Molecular dynamics simulation of a cucurbituril based molecular switch triggered by pH changes

Molecular dynamics simulation of a cucurbituril based molecular switch triggered by pH changes

Accepted Manuscript Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Cucurbituril Based Molecular Switch Triggered by pH Changes Lama D. Malhis, Khaled Bodoor, Khal...

2MB Sizes 15 Downloads 118 Views

Accepted Manuscript Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Cucurbituril Based Molecular Switch Triggered by pH Changes Lama D. Malhis, Khaled Bodoor, Khaleel I. Assaf, Nada A. Al-Sakhen, Musa I. El-Barghouthi PII: DOI: Reference:

S2210-271X(15)00199-1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comptc.2015.05.010 COMPTC 1817

To appear in:

Computational & Theoretical Chemistry

Received Date: Revised Date: Accepted Date:

3 April 2015 5 May 2015 5 May 2015

Please cite this article as: L.D. Malhis, K. Bodoor, K.I. Assaf, N.A. Al-Sakhen, M.I. El-Barghouthi, Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Cucurbituril Based Molecular Switch Triggered by pH Changes, Computational & Theoretical Chemistry (2015), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comptc.2015.05.010

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Cucurbituril Based Molecular Switch Triggered by pH Changes Lama D. Malhis1, Khaled Bodoor2, Khaleel I. Assaf3, Nada A. Al-Sakhen1 and Musa I. ElBarghouthi1,* 1

Department of Chemistry, The Hashemite University, Zarqa 13115, Jordan 2

3

Department of Physics, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan

School of Engineering and Science, Jacobs University, Campus Ring 1, D-28759 Bremen, Germany

Abstract Molecular Dynamics (MD) Simulations are performed for a cucurbituril-pseudorotaxane system that functions as a molecular switch in which the movement of the macrocycle (CB) component of the rotaxane between two sites is triggered by an appropriate change in pH. The system consists of a CB bead and a fluorenyltriamine string in aqueous solution. Examining the extracted snapshots reveals that the fluorenyl ring bends toward the CB rim when it locates at the butyl moiety, and it becomes aligned with the rest of the guest when it locates at the hexyl moiety. No movement of the macrocycle between the possible positions for CB6 complexes for the fully protonated or the diprotonated guests was observed during the 20 ns simulation. However, such movement was observed in the case of CB7 and CB8. Umbrella sampling was used to obtain the potential of mean force curves, which demonstrates the existence of an energy barrier between the two positions. The height of the barrier was found to decrease as the size of the CB increases. Molecular Mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann Surface Area results indicate that the host-guest electrostatic interactions have the largest contribution to the stability of the complexes.

Keywords: Cucurbit[n]uril; Simulations; Molecular switches; MM-PBSA. *Corresponding Author: Department of Chemistry, The Hashemite University, P.O. Box 150459, Zarqa 13115, Jordan Tel : +962 (5) 3903333 Fax : +962 (5) 3826613 Email : [email protected]

1

Introduction Cucurbit[n]urils (CB[n]) are a family of macrocyclic molecules that consist of n glycoluril units bridged by 2n methylene groups [1-3]. CBs are available in different sizes (n = 5−8 and 10) and are well known for being good cation receptors owing to their two carbonyl portals, which establish natural docking sites for positively charged residues [1,4,5]. Additionally, CBs are well known to host hydrophobic residues in their cavities. The combination of ion-dipole and hydrophobic interactions enables CBs to bind a wide range of synthetic and naturally occurring molecules with exceptional strength [6-9]. CBs have been used for various applications, including drug delivery, dye tuning, and molecular switching [8,10-31]. Various CB-based rotaxanes that function as molecular switches have recently been synthesized and studied [32-39]. An external stimulus, such as a change in pH or temperature, can be used to control their switching behavior. The ability of CBs to interact preferentially with cationic species compared to neutral species makes amine-containing organic compounds attractive candidates for use as guest molecules in CB-based molecular switches [8, 32, 37, 40]. One can control the pH of the medium and hence the protonation states of the amine groups of the guest molecule, modifying the strength of their interactions with the CB macrocycle. Mock and Pierpont studied the encapsulation of the ligand PhNH(CH 2)6NH(CH2)4NH2 within CB6 [32]. When the aniline nitrogen is protonated, CB6 prefers to bind to the six-carbon (diaminohexane) site, which allows the ammonium groups to reside closer to the center of the carbonyl rims of the CB6 cavity, thereby maximizing the ion-dipole interactions [41]. On the other hand, when the aniline nitrogen is in a deprotonated state, the CB6 moves to the four-carbon (diaminobutane) site in the ligand [32]. Inspired by the above work of Mock and Pierpont, Kim and coworkers designed a fluorescent CB6-based molecular switch, (Scheme 1). The CB6 bead resides at the

2

diaminohexane site at pH 1.0, but shuttles to the diaminobutane site at pH 8.0 as shown by NMR studies [33]. Equilibrium between the two binding sites was observed at intermediate pH values. They found that the shuttling of CB6 between the two sites is slow on the NMR time scale, as separate resonances are observed for each binding mode [33]. Investigation of host-guest complexation processes can be carried out with the help of molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, which have proved to be a powerful tool for identifying and computing the driving forces for complex formation as well as for solving the optimal geometries of the resulting complexes [40, 42-47]. In the present work, we use MD simulations to study the thermodynamics of the (host) CB macrocycle interacting with the (guest) fluorenyltriamine molecule at the two possible sites (Scheme 1). The guest can exist in two protonation states: a diprotonated state with two of the three amine groups protonated, and a fully protonated state in which the aromatic amine is protonated as well (Scheme 1). For each state, we carried out simulations for the complexes formed between the guest at the appropriate site and each of the three CB homologous CB6, CB7 and CB8. The MD trajectories we obtained were analyzed to deduce the forces driving host-guest complexation and the relative stability of each complex at a given site in a given protonation state. Moreover, we used the Molecular Mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann Surface Area (MM-PBSA) method to estimate the free energy of complexation as a sum of contributions from appropriate host-guest interactions. Umbrella sampling was used to compute the height of the energy barrier separating the two presumed binding sites of the macrocycle on the guest.



3

Computational Methods The initial molecular geometries of CB6, CB7, and CB8 were obtained from X-ray diffraction data [2, 3]. The starting geometries of the studied complexes were obtained by manually inserting the host into the desired position in the guest molecule. MD simulations were performed with the sander module of the AMBER 11 program [48] using general force field parameters sets [49, 50]. The atomic charges for the host and guest molecules were obtained using AM1-BCC charges [51]. Each system was solvated in a truncated octahedral periodic box of TIP3P [52] water molecules. Chloride ions were added to maintain the neutrality of each system. The non-bonded cut off was set to 12.0 Å. Each given solvated complex was subjected to energy minimization using the conjugate gradient algorithm prior to starting the MD simulation. The minimized complex was then heated up to 298 K for 60 ps, followed by a 500 ps equilibration step at 298 K and 1 atm. During minimization and MD simulation, the Particle Mesh Ewald method (PME) was employed to treat the long range electrostatic interactions in periodic boundary conditions [53]. All bond lengths involving hydrogen atoms were constrained by means of the SHAKE Algorithm [54]. Production runs were carried out for 20 ns at 298 K and 1.0 atm. A 2-fs time step was used, saving structures every 2 ps, and updating the nonbonded pair list every 25 steps. The MD simulation analysis was performed with PTRAJ module of the AMBER 11 program. The VMD 1.8.6 program was used to visualize the structures [55]. The MM-PBSA and normal mode analysis were performed according to the procedure described elsewhere [43,44]. All snapshots (10,000) were used in the different analyses performed in this study. The reaction coordinate used in umbrella sampling was the distance (r) between the terminal nitrogen (N1) in guests A and B and the center of mass of the oxygen atoms of the far carbonyl

4

portal. The values of r ranged from 5 to 18 Å in 1.0 Å increments. A force constant of 16 kcal/mol.Å2 was applied at each position. The extended form of the guest molecule was considered and hence a restraint on guest geometry was employed. Attempts to conduct umbrella sampling while allowing the guest molecule to move without restraints proved difficult because of the bad overlap between the sampled distance distributions. Each biasing simulation consists of an equilibrium run for 500 ps followed by a 1000 ps production run. The distance data for each simulation were collected in 2.0 fs intervals. The results were post-processed using the Weighted Histogram Analysis Method (WHAM) [56, 57].

Results and Discussion The pseudorotaxane system comprised of a CB6 bead and a fluorenyltriamine string has been studied by Kim and coworkers [33]. The shuttling process in this system was found to be controlled by the pH of the medium. The pKa of the aromatic amine of fluorenyltriamine is 5.7, while for the primary and secondary amines it is greater than 10 [33]. This means that at pH 1 the three amine groups of fluorenyltriamine are protonated, while at pH 8 the aromatic amine is neutral and the alkyl amino groups remain protonated. As NMR studies have shown, CB resides at the diprotonated diaminohexane site at pH 1.0 (position 1, Scheme 1) while at pH 8.0 it resides at the diprotonated diaminobutane site (position 2, Scheme 1). MD simulations were carried out to study the thermodynamics of the complexation process at the two possible sites both for the fluorenyltriamine molecule in the triprotonated, (A), and diprotonated, (B), states (Scheme 2). In addition to CB6, the larger CB homologues, CB7 and CB8, were also investigated. 20 ns MD simulations for the free hosts, guests, and their corresponding molecular complexes were carried out.

5



The guest dynamics inside the host cavity was monitored by the superposition of 25 equally spaced snapshots extracted from the MD trajectory for each complex, superimposed on a representative host structure. The clusters of snapshots for the free guests and their complexes that were obtained are given in the supporting information (Figures S1-S7). Moreover, 5 snapshots corresponding to 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 ns for CB6 complexes are shown in Figure 1. Inspection of the snapshots shows stable binding of CB at both positions 1 and 2 in each of the CB6/A and CB6/B complexes (Figures 1, S2-S3), with no inter-site movement of CB6 taking place during the 20 ns simulations. This indicates the existence of a high energy barrier to host migration from one site to another in CB6 complexes. This view is supported by 1H NMR study of CB6/A, which shows that the shuttling of CB between the two sites is slow on the NMR time scale [33]. Conducting a 300-ns MD simulation of position-1 CB6/B complex also reveals no migration of CB6 to the presumably more stable position 2.



On the other hand, MD simulations for position-2 CB7/A and CB8/A complexes showed movement of the macrocycle toward position 1. This process was found to occur at the equilibration period of MD simulation for CB8. For CB7, the snapshots sampled at the beginning of the production run revealed that the fluorenyl ring in guest A is bent toward the CB7 rim (Figure 2). Then, 8 ns later, the host starts moving toward N2 while the ring moiety moves away from the CB7 rim. Movement of CB7 continues until it finally reaches position 1 at 11 ns and

6

remains there for the rest of the simulation (Figure 2). Figure 3 shows this movement, where the distance between the center of mass of CB7 and nitrogen atom N3 is plotted against simulation time. Interestingly, no movement in either direction was observed for the CB7/B or CB8/B complexes.


These results point to the presence of an energy barrier for the shuttling process for CB6, and smaller ones for the larger CB7 and CB8. The larger barrier in the case of CB6 can be explained by its small cavity size, which causes the intermediate states for the movement, which involve the presence of the protonated amine (N2) inside the CB6 cavity, to possess high energies. Umbrella sampling was used to examine this point; the results obtained will be discussed later. It should be noted here that all results presented below for CB7/A position-2 complex are just for the first 8 ns of its MD trajectory, during which the snapshots show CB7 to be at position 2. The simulations for CB8/A in positions 1 and 2 after the equilibration period are similar and, therefore, only the results for position 1 are shown. Returning to the snapshots for position 1, the guest molecule assumes an extended form (Figures S2, S4 and S6) compared to the free molecules especially for the hexyl segment (Figure S1). This is probably driven by the enhancement of the size match between the diaminohexane part of the guest and the CB molecule as well as the more favorable positioning of the ammonium groups, resulting in increased ion dipole interaction and hydrogen bonding with the CB portals. A much less constrained form of the guests is observed when CB is at position 2, which appears to allow it to interact with the flourenyl ring of the guest (Figures S3, S5 and S7). Root-mean-

7

square-fluctuation analysis was performed on the 10000 snapshots of guests A and B and their complexes (Figure 4) and demonstrate significant increase in guest flexibility upon complexation at position 2, in agreement with snapshots shown in Figures S3, S5 and S7.



The numbers of water-guest and host-guest hydrogen bonds (HBs) are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. A HB cut distance ≤ 3.0 Å and angle ≥ 120º were used for the analysis. The Free guests form several HBs with the surrounding water molecules (Table 1), with a total of 6.15 and 4.88 for A and B, respectively. A reduction was observed in the number of guest-water HBs upon complexation. This reduction is less pronounced as a result of the decreased steric hindrance to the water molecules in the larger CBs.



The number of the host-guest HBs is more or less the same for CB6/A complexes in both host locations (Table 2). This is contrary to what one would expect, since the length of the hexyl chain is more optimal for hydrogen bonding with the carbonyl portal in both rims of CB than is that of the butyl chain. However, it seems that the butyl moiety in the A molecule undergoes an increase in its length in position-2 complex to achieve better interactions with the rim. An extra HB is formed by A with CB7 when it is at position 1. Table 2 shows an increase in the HBs as CB6 moved from position 1 (neutral amine) to position 2 (ammonium group) in the B complex. A smaller difference between the two positions is

8

observed in the case of CB7/B complexes. However, for CB8 the situation is reversed. Interestingly, the far N1 ammonium group contributes significantly to the guest-host HB in CB8/B complex, position 1, (Supplementary materials, Figure S6). A reduction takes place in the number of HBs in all complexes in position 1 upon deprotonation of the ammonium group next to the ring (N3). Table 2 shows that the number of HBs is more or less the same for both guests in position-2 complexes, in accordance with the similarity of this part of the two molecules. The decrease of host-guest HBs with the size of CB is a result of the increasing distance between guest donors and host acceptors.



Snapshots extracted from the studied trajectories show differences in guest dynamics between the complexes and the free molecules. A set of distances, defined in Scheme 3, was selected to study this variation. The MD-averaged values of the selected distances and the corresponding standard deviations (in brackets) are given in Table 3. Plots of probability distributions of the selected distances are shown in Figures 5 and S8-S19.



Table 3 shows a slight reduction of d1 value upon complexation of A and B guests with the CBs at position 1. Moreover, the standard deviations did not change significantly. The distribution curves for d1 show two main populations for free guests and CB6 position-1 complexes (Figure

9

5). These findings are rationalized by noting that d1 measures the butyl chain when the CB is located at the hexyl site and hence a significant conformational change in the butyl chain upon complexation is not expected. The case of position-2 CB6 complexes is, as expected, quite different: the average value of d1 is larger than for the free guest and the standard deviation is decreased dramatically upon complexation, as demonstrated in Figure 5 and Table 3. In effect, the inclusion of the butyl moiety in the cavity of the macrocycle and the strong electrostatic interaction of its ammonium groups with the carbonyl portals on CB increase its length and reduce its flexibility. Similar observations were found for the position-2 CB7 complexes, but to a lesser extent. Figures S8-S9 show the presence of the two peaks in the distribution curves of d1 for position-2 CB7 complexes, but with a significantly reduced amplitude for the peak at the lower value compared to the free guests and position-1 complexes.



The hexyl diammonium molecule forms a more stable complex with CB6 than the butyl diammonium molecule, due to its size match with CB height [41]. Therefore, no significant change was found for the average value of d2 for the A molecule upon complexation with CB6 (position 1). However the distribution curve is much less broad than the free guest indicating the decrease of the flexibility of hexyl moiety (Figure 5). For the larger CB/A complexes (position 1) the average value of d2 decreased (more notably in CB8 case). A remarkable decrease in the average value of d2 is observed in position-2 CB6/A and CB6/B complexes. As evidenced by the snapshots extracted from the trajectory (Figure 1), the A and B molecules bend so as to allow the ring to interact with the CB located at position 2 which, presumably, leads to the observed

10

reduction of d2 value. This is more clearly demonstrated by the severe reduction in d3 values for all CBs at position 2. In contrast, for position-1 complexes, d3 generally increases (more notably for CB6 complexes).



MM-PBSA analysis was performed to estimate the binding free energy for each complex. Tables S1-S3 show the values of the various energy terms that contribute to the absolute free energies for the free hosts, guests, and their complexes. The free energies of binding are taken as a sum of the differences of the absolute free energies presented in Tables 4 and 5.


Results indicate that the major favorable contribution toward complex stability for all systems arises from host-guest electrostatic (∆Eelec) interactions, followed to a lower extent by van der Waals interactions (∆EvdW). As anticipated, the electrostatic interaction energy is more favorable in position-1 A complexes than the corresponding B complexes for all CBs. The electrostatic interaction of CB6 at position 2 is practically the same for both A and B complexes and is more favorable for position-2 CB/B complexes than for position-1 complexes for all studied CBs. This is in accordance with the neutrality of the aromatic amine in the B molecule. Therefore, at position 1 only one ammonium group interacts with the CB instead of two ammonium groups at position 2. The observed inverse relationship between the electrostatic interaction and the size of the macrocycle, for both position-2 CB/A and CB/B complexes, is expected since these interactions are distance dependent. For position-1 CB/B complexes, the opposite tendency was 11

found. This is due to the N1 ammonium group interacting with the portal in CB7 and CB8 (Figures S4 and S6). The host-guest van der Waals interaction energy is more favorable for position-2 A and B complexes than their position-1 counterparts, despite the fact that at position 2 it is the smaller butyl segment that is included as opposed to the larger hexyl segment in the case of position 1. This finding was already clear from the earlier discussion of the snapshots and the distance analysis, where it was observed that the fluorenyl ring in position-2 complexes undergoes a conformational change that enhances its interaction with the CB rim. Tables 4 and 5 show a small favorable non-polar solvation free energy (∆GNP) contribution to complex formation. Large unfavorable electrostatic solvation energies (positive ∆GPB) were obtained due to desolvation of the guest cationic groups upon complexation, with the energies for position-1 B complexes less unfavorable for obvious reasons. The values of ∆GPB (for both positions and both protonation states) were higher for CB7 complexes than for CB6. This is despite the fact that the desolvation of the guest (A or B) is higher for CB6 than for CB7 (Table 1). This might be explained by a larger desolvation cost for CB7. Normal mode (Nmode) calculations for all complexes yielded negative values of the change in the configurational entropy, ∆S, indicating a reduction of guest and host freedom upon complexation. Since Nmode gives only qualitative estimates of the solute entropy change, we calculate the binding free energies of complexation with and without the solute entropy change, ∆G and ∆G*, respectively. Contrary to experiment, ∆G for CB6/A complex is more negative for position 2 than for position 1 [33]. As mentioned earlier, experimental values show better stability of hexyl diammonium with CB6 than butyl diammonium [41]. The experimental difference in ∆G is around 3.5 kcal. It

12

should be noted that these experimental values were recorded for the complexation process in aqueous formic acid solutions. To test the validity of MM-PBSA in such systems, MD simulations were performed for diammonium hexane and diammonium butane molecules. MMPBSA analysis of the obtained trajectories is presented in Table 6. Inclusion of the configurational entropy term results in more or less the same free energy which, as explained above, is to be expected given the qualitative nature of the normal mode analysis. However, excluding the solute configurational entropy contribution to the free energy yields a ∆∆G* value of -4.2 kcal (in favor of diammonium hexane), in good agreement with the experimental value. This indicates that MM-PBSA reproduces the experimental data for such molecules. Returning to the free energy values of the CB6/A complex, the ∆∆G* value of 3.9 kcal between the position 1 and 2 is obtained. NMR studies indicate that at pH = 1, CB6 is located at position 1 in clear discrepancy with our results [33]. This may indicate the importance of specific solute-solvent interactions that the MM-PBSA method does not take into account. Nevertheless, for CB7/A complexes MM-PBSA suggests preference of position 1 over position 2. For CB6/B complex, the MM-PBSA results are in agreement with the NMR findings according to which the B molecule forms a complex with CB6 located at position 2. Similar preference was obtained for CB7/B complex, while for CB8 close values of the free energy were obtained for the two positions reflecting the formations of isomeric complexes.



Figure 6 shows the potentials of mean force (PMF) vs. distance for the CB complexes. A large energy barrier exists (22 kcal/mol and 17 kcal/mol for CB6/A and CB6/B, respectively) that

13

prevents the migration of the CB6 macrocycle from one position to another. Much smaller barriers exist for the CB7 and CB8 complexes, with the barriers for B complexes also smaller than for the A complexes. The large barriers in the case of CB6 complexes explain why the position of CB6 did not change significantly during the simulation. The maximum obtained value of PMF was around 9.5 Å, corresponding to the position of the ammonium group at the center of the cavity. The remarkable decrease of the calculated heights of the energy barriers when going to bigger sizes of CB explains the observation of CB migration from position 2 to position 1 in the present MD simulations for CB7 and CB8 complexes with guest A. No migration of CB7 or CB8 was observed in their B complexes in the conventional MD simulations, despite the smaller barrier. This could be attributed to the fact that the present PMF study restrains the guest molecule in its extended form (see computational methods) and hence underestimates the energy barrier.

Conclusion MD simulations were performed for a pH-triggered molecular switch comprised of a CB cycle and a fluorenyltriamine string. Two protonated states of the string were chosen for this study. Post processing of the obtained trajectories reveals that the position of the CB macrocyle along the guest depends strongly on the protonation state of the guest and, hence, changing the pH of the medium should induce movement of the macrocycle between the two possible positions. Such movement within the 20 ns duration of the simulations was observed for CB7 and CB8 but not for CB6, with the time needed for CB8 to migrate being less than for CB7. Therefore, one may conclude that as the macrocycle size decreases the shuttling time increases, with CB6 taking

14

the longest time. This conclusion is supported by the potential of mean force analysis, which demonstrates the existence of an energy barrier between the two positions, with the height of barrier inversely proportional to the size of the CB. The high barriers found for CB6 indicate that CB6 is truly trapped in a certain location for a certain guest protonation state. This finding points to the feasibility of using CB6 with the guests under study to produce a molecular switch with pH-controlled movement of CB6. The situation is different for CB7 and CB8, where smaller barriers were found and therefore, complete control of the macrocycle might be not possible.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors wish to thank the Hashemite University for the financial support. The authors also wish to thank Nancy Levinger and Richard Ruble for revising the language of the manuscript.

Appendix A. Supplementary material Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version

References 15

[1] J. Lagona, P. Mukhopadhyay, S. Chakrabarti and L. Isaacs, The cucurbit[n]uril family, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 44 (2005) 4844-4870. [2] W. A. Freeman, W. L. Mock and N. Y. Shih, Cucurbituril, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103 (1981) 7367-7368. [3] J. Kim, I. S. Jung, S. Y. Kim, E. Lee, J. K. Kang, S. Sakamoto, K. Yamaguchi and K. Kim, New cucurbituril homologues: Syntheses, isolation, characterization, and X-ray crystal structures of cucurbit[n]uril (n=5, 7, and 8), J. Am. Chem. Soc. 122 (2000) 540-541. [4] J. W. Lee, S. Samal, N. Selvapalam, H. J. Kim and K. Kim, Cucurbituril homologues and derivatives: New opportunities in supramolecular chemistry, Acc. Chem. Res. 36 (2003) 621630. [5] K. I. Assaf and W. M. Nau, Cucurbiturils: from synthesis to high-affinity binding and catalysis, Chem. Soc. Rev. 44 (2015) 394-418. [6] K. I. Assaf and W. M. Nau, Cucurbiturils as fluorophilic receptors, Supramol. Chem. 26 (2014) 657-669. [7] L. P. Cao, M. Šekutor, P. Y. Zavalij, K. Mlinarić-Majerski, R. Glaser and L. Isaacs, Cucurbit[7]uril.guest pair with an attomolar dissociation constant, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53 (2014) 988-993. [8] N. Saleh, A. L. Koner and W. M. Nau, Activation and stabilization of drugs by supramolecular pK(a) shifts: Drug-delivery applications tailored for cucurbiturils, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47 (2008) 5398-5401. [9] Y. H. Ko, I. Hwang, D. W. Lee and K. Kim, Ultrastable host-guest complexes and their applications, Isr. J. Chem. 51 (2011) 506-514. [10] N. J. Wheate, D. P. Buck, A. I. Day and J. G. Collins, Cucurbit[n]uril binding of platinum anticancer complexes, Dalton Trans. (2006) 451-458. [11] H. D. Nguyen, D. T. Dang, J. L. J. van Dongen and L. Brunsveld, Protein dimerization induced by supramolecular interactions with cucurbit[8]uril, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 49 (2010) 895-898. [12] N. Dong, S. F. Xue, Q. J. Zhu, Z. Tao, Y. Zhao and L. X. Yang, Cucurbit[n]urils (n=7,8) binding of camptothecin and the effects on solubility and reactivity of the anticancer drug, Supramol. Chem. 20 (2008) 659-665.

16

[13] C. Kim, S. S. Agasti, Z. J. Zhu, L. Isaacs and V. M. Rotello, Recognition-mediated activation of therapeutic gold nanoparticles inside living cells, Nat. Chem. 2 (2010) 962-966. [14] I. Ghosh and W. M. Nau, The strategic use of supramolecular pK(a) shifts to enhance the bioavailability of drugs, Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 64 (2012) 764-783. [15] A. L. Koner, I. Ghosh, N. Saleh and W. M. Nau, Supramolecular encapsulation of benzimidazole-derived drugs by cucurbit[7]uril, Can. J. Chem. 89 (2011) 139-147. [16] G. Ghale, V. Ramalingam, A. R. Urbach and W. M. Nau, Determining protease substrate selectivity and inhibition by label-free supramolecular tandem enzyme Assays, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133 (2011) 7528-7535. [17] M. Florea and W. M. Nau, Implementation of anion-receptor macrocycles in supramolecular tandem assays for enzymes involving nucleotides as substrates, products, and cofactors, Org. Biomol. Chem. 8 (2010) 1033-1039. [18] D. H. Macartney, Cucurbit[n]uril type hosts for the reversal of steroidal neuromuscular blocking agents, Future Med. Chem. 5 (2013) 2075-2089. [19] S. Walker, R. Oun, F. J. McInnes and N. J. Wheate, The potential of cucurbit[n]urils in drug delivery, Isr. J. Chem. 51 (2011) 616-624. [20] N. Saleh, M. A. Meetani, L. Al-Kaabi, I. Ghosh and W. M. Nau, Effect of cucurbit[n]urils on tropicamide and potential application in ocular drug delivery, Supramol. Chem. 23 (2011) 654-661. [21] D. H. Macartney, Encapsulation of Drug Molecules by Cucurbiturils: Effects on their chemical properties in aqueous solution, Isr. J. Chem. 51 (2011) 600-615. [22] Y. Huang, Z. Tao, S. F. Xue and Q. J. Zhu, Progress of cucurbit[n]urils in drug delivery system, Chem. J. Chinese. U. 32 (2011) 2022-2031. [23] N. J. Wheate, V. Vora, N. G. Anthony and F. J. McInnes, Host-guest complexes of the antituberculosis drugs pyrazinamide and isoniazid with cucurbit[7]uril, J. Inclusion Phenom. Macrocyclic Chem. 68 (2010) 359-367. [24] L. Goldoni, M. Grugni, S. De Munari, M. Cassin and R. Bernardini, Cucurbit[7]uril inclusion complexes of platinum(II)-based anticancer drugs: further insight, Chem. Lett. 39 (2010) 676-677.

17

[25] K. M. Park, K. Suh, H. Jung, D. W. Lee, Y. Ahn, J. Kim, K. Baek and K. Kim, Cucurbiturilbased nanoparticles: a new efficient vehicle for targeted intracellular delivery of hydrophobic drugs, Chem. Commun. (2009) 71-73. [26] Y. J. Jeon, S. Y. Kim, Y. H. Ko, S. Sakamoto, K. Yamaguchi and K. Kim, Novel molecular drug carrier: encapsulation of oxaliplatin in cucurbit[7]uril and its effects on stability and reactivity of the drug, Org. Biomol. Chem. 3 (2005) 2122-2125. [27] S. Sun, F. Li, F. Liu, J. Wang and X. Peng, Fluorescence detecting of paraquat using hostguest chemistry with cucurbit[8]uril, Sci. Rep. 4 (2014) [28] G. Hettiarachchi, D. Nguyen, J. Wu, D. Lucas, D. Ma, L. Isaacs and V. Briken, Toxicology and drug delivery by cucurbit[n]uril type molecular containers, PLoS One 5 (2010) [29] V. D. Uzunova, C. Cullinane, K. Brix, W. M. Nau and A. I. Day, Toxicity of cucurbit[7]uril and cucurbit[8]uril: an exploratory in vitro and in vivo study, Org. Biomol. Chem. 8 (2010) 2037-2042. [30] D. Tuncel, O. Unal and M. Artar, Supramolecular assemblies constructed by cucurbiturilcatalyzed click reaction, Isr. J. Chem. 51 (2011) 525-532. [31] A. L. Koner and W. M. Nau, Cucurbituril encapsulation of fluorescent dyes, Supramol. Chem. 19 (2007) 55-66. [32] W. L. Mock and J. Pierpont, A cucurbituril-based molecular switch, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. (1990) 1509-1511. [33] S. I. Jun, J. W. Lee, S. Sakamoto, K. Yamaguchi and K. Kim, Rotaxane-based molecular switch with fluorescence signaling, Tetrahedron Lett. 41 (2000) 471-475. [34] C. Gao, S. Silvi, X. Ma, H. Tian, A. Credi and M. Venturi, Chiral supramolecular switches based on (R)-binaphthalene-bipyridinium guests and cucurbituril hosts, Chem. Eur. J. 18 (2012) 16911-16921. [35] X. H. Huang, S. Y. Huang, B. Q. Zhai, Y. Zhang, Y. A. Xu and Q. C. Wang, Slipping synthesis of cucurbit[7]uril-based [2]rotaxane in organic environment, Tetrahedron Lett. 53 (2012) 6414-6417. [36] V. Kolman, M. S. A. Khan, M. Babinsky, R. Marek and V. Sindelar, Supramolecular shuttle based on inclusion complex between cucurbit[6]uril and bispyridinium ethylene, Org. Lett. 13 (2011) 6148-6151.

18

[37] D. Tuncel, O. Ozsar, H. B. Tiftik and B. Salih, Molecular switch based on a cucurbit[6]uril containing bistable [3]rotaxane, Chem. Commun. (2007) 1369-1371. [38] L. L. Zhu, H. Yan, X. J. Wang and Y. L. Zhao, Light-controllable cucurbit[7]uril-based molecular shuttle, J. Org. Chem. 77 (2012) 10168-10175. [39] D. Tuncel and M. Katterle, pH-triggered dethreading-rethreading and switching of cucurbit[6]uril on bistable [3]pseudorotaxanes and [3]rotaxanes, Chem. Eur. J. 14 (2008) 41104116. [40] A. M. M. Rawashdeh, M. I. El-Barghouthi, K. I. Assaf and S. I. Al-Gharabli, Complexation of N-methyl-4-(p-methyl benzoyl)-pyridinium methyl cation and its neutral analogue by cucurbit[7]uril and beta-cyclodextrin: a computational study, J. Inclusion Phenom. Macrocyclic Chem. 64 (2009) 357-365. [41] W. L. Mock and N. Y. Shih, Structure and selectivity in host guest complexes of cucurbituril, J. Org. Chem. 51 (1986) 4440-4446. [42] M. I. El-Barghouthi, K. I. Assaf and A. M. M. Rawashdeh, Molecular dynamics of methyl viologen-cucurbit[n]uril complexes in aqueous solution, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 6 (2010) 984992. [43] M. I. El-Barghouthi, H. M. Abdel-Halim, F. J. Haj-Ibrahim and K. I. Assaf, Molecular dynamics simulation study of the structural features and inclusion capacities of cucurbit[6]uril derivatives in aqueous solutions, Supramol. Chem. 27 (2015) 80-89. [44] M. I. El-Barghouthi, H. M. Abdel-Halim, F. J. Haj-Ibrahim, K. Bodoor and K. I. Assaf, Molecular dynamics of nor-seco-cucurbit[10]uril complexes, J. Inclusion Phenom. Macrocyclic Chem. DOI 10.1007/s10847-015-0488-9 (2015) [45] C. Velez-Vega and M. K. Gilson, Force and stress along simulated dissociation pathways of sucurbituril-guest systems, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 8 (2012) 966-976. [46] M. K. Gilson, Stress Analysis at the Molecular Level: A forced cucurbituril-guest dissociation pathway, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 6 (2010) 637-646. [47] A. T. Fenley, N. M. Henriksen, H. S. Muddana and M. K. Gilson, Bridging calorimetry and simulation through precise calculations of cucurbituril-guest binding enthalpies, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 10 (2014) 4069-4078. [48] T. A. D. D.A. Case, T.E. Cheatham, III, C.L. Simmerling, J. Wang, R.E. Duke, R., R. C. W. Luo, W. Zhang, K.M. Merz, B. Roberts, B. Wang, S. Hayik, A. Roitberg,, I. K. G. Seabra, K.F.

19

Wong, F. Paesani, J. Vanicek, J. Liu, X. Wu, S.R. Brozell,, H. G. T. Steinbrecher, Q. Cai, X. Ye, J. Wang, M.-J. Hsieh, G. Cui, D.R. Roe, D.H., M. G. S. Mathews, C. Sagui, V. Babin, T. Luchko, S. Gusarov, A. Kovalenko, and and P. A. Kollman in AMBER 11, Vol. University of California, San Francisco, 2010. [49] J. M. Wang, R. M. Wolf, J. W. Caldwell, P. A. Kollman and D. A. Case, Development and testing of a general amber force field (vol 25, pg 1157, 2004), J. Comput. Chem. 26 (2005) 114114. [50] J. M. Wang, R. M. Wolf, J. W. Caldwell, P. A. Kollman and D. A. Case, Development and testing of a general amber force field, J. Comput. Chem. 25 (2004) 1157-1174. [51] A. Jakalian, B. L. Bush, D. B. Jack and C. I. Bayly, Fast, efficient generation of high-quality atomic Charges. AM1-BCC model: I. Method, J. Comput. Chem. 21 (2000) 132-146. [52] W. L. Jorgensen, J. Chandrasekhar, J. D. Madura, R. W. Impey and M. L. Klein, Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water, J. Chem. Phys. 79 (1983) 926-935. [53] D. M. York, T. A. Darden and L. G. Pedersen, The effect of long-range electrostatic interactions in simulations of macromolecular crystals - a comparison of the ewald and truncated list methods, J. Chem. Phys. 99 (1993) 8345-8348. [54] J. P. Ryckaert, G. Ciccotti and H. J. C. Berendsen, Numerical-integration of cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints - molecular-dynamics of n-Alkanes, J. Comput. Phys. 23 (1977) 327-341. [55] W. Humphrey, A. Dalke and K. Schulten, VMD: Visual molecular dynamics, J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 14 (1996) 33-38. [56] S. Kumar, D. Bouzida, R. H. Swendsen, P. A. Kollman and J. M. Rosenberg, The weighted histogram analysis method for free-energy calculations on biomolecules .1. The Method, J. Comput. Chem. 13 (1992) 1011-1021. [57] S. Kumar, J. M. Rosenberg, D. Bouzida, R. H. Swendsen and P. A. Kollman, Multidimensional free-energy calculations using the weighted histogram analysis method, J. Comput. Chem. 16 (1995) 1339-1350.

20

Table 1. Water-guest intermolecular hydrogen bond analysis for CB complexes.

CB6 complexes

CB7 complexes

CB8 complexes

Free guests a b

N1 N2 N3 Total N1 N2 N3 Total N1 N2 N3 Total N1 N2 N3 Total

Aa 2.70 0.04 0.06 2.80 2.57 0.61 0.21 3.39 2.04 1.65 0.97 4.66 2.73 1.70 1.72 6.15

Ab 1.00 0.0 1.59 2.59 1.65 0.85 1.61 4.11

Ba 2.67 0.18 0.60 3.45 2.45 0.65 0.54 3.14 1.96 1.68 0.64 4.28 2.73 1.71 0.94 4.88

Bb 0.99 0.00 0.87 1.86 1.71 0.69 0.91 3.31 2.57 1.25 0.94 4.76

CB located at position 1 CB located at position 2

21

Table 2. CB-guest intermolecular hydrogen bond analysis for the studied complexes. Aa CB6 N1 0.02 N2 1.76 N3 1.74 Total 3.52 a CB located at position 1 b CB located at position 2

CB7 0.15 1.15 1.58 2.88

CB8 0.74 0.07 0.77 1.58

Ab CB6 1.78 1.79 0.00 3.57

CB7 1.06 0.84 0.00 1.90

Ba CB6 0.07 1.75 0.34 2.16

CB7 0.32 1.08 0.48 1.88

CB8 0.84 0.03 0.47 1.34

Bb CB6 1.82 1.80 0.01 3.63

CB7 1.03 1.06 0.01 2.10

CB8 0.20 0.48 0.01 0.69

22

Table 3. MD-averaged values in Å (and corresponding standard deviations) for the selected distances. d1 d2 d3 a b

Free 5.69 (0.49) 7.90 (0.65) 18.15 (2.80)

Aa CB6 5.47 (0.47) 7.95 (0.25) 20.26 (1.11)

CB7 5.41 (0.46) 7.72 (0.57) 19.77 (1.26)

CB8 5.48 (0.37) 7.26 (0.44) 18.97 (1.35)

Ab CB6 6.30 (0.09) 6.65 (0.59) 11.08 (2.77)

CB7 6.058 (0.34) 6.97 (0.60) 11.27 (1.60)

Free 5.69 (0.47) 7.30 (0.94) 15.77 (5.23)

Ba CB6 5.34 (0.54) 8.51 (0.32) 20.52 (1.32)

CB7 5.44 (0.48) 7.74 (0.51) 19.57 (1.42)

CB8 5.36 (0.35) 7.30 (0.94) 18.44 (1.38)

Bb CB6 6.30 (0.08) 6.10 (0.45) 10.69 (1.25)

CB7 6.17 (0.28) 6.54 (0.60) 11.26 (2.34)

CB8 5.51 (0.35) 7.30 (0.94) 11.61 (2.02)

CB located at position 1 CB located at position 2

23

Table 4. Free energy difference of the CB-A complex formation [∆GBinding = complex ‎– ‎ (host + guest)] in kcal mol‎–‎1 Energy (kcal/mol)

CB6a

CB6b

CB7a

CB7b

CB8a

∆Eelec

−169.02

−176.88

−172.52

−168.57

−164.61

∆EvdW

−28.75

−36.8

−29.01

−30.23

−25.18

∆EINT

−0.86

−0.13

1.78

1.54

1.32

∆GNP

−2.35

−2.79

−2.68

−3.03

−2.72

164.16

170.59

173.55

170.98

∆GPB

152.4

∆GSOLV

150.05

161.37

167.91

170.52

168.26

∆G*

−48.58

−52.44

−31.84

−26.74

−20.21

T∆S

−19.66

−20.02

−17.45

−18.14

−18.87

−28.92

−32.42

−14.39

−8.6

−1.34

∆G (∆G* −T∆S) CB located at position 1 b CB located at position 2 a

24

Table 5. Free energy difference of the CB/B complex formation [∆GBinding = complex‎‎ – ‎ (host + guest)] in kcal mol‎–‎1 CB6a –109.66

CB6b –176.52

CB7b –162.25

CB8a –116.52

CB8b –131.92

∆EvdW

–30.25

–36.77

–31.28

–26.39

–29.10

∆EINT

–0.83

–0.42

1.09

1.94

1.03

1.40

∆GNP

–2.17

–2.70

–2.57

–2.86

–2.68

–2.72

∆GPB

106.76

163.17

121.19

168.08

126.85

145.72

∆GSOLV

104.59

160.46

118.62

165.22

124.17

143.01

∆G*

–36.15

–53.24

–21.86

–26.37

–17.71

–16.62

T∆S

–18.03

–19.92

–17.67

–17.40

–19.5

–18.19

∆G (∆G*–T∆S)

–18.12

–33.32

–4.19

–8.97

Energy (kcal/mol) ∆Eelec

a b

CB7a –112.37 –29.2

1.79

1.57

CB located at position 1 CB located at position 2

25

Table 6. Free energy difference of for N2C6H18 and N2C4H12 complexes with CB6 kcal mol‎–‎1 Energy (kcal/mol) ∆Eelec

N2C4H12 –186.08

N2C6H18 –173.14

∆EvdW

–20.3

–20.86

∆EINT

–6.68

–7.98

∆GNP

–1.79

–2.01

∆GPB

167.59

152.56

∆GSOLV

165.8

150.55

∆G*

–47.26

–51.43

T∆S ∆G (∆G *–T∆S)

–14.73 –32.53

–18.87 –32.56

26

Scheme 1. Cucurbit[n]uril based molecular switch triggered by pH changes.

27

Scheme 2. Selected guest molecules for MD simulations: triprotonated (A) and diprotonated (B) fluorenyltriamine.

28

Scheme 3. Definition of the distances d1, d2, and d3.

29

a)

b)

c)

d)

Figure 1. Snapshots for CB6 complexes extracted at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 ns (from left to right) a) CB6/A position 1, b) CB6/A position 2, c) CB6/B position 1 d) CB6/B position 2.

30

Figure 2. Snapshots extracted at 4, 8.5, 11 and 20 ns (from left to right) of CB7/A show the shuttling of the CB7 through guest A from position 2 to position 1.

31

12

Distance (Å)

10 8 6 4 2 0 0

4

8

12

16

20

Time (ns)

Figure 3 Distance between center of mass of CB7 and N3 as a function of time for position-2 CB7/A complex.

32

8

8

A Position 1 Position 2

2

4

0

0 0

4

8

12 16 20 Atom Index

24

28

0

B Position 1 Position 2

8

4

8

12 16 20 Atom Index

24

0

28

B Position 1 Position 2

8

2

4

2

0 4

8

12 16 20 Atom Index

24

C26 C22

C24

28

24

28

B Position 1 Position 2

4

0 0

C18 C19

24

4

8

12 16 20 Atom Index

N13 C14

C11 C12

24

28

C9 C10

0

C7 C8

4

8

C5 N6

12 16 20 Atom Index C3

C4

N1 C2

C21 C20

C23

28

12 16 20 Atom Index

2

0 0

8

6 RMSF (Å)

4

4

8

6 RMSF (Å)

6

4

2

2

0

RMSF (Å)

6 RMSF (Å)

4

A Position 1

6 RMSF (Å)

RMSF (Å)

6

8

A Position 1 Position 2

C17

C15 C16

C25

Figure 4 The root mean square fluctuation (RMSF) for the heavy atoms of A and B for CB6 (left), CB7 (center), and CB8 (right) complexes. For position-2 CB7/A complex only the first 8 ns of its trajectory were considered.

33

0.4

0.4

0.6

d2

0.4

A position 1 position 2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0

0

0 4

5 6 Distance (Å)

7

3

8

d2

0.6

7

4

8

5

6

d3

0.2

0.3 0.2

8

9

10

d3 B

position 1

0.15

7

Distance (Å)

A Probability

0.4

5 6 Distance (Å)

0.2

B position 1 position 2

0.5

4

position 1

0.15 Probability

3

Probability

d1 B position 1 position 2

0.6 Probability

0.6 Probabaility

0.8

A position 1 position 2

Probability

d1

0.8

position 2 0.1

position 2 0.1 0.05

0.05 0.1 0

0

0 2

3

4

5 6 7 8 Distance (Å)

9 10

2

6

10 14 18 Distance (Å)

22

26

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

Distance (Å)

Figure 5 Probability distribution function of the selected distances for CB6 complexes with A and B guest molecules.

34

PMF (kcal/mol)

20

CB6/A CB7/A CB8/A

24 20 PMF (kcal/mol)

24 16 12 8 4 0

CB6/B CB7/B CB8/B

16 12 8 4 0

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Distance (Å)

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Distance (Å)

Figure 6 PMF vs distance for CB6, CB7, CB8 complexes.

35

Graphical abstract

Highlights



MD of a molecular switch comprising a CB cycle bound to a fluorenyltriamine string.



Movement of CB between binding positions during simulations observed only for CB7 and CB8.



Estimated free energy barrier for CB movement inversely proportional to CB size.



MM-PBSA indicates electrostatic interactions contribute most to binding free energy.

36