance of the most commonly used non-covalent synthetic tools; hydrogen bonds and halogen bonds.
The most recent attempt [1] at defining hydrogen bonding arrives almost a century after Latimer and Rodebush proposed the concept of hydrogen bonding [2]. The dominant contribution in most hydrogen-bond interactions is the electrostatic component, but the hydrogen bond is partially covalent in nature, [3, 4] and induction and dispersion, in addition to induced covalency and exchange correlation from short range repulsion, all contribute to the complexity of this chemical bond [5, 6]. Crystallographic data have been used to characterize hydrogen bonding although it is difficult to decide upon definitive hydrogen bond distances [7, 8] or energies, [9, 10] as parameters for a definition and instead the linearity of a hydrogen bond has been identified as the “discriminative attribute” [11]. Spectroscopic studies reveal that hydrogen bonds frequently result in a red-shift of X-H bands in the IR [12, 13] and a down-field shift in NMR [14] However, alternative interpretations remain as to whether these methods produce consistent changes in response to hydrogen-bond interactions [15, 16].
Halogen bonding was highlighted as a viable non-covalent interaction by Hassel, [17] and it has recently received considerable attention from the crystal engineering community and beyond [18]. The halogen bond (XB) shows fundamental similarities to the hydrogen bond, and it has been debated in ways that are reminiscent of the way in which hydrogen bonding has been described. This attention to halogen bonding is understandable given its documented importance in supramolecular synthesis, materials chemistry, biological systems and drug design [19, 20]. Halogen bond strength and effectiveness are also “tunable” through a variety of covalent modifications [21, 22]. Electron-withdrawing groups in suitable locations facilitate redistribution of electron density thereby making the halogen atom more electropositive and thus a more effective halogen-bond donor. However, electrostatic forces are not exclusively responsible for the power of halogen bonds and dispersion and induction also play a role, [23] which means that the debate about the nature of different halogen-bond interactions is very similar to that which has accompanied the hydrogen bond. While accurate energies and geometries can be determined by calculations many methods are expensive and often difficult for large halogen-bonding complexes [24, 25].
The question is how do we now develop strategies that effectively utilize the synthetic possibilities that these two interactions offer without having to resort to chance or to some supramolecular combinatorial approach [26,27,28,29,30]? One way of getting some answers may be through systematic structural studies where relatively simple custom-designed probe molecules, equipped with potentially competing hydrogen- and halogen-bond donor sites, are introduced to a series of molecules decorated with varying accessible acceptor sites. By examining the structural outcome of a sufficient number of experiments, it may be possible to begin to identify some of the finer details in the structural landscape that surrounds competing (or complementary) hydrogen- and halogen bonds [30,31,32,33].
2 Hydrogen-Bond Directed Assembly of Co-crystals
To develop supramolecular synthetic strategies based on hydrogen bonding, we must identify a series of chemical functional groups that display reliable binding preferences [34]. The molecular recognition preferences of these groups can then be explored systematically in order to establish a hierarchy of hydrogen-bond preferences [35].
Hydrogen bonds can be considered primarily electrostatic attractive forces where the hydrogen bond donor is the positively charged site and the acceptor the negatively charged group. By quantifying this charge we can develop the means for quantifying the expected relative importance of different hydrogen bond donors and acceptors [36]. Simple semi-empirical calculations (AM1) provide molecular electrostatic potential values that can be used as quantitative approximations for the charges on individual donor and acceptor groups.
According to Etter’s rules, the best hydrogen bond donor forms a hydrogen bond with the best acceptor and the second best donor binds to the second best acceptor [37]. Therefore we can postulate that the donor with the highest positive molecular electrostatic potential value will preferentially bind to the acceptor with the highest negative molecular electrostatic potential value and the donor with the second highest value will bind to the acceptor with second highest value. In order to test the validity of this hypothesis we focused on five different hydrogen-bond donors, (Fig. 3.1).
To test the binding preferences of cyanooximes, acetyloximes, carboxylic acids, phenols, and amines, a series of asymmetric ditopic donor molecules decorated with a combination of these functional groups were synthesized and characterized, (Fig. 3.2). The molecular electrostatic potential values shown were calculated using semi-empirical methods.
These ligands were co-crystallized with a series of asymmetric ditopic acceptors (see Fig. 3.3 for one example) and suitable crystals obtained (from slow evaporation) were analyzed by single crystal X-ray diffraction.
The crystal structures obtained show that the best donor forms a hydrogen bond to the best acceptor and the second best donor binds to the second best acceptor (ranking based upon the values obtained from molecular electrostatic potential calculations), (Fig. 3.3).
All of the crystal structures obtained in this series display hydrogen-bond (HB) patterns and connectivities that can be rationalized in the context of preferences based on the molecular electrostatic potential calculations. Of course, even though hydrogen bonds have considerable strength and directionality, they are reversible which means that synthon polymorphism [38] and synthon crossover [39] are always possible in synthetic crystal engineering, and solvent effects can also be expected to influence the outcome (much as can be observed in conventional organic synthesis). Therefore, even though exceptions are to be expected, it is still very worthwhile to be able to identify patterns of structural behaviour, because trends clearly provide useful starting points for further studies that can validate or refine early observations.
3 Expanding the Scope of Hydrogen-Bond Driven Co-Crystal Synthesis
To provide more support for a supramolecular synthetic strategy informed by calculated electrostatic molecular potential surfaces, we expanded our library of ditopic molecules with two different HB acceptor sites [40]. Our choice of building block was driven by a survey of the Cambridge Structural Database (CSD), [41] which plays a key role in offering extensive and appropriate structural information. In the search of the database, a combination of a carboxylic acid and a 2-aminopyridine based moiety yielded 27 hits whereas a combination of carboxylic acid and pyridine groups gave 202 hits [42]. The purpose of this search was to unambiguously show that carboxylic acids have the capability to bind to both 2-aminopyridine and pyridine based acceptor sites. We subsequently wanted to identify any possible preference of carboxylic acids for either of the two binding sites so we chose a target molecular decorated with both functional groups. Aminopyrazine was the natural choice having 2-aminopyridine and a pyridine-type site attached to the same backbone. In order to tune the possible interaction strengths of these sites we modified the aromatic backbone with one or two bromine atoms, respectively, in order to alter the electrostatic potential at the primary hydrogen-bond acceptor site, (Fig. 3.4). We obtained ten crystal structures and 3/10 times the carboxylic acid moiety binds exclusively at the 2-amino end of pyrazine. In the remaining 7/10 there is no pronounced synthon selectivity since the carboxylic acid binds to the 2-amino and the N-4 end of pyrazine at the same time (producing discrete trimers).
4 Establishing a Hierarchy of Halogen-Bond (XB) Preferences
Etter’s groundbreaking work [43] on the preparation of co-crystals using hydrogen bonds and co-crystallization reactions can be used as probes of the competition between different hydrogen-bonding interactions. Since halogen bonds are also governed to a large extent by electrostatics it is reasonable to expect that they would follow the hierarchy of interactions in a similar manner. To test our hypothesis, we designed and synthesized eight asymmetric ditopic halogen bond donor molecules, (Fig. 3.5), containing two halogen-bond donor sites with slightly different electrostatic potential value. We subsequently allowed these ditopic XB donor molecules to react with a variety of single point XB acceptors, symmetric ditopic acceptors and asymmetric ditopic XB acceptors.
According to molecular electrostatic potential surface calculations, iodine should be a better XB donor site than bromine which should make it bind preferentially to the only available acceptor pyridine site. We obtained two crystal structures, (Fig. 3.6), and in both cases the halogen bonding occurs as anticipated.
5 Modular Non-covalent Synthesis with Hydrogen- and Halogen Bonds
In order to refine supramolecular synthesis and to devise more robust synthetic ‘reactions’, it is necessary to develop supramolecular strategies that can accommodate two or more different non-covalent interactions in such a way that they are unlikely to interfere with each other. A suitable complement to widely studied hydrogen-bond based strategy could be provided by halogen bonds, which are typically formed between activated iodine- or bromine atoms (the halogen-bond donor) and an appropriate halogen-bond acceptor (electron-pair donor) such as an N-heterocycle. A potential problem with pairing these two interactions is that any halogen-bond acceptor can also act as a hydrogen-bond acceptor. We hypothesized that if we can choose HB and XB synthons carefully then they can operate in side-by-side in hierarchical fashion in the assembly of co-crystals. We developed a facile one-step strategy to synthesize ditopic XB/HB donor molecules; 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoro-4-halobenzoic acids (halo = iodo or bromo) [44]. We then co-crystallized these donors with the three ditopic acceptors described (Fig. 3.4). Crystal structures for all six reactions (1–3 with the two acids) were obtained and in each case the supermolecules were constructed via combinations of HB and XB interactions without any interference (Fig. 3.7). Moreover, the role of electrostatic potential in controlling the presence/absence of proton transfer was also emphasized as the acceptor molecule with the highest negative value was capable of abstracting a proton from both acids, leading to two salts and four co-crystals [45].
These results demonstrate how it may be possible to construct complex supramolecular assemblies with a larger number of different molecules (ternary co-crystals are still notoriously difficult to obtain) by combining interactions that can function independently of each other both at the level of molecular recognition, and at the level of overall structural control. In addition, in order to meet specific and well-defined supramolecular challenges it is necessary to employ custom-designed molecules with the appropriate functionalities which lead us to develop a simple synthetic path to 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoro-4-iodobenzoic acid and 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoro-4-bromobenzoic acid, molecules which combine powerful halogen bond, and halogen bond donors, respectively.
Despite considerable recent interest in the fundamental nature and possible uses of halogen bonds, these interactions and their applications remain substantially underexplored [46]. There are relatively few reports on the logical and deliberate combination of different interactions in supramolecular synthetic and we are currently exploring the improved strategies for the targeted assembly of more complex, multimeric, molecular architectures using an expanded range of reversible intermolecular interactions [47,48,49].
References
Arunan E, Desiraju GR, Klein RA, Sadlej J, Scheiner S, Alkorta I, Clary DC, Crabtree RH, Dannenberg JJ, Hobza P, Kjaergaard HG, Legon AC, Mennucci B, Nesbitt DJ (2011) Definition of the hydrogen bond (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem 83:1619
Latimer WM, Rodebush WH (1920) Polarity and ionization from the standpoint of the Lewis theory of valence. J Am Chem Soc 42:1419–1433
McWeeny R (1979) Coulson’s valence, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Del Bene J, Pople JA (1970) Theory of molecular interactions. I. Molecular orbital studies of water polymers using a minimal Slater-type basis. J Chem Phys 52:4858–4866
Dykstra CE, Lisy JM (2000) Experimental and theoretical challenges in the chemistry of noncovalent intermolecular interaction and clustering. THEOCHEM J Mol Struct 500:375–390
Umeyama H, Morokuma K (1977) The origin of hydrogen bonding. An energy decomposition study. J Am Chem Soc 99:1316–1332
Raghavendra B, Mandal PK, Arunan E (2006) Ab initio and AIM theoretical analysis of hydrogen-bond radius of HD (D = F, Cl, Br, CN, HO, HS and CCH) donors and some acceptors. Phys Chem Chem Phys 8:5276–5286
Klein RA (2006) Modified van der Waals atomic radii for hydrogen bonding based on electron density topology. Chem Phys Lett 425:128–133
Jeffrey GA, Saenger W (1991) Hydrogen bonding in biological structures. Springer Verlag, Berlin
Desiraju GR, Steiner T (1999) The weak hydrogen bond. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Elghobashi N, Gonzalez L (2006) A theoretical anharmonic study of the infrared absorption spectra of FHF-, FDF-, OHF-, and ODF- anions. J Chem Phys 124:174308
Scheiner S (1997) Hydrogen bonding: a theoretical perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Badger RM, Bauer SH (1937) Spectroscopic studies of the hydrogen bond. I. A photometric investigation of the association equilibrium in the vapor of acetic acid. J Chem Phys 5:605–608
Hobza P, Havlas Z (2000) Blue-shifting hydrogen bonds. Chem Rev 100:4253–4264
Scheiner S, Kar T (2002) Red- versus blue-shifting hydrogen bonds: are there fundamental distinctions? J Phys Chem A 106:1784–1789
Joseph J, Jemmis ED (2007) Steric effects on water accessability control sequence-selectivity of radical cation reactions in DNA. J Am Chem Soc 129:4620–4632
Hassel O (1970) Structural aspects of interatomic charge-transfer bonding. Science 170:497–502
Metrangolo P, Neukirch H, Pilati T, Resnati G (2005) Halogen bonding based recognition processes: a world parallel to hydrogen bonding. Acc Chem Res 38:386–395
Bauzá A, Quiñero D, Frontera A, Deyá PM (2011) Substituent effects in halogen bonding complexes between aromatic donors and acceptors: a comprehensive ab initio study. Phys Chem Chem Phys 13:20371–20379
Sarwar MG, Bojan D, Salsberg LJ, Gouliaras C, Taylor MS (2010) Thermodynamics of halogen bonding in solution: substituent, structural, and solvent effects. J Am Chem Soc 132:1646–1653
Riley KE, Hobza P (2008) Investigations into the nature of halogen bonding including symmetry adapted perturbation theory analyses. J Chem Theory Comput 4:232–242
Riley KE, Hobza P (2011) Strength and character of halogen bonds in protein-ligand complexes. Cryst Growth Des 11:4272–4278
Jeziorski B, Moszynski R, Szalewicz K (1994) Perturbation theory approach to intermolecular potential energy surfaces of van der Waals Complexes. Chem Rev 94:1887–1930
Rezac J, Riley KE, Hobza J (2012) Benchmark calculations of noncovalent interactions of halogenated molecules. J Chem Theory Comput 8:4285–4292
Riley KE, Hobza P (2013) The relative roles of electrostatics and dispersion in the stabilization of halogen bonds. Phys Chem Chem Phys 15:17742–17751
Aakeröy CB, Baldrighi M, Desper J, Metrangolo P, Resnati G (2013) Supramolecular hierarchy among halogen-bond donors. Chem Eur J 19:16240–16247
Aakeröy CB, Panikkattu SV, Chopade PD, Desper J (2013) Competing hydrogen-bond and halogen-bond donors in crystal engineering. CrystEngComm 15:3125–3136
Aakeröy CB, Panikkattu SV, DeHaven B, Desper J (2012) Establishing supramolecular control over solid-state architectures: a simple mix and match strategy. Cryst Growth Des 12:2579–2587
Aakeröy CB, Fasulo M, Schultheiss N, Desper J, Moore C (2007) Structural competition between hydrogen bonds and halogen bonds. J Am Chem Soc 129:13772–13773
Aakeröy CB, Salmon DJ (2005) Building co-crystals with molecular sense and supramolecular sensibility. CrystEngComm 7:439–448
Aakeröy CB, Desper J, Smith MM (2007) Constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing ternary supermolecules. Chem Commun 38:3936–3938
Aakeröy CB, Desper J, Fasulo M, Hussain I, Levin B, Schultheiss N (2008) Ten years of co-crystal synthesis; the good, the bad, and the ugly. CrystEngComm 10:1816–1821
Aakeröy CB, Desper J, Scott BMT (2006) Balancing supramolecular reagents for reliable formation of co-crystals. Chem Commun 13:1445–1447
Aakeröy CB, Epa K, Forbes S, Schultheiss N, Desper J (2013) Ranking relative hydrogen-bond strengths in hydroxybenzoic acids for crystal-engineering purposes. Chem A Eur 19:14998–15003
Aakeröy CB, Epa KN, Forbes S, Desper J (2013) Competing hydrogen-bond donors: phenols vs. cyanooximes. CrystEngComm 15:5946–5949
Hunter CA (2004) Quantifying intermolecular interactions: guidelines for the molecular recognition toolbox. Angew Chem Int Ed 43:5310–5324
Etter MC (1990) Encoding and decoding hydrogen-bond patterns of organic compounds. Acc Chem Res 23:120–126
a. Mukherjee A, Desiraju GR (2011) Synthon polymorphism and pseudopolymorphism in co-crystals. The 4,4'-bipyridine-4-hydroxybenzoic acid structural landscape. Chem Commun 47:4090–4092: b. Sarma B, Sanphui P, Nangia A (2010) Polymorphism in isomeric dihydroxybenzoic acids. Cryst Growth & Des 10:2388–2399
Aakeröy CB, Chopade PD, Desper J (2011) Avoiding “synthon crossover” in crystal engineering with halogen bonds and hydrogen bonds. Cryst Growth Des 11:5333–5336
Aakeröy CB, Chopade PD, Rajbanshi A, Ganser C, Desper J (2012) Exploring the structural landscape of 2-aminopyrazines via co-crystallizations. CrystEngComm 14:5845–5853
Allen FA (2002) The Cambridge Structural Database: a quarter of a million crystal structures and rising. Acta Crystallogr Sect B Struct Sci 58:380–388
CSD search carried out on ConQuest Version 1.12 (2010)
Etter MC, Frankenbach GM (1989) Hydrogen-bond directed cocrystallization as a tool for designing acentric organic solids. Chem Mater 1:10–12
Aakeröy CB, Chopade PD, Ganser C, Desper J (2011) Facile synthesis and supramolecular chemistry of hydrogen bond/halogen bond-driven multi-tasking tectons. Chem Commun 47:4688–4690
Aakeröy CB, Fasulo ME, Desper J (2007) Cocrystal or salt: does It really matter? Mol Pharm 4:317–322
Aakeröy CB (2015) Is there any point in making co-crystals? Acta Crystallogr Sect B 71:387–391
Aakeröy CB, Spartz CL, Desper J (2015) Systematic study of halogen bonding versus hydrogen bonding within supramolecular synthetic systems. IUCrJ 2:498–510
Aakeröy CB, Wijethunga TK, Desper J (2015) Molecular electrostatic potential dependent selectivity of hydrogen bonding. New J Chem 39:822–828
Aakeröy CB, Wijethunga TK, Desper J, Đaković M (2015) Crystal engineering with iodoethynylnitrobenzenes: a group of highly effective halogen-bond donors. Cryst Growth Des 15:3853–3861
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Aakeröy, C.B., Perera, M.D. (2017). Supramolecular Assembly and Solid State Chemistry. In: Roberts, K., Docherty, R., Tamura, R. (eds) Engineering Crystallography: From Molecule to Crystal to Functional Form. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series A: Chemistry and Biology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1117-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1117-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1115-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1117-1
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)