Tag Archives: J. Fraser Stoddart

2016 Nobel prize winner introduces anti-aging skincare line

Leave a reply

When last mentioned here (Oct. 6, 2016 posting), J. Fraser Stoddart, along with his French colleague Jean-Pierre Sauvage and his Dutch colleague Bernard “Ben” Feringa, had just been awarded a 2016 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for developing molecular machines. In what seems like an unusual career move, Stoddart has recently introduced a skin care line. From a December 5, 2017 article by Marc S. Reisch for Chemical and Engineering News (c&en), Note: A link has been removed,

In 2016, J. Fraser Stoddart won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his part in designing a molecular machine. Now as chief technology officer and co-founder of nanotechnology firm PanaceaNano, he has introduced the “Noble” line of antiaging cosmetics including a $524 formula described as an “anti-wrinkle repair” night cream. The firm says the cream contains patented Nobel Prize-winning “organic nano-cubes” loaded with ingredients that reverse skin damage and reduce the appearance of wrinkles.

Other prize-winning chemists have founded companies, but Stoddart’s backing of the anti-aging cosmetic line takes the promotion of a new company by an award-winning scientist to the next level.

The nano-cubes are made of carbohydrate molecules known as cyclodextrins. The cubes, of various sizes and shapes, release ingredients such as vitamins and peptides onto the skin “at predefined times with molecular precision,” according to the Noble skin care website. PanaceaNano co-founder Youssry Botros, former nanotechnology research director at Intel, contends that the metering technology makes the product line “far superior to comparable products in the market today,” However, the nanocubes aren’t molecular machines, for which Stoddart won his Nobel prize.

A November 27, 2017 PanaceaNano news release on Cision PR Newswire provides more details about the skin care line,

The NOBLE skin care breakthrough technology is based on patented Organic Nano-Cube (ONC) molecules, which are made up of hollow cubes that work as molecular reservoirs to store and release skin care active ingredients in an extended release formulation directly onto the skin in a controlled manner, allowing for continuous skin revitalization, renewal and repair over a longer period of time.

Unlike other products, with ONC, you have more than just extended release. ONC molecules provide tunable release profiles that are engineered for delayed and multiple release of different ingredients that each have their own characteristics. ONC molecules are controllable at a smaller nano-scale to better control the individual molecular ingredients. NOBLE is “Skin Care with Molecular Precision” because ONC molecules really control the release of active skin care ingredients at the molecular level, instead of just putting the ingredients in a macroscopic slow-release matrix like other products in the market today.

“This molecular precision enables the NOBLE luxury skin care product line to reduce visible signs of aging more effectively by precisely releasing the anti-aging ingredients for over a longer period. Because of the revolutionary ONC technology, NOBLE has a much longer duration of anti-aging benefit with continuous and steady efficacy, making it far superior to comparable products in the market today,” says Dr. Youssry Botros, PanaceaNano Co-founder and CEO. “Other skin care brands have immediate release formulations whose active ingredients are often depleted immediately. NOBLE products are clinically proven to reverse and slow down skin aging.”

NOBLE skin care products will immediately start working on the skin. Most consumers notice relatively visible results within two weeks, while significant results are observed by most consumers after 10 to 12 weeks.

“It is an exciting moment to witness the birth of commercial products that improve the quality of life of people based on renewable, safe, organic, bio-degradable functional nanomaterials,” stated Sir Fraser.

For additional information, please go to www.noble-skincare.com

Noble/Nobel? Was someone indulging in word play?

According to the Noble skin care product page, costs range from $249. for .5 oz of anti-aging eye cream to $524 for 1.7 oz of anti-wrinkle repair cream, presumably in US dollars. Note: I am not endorsing this product as I have not used it.

For anyone interested in the parent company, PanaceaNano can be found here.

2016 Nobel Chemistry Prize for molecular machines

Leave a reply

Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2016 was the day three scientists received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their work on molecular machines, according to an Oct. 5, 2016 news item on phys.org,

Three scientists won the Nobel Prize in chemistry on Wednesday [Oct. 5, 2016] for developing the world’s smallest machines, 1,000 times thinner than a human hair but with the potential to revolutionize computer and energy systems.

Frenchman Jean-Pierre Sauvage, Scottish-born Fraser Stoddart and Dutch scientist Bernard “Ben” Feringa share the 8 million kronor ($930,000) prize for the “design and synthesis of molecular machines,” the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said.

Machines at the molecular level have taken chemistry to a new dimension and “will most likely be used in the development of things such as new materials, sensors and energy storage systems,” the academy said.

Practical applications are still far away—the academy said molecular motors are at the same stage that electrical motors were in the first half of the 19th century—but the potential is huge.

Dexter Johnson in an Oct. 5, 2016 posting on his Nanoclast blog (on the IEEE [Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers] website) provides some insight into the matter (Note: A link has been removed),

In what seems to have come both as a shock to some of the recipients and a confirmation to all those who envision molecular nanotechnology as the true future of nanotechnology, Bernard Feringa, Jean-Pierre Sauvage, and Sir J. Fraser Stoddart have been awarded the 2016 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their development of molecular machines.

The Nobel Prize was awarded to all three of the scientists based on their complementary work over nearly three decades. First, in 1983, Sauvage (currently at Strasbourg University in France) was able to link two ring-shaped molecules to form a chain. Then, eight years later, Stoddart, a professor at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill., demonstrated that a molecular ring could turn on a thin molecular axle. Then, eight years after that, Feringa, a professor at the University of Groningen, in the Netherlands, built on Stoddardt’s work and fabricated a molecular rotor blade that could spin continually in the same direction.

…

Speaking of the Nobel committee’s selection, Donna Nelson, a chemist and president of the American Chemical Society told Scientific American: “I think this topic is going to be fabulous for science. When the Nobel Prize is given, it inspires a lot of interest in the topic by other researchers. It will also increase funding.” Nelson added that this line of research will be fascinating for kids. “They can visualize it, and imagine a nanocar. This comes at a great time, when we need to inspire the next generation of scientists.”

The Economist, which appears to be previewing an article about the 2016 Nobel prizes ahead of the print version, has this to say in its Oct. 8, 2016 article,

BIGGER is not always better. Anyone who doubts that has only to look at the explosion of computing power which has marked the past half-century. This was made possible by continual shrinkage of the components computers are made from. That success has, in turn, inspired a search for other areas where shrinkage might also yield dividends.

One such, which has been poised delicately between hype and hope since the 1990s, is nanotechnology. What people mean by this term has varied over the years—to the extent that cynics might be forgiven for wondering if it is more than just a fancy rebranding of the word “chemistry”—but nanotechnology did originally have a fairly clear definition. It was the idea that machines with moving parts could be made on a molecular scale. And in recognition of this goal Sweden’s Royal Academy of Science this week decided to award this year’s Nobel prize for chemistry to three researchers, Jean-Pierre Sauvage, Sir Fraser Stoddart and Bernard Feringa, who have never lost sight of nanotechnology’s original objective.

…

…

Optimists talk of manufacturing molecule-sized machines ranging from drug-delivery devices to miniature computers. Pessimists recall that nanotechnology is a field that has been puffed up repeatedly by both researchers and investors, only to deflate in the face of practical difficulties.

There is, though, reason to hope it will work in the end. This is because, as is often the case with human inventions, Mother Nature has got there first. One way to think of living cells is as assemblies of nanotechnological machines. For example, the enzyme that produces adenosine triphosphate (ATP)—a molecule used in almost all living cells to fuel biochemical reactions—includes a spinning molecular machine rather like Dr Feringa’s invention. This works well. The ATP generators in a human body turn out so much of the stuff that over the course of a day they create almost a body-weight’s-worth of it. Do something equivalent commercially, and the hype around nanotechnology might prove itself justified.

Congratulations to the three winners!

Toggling atomic switches and other talks at the Foresight Institute’s 2013 technical conference

Leave a reply

The correct title for the conference, which took place almost one year ago (Jan. 11-13, 2013 in Palo Alto, California, US, is the 2013 Foresight Technical Conference: Illuminating Atomic Precision, and the organizers, the Foresight Institute in a Dec. 2, 2013 posting by James Lewis have announced a number of conference videos have been made available and have provided a transcript of sorts for one of the videos,

A select set of videos from the 2013 Foresight Technical Conference: Illuminating Atomic Precision, held January 11-13, 2013 in Palo Alto, have been made available on vimeo. Videos have been posted of those presentations for which the speakers have consented. Other presentations contained confidential information and will not be posted.

Here’s a listing of the 2013 conference presentations made available (click to access the videos),

  • Larry Millstein: Introductory comments at Foresight Technical Conference 2013
  • J. Fraser Stoddart: Introductory comments at Foresight Technical Conference 2013
  • Leonhard Grill: “Assembly and Manipulation of Molecules at the Atomic Scale”
  • John Randall: “Atomically Precise Manufacturing”
  • Philip Moriarty: “Mechanical Atom Manipulation: Towards a Matter Compiler?”
  • David Soloveichik: “DNA Displacement Cascades”
  • Alex Wissner-Gross: “Bringing Computational Programmability to Nanostructured Surfaces”
  • Joseph Puglisi: “Deciphering the Molecular Choreography of Translation”
  • Feynman Awards Banquet at Foresight Technical Conference 2013
  • Gerhard Klimeck: “Multi-Million Atom Simulations for Single Atom Transistor Structures”
  • William Goddard: “Nanoscale Materials, Devices, and Processing Predicted from First Principals” [Note: He’s a wearing a jaunty beret adding a note of style not usually found at technical conferences.]
  • Gerhard Klimeck: “Mythbusting Knowledge Transfer Mechanisms through Science Gateways”
  • Art Olson: “New Methods of Exploring, Analyzing, and Predicting Molecular Interactions”
  • George Church: “Regenesis: Bionano”
  • Dean Astumian: “Microscopic Reversibility: The Organizing Principle for Molecular Machines”
  • Larry Millstein: Closing comments at Foresight Technical Conference 2013

In his Foresight Institute blog posting  Lewis goes on to offer a description of Philip Moriarty’s presentation “Mechanical Atom Manipulation: Towards a Matter Compiler?,”

Prof. Moriarty presented his work with the qPlus technique of non-contact AFM of semiconductors, using chemical forces to mechanically move atoms around to structure matter, focusing on the tip of the probe—specifically how to optimize the tip structure, and how to return the tip to a previously known state. He begins with a brief review of how non-contact AFM uses a damped, driven oscillator to measure and manipulate what is happening at the level of single chemical bonds. The tip at the end of the oscillating cantilever measures the frequency shift of the cantilever as it approaches and interacts with the surface, and it maintains a constant amplitude of oscillation by pumping energy into the system. The frequency shift provides information about conservative forces acting on the tip, and the amount of energy pumped in gives a handle on non-conservative, or dissipative, forces. Before diving into the experimental details of his own work, Prof. Moriarty noted that various experimental accomplishments have vindicated Eric Drexler’s assertion that single atom chemistry could be done using purely mechanical force.

…

I found this description to be a beautiful piece of technical writing although I do have to admit to being distracted by thoughts of Sherlock Holmes on reading “Prof. Moriarty.” One final note, I noted the reference to Eric Drexler in the last sentence of my excerpt as Drexler was a Foresight Institute founder amongst his many other accomplishments.

When mining for gold nanoparticles use substitute cornstarch for cyanide

Leave a reply

A May 14, 2013 news release from Northwestern University (US) on EurekAlert notes that researchers have found cornstarch can be used in the place of cyanide to extract gold,

Northwestern University scientists have struck gold in the laboratory. They have discovered an inexpensive and environmentally benign method that uses simple cornstarch — instead of cyanide — to isolate gold from raw materials in a selective manner.

This green method extracts gold from crude sources and leaves behind other metals that are often found mixed together with the crude gold. The new process also can be used to extract gold from consumer electronic waste.

Commonly used techniques, according to the news release, are problematic,

Current methods for gold recovery involve the use of highly poisonous cyanides, often leading to contamination of the environment. Nearly all gold-mining companies use this toxic gold leaching process to sequester the precious metal.

“The elimination of cyanide from the gold industry is of the utmost importance environmentally,” said Sir Fraser Stoddart, the Board of Trustees Professor of Chemistry in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. “We have replaced nasty reagents with a cheap, biologically friendly material derived from starch.”

Here’s how the researchers made their accidental discovery (from the news release),

Zhichang Liu, a postdoctoral fellow in Stoddart’s lab and first author of the paper, took two test tubes containing aqueous solutions — one of the starch-derived alpha-cyclodextrin, the other of a dissolved gold (Au) salt (called aurate) — and mixed them together in a beaker at room temperature.

Liu was trying to make an extended, three-dimensional cubic structure, which could be used to store gases and small molecules. Unexpectedly, he obtained needles, which formed rapidly upon mixing the two solutions.

“Initially, I was disappointed when my experiment didn’t produce cubes, but when I saw the needles, I got excited,” Liu said. “I wanted to learn more about the composition of these needles.”

…  said Stoddart, a senior author of the paper[,] “The needles, composed of straw-like bundles of supramolecular wires, emerged from the mixed solutions in less than a minute.”

After discovering the needles, Liu screened six different complexes — cyclodextrins composed of rings of six (alpha), seven (beta) and eight (gamma) glucose units, each combined with aqueous solutions of potassium tetrabromoaurate (KAuBr4) or potassium tetrachloroaurate (KAuCl4).

He found that it was alpha-cyclodextrin, a cyclic starch fragment composed of six glucose units, that isolates gold best of all.

“Alpha-cyclodextrin is the gold medal winner,” Stoddart said. “Zhichang stumbled on a piece of magic for isolating gold from anything in a green way.”

Alkali metal salt waste from this new method is relatively environmentally benign, Stoddart said, while waste from conventional methods includes toxic cyanide salts and gases. The Northwestern procedure is also more efficient than current commercial processes.

The supramolecular nanowires, each 1.3 nanometers in diameter, assemble spontaneously in a straw-like manner. In each wire, the gold ion is held together in the middle of four bromine atoms, while the potassium ion is surrounded by six water molecules; these ions are sandwiched in an alternating fashion by alpha-cyclodextrin rings. Around 4,000 wires are bundled parallel to each other and form individual needles that are visible under an electron microscope.

“There is a lot of chemistry packed into these nanowires,” Stoddart said. “The elegance of the composition of single nanowires was revealed by atomic force microscopy, which throws light on the stacking of the individual donut-shaped alpha-cyclodextrin rings.”

The atomic detail of the single supramolecular wires and their relative disposition within the needles was uncovered by single crystal X-ray crystallography.

As I’ve noted before, the perennial science story is a ‘mistake’ leading to an exciting discovery and this is one more example. I think it’s one of the things that scientists don’t get enough credit for, their ability to reshape a disappointing result into a new discovery or, in the vernacular, ‘make lemonade out of lemons’.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the research paper,

Selective isolation of gold facilitated by second-sphere coordination with α-cyclodextrin by Zhichang Liu, Marco Frasconi, Juying Lei, Zachary J. Brown, Zhixue Zhu, Dennis Cao, Julien Iehl, Guoliang Liu, Albert C. Fahrenbach, Youssry Y. Botros, Omar K. Farha, Joseph T. Hupp,  Chad A. Mirkin & J. Fraser Stoddart. Nature Communications 4, Article number: 1855  doi:10.1038/ncomms2891 Published 14 May 2013

This article is open access.

Love, hate, and the whole damn thing affect batteries, semiconductors, and electronic memory

Leave a reply

A Jan. 24, 2013 news item on ScienceDaily features love triumphing over hate where tetracationic rings are concerned,

Northwestern University graduate student Jonathan Barnes had a hunch for creating an exotic new chemical compound, and his idea that the force of love is stronger than hate proved correct. He and his colleagues are the first to permanently interlock two identical tetracationic rings that normally are repelled by each other. Many experts had said it couldn’t be done.

On the surface, the rings hate each other because each carries four positive charges (making them tetracationic). But Barnes discovered by introducing radicals (unpaired electrons) onto the scene, the researchers could create a love-hate relationship in which love triumphs.

The Jan. 24, 2013 Northwestern University news release by Megan Fellman, which originated the news item, probes into the nature of the problem and its solution (Note: A link has been removed),

Unpaired electrons want to pair up and be stable, and it turns out the attraction of one ring’s single electrons to the other ring’s single electrons is stronger than the repelling forces.

The process links the rings not by a chemical bond but by a mechanical bond, which, once in place, cannot easily be torn asunder.

The study detailing this new class of stable organic radicals will be published Jan. 25 [2013] by the journal Science.

“It’s not that people have tried and failed to put these two rings together — they just didn’t think it was possible,” said Sir Fraser Stoddart, a senior author of the paper. “Now this molecule has been made. I cannot overemphasize Jonathan’s achievement — it is really outside the box. Now we are excited to see where this new chemistry leads us.”

…

The rings repel each other like the positive poles of two magnets. Barnes saw an opportunity where he thought he could tweak the chemistry by using radicals to overcome the hate between the two rings.

“We made these rings communicate and love each other under certain conditions, and once they were mechanically interlocked, the bond could not be broken,” Barnes said.

Barnes’ first strategy — adding electrons to temporarily reduce the charge and bring the two rings together — worked the first time he tried it. He, Stoddart and their colleagues started with a full ring and a half ring that they then closed up around the first ring (using some simple chemistry), creating the mechanical bond.

When the compound is oxidized and electrons lost, the strong positive forces come roaring back — “It’s hate on all the time,” Barnes said — but then it is too late for the rings to be parted. “That’s the beauty of this system,” he added.

Most organic radicals possess short lifetimes, but this unusual radical compound is stable in air and water. The compound tucks the electrons away inside the structure so they can’t react with anything in the environment. The tight mechanical bond endures despite the unfavorable electrostatic interactions.

The two interlocked rings house an immense amount of charge in a mere cubic nanometer of space. The compound, a homo[2]catenane, can adopt one of six oxidation states and can accept up to eight electrons in total.

“Anything that accepts this many electrons has possibilities for batteries,” Barnes said.

“Applications beckon,” Stoddart agreed. “Now we need to spend more time with materials scientists and people who make devices to see how this amazing compound can be used.”

For anyone interested in the details of the work, here’s a citation and link to the paper published in Science,

A Radically Configurable Six-State Compound by Jonathan C. Barnes, Albert C. Fahrenbach, Dennis Cao, Scott M. Dyar, Marco Frasconi, Marc A. Giesener, Diego Benítez, Ekaterina Tkatchouk, Oleksandr Chernyashevskyy, Weon Ho Shin, Hao Li, Srinivasan Sampath, Charlotte L. Stern, Amy A. Sarjeant, Karel J. Hartlieb, Zhichang Liu, Raanan Carmieli, Youssry Y. Botros, Jang Wook Choi, Alexandra M. Z. Slawin, John B. Ketterson, Michael R. Wasielewski, William A. Goddard III, J. Fraser Stoddart. Science 25 January 2013: Vol. 339 no. 6118 pp. 429-433 DOI: 10.1126/science.1228429

This is paper is behind a paywall.