Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The kinetics of the Cu2+ complexation by macrocycles 1 (4‐[(l,4,8,11‐tetraazacyclotetradec‐1‐yl)methyl]‐benzoic acid) and 2 (N‐propyl‐4‐[(1,4,8,11‐tetraazacyclotetradec‐1‐yl)methyl]‐benzamide) as well as by macrocycle 1 conjugated to bovine serum albumin (bsa) and to ribonuclease A (rnase) were studied by stopped flow techniques. For 1 and 2, the kinetics were followed in the mM range monitoring the d‐d* absorption band of the Cu2+ complex. From the pH dependence of kobs, the rate law is v = [Cu2+] (kLH[LH] + k [LH2]), where kLH and k are the bimolecular rate constants for Cu2+ with the diprotonated (LH2) and monoprotonated (LH1) form of the ligand, respectively. The values are k = 1.7(1) M−1s−1 and kLH = 2.3(1) 105 M−1s−1 for 1, and k , = 0.28(9) M−1s−1 and kLH = 2.0(1) 105 M−1s−1 for 2. The kinetics of the Cu2+ incorporation into 1,2 and 1 conjugated to bsa and rnase, i.e., 3 and 4, respectively, were also followed using nitroso‐R salt as a metal indicator in the μM range, i.e., under conditions typical for the ‘post‐labeling’ technique to give radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies. In these cases, the reaction takes place between the 1:1 complex of Cu2+ with nitroso‐R‐salt and the macrocycle. At pH 6.5, the rates are very similar to each other indicating that the complexation properties of the macrocycle attached to a protein are not very different from those of the free ligand under comparable conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Manzetti et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: