Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • >> All right.

  • What I want to do today is talk about just various aspects

  • of these correlation experiments that we've been talking about

  • and using now, COSY experiments and HMQC and HMBC experiments.

  • We're not going to become like super experts

  • on these experiments, but we've got a lot

  • of concepts floating around.

  • We've got the concept of inverse detection,

  • we've got some concepts of digital resolution that I'd

  • like to bring to bear.

  • We have various delays.

  • We've already seen when we were talking

  • about the depth experiment how important delay parameters are

  • and I'd like us to get a little bit of a feeling of that.

  • Down in the spec lab you're using gradient-based experiments

  • and without getting to be super technical I'd like to talk

  • about the benefits of that and benefits

  • on phase cycling and experiment time.

  • So let's start, and I also want to talk about variants

  • of experiments because although I've said, you know,

  • we're going to take this core of experiments

  • and it's not many experiments, I want to talk about some

  • of the variants of these experiments so that you can see

  • as you encounter specific problems what other tools you

  • can unpack from your toolbox to address those problems.

  • So, let's start by talking about the COSY experiment.

  • I'll give you the general pulse sequence here and then talk

  • about some variations of the experiments.

  • So in general, your experiments start

  • with a delay that we'll call D1.

  • That's a relaxation delay.

  • Remember we were talking about return

  • of magnetization to the Z axis?

  • I said normally your relaxation time, T1 relaxation time,

  • capital T1 relaxation time, is on the order of a second or two.

  • So when you pulse, normally it takes a few seconds for most

  • of your magnetization to return on the Z axis

  • and that's your DIOF [phonetic] and your FID.

  • Now when you're doing a normal 1D experiment,

  • that's not a big issue because you're collecting data

  • for a few seconds to get the typical digital resolutions

  • that you get in the 1D experiment.

  • Your 2D experiments there's an inverse relationship

  • between the amount of time you're collecting data

  • in your digital resolution and that's kind

  • of your uncertainty principle.

  • That gives you your, you know,

  • how accurately you can know your peak positions.

  • In a 2D experiment, you don't generally need super high

  • digital resolution.

  • So your acquisition times are typically shorter

  • like .17 seconds for say a typical COSY experiment.

  • So you don't want to be banging away every .17 seconds

  • because none of your magnetization will return

  • to the Z axis.

  • So most experiments, even your 1D experiments,

  • have a little relaxation delay.

  • So that's generally 1 to 2 seconds.

  • That's basically allowing your magnetization and that's,

  • of course, not allowing all your magnetization

  • to return to the Z axis.

  • It's allowing basically half of it or, you know,

  • or to allow 1 eth life so to allow 60%

  • of your magnetization to return.

  • All right so your pulse sequence is going to run

  • through relaxation delay then pulse then you wait

  • and you wait T1, that's your time, you increment this time

  • and you increment this time up to 1 over your sweep

  • with in the F1 dimension.

  • So we'll call that SW1 and remember we talked

  • about the 2 dimensional Fourier transform

  • where you're Fourier transforming with respect

  • to both the non-real dimension to the incremented dimension,

  • F1 dimension, and the F2 dimension, so you're going

  • to get periodicity from this weight just

  • as we see periodicity in the FID.

  • So then like most 2D experiments the general gist is pulse wait,

  • pulse observe sometimes with multiple pulses

  • but remember that's my general sort of simplified thing,

  • observe, and that's your T2, and then when you Fourier transform

  • and you get your 2D spectrum,

  • this is the F2 axis, this is the F1 axis.

  • So remember, the real axis,

  • the real 1 for each FID is the F2 axis

  • and then this one is coming from your incremented time here.

  • So you typically increment in usually it's a power of 2

  • so it's usually like in 256 or 512 or 1024 increments.

  • So, in other words, when you're collecting a COSY experiment

  • at minimum you're doing 256 or 512 or 1024 repeats

  • of this whole process.

  • Now, the more increments, the more digital resolution

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • in F1. So if you have 256 increments

  • and let's say F1 is 6,000 hertz.

  • In other words, let's say it's 12 PPM

  • on a 500 megahertz spectrometer that's 6,000 hertz,

  • then your digital resolution in F1 is going

  • to be 6,000 divided by 256.

  • In other words, your digital resolution is going

  • to be about 20 hertz.

  • That's pretty coarse because you think of say a typical multiplet

  • like a triplet and let's say your coupling constant is 7

  • hertz, so your multiple is 14 hertz wide.

  • So basically so that's sort of the bare minimum

  • on digital resolution because your digital resolution is going

  • to be on the order of like 20 hertz there.

  • Now there are various tricks with 0 filling.

  • So even if you don't, so if you collected 1024 increments,

  • you'd say, okay, my digital resolution would be 6 hertz.

  • It would be 6,000 divided by 1024, 6 hertz.

  • So that's sort of more like a typical peak size.

  • So some of the tricks that you can use are 0 filling

  • which adds data points artificially

  • but doesn't actually add new data, which can tighten

  • up your digital resolution.

  • Typically that's being done downstairs so typically you're

  • at least 0 filling to 1024 to sort

  • of artificially get your digital resolution

  • to about 6 hertz in this dimension.

  • All right I want to talk about, we'll talk about the time

  • for this experiment in just a second.

  • I just want to talk about some variations

  • of the COSY experiment

  • and so there's a variation called a long range COSY

  • and long range doesn't mean that you're picking

  • up long-range couplings or necessarily that you're going

  • and picking up small, you're picking up through 4 bonds.

  • Remember I said long-range coupling is typically more

  • than 3 bonds.

  • What a long-range COSY means is it picks up the small js better.

  • Why can't I write today?

  • I'm a mess here.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • We've already seen this problem in COSY.

  • COSY is great if you have tall peaks,

  • it'll pick up any coupling, you know,

  • heck if you've got methyl singlets

  • that have invisibly small coupling,

  • you may get a cross peak over them from a tall methyl singlet,

  • but if you have a multiplet like this and your js are small

  • and you're coupling with another multiplet and your js are just

  • like less than 3 hertz, often it's hard to pick

  • up a cross peak and you saw that in the COSY

  • of the hydroxyl prolene, the one that we were talking

  • about in discussion where you saw that, for example,

  • your geminal protons you would only get a cross peak off of 1

  • of them because the other had a small coupling

  • and you could see the small coupling,

  • you could see a little splitting, remember this?

  • You saw a little splitting and yet only one

  • of those 2 diastereotopic methyls was giving you

  • a coupling.

  • So, this is like multiplets with, I hate to put a number

  • on it, but let's say j is less than or equal to 3.

  • It's sometimes hard to pick up the cross peak.

  • So a long-range COSY adds an extra delay, it's a fixed delay

  • that gives these js better and so the sequence is just

  • as we saw before it's D1 pulse, D1 is as above, pulse,

  • T1 so these are just as before,

  • but now you add one more fixed delay we'll call it D2

  • and then you pulse and you observe.

  • What the fixed delay does is it makes the experiment pick

  • up these small js better.

  • Now there's a price, you say why don't you use it all the time?

  • There's a small price that you pay.

  • Your fixed delay is typically let's say 100

  • to 400 milliseconds.

  • Longer is going to be better for picking

  • up small js but there's caveat.

  • What's happening during that 100 to 400 milliseconds?

  • >> Relaxation.

  • >> Relaxation.

  • So, you're losing signal intensity

  • because your magnetization is returning to Z axis

  • so there's a point of diminishing returns

  • but this would be an experiment that you would do

  • if you're saying I'm trying to pick up a coupling,

  • I'm not seeing it in my COSY, I think it's there, I'm confused

  • about my connectivity because of this and usually the places

  • that you're going to see it are places

  • where you have say a methine and you have bad geometry

  • to say another methine proton

  • because if you have a methyl group, a CH3CH,

  • you'll always have a good coupling.

  • You'll always have a good coupling with CH3CH

  • because the methyl is always going to have 1 or 2 protons

  • that have a decent geometry to give a decent j and a CH2,

  • these are all going to be okay typically although I guess we

  • actually saw one in the constrained 5-membered ring

  • where you didn't get 1 of your cross peaks

  • and you might have wondered, but when you start to have

  • like a CH next to a CH2 or next to a CH, you might want

  • to think about using it.

  • So, okay, I'll just write out what I said, but big delays lead

  • to loss of sensitivity.

  • More signal to noise problems.

  • There are tons and tons of flavors of COSY and just

  • like people develop different synthetic methods, you know,

  • yet another protecting group.

  • BJ Cory [phonetic] just has a paper

  • on a new variant that's very similar to TDBMS [phonetic],

  • but is a better protecting group and it's similar

  • to TIPS [phonetic] and so you say, okay, here's another one

  • in the toolbox and when you're starting out it's

  • like why do I need another tool in the toolbox

  • when I barely know how to use the tools I have?

  • So you can kind of file these away in the sense

  • that you're not going to be necessarily become an expert

  • in all of the alphabet soup.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • There's a phase sensitive COSY experiment and what's good

  • about a phase sensitive COSY experiment it's harder to phase

  • but the cross peaks show splitting.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So from that experiment you can extract your js.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So you can imagine if you had some hideously complicated NMR

  • experiment and you absolutely wanted to measure your j values.

  • Let's say we've used j values for determining stereochemistry

  • so your stereochemistry was dependent on it

  • and you couldn't get your js by another way,

  • this might be a nice way to get your j values out of it.

  • Now there's another experiment that's very popular.

  • It has never been part

  • of my personal repertoire although now we're starting

  • to think about using it,

  • it's called the double quantum filtered COSY, DQF COSY,

  • it's a very popular experiment.

  • I just personally don't have a lot

  • of good things to say about it.

  • What it tends to do is reduce digital artifacts associated

  • with singlets.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So, for example, if you have a big methyl peak

  • or a big tert butyl peak in a COSY,

  • sometimes you get this stripe of T1 noise, this stripe it's

  • like a cruciform pattern off of that peak

  • and this can reduce some of that.

  • It can also reduce crowding around the diagonal.

  • Let's say helps show cross peaks close to the diagonal.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • 8 Sometimes if you look at your COSY spectra if you have 2 peaks

  • that are like a tenth of a part per million apart you'll look

  • and it's hard to tell if there's a cross peak with them

  • because the cross peak is barely going

  • to be away from the diagonal.

  • There's a variant of the COSY called a COSY 45.

  • So we've been talking about all of these pulses here.

  • The pulse doesn't have to be a 90-degree pulse, it doesn't have

  • to drag all your magnetization down into the X, Y plane.

  • You can give a pulse that's weaker that only knocks half

  • of your magnetization down to the X, Y plane.

  • Remember, knocking all of your magnetization

  • to the XY plane means equalizing the alpha and beta populations.

  • Knocking, giving a 45-degree pulse means only putting part

  • of your magnetization in the X,

  • Y plane only partially equalizing,

  • only reducing the difference between alpha and beta states

  • so you get faster relaxation.

  • The COSY 45 experiment uses a 45-degree pulse and what's cool

  • about that is that your shape

  • of the cross peaks can reflect the sign

  • of the coupling constants.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • The shape instead of becoming a square it's kind

  • of an oblong shape and the oblong shape can point either

  • to the left or to the right depending on the sign

  • of the coupling constant.

  • Why might you care about that?

  • Why would you care about whether you were picking

  • up a positive coupling or a negative coupling

  • or telling those apart?

  • >> It might change the phase.

  • >> Change the phase but what practical thing in structure?

  • >> Stereochemistry?

  • >> Stereochemistry?

  • What?

  • >> Geminal.

  • >> Geminal, exactly.

  • Remember how I said for all intents

  • and purposes I said often your geminal js are negative.

  • Often j2 hh, is negative and j3 hh is positive?

  • The case that that's useful is remember how we were looking

  • at all of these spectra

  • where you have a diastereotopic methylene coupled

  • to a diastereotopic methylene

  • and you're getting all these cross peaks?

  • It's useful to know is this cross peak important?

  • Is it a vicinal coupling?

  • It's important for determining connectivity.

  • Is it a vicinal coupling or geminal coupling?

  • So this is one little trick that you can do

  • so you can distinguish j2 hh from j3 hh.

  • So this is one little trick where you can look and say, oh,

  • this cross peak is telling me about connectivity,

  • this is just tell me a geminal.

  • In a way, you can say it's redundant

  • with the HMQC experiment because you'll know your geminal

  • partners from the HMQC experiment.

  • Not it turns out that Phil Dennison [phonetic] is actually

  • not doing a cozine 90 [phonetic].

  • A cozine 90 would be a traditional COSY

  • where you're pulsing your magnetization

  • down all into the X, Y plane.

  • He's giving you a 60-degree pulse

  • which allows faster cycling because you don't have

  • as much relaxation that has to occur

  • and it gives you a slightly cleaner diagonal.

  • So the COSYs that we're getting

  • down in the spec lab are actually really nice

  • which is one of the reasons why I'm not a huge fan

  • of the DFQ COSY.

  • Anyway those are some minor variants of COSY experiment.

  • I want to talk to you about one that really is important

  • and I think you'll appreciate the benefit of it

  • since you're all doing the practical component

  • of the course and you're actually using this technique.

  • So 2 big advances in NMR that have occurred

  • in the past couple of decades.

  • One of the advances was inverse detected experiments;

  • that's our HMQC and we've talked about and I will talk again

  • about the faster data collection of that experiment

  • because you're doing inverse detection

  • and detecting protons on the F2 axis.

  • The other big advance was gradient selected experiments.

  • So the GS COSY or G COSY, you'll see it written both ways,

  • uses gradients and so it uses pulse field gradients

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • and does a couple of things.

  • The most important practical thing is it eliminates the need

  • for phase cycling.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • It also gives fewer artifacts

  • so the spectra tend to be a lot cleaner.

  • What do I mean by phase cycling?

  • In a regular 2D experiment, in a regular COSY, you need a minimum

  • of 4 different pulses to eliminate artifacts.

  • Remember how I talked about pulsing on the X axis

  • and driving our magnetization into the X,

  • Y plane and the Y axis?

  • In reality you do your experiments

  • in sets of 4 typically.

  • You apply a pulse on the X axis,

  • it puts your magnetization on the Y axis.

  • You apply a pulse on the Y axis, it puts your magnetization

  • on the negative X axis.

  • You apply a pulse

  • on the negative X axis it puts your magnetization

  • onto the Y axis.

  • Anyway you go around and you do basically 4 pulses.

  • Regular COSY is 4 sets of pulses so in other words X, Y,

  • negative X, negative Y as a set

  • and that's called phase cycling to do all of that.

  • Now let's think about the math

  • of a minimum COSY experiment with phase cycling.

  • So, a minimum COSY experiment

  • with phase cycling we call this NS equals 4.

  • When you're doing your 2 D experiment,

  • you've already seen your NS parameter, right?

  • And the more you do the better the signal to noise ratio

  • but the longer your time takes.

  • So remember I said that we're typically doing a minimum

  • of 256 increments.

  • So we'll say NS equals 4, 256 increments,

  • let's say we're doing a D1 of 1 because of 1 second

  • because you're not just banging away on the thing.

  • Then let's say you're doing an acquisition time AQ of 0.17.

  • How did I get that number?

  • Acquisition time is equal to the number of points

  • in the time domain divided by the sweep with.

  • So this is the total number of points

  • so let's say we do 2048 points total that's going to be real

  • and imaginary points so I'll say in the time domain.

  • So when you Fourier transform

  • that you throw away the imaginary half that's 1024

  • points in the frequency domain so that's our F2 domain.

  • So think about this.

  • Remember I said let's say our sweep with is 6,000 hertz,

  • let's say 12 PPM out of 500 megahertz spectrometer.

  • So your digital resolution is going to be 6,000 divided

  • by 1024 on the F1 axis.

  • So that's sort of a minimal digital resolution

  • that you would want.

  • So you do the math on this and that works

  • out to an acquisition time of .1 seconds

  • and then you're also doing that increment up to 1 over the sweep

  • with so you're incrementing up to 256 increments up to

  • about 167 microseconds, which is pretty small.

  • So basically each experiment takes 1 second plus .17 seconds.

  • So you do the math on this 4 times 256 times 1.17 seconds

  • and the minimum time is 1198 seconds.

  • It's actually a little bit more because you've got

  • up to 167 microsecond increment

  • but that's very, very, very small.

  • Okay. So, that ends up working out to 20 minutes.

  • Now there are 22 of us in the class.

  • We're all going down to this spectrometer and trying

  • to collect data so now you say wait a second we're all queued

  • up here and it's 20 minutes a person plus locking

  • and shimmying.

  • It's 30 minutes to collect a 2D spectrum.

  • Watch what happens.

  • You get rid of your phase cycling so you go to NC equals 1

  • and you do a minimal COSY and now it's 5 minutes.

  • So that is a huge, huge advantage.

  • That's a huge timesaving and it means

  • that one can routinely get a spectrum plus the COSY is going

  • to be cleaner because you'll have fewer digital artifacts.

  • So it's a really, really nice advantage to the experiment.

  • So the gradient COSY.

  • I mean now all

  • of the experiments we're doing are gradient COSYs.

  • So what's happening is you're applying,

  • it's also paired pulses.

  • You're applying 1 pulse on the Z axis

  • that makes the magnetic field inhomogeneous on the Z axis.

  • You are varying it by some number of gauss per centimeter

  • like 10 gauss per centimeter or 30 gauss per centimeter.

  • In other words, you pulse and at the bottom

  • of the NMR tube you feel a stronger magnetic field

  • than at the top of the NMR tube.

  • That screws up the magnetic homogeneity but it does

  • so in a systematic way.

  • Then partway through the experiment you pulse again

  • which flips the screwing up of the magnetic homogeneity

  • so now the top gets a stronger magnetic field than the bottom

  • and that ends up getting rid of a lot of the artifacts and a lot

  • of the need for phase cycling.

  • So most of the gradient experiments require either a

  • minimum NS of 1 or 2 or in some cases 4, but it means it cuts

  • down your experimental time a lot

  • and gives you a lot cleaner spectra.

  • I guess the other big advantage and I'm not, the advantage

  • that many of you have taken, enjoyed are the cryaprobes.

  • So the digital, the noise on the cryaprobe instrument

  • where the probe is being cooled

  • to reduce electronic noise, is hugely lower.

  • The signal to noise ratio in a standard experiment

  • on that machine is like 4,000 or 5,000 versus like 1,000 or 800

  • on a typical machine meaning you're getting 5 times the

  • sensitivity which means you could use 5 times a dilute a

  • sample or if you were sample limited you could do the

  • experiment 25 times faster because remember the amount

  • of data you have to do

  • for signal averaging goes as a square root.

  • So, in other words, to get twice the signal to noise you have

  • to collect 4 times as much as data

  • so that's another beautiful, beautiful experiment.

  • All right.

  • Let me, I want to talk about the experiment that I told you

  • about before but we didn't do and I want to talk

  • about the differences between a het core and an HMBC

  • and then show you some of the real issues that are involved.

  • So the het core experiment is the older experiment.

  • Both of them, both the het core

  • and the HMQC are heteronuclear correlation experiments.

  • The het core is the older experiment.

  • It's the carbon detected experiment.

  • So on your proton channel, you're going to start with D1,

  • which is your same relaxation delay

  • because you're always going

  • to be repeating these experiments pulsing

  • and pulsing and pulsing.

  • You're going to hit with a 90-degree pulse.

  • You're then going to wait your time increment

  • so it's T1 divided by 2,

  • and so at that point remember we're incrementing this.

  • This is just like the COSY.

  • This is going to be the time that's going

  • to give you your resolution, your sweep with,

  • you're incrementing it up to 1 over your sweep

  • with in the F1 dimension on the experiment.

  • Then halfway through, so at this point after we've waited,

  • you're going to start your carbon channel up

  • and you're going to apply 180 degree pulse to the carbon.

  • You're then going to have your incremented time again

  • so collectively between these two you're incrementing to 1

  • over the sweep with in the H1 dimension,

  • in the proton dimension.

  • Now you have a delay.

  • Okay, this delay is important.

  • So, this delay is to, so this is D2 and you're going

  • to choose the delay to be 1 over 2 over your, pardon me, J1 CH.

  • All right.

  • What's the issue here?

  • >> It's carbon detection.

  • >> What? It's carbon detection but what's the problem here?

  • Same problem we talked about in [inaudible].

  • >> Hybridization.

  • >> Hybridization and specifically you have

  • to choose an average j

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So, for example, let's say EG I'll say 145 hertz.

  • Because an SP2 hybrid J1CH is on the order of 160 hertz

  • and SP3 hybrid J1CH is on the order of 125 hertz

  • and the odd man out is?

  • SP which is like 250 hertz or anything with any sort

  • of really weird geometry.

  • So in all of these experiments, you're making some compromises

  • and when the experiment doesn't work quite the way you might

  • have figured, it's often that.

  • If you noticed on that 5-page sheet ,the het core or HMQC,

  • I don't remember which it was I think it was an HMQC experiment,

  • for that E9 compound

  • on the 5-page sheet remember you were doing a COSY

  • and a het core on it?

  • The alkine didn't come through properly

  • and the reason the alkine didn't come

  • through properly is 1 size does not fit all.

  • Okay. So, after your D2, you apply a 90-degree proton pulse

  • and you apply a 90-degree carbon pulse.

  • Then you apply a D3, you wait D3.

  • D3 is just another delay.

  • It's just one-third of J1CH.

  • Then you turn on your broadband decouple

  • and concurrently you observe.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So, because you're observing in carbon, your real dimension,

  • your F2 dimension is C13, and your F1 dimension is H1.

  • Also because you're observing in this dimension you can

  • at very little expense have high digital resolution

  • in this dimension.

  • Point is you can have very high digital resolution

  • in the carbon dimension and that's beautiful

  • because carbon is the one

  • where your peaks virtually never overlap unless you have symmetry

  • because in a typical carbon experiment even if your peaks,

  • I think you've already seen this on the homework problems

  • and you'll see this on others,

  • even if your peaks are just a couple of hundredths

  • of a PPM apart, you typically can see 2 distinct

  • C13 resonances.

  • The C13 resonances are just a couple of hertz wide,

  • your C13 is about 100 hertz per PPM or 125 hertz per PPM

  • at a 500 megahertz spectrometer,

  • which is running at 125 for carbon.

  • So your peaks even 100th of a PPM apart you can typically,

  • or 2/100th of a PPM apart, you can see resolved peaks,

  • which is great because there's no guess work.

  • Now you contrast this experiment with the HMQC experiment.

  • [ Pause ]

  • And the big difference is the HMQC it's like het core

  • but it's inverse detection.

  • The practical matter is inverse detection

  • because you get advantage of the bigger magnetogyric ratio

  • of protons, the bigger magnetic vector of protons

  • and the bigger rate of procession of protons

  • over carbon you end up with the magnetogyric ratio translates

  • to a bigger Boltzmann distribution so you end

  • up with a factor of 4 roughly on the Boltzmann distribution,

  • a factor of 4 on the size of your magnetic vector

  • and a factor of 4 on your procession rate that translates

  • to voltage in the detector coil

  • and the result is you get 64 times greater sensitivity.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • In other words, I can get an HMQC spectrum

  • on a milligram sample in the same time

  • that I would need a 64- milligram sample for het core.

  • So the disadvantage is low sensitivity

  • or to put it another way if I had the same sample I could

  • in theory if data acquisition wasn't an issue I could do it

  • like 400 times less time here.

  • In practice, you still have to do your phase cycling

  • and whatever number of increments.

  • Okay. Let's look at the, so I'll say let me actually put this

  • into concrete numbers.

  • I'll say poor sensitivity leads to hours.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • How long did it take to collect your HMQC on strychnine?

  • What?

  • >> Twenty minutes.

  • >> Twenty minutes, okay.

  • So in vision for the strychnine sample because you were limited

  • by number of increments and so forth

  • on the strychnine sample not by the amount of sample,

  • but imagine that same experiment being an overnight run literally

  • 8 hours.

  • So basically to do your HMQC experiment,

  • to do your het core experiment, you would have

  • to be babysitting the spectrometer

  • or planning overnight whereas here it's like, all right,

  • 20 minutes it's a pain in the neck but it's not a big pain.

  • All right.

  • Let's look at the pulse sequences here.

  • So the basic het core experiment, again,

  • you start with your D1 delay, you apply a 90-degree pulse,

  • you'll have your D2 delay just like you had in the other one.

  • Now you start up your carbon

  • and your basic het core you do a 90-degree pulse in carbon.

  • We wait our T1 over 2, we apply 180-degree pulse in proton,

  • we wait out T1 over 2, the incremented weight.

  • We apply a 90-degree pulse in carbon and the basis het core,

  • this is not the one you're doing.

  • At this point you observe and you're observing in the proton,

  • you're observing at your 500 megahertz not

  • at your 125 megahertz.

  • So you've transferred your magnetization to the protons.

  • What can you tell me about this basic experiment?

  • What don't you do in this experiment?

  • What aren't we doing?

  • >> Decoupling.

  • >> Decoupling.

  • So what does this experiment give you?

  • >> Coupling.

  • >> This gives you coupling which means all

  • of your peaks are vampire bites.

  • So, the basic experiment is no C3 decoupling

  • and so you get J1CH in other words you get your vampire

  • peaks here.

  • The reason that it's harder, so this is the basic experiment.

  • We do it with decoupling, but the reason it's harder

  • to decouple on carbon on proton you're only hitting a band

  • that's 12 PPM wide when you decouple.

  • You're only eradiating 6,000 hertz or even less than that

  • because typically you don't have coupled protons

  • out at 10 parts per million, 11 parts per million,

  • but when you're doing carbon even though your carbon spectrum

  • may be collected at 125 megahertz

  • if you've got a 200 lower frequency

  • if you've got a 200 PPM range that's 25,000 hertz.

  • In other words, you have to apply radio frequency radiation

  • that spans 25,000 hertz instead of 5,000 or 6,000 hertz.

  • You put too much energy

  • in you're basically microwaving your sample.

  • In other words, you're literally heating

  • up your sample and cooking it.

  • So it's a more demanding experiment.

  • So, the one that gives you the couplings, the vampire bites,

  • is actually the simpler experiment.

  • Okay, so for our experiment all the delays here our D2 is

  • the same.

  • Okay, so what is our spectrum look like?

  • Well, because it's inverse detected now your F1 dimension

  • is H1, your F2 dimension is C13.

  • This is, of course, what you're used to seeing.

  • So the good side is it's faster, there's less sample.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • You can do it in 20 minutes.

  • What's the downside?

  • >> I have a question.

  • You have C13 on the top here.

  • >> That's because I'm not paying attention here.

  • Thank you.

  • Yeah, so the real dimension, the direct dimension.

  • So they call the F2 is the direct dimension.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • That's the one you're getting off of each FID

  • and the F1 is the indirect dimension;

  • that's the one you're getting from the periodicity of the FIDs

  • as you're incrementing T1.

  • All right so the downside of this experiment?

  • >> Coupling?

  • >> Coupling, but okay, so this one is a very,

  • so there's a variant with C13 decoupling.

  • Okay. And there is a variant with C13 decoupling

  • and there are variants with pulse field gradients

  • which generally give a cleaner spectrum.

  • So, okay so that can be taken care of.

  • So you don't need to get vampire bites.

  • What's the disadvantage?

  • [ Pause ]

  • [ Inaudible response ]

  • It deals with the fact you're doing an inverse.

  • [ Inaudible response ]

  • Yeah, and that's it.

  • The killer is the digital resolution in the C13.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So, let's come back and say, okay,

  • let's say we do 1024 increments or we do 0 filling

  • to bring our 256 if we're in a rush to 1024 or 512 up to 1024.

  • So the killer is even if you have 1024 increments,

  • so I'll say 1024 increments let's imagine for a moment

  • that say we cover 200 PPM and so we're talking about, you know,

  • 200 PPM divided by 5, whoops, I guess I'm doing 1024,

  • and we're still talking

  • about just what is it .2 PPM digital resolution.

  • So we said in our carbon NMR we can detect peaks that are 100th

  • or maybe 200ths of a PPM apart because the peaks are hertz are

  • so wide and so you can detect them

  • when they're just touching each other and

  • yet pretty much no matter what you do

  • on this experiment you just can't bring

  • that digital resolution up nearly as high as the het core.

  • It's 1 order of magnitude [inaudible] digital resolution.

  • You can play games to make it a little better

  • but it's still going to be lower,

  • which means there will be times when you're looking

  • and saying damn it, I can't tell whether it's carbon 8

  • or carbon 9 that's associated with this proton and that's sort

  • of the nature of the beast.

  • All right last thing I want to talk about I think is HMBC.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So HMBC in terms of the pulse sequence, so you know HMBC now.

  • We've talked about it, we've used it,

  • you've learned what it's useful for.

  • It's useful to pick up J2CH and J3CH.

  • It's useful for putting the pieces together.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • And the pulse sequence is very similar to the HMQC

  • but your delays are related to 1 over your JCH so your delays

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • for one over your JCH.

  • So now if you think about it remember we said typically

  • what's our J2CH, our J3CH,

  • let's say a typical value is let's say approximately

  • 10 hertz.

  • So now you're talking about putting in delays that are

  • like 1 over 2 JCH so instead of putting in delays that are

  • on the order of microseconds you're putting in delays

  • that are on the order of a 20th of a second to pick up your Js

  • and you're choosing you delays to pick

  • up the J as best as possible.

  • Now, remember I said you won't always see your cross peaks.

  • So I'll say a caveat, absence

  • of a cross peak doesn't necessarily mean an absence

  • of connectivity.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • Because your Js can be very small.

  • [ Writing on board ]

  • So let's say your J is very small,

  • let's say you've got a really bad dihedral angle close

  • to 90 degrees and you're trying to pick up a J3CH

  • and you just can't it up.

  • So you say, okay, I'll make my delay longer, right?

  • If I decide I'll optimize for 1 hertz,

  • I'll put in a delay of a half a second.

  • What happens if you put in a delay of half a second?

  • [ Inaudible response ]

  • You're optimizing for 1 hertz coupling

  • but what happens to your spectrum?

  • [ Inaudible response ]

  • You get more relaxation so you basically die on relaxation.

  • Now it turns out the values down in the spec lab are pretty good,

  • you know, it's optimized for 10 hertz and it's sort of a point

  • of diminishing returns.

  • So, anyway the other thing is remember how we see those

  • vampire bites because you are sometimes picking up your J1CH?

  • In this experiment, you're not typically doing C13 decoupling;

  • it's just too complicated an experiment.

  • So you basically are deliberately not doing the

  • C13 decoupling.

  • I think that pretty much covers all the sort of aspects

  • of different types of experiments

  • and different pulse sequenced that I wanted

  • to touch on for today.

  • Good luck in your mech exam. ------------------------------f51ee0235c1d--

>> All right.

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it