4.6 Article

Efficiency of Water-Soluble Nitroxide Biradicals for Dynamic Nuclear Polarization in Rotating Solids at 9.4 T: bcTol-M and cyolyl-TOTAPOL as New Polarizing Agents

期刊

CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL
卷 24, 期 51, 页码 13485-13494

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/chem.201801251

关键词

dynamic nuclear polarization; magic angle spinning; NMR spectroscopy; radicals; water-soluble

资金

  1. Icelandic Research Fund [141062051]
  2. University of Icelandic Research Fund
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) through Emmy Noether grant [CO802/2-1]
  4. BMRZ
  5. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [SFB 740, SFB 1078]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitroxide biradicals are very efficient polarizing agents in magic angle spinning (MAS) cross effect (CE) dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP) nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Many recently synthesized, new radicals show superior DNP-efficiency in organic solvents but suffer from insufficient solubility in water or glycerol/water for biological applications. We report DNP efficiencies for two new radicals, the water-soluble bcTol-M and cyolyl-TOTAPOL, and include a comparison with three known biradicals, TOTAPOL, bcTol, and AMUPol. They differ by linker groups, featuring either a 3-aminopropane-1,2-diol or a urea tether, or by the structure of the alkyl substituents that flank the nitroxide groups. For evaluating their performances, we measured both signal enhancements epsilon and DNP-enhanced sensitivity kappa, and compared the results to electron spin relaxation data recorded at the same magnetic field strength (9.4 T). In our study, differences in DNP efficiency correlate with changes in the nuclear polarization dynamics rather than electron relaxation. The ratios of their individual epsilon and kappa differ by up to 20%, which is explained by starkly different nuclear polarization build-up rates. For the radicals compared here empirically, using proline standard solutions, the new radical bcTol-M performs best while being most soluble in water/glycerol mixtures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据