Skip to main content

Synthesis, bioactivities and phloem uptake of dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole derivatives

Abstract

Phloem systemicity is a desirable property for insecticides to control sucking insects. However, the development of phloem systemic insecticides is challenging. One possible strategy is to link existed insecticides with endogenous substances so that the resulting conjugates can be transported by specific transporters into the phloem. In this study, novel dipeptide promoieties were introduced into chlorantraniliprole, which is an efficient and broad-spectrum anthranilic diamide insecticide without phloem mobility. Twenty-two new dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates have been synthesized. Systemic tests showed that all conjugates exhibited phloem mobility in Ricinus communis. In particular, compound 4g with alanyl-alanine dipeptide fragment was able to accumulate in phloem sap (114.49 ± 11.10 μM) in the form of its hydrolysis product 5g. Results of bioassay showed that conjugates 4g and 5g were able to exhibit comparable insecticidal activity against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua compared to its parent compound chlorantraniliprole. This work demonstrated that the dipeptide structures were able to contribute to the improvement of the uptake and phloem mobility of chlorantraniliprole, and two phloem mobile conjugates with satisfactory in vivo insecticidal effect was obtained as new candidates for high-efficient insecticides.

Introduction

With increasing demand for food and environmental safety, the use of pesticides is subjected to stringent restrictions. Furthermore, it was apparent to all that only a very small part of applied pesticide actually reached the sites of action, and the off-target portion became environmental pollutant [1, 2] which led to great public concern. Hence, the accurate and efficient utilization of agrochemicals was the focus of our research.

It has been demonstrated that coupling existing non-phloem mobile pesticide structures with endogenous substances, such as amino acids and saccharides, was effective on improving their phloem mobility [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. For example, a series of phloem mobile glucose–fipronil conjugates (GTF and GOF), glycinergic–fipronil conjugate (GlyF) and alanine ester-chlorantraniliprole conjugate were synthesized in our previous work, and their uptake process was proven to be mediated by active transport systems [5, 6, 8]. Such carrier-mediated transport strategy has been considered as a promising way for vectorizing agrochemicals, which can enhance bioavailability of pesticides [15].

Dipeptides and tripeptides can be transported into plant cells through peptide transporters, which were first discovered in Arabidopsis plants [16] as a H+-coupled transporter for oligopeptides [17, 18]. Similar facilitator transporters, such as oligopeptide transporter (PepT1 and PepT2), were also found in mammals to drive the uptake of di- and tri-peptides [19, 20]. It has been proved that dipeptides could be used as promoieties to link with pharmacologically active substances and deliver prodrugs to target tissues [21,22,23]. Therefore, conjugating dipeptide structures with existing pesticides is expected to be another potential strategy to obtain new candidates for phloem-mobile pesticides, which could enhance the efficiency and reduce the consumption of pesticides.

Materials and methods

Chemistry

A series of new dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates were synthesized by coupling chlorantraniliprole with different dipeptides as shown in Scheme 1. Reacting intermediate 1 with corresponding amino acid methyl ester hydrochlorides led to 2ab [24, 25]. Then, to a solution of compound 2a or 2b in tetrahydrofuran (THF), lithium hydroxide was slowly added. After being stirred for 2 h, the reaction mixture was acidified to pH = 3 with 1 M hydrochloric acid (HCl), and the organic phase was concentrated under reduced pressure to obtain 3a and 3b [26]. To a solution of 3a or 3b in dry dichloromethane were sequentially added amino acid hydrochlorides, 1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide hydrochloride (EDCI), and N, N-dimethyl-4-aminopyridine (DMAP). The mixture was stirred at room temperature overnight. After evaporating the solvent in vacuo, the residue was purified by flash column chromatography (silica gel, petroleum ether/ethyl acetate = 2:1, v/v) to afford compounds 4ak [27]. Compounds 5ak were prepared with similar hydrolysis reactions as used to prepare compounds 3a and 3b. Purifications of the crude products were performed via flash column chromatography (silica gel, petroleum ether/ethyl acetate/acetic acid = 1:1:0.005, v/v/v).

Scheme 1
scheme1

Synthetic route of target compounds 4a–k and 5a–k. General reaction conditions: a TEA, CH2Cl2, room temperature to 45 °C, 8 h; b LiOH, THF/H2O, 0 °C to room temperature, 2 h; c NMM, EDCI, DMAP, CH2Cl2, room temperature, overnight; d LiOH, THF/H2O, 0 °C to room temperature, 2 h

Reagents were purchased from commercial resources and were used without further purification unless otherwise stated. All reactions were carried out under nitrogen atmosphere with dry solvents and were monitored by thin-layer chromatography (TLC) analysis using silica gel GF254 thin-layer plates, and spots were visualized with a ZF-20D ultraviolet (UV) analyzer. Column chromatography purification was performed over silica gel (200–300 mesh, Qingdao Marine Chemical Ltd.). 1H fourier transform nuclear magnetic resonance (FT-NMR) spectra were measured with a Bruker AV-600 MHz instrument and calibrated using residual un-deuterated solvents as internal references (CDCl3: δ = 7.26 ppm for 1H NMR; DMSO-d6: δ = 2.50 ppm for 1H NMR) [28]. Multiplicities were reported as follows: singlet (s), doublet (d), triplet (t), quartet (q), doublet of doublets (dd), and multiplet (m). Coupling constants were reported as J values in hertz. MS data were obtained using the Waters SYNAPT™ mass spectrometry.

General procedure for synthesis of compounds 2a–b

To a dry round-bottomed flask containing a solution of dry triethylamine (12 mmol) in 20 mL anhydrous dichloromethane (CH2Cl2), glycine methyl ester hydrochloride (1.50 g, 12 mmol) or l-alanine methyl ester hydrochloride (1.67 g, 12 mmol) was added under nitrogen, respectively. The reaction mixture was stirred for 30 min at room temperature. A solution of compound 1 (10 mmol) in anhydrous CH2Cl2 was then added dropwise under nitrogen. The suspension was warmed up to 45 ℃ and stirred for 8 h until TLC indicated complete consumption of the starting materials. The reaction mixture was cooled to room temperature, followed by the addition of water (10 mL). The mixture was extracted with ethyl acetate (3 × 10 mL). The combined organic layer was dried over Na2SO4, filtered and concentrated by rotary evaporation to obtain 2a and 2b, which were used in the next step without purification.

General procedure for synthesis of compounds 3a–b [29]

Compound 2a or 2b (5 mmol) was added in the mixed solvent of THF and H2O at 0℃, then lithium hydroxide (0.63 g, 15 mmol) was slowly added. After being stirred for 2 h, the reaction mixture was acidified to pH = 2 with HCl (1 M). The organic phase was removed by rotary evaporation. The residual aqueous solution was extracted with ethyl acetate (3 × 20 mL), and the combined organic extract was washed with H2O (3 × 20 mL), dried over Na2SO4, then concentrated under reduced pressure to obtain crude product of 3a and 3b which was used in the next step directly.

General procedure for synthesis of compounds 4a–k [27]

To a solution of 3a or 3b (10 mmol) in dry CH2Cl2 (10 mL) were sequentially added amino acid hydrochlorides (13 mmol), EDCI (2.88 g, 15 mmol), and DMAP (0.61 g, 5.0 mmol). The mixture was stirred at room temperature for overnight, then diluted with H2O (10 mL), acidified with citric acid (10%) and extracted with CH2Cl2 (3 × 10 mL). The combined organic layers were washed with saturated NaHCO3 aq. Solution and dried over Na2SO4, filtered, and concentrated. The residue was purified by flash column chromatography (silica gel, petroleum ether/ethyl acetate = 2:1, v/v) to afford compounds of 4ak.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido]-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycylglycinate (4a)

White solid in 79% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.26 (s, 1H), 8.66 (s, 1H), 8.47 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.19 (t, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H), 8.15 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.59 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.51 (d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 1H), 7.31 (s, 1H), 3.83 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 3.77 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H), 3.62 (s, 3H), 2.16 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.55, 172.48, 172.31, 165.79, 165.72, 156.03, 148.84, 147.53, 139.68, 139.16, 136.15, 131.77, 131.41, 128.33, 127.22, 127.04, 126.31, 111.14, 61.84, 54.96, 49.05, 18.11. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C22H18BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 594.9899, found 594.9893.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-alaninate (4b)

White solid in 71% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.54 (t, J = 5.8 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (d, J = 4.6 Hz, 1H), 8.31 (d, J = 6.9 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.2, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (d, J = 15.7 Hz, 2H), 7.34 (s, 1H), 4.31 (q, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 3.85–3.73 (m, 2H), 3.62 (s, 3H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.27 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.11, 167.81, 167.62, 155.99, 148.79, 146.78, 139.13, 139.08, 138.41, 133.56, 132.17, 132.11, 130.59, 128.87, 128.09, 125.69, 125.05, 110.88, 52.68, 48.37, 43.26, 18.96, 18.14. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C23H20BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 609.0056, found 609.0053.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-leucinate (4c)

White solid in 65% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.26 (s, 1H), 8.53 (t, J = 5.9 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (d, J = 4.7 Hz, 1H), 8.28 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.50–7.46 (m, 2H), 7.34 (s, 1H), 4.32 (ddd, J = 9.8, 7.8, 5.1 Hz, 1H), 3.83 (dd, J = 16.6, 6.0 Hz, 1H), 3.76 (dd, J = 16.6, 5.8 Hz, 1H), 3.61 (s, 3H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.63–1.51 (m, 2H), 1.52–1.47 (m, 1H), 0.86 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H), 0.83 (d, J = 6.4 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.30, 169.24, 166.51, 156.21, 148.70, 147.54, 139.88, 139.77, 139.29, 135.67, 131.99, 131.40, 128.15, 127.29, 127.02, 126.16, 111.20, 52.34, 50.73, 42.55, 40.42, 24.65, 23.16, 21.79, 18.15. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C26H26BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 651.0525, found 651.0514.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-valinate (4d)

White solid in 58% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 9.99 (s, 1H), 8.41 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.82 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.36–7.32 (m, 2H), 7.27 (d, J = 1.7 Hz, 1H), 7.23 (t, J = 5.2 Hz, 1H), 7.03 (s, 1H), 6.67 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 1H), 4.53 (dd, J = 8.7, 5.0 Hz, 1H), 4.04 (dd, J = 7.2, 5.2 Hz, 2H), 3.74 (s, 3H), 2.18 (s, 3H), 2.14 (dd, J = 11.9, 6.9 Hz, 1H), 0.91 (d, J = 6.9 Hz, 6H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.90, 172.39, 165.68, 156.03, 148.83, 147.53, 139.69, 139.17, 135.98, 131.84, 131.38, 128.31, 127.22, 127.04, 126.33, 111.11, 57.55, 52.18, 49.18, 30.61, 19.47, 18.75, 18.52, 18.12. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C25H24BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 637.0369, found 637.0359.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-serinate (4e)

White solid in 64% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.52 (t, J = 6.1 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (d, J = 4.7 Hz, 1H), 8.28 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H), 7.61 (dd, J = 7.3, 4.2 Hz, 1H), 7.50 (s, 1H), 7.44 (s, 1H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 5.09 (t, J = 5.7 Hz, 1H), 4.39 (q, J = 5.3 Hz, 1H), 3.85 (qd, J = 16.7, 5.9 Hz, 2H), 3.71 (dt, J = 11.0, 5.4 Hz, 1H), 3.64 (s, 3H), 3.63–3.59 (m, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 170.89, 168.90, 168.11, 156.37, 148.71, 146.63, 139.37, 139.00, 138.35, 133.33, 132.29, 131.69, 131.29, 129.07, 125.88, 125.38, 111.16, 62.13, 54.69, 52.81, 43.45, 29.68, 18.76. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C23H20BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 625.0005, found 625.0007.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanylglycinate (4f)

White solid in 76% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.49 (s, 2H), 8.19 (s, 1H), 8.16 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.61 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.52 (dd, J = 2.5, 0.7 Hz, 2H), 7.35 (s, 1H), 4.31 (s, 1H), 3.82 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 3.63 (s, 3H), 2.18 (s, 3H), 1.21 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.06, 170.59, 166.07, 156.12, 148.80, 147.54, 139.77, 139.71, 138.92, 135.97, 131.80, 131.75, 131.33, 128.27, 127.25, 127.05, 126.42, 111.10, 52.14, 49.23, 41.00, 18.11, 18.07. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C23H20BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 609.0056, found 609.0042.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-alaninate (4g)

White solid in 76% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.25 (s, 1H), 8.49 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 8.37 (d, J = 4.9 Hz, 1H), 8.27 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.50 (dd, J = 7.3, 2.3 Hz, 2H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 4.39–4.32 (m, 1H), 4.31–4.25 (m, J = 7.3, 2.7 Hz, 1H), 3.62 (s, 3H), 2.18 (s, 3H), 1.26 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 3H), 1.21 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.30, 172.41, 165.83, 156.06, 148.80, 147.52, 139.77, 139.69, 139.06, 135.99, 135.86, 131.83, 131.37, 128.27, 127.24, 127.02, 126.44, 126.35, 111.14, 52.31, 49.21, 18.41, 18.14, 17.51. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C24H22BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 623.0212, found 623.0209.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-methioninate (4 h)

White solid in 65% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.25 (s, 1H), 8.48 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.40 (d, J = 7.0 Hz, 1H), 8.31 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.61 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.54 (d, J = 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.37 (s, 1H), 4.42–4.37 (m, 1H), 4.30 (q, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 3.62 (s, 3H), 2.48–2.36 (m, 2H), 2.17 (s, 3H), 2.00 (s, 3H), 1.98–1.86 (m, 2H), 1.21 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.93, 172.58, 165.95, 156.10, 148.80, 147.53, 139.70, 139.68, 139.07, 135.95, 131.85, 131.74, 131.44, 128.30, 127.28, 127.06, 126.39, 111.09, 52.45, 51.16, 49.54, 31.59, 30.91, 18.35, 18.09, 15.04. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C26H26BrCl2N6O5S: [M−H] 683.0246, found 683.0237.

Dimethyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-aspartate (4i)

White solid in 64% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.21 (s, 1H), 8.47 (d, J = 4.7 Hz, 1H), 8.38 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 8.33 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H), 8.15 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (d, J = 2.4 Hz, 1H), 7.45 (dd, J = 7.3, 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.36 (d, J = 3.0 Hz, 1H), 4.64 (q, J = 6.6 Hz, 1H), 4.31 (q, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H), 3.61 (s, 3H), 3.58 (d, J = 9.6 Hz, 3H), 2.80 (dd, J = 16.4, 6.2 Hz, 1H), 2.70 (dd, J = 16.5, 6.9 Hz, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.17 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.59, 171.43, 170.92, 170.88, 165.88, 156.05, 148.83, 147.53, 139.68, 139.09, 135.95, 131.84, 131.77, 131.39, 128.32, 127.24, 127.05, 126.35, 111.10, 52.68, 52.14, 49.02, 48.98, 35.96, 18.10, 18.01. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C26H24BrCl2N6O7: [M−H] 681.0267, found 681.0278.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-phenylalaninate (4j)

White solid in 56% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.22 (s, 1H), 8.48 (d, J = 4.6 Hz, 1H), 8.30 (t, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 8.15 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 6.7, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 1H), 7.38 (d, J = 4.0 Hz, 2H), 7.24 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2H), 7.20 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 3H), 4.47 (q, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 4.36 (q, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H), 3.58 (s, 3H), 3.02 (dd, J = 13.9, 5.8 Hz, 1H), 2.94 (dd, J = 13.9, 8.6 Hz, 1H), 2.17 (s, 3H), 1.15 (dd, J = 7.1, 1.5 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.42, 173.30, 172.46, 172.35, 165.61, 156.31, 156.00, 148.85, 147.52, 139.66, 136.05, 131.78, 131.37, 130.56, 128.34, 127.88, 127.22, 127.03, 126.28, 115.41, 115.33, 111.09, 54.28, 54.03, 49.03, 36.63, 21.52, 18.48. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C30H26BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 699.0525, found 699.0523.

Methyl{2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido]-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl}-l-alanyl-l-tyrosinate (4k)

White solid in 66% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.23 (s, 1H), 9.20 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 1H), 8.47 (s, 1H), 8.31 (s, 1H), 8.31–8.27 (m, 1H), 8.23 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 8.15 (dd, J = 8.0, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 1H), 7.42 (dd, J = 15.3, 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.37 (d, J = 4.5 Hz, 1H), 6.98 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 2H), 6.63 (t, J = 8.6 Hz, 2H), 4.45–4.28 (m, 2H), 3.58 (d, J = 23.1 Hz, 3H), 2.95–2.75 (m, 2H), 2.17 (d, J = 2.9 Hz, 3H), 1.10 (dd, J = 60.6, 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.42, 173.30, 172.46, 172.35, 165.60, 156.31, 156.00, 148.85, 147.52, 139.67, 139.05, 136.05, 131.78, 131.37, 130.56, 128.34, 127.22, 127.03, 126.28, 115.41, 115.33, 111.09, 54.28, 54.03, 49.03, 36.63, 21.52, 18.11. ESI-HRMS calcd for C30H26BrCl2N6O6: [M−H] 715.0474, found 715.0474.

Synthesis of compound 5a–k

Compounds 5ak were prepared with similar hydrolysis reactions as used to prepare compounds 3a and 3b.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl}glycylglycine (5a)

White solid in 90% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.26 (d, J = 4.6 Hz, 1H), 8.64 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (s, 1H), 8.16 (t, J = 6.3 Hz, 1H), 8.11 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 1H), 7.61 (dd, J = 8.4, 4.5 Hz, 1H), 7.53 (s, 1H), 7.50 (s, 1H), 7.33 (d, J = 4.6 Hz, 1H), 3.80–3.74 (m, 4H), 2.17 (d, J = 4.6 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 171.51, 169.47, 166.66, 156.24, 148.73, 147.56, 139.90, 139.77, 139.16, 135.72, 131.96, 131.38, 128.19, 127.29, 127.05, 126.24, 111.19, 42.88, 41.05, 40.38, 18.13. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C21H16BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 580.9743, found 580.9753.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-alanine (5b)

White solid in 85% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.58 (s, 1H), 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.52 (t, J = 6.0 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (d, J = 4.7 Hz, 1H), 8.17 (dd, J = 11.7, 7.8 Hz, 2H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.2, 4.8 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (d, J = 15.4 Hz, 2H), 7.34 (s, 1H), 4.24 (q, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H), 3.85–3.73 (m, 2H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.27 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.55, 172.48, 172.31, 165.79, 165.72, 156.03, 148.84, 147.53, 139.68, 139.16, 136.15, 131.77, 131.41, 128.33, 127.22, 127.04, 126.31, 111.14, 54.96, 49.05, 18.33, 18.11. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C22H18BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 594.9899, found 594.9901.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-leucine (5c)

White solid in 91% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.56 (s, 1H), 10.26 (s, 1H), 8.52 (t, J = 5.9 Hz, 1H), 8.49 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.17–8.13 (m, 2H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.50 (d, J = 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (d, J = 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 4.30–4.22 (m, 1H), 3.83 (dd, J = 16.6, 6.0 Hz, 1H), 3.76 (dd, J = 16.6, 5.8 Hz, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.66–1.58 (m, 1H), 1.54–1.50 (m, 2H), 0.87 (d, J = 6.6 Hz, 3H), 0.83 (d, J = 6.5 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 174.38, 169.00, 166.45, 156.14, 148.75, 147.53, 139.85, 139.74, 139.28, 135.75, 132.01, 131.94, 131.38, 128.20, 127.27, 127.02, 126.17, 111.18, 50.70, 42.60, 40.55, 24.75, 23.29, 21.85, 18.16. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C25H24BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 637.0369, found 637.0383.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-valine (5d)

White solid in 89% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.31 (s, 1H), 8.34 (dd, J = 4.8, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.91 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.82 (s, 1H), 7.40–7.35 (m, 2H), 7.29 (d, J = 2.3 Hz, 1H), 7.18 (d, J = 9.0 Hz, 1H), 7.00 (s, 1H), 4.31 (dd, J = 9.0, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 4.25 (dd, J = 15.2, 6.7 Hz, 1H), 3.68 (dd, J = 15.1, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 2.18 (s, 3H), 2.15–2.07 (m, J = 4.9 Hz, 1H), 0.89 (d, J = 6.9 Hz, 3H), 0.80 (d, J = 6.9 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 174.38, 169.00, 166.45, 156.14, 148.75, 147.53, 139.85, 139.74, 139.28, 135.75, 132.01, 131.94, 131.38, 128.20, 127.27, 127.02, 126.17, 111.18, 50.70, 42.60, 24.75, 23.29, 21.85, 18.16. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C24H22BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 623.0212, found 623.0212.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)glycyl-l-serine (5e)

White solid in 87% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.49 (d, J = 4.1 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 8.10 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.2, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.50 (s, 1H), 7.45 (s, 1H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 4.31 (dt, J = 8.4, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 3.85 (qd, J = 16.7, 6.0 Hz, 2H), 3.71 (dd, J = 11.0, 5.0 Hz, 1H), 3.62 (dd, J = 11.0, 4.2 Hz, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 171.51, 169.47, 166.66, 156.24, 148.73, 147.56, 139.91, 139.77, 139.16, 135.72, 131.96, 131.38, 128.19, 127.29, 127.05, 126.24, 111.19, 42.88, 41.05, 40.38, 18.13. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C22H18BrCl2N6O6: [M−H] 610.9848, found 610.9845.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl}-l-alanylglycine (5f)

White solid in 93% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.24 (s, 1H), 8.48 (dd, J = 4.8, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.46 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.10 (t, J = 5.9 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.51 (dd, J = 19.1, 2.4 Hz, 2H), 7.35 (s, 1H), 4.31 (q, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 3.73 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 2.18 (s, 3H), 1.20 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.55, 172.48, 172.31, 165.79, 165.72, 156.03, 148.84, 147.53, 139.68, 139.16, 136.15, 131.77, 131.41, 128.33, 127.22, 127.04, 126.31, 111.14, 54.96, 49.05, 18.33, 18.11. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C22H18BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 594.9899, found 594.9896.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido]-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl}-l-alanyl-l-alanine (5g)

White solid in 91% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 10.25 (s, 1H), 8.48 (dd, J = 4.7, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.36 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (dd, J = 8.1, 1.6 Hz, 1H), 8.13 (d, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 2H), 7.36 (s, 1H), 4.34 (q, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 4.21 (q, J = 7.3 Hz, 1H), 2.17 (s, 3H), 1.24 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 3H), 1.19 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 174.39, 172.20, 165.79, 156.03, 148.80, 147.53, 139.74, 139.69, 139.06, 135.95, 131.83, 131.81, 131.37, 128.29, 127.23, 127.04, 126.39, 111.10, 49.19, 47.92, 18.44, 18.11, 17.77. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C23H20BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 609.0056, found 609.0041.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-methionine (5h)

White solid in 86% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.58 (s, 1H), 10.22 (s, 1H), 8.48 (d, J = 4.8 Hz, 1H), 8.37 (d, J = 7.4 Hz, 1H), 8.15 (t, J = 8.1 Hz, 2H), 7.60 (dd, J = 7.9, 5.0 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (s, 1H), 7.44 (s, 1H), 7.37 (s, 1H), 4.38–4.28 (m, 2H), 2.49–2.39 (m, 2H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 2.02 (s, 3H), 2.00–1.94 (m, 1H), 1.90–1.82 (m, 1H), 1.20 (d, J = 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.65, 172.66, 165.87, 156.01, 148.86, 147.53, 139.68, 139.66, 139.01, 136.08, 131.77, 131.39, 130.10, 128.34, 127.24, 127.04, 126.42, 111.06, 51.13, 49.50, 31.20, 30.08, 18.45, 18.10, 15.06. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C25H24BrCl2N6O5S: [M−H] 669.0089, found 669.0085.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-aspartic acid (5i)

White solid in 85% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.54 (s, 2H), 10.21 (s, 1H), 8.48 (d, J = 4.8 Hz, 1H), 8.35 (t, J = 6.5 Hz, 1H), 8.20 (t, J = 6.6 Hz, 1H), 8.16 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 7.9, 4.9 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 1H), 7.45 (s, 1H), 7.38 (s, 1H), 4.54 (q, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H), 4.35 (q, J = 7.1 Hz, 1H), 2.74–2.65 (m, 1H), 2.62–2.53 (m, 1H), 2.17 (s, 3H), 1.17 (t, J = 8.8 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 172.59, 171.43, 170.92, 170.88, 165.88, 156.05, 148.83, 147.53, 139.68, 139.09, 135.95, 131.84, 131.77, 131.39, 128.32, 127.24, 127.05, 126.35, 111.10, 52.68, 52.14, 49.02, 18.10, 18.01. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C24H20BrCl2N6O7: [M−H] 652.9954, found 652.9950.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido)-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl)-l-alanyl-l-phenylalanine (5j)

White solid in 79% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.79 (s, 1H), 10.22 (s, 1H), 8.47 (d, J = 4.8 Hz, 1H), 8.22 (d, J = 7.5 Hz, 1H), 8.18 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 1H), 8.15 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.9 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (s, 1H), 7.40 (d, J = 2.6 Hz, 1H), 7.37 (s, 1H), 7.24–7.16 (m, 5H), 4.46 (td, J = 9.0, 4.5 Hz, 1H), 4.32 (q, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 3.08 (dd, J = 13.8, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 2.87 (dd, J = 13.7, 9.6 Hz, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.01 (d, J = 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.30, 172.38, 165.59, 156.00, 148.85, 147.52, 139.67, 139.05, 137.89, 136.01, 131.79, 131.35, 129.66, 129.63, 128.58, 128.52, 128.34, 127.22, 127.04, 126.84, 126.31, 111.09, 53.67, 49.07, 37.34, 18.41, 18.11. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C29H24BrCl2N6O5: [M−H] 685.0369, found 685.0366.

{2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloropyridin-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamido]-5-chloro-3-methylbenzoyl}-l-alanyl-l-tyrosine (5k)

White solid in 88% yield; 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 12.68 (s, 1H), 10.24 (s, 1H), 9.18 (s, 1H), 8.48 (dd, J = 4.6, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 8.31 (s, 1H), 8.15 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 8.07 (dd, J = 63.5, 8.0 Hz, 1H), 7.60 (dd, J = 8.1, 4.7 Hz, 1H), 7.49 (s, 1H), 7.41 (dd, J = 11.6, 2.5 Hz, 1H), 7.38 (d, J = 5.1 Hz, 1H), 6.99 (dd, J = 8.3, 4.9 Hz, 2H), 6.62 (t, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 4.39–4.30 (m, 2H), 2.91 (dd, J = 13.9, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 2.78 (ddd, J = 36.8, 13.9, 8.8 Hz, 1H), 2.16 (s, 3H), 1.09 (dd, J = 65.8, 7.1 Hz, 3H). 13C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): δ 173.27, 172.45, 165.78, 156.31, 156.08, 148.81, 147.52, 139.67, 139.13, 136.08, 131.81, 131.67, 130.54, 128.31, 127.81, 127.26, 127.05, 126.24, 115.44, 115.36, 111.12, 79.55, 54.28, 54.04, 49.07, 40.39, 18.15, 18.09. ESI-HRMS calcd. For C29H24BrCl2N6O6: [M−H] 701.0318, found 701.0311.

Determination of phloem mobility

Plant materials

Castor bean seeds (Ricinus communis L.) No. 9 were purchased from the Agricultural Science Academy (Zibo, China) and nurtured in wet absorbent cotton for 24 h at 27 ± 1 °C prior to sowing in vermiculite watered with tap water. Seedlings were grown at 27 ± 1 °C and 80% ± 5% RH during the photoperiod (14 h) for 6 days.

Screening of phloem mobility

The already described procedure [30] was utilized to the phloem sap collection. After endosperms being carefully stripped off, cotyledons were incubated in buffered solution containing 20 mM 4-morpholineethanesulfonic acid (MES) (pH = 5.0), 0.25 mM MgCl2, and 0.5 mM CaCl2 for 0.5 h, then immediately transferred to a new MES culture fluid containing 100 μM of the test compounds. After the cotyledons were incubated for 2 h, the hypocotyls were severed in the hook region for phloem exudation, and the phloem sap was continually collected for 2 h.

Analytical methods

After dilution with methanol (phloem sap/methanol = 1:4, v/v), the collected phloem sap was analyzed on high-performance liquid chromatograph (HPLC, Agilent 1290 series) equipped with a UV detector at 210 nm. Separations were done on a SB-C18 reversed-phase column (5 μm, 250 × 4.6 mm i.d.; Agilent) with a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min at 30 °C, and the eluent was made of acetonitrile and water containing 0.1% trifluoroethanoic acid (TFA). The calibration curves of the test compounds (ranging from 0 to 100 μM) were linear.

Calculation of physicochemical properties

The physicochemical properties of all conjugates and chlorantraniliprole, including ionization constant in aqueous solution (pKa) and octanol/water partitioning coefficient (log Ko/w), were predicted by ACD LogD software suite version 14.0 [31].

Biological assay in vitro

The insecticidal activities of compounds 4g and 5g against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua were tested according to literature [6], and the insecticidal activity of chlorantraniliprole was also tested as positive control. Leaf-disc dipping assays were employed with petri dishes kept in incubator at 26 °C and 85% relative humidity under a photoperiod of 16 h:8 h (light/dark). Mortalities were checked after treated for 48 h.

Results and discussion

Phloem mobility in R. communis

Phloem mobilities of all dipeptide conjugates were studied in R. communis, which is an ideal model to investigate the phloem mobility of xenobiotics [10, 12, 32]. An interesting observation was that the methyl ester structure on compounds 4ak were mostly hydrolyzed to their corresponding acidic conjugates during the uptake and transport process in planta. When R. communis cotyledons were treated with dipeptide methyl ester conjugates 4ak, the concentrations of tested compound in phloem sap were close to the limit of detection, and only corresponding dipeptide conjugates 5ak were detected by HPLC. Therefore, the phloem mobility of the dipeptide methyl ester conjugates 4ak was represented by the amount of corresponding dipeptide conjugates being detected.

Results from systemicity tests demonstrated that the non-phloem-mobile chlorantraniliprole could acquire phloem mobility by conjugating with dipeptide or dipeptide methyl ester structures. As shown in Fig. 1, both the dipeptide methyl ester conjugates 4ak and corresponding dipeptide conjugates 5ak were able to be absorbed by cotyledons of R. communis, while the parent insecticide chlorantraniliprole could not be detected in the phloem sap. Especially, the concentrations of compounds 4ak in phloem sap (in forms of hydrolysis products) were generally higher than that of corresponding dipeptide conjugates 5ak. In particular, compound 4g represented the highest concentration (114.49 ± 11.10 μM) under the existing experimental conditions in the form of its hydrolysis product 5g, which has exceeded its concentration in incubation solution (100 μM). There was no significant difference between the detected concentrations of 4b, 4c, 4d, 4f, 4h, 4i, all of which were significantly lower than that of conjugate 4g.

Fig. 1
figure1

Concentrations of different dipeptide conjugates in phloem sap of Ricinus communis. Cotyledons were incubated in incubation solution contain 100 μM of tested compound. The phloem sap collection started 30 min after pre-incubation and lasted for 2 h. Duncan’s multiple-range tests at a 5% probability level were used to determine statistical differences among treatments (P < 0.05). Ch chlorantraniliprole, ND not detected. The data (mean ± SE, n = 10) with a column topped by different letters are significantly different from each other

In addition to the difference between acids and esters, the side chain groups on dipeptide residues also showed effects on phloem mobility of dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates. By comparing the difference between the uptake amounts of the conjugates, it was found that the substituent R at the α position in the amino acid structure was related to the transport of the conjugate in plants. When R = methyl, the conjugate showed the best phloem mobility. When the size of substituent group gradually increase, the phloem mobility of the conjugate would decrease. The conjugates carrying aromatic rings on the side chain, such as 4j and 4k, exhibited the lowest concentration in the phloem sap. It demonstrated that the dipeptides with aromatic ring on the side chain was less effective on improving the phloem uptake.

Predicted phloem mobility

Our previous research indicated that the phloem mobility of pesticide-nutrient conjugates could be influenced by their physicochemical properties and affinities with active carrier systems, which can affect the efficiency of passive diffusion and active transportation respectively [6, 8, 11]. In order to further interpret the structure-phloem mobility relationship of dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates, their physicochemical properties were first calculated and analyzed. For each conjugate, ionization constant in aqueous solution (pKa) and octanol/water partitioning coefficient (log Ko/w) were predicted (Table 1).

Table 1 Molecular weights, log Ko/w, and pKa of compounds 4a5k

Results showed no obvious correlation between phloem systemicity and log Ko/w values. Compared to the significant differences among phloem mobilities of conjugates, the range fluctuation of log Ko/w values was small. The pKa and log Ko/w values were then fitted in Kleier model, which was widely applied to predict the phloem mobility of xenobiotics [33, 34]. As shown in Fig. 2, the data points for all dipeptide ester conjugates 4ak were located in non-phloem-mobile area, which was not consistent with the experimental data. It was speculated that dipeptide derivatives were loaded into the phloem of plants via pathways other than passive diffusion, possibly with the participation of dipeptide transporters [35]. Although some of the dipeptide acid conjugates (5a, 5b, 5e, 5g, 5f, and 5i) showed data points located in phloem-mobile area, their phloem uptake was not significantly improved compared with the ones located in non-phloem-mobile area. This indicated that passive diffusion could help the conjugates to penetrate into phloem tissue [11], but was not the major route for the uptake process. In summary, active transport may play a dominant role in the uptake and transport of dipeptide conjugates. It is possible that by linking dipeptide fragments with pesticide structure, the conjugates will be able to bind with dipeptide transporters, and thus process phloem mobility.

Fig. 2
figure2

Predication of phloem mobility of dipeptide conjugates via the Kleier map (log Cf as a function of log Ko/w and pKa). Log Ko/w and pKa were calculated by ACD LogD suite v.14.0 software

Insecticidal activity

Insecticidal activities of compound 4g, which represented the highest phloem mobility in R. communis, and its hydrolysis product 5g were tested against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua according to methods reported in literature [36]. The insecticidal activity of chlorantraniliprole was also tested as positive control. As shown in Table 2, both compounds 4g and 5g maintained good biological activity against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua comparable to chlorantraniliprole. Compared to compound 4g, compound 5g showed significantly better control effect against Plutella xylostella L. and similar insecticidal activity against Spodoptera exigua. Considering the compound 4g could be hydrolyzed into the compound 5g and accumulate in phloem sap during the transportation process in planta, application of the ester conjugate 4g could potentially decrease the usage of pesticides while showing similar control effect on sucking pests compared to commercial chlorantraniliprole.

Table 2 Insecticidal activities of compounds 4g, 5g and chlorantraniliprole (50 mg/L) against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua in 48 h

Conclusion

In summary, 22 new dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates were synthesized via simple synthetic route. All derivatives have acquired phloem mobility in R. communis compared to non-phloem-mobile chlorantraniliprole, which proved that dipeptides could be another option for promoiety when designing new phloem-mobile pesticides. The uptaken amounts of most dipeptide ester conjugates in phloem were better than that of corresponding dipeptide conjugates, while the dipeptide esters would be hydrolyzed to corresponding dipeptides during the uptake or transportation process. In particular, compound 4g that conjugated with alanyl-alanine dipeptide fragment showed the highest phloem mobility among all conjugates, and could lead to high concentration of 5g in phloem sap which exceeded its concentration in incubation solution. Bioassay results showed that the control effects of 4g and 5g against Plutella xylostella L. and Spodoptera exigua were comparable to that of chlorantraniliprole. Thus, application of compound 4g could potentially lead to better in vitro control effect compared to chlorantraniliprole. Further research on the uptake mechanism of dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole conjugates and its affinity with dipeptide transporters is still in progress.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CH2Cl2 :

Dichloromethane

DMAP:

N, N-dimethyl-4-aminopyridine

EDCI:

1-(3-Dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide hydrochloride

HCl:

Hydrochloric acid

HPLC:

High-performance liquid chromatography

LiOH:

Lithium hydroxide

log Ko/w :

Octanol/water partitioning coefficient

MES:

4-Morpholineethanesulfonic acid

NMM:

N-methyl morpholine

pKa :

Ionization constant in aqueous solution

TLC:

Thin-layer chromatography

TFA:

Trifluoroacetic acid

THF:

Tetrahydrofuran

UV:

Ultraviolet

References

  1. 1.

    Birch ANE, Begg GS, Squire GR (2011) How agro-ecological research helps to address food security issues under new IPM and pesticide reduction policies for global crop production systems. J Exp Bot 62(10):3251–3261

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Wang CJ, Liu ZQ (2007) Foliar uptake of pesticides—present status and future challenge. Pestic Biochem Physiol 87(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Wu H, Marhadour S, Lei Z, Yang W, Marivingt-Mounir C, Bonnemain JL, Chollet JF (2016) Vectorization of agrochemicals: amino acid carriers are more efficient than sugar carriers to translocate phenylpyrrole conjugates in the Ricinus system. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(15):14336–14349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Marhadour S, Wu H, Yang W, Marivingt-Mounir C, Bonnemain JL, Chollet JF (2017) Vectorisation of agrochemicals via amino acid carriers: influence of the spacer arm structure on the phloem mobility of phenylpyrrole conjugates in the Ricinus system. Pest Manag Sci 73(9):1972–1982

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Yang W, Wu H, Xu H, Hu A, Lu M (2011) Synthesis of glucose–fipronil conjugate and its phloem mobility. J Agric Food Chem 59(23):12534–12542

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Yao G, Wen Y, Zhao C, Xu H (2017) Novel amino acid ester-chlorantraniliprole conjugates: design, synthesis, phloem accumulation and bioactivity. Pest Manag Sci 73(10):2131–2137

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Chen Y, Lei ZW, Zhang Y, Yang W, Liu HF, Zhou YF, Yang MF (2017) Influence of pyranose and spacer arm structures on phloem mobility and insecticidal activity of new tralopyril derivatives. Molecules 22(7):1058

    PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Xie Y, Zhao J, Wang C, Yu A, Liu N, Chen L, Lin F, Xu H (2016) Glycinergic–fipronil uptake is mediated by an amino acid carrier system and induces the expression of amino acid transporter genes in Ricinus communis seedlings. J Agric Food Chem 64(19):3810–3818

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Wang J, Lei Z, Wen Y, Mao G, Wu H, Xu H (2014) A novel fluorescent conjugate applicable to visualize the translocation of glucose–fipronil. J Agric Food Chem 62(35):8791–8798

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Wu H, Yang W, Zhang Z, Huang T, Yao G, Xu H (2012) Uptake and phloem transport of glucose–fipronil conjugate in Ricinus communis involve a carrier-mediated mechanism. J Agric Food Chem 60(24):6088–6094

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sheng Q, Liu X, Xie Y, Lin F, Zhang Z, Zhao C, Xu H (2018) Synthesis of novel amino acid-fipronil conjugates and study on their phloem loading mechanism. Molecules 23(4):778

    PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Chollet JF, Rocher F, Jousse C, Deletage-Grandon C, Bashiardes G, Bonnemain JL (2004) Synthesis and phloem mobility of acidic derivatives of the fungicide fenpiclonil. Pest Manag Sci 60(11):1063–1072

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kleier DA, Hsu FC (1996) Phloem mobility of xenobiotics: VII. The design of phloem systemic pesticides. Weed Sci 44(3):749–756

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jiang X, Xie Y, Ren Z, Ganeteg U, Lin F, Zhao C, Xu H (2018) Design of a new glutamine–fipronil conjugate with α-amino acid function and its uptake by A. thaliana Lysine Histidine Transporter 1 (AtLHT1). J Agric Food Chem 66(29):7597–7605

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Wu H, Xu H, Marivingt-Mounir C, Bonnemain JL, Chollet JF (2018) Vectorizing agrochemicals: enhancing bioavailability via carrier-mediated transport. Pest Manag Sci 75(6):1507–1516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Steiner HY, Song W, Zhang L, Naider F, Becker JM, Stacey G (1994) An Arabidopsis peptide transporter is a member of a new class of membrane transport proteins. Plant Cell 6(9):1289–1299

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Paulsen IT, Skurray RA (1994) The POT family of transport proteins. Trends Biochem Sci 19(10):404

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Steiner H, Naider F, Becker JM (1995) The PTR family: a new group of peptide transporters. Mol Microbiol 16(5):825–834

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Newstead S (2011) Towards a structural understanding of drug and peptide transport within the proton-dependent oligopeptide transporter (POT) family. Biochem Soc Trans 39(5):1353–1358

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Biegel A, Knüetter I, Hartrodt B, Gebauer S, Theis S, Luckner P, Kottra G, Rastetter M, Zebisch K, Thondorf I, Daniel H, Neubert K, Brandsch M (2006) The renal type H+/peptide symporter PEPT2: structure-affinity relationships. Amino Acids 31(2):137–156

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Zhang L, Zhang L, Luo T, Zhou J, Sun L, Xu Y (2012) Synthesis and evaluation of a dipeptide-drug conjugate library as substrates for PEPT1. ACS Comb Sci 14(2):108–114

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Rubioaliaga I, Daniel H (2002) Mammalian peptide transporters as targets for drug delivery. Trends Pharmacol Sci 23(9):434–440

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Dubowchik GM, Firestone RA, Padilla L, Willner D, Hofstead SJ, Mosure K, Knipe JO, Lasch SJ, Trail PA (2002) Cathepsin B-labile dipeptide linkers for lysosomal release of doxorubicin from internalizing immunoconjugates: model studies of enzymatic drug release and antigen-specific in vitro anticancer activity. Bioconjug Chem 13(4):855–869

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Shi J, Ren G, Wu N, Weng J, Xu T, Liu X, Tan C (2017) Design, synthesis and insecticidal activities of novel anthranilic diamides containing polyfluoroalkyl pyrazole moiety. Chin Chem Lett 28(8):1727–1730

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Feng Q, Liu Z, Xiong L, Wang M, Li Y, Li Z (2010) Synthesis and insecticidal activities of novel anthranilic diamides containing modified n-pyridylpyrazoles. J Agric Food Chem 58(23):12327–12336

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Fang Y, Wu C, Larock RC, Shi F (2011) Synthesis of 2H-indazoles by the [3+2] dipolar cycloaddition of sydnones with arynes. J Org Chem 76(21):8840–8851

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Lu H, Zhang F, Meng X, Duan S, Xiao W (2009) Enantioselective Michael reactions of β, β-disubstituted nitroalkenes: a new approach to β-2,2-amino acids with hetero-quaternary stereocenters. Org Lett 11(17):3946–3949

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Babij NR, Mccusker EO, Whiteker GT, Canturk B, Choy N, Creemer LC, De Amicis CV, Hewlett NM, Johnson PL, Knobelsdorf JA, Li F, Lorsbach BA, Nugent BM, Ryan SJ, Smith MR, Yang Q (2016) NMR chemical shifts of trace impurities: industrially preferred solvents used in process and green chemistry. Org Process Res Dev 20(3):661–667

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Quideau S, Lyvinec G, Marguerit M, Bathany K, Ozanne-Beaudenon A, Buffeteau T, Cavagnat D, Chenede A (2009) Asymmetric hydroxylative phenol dearomatization through in situ generation of iodanes from chiral iodoarenes and m-CPBA. Angew Chem Int Ed 48(25):4605–4609

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Rocher F, Chollet JF, Jousse C, Bonnemain JL (2006) Salicylic acid, an ambimobile molecule exhibiting a high ability to accumulate in the phloem. Plant Physiol 141(4):1684–1693

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Rocher F, Chollet JF, Legros S, Jousse C, Lemoine R, Faucher M, Bush DR, Bonnemain JL (2009) Salicylic acid transport in Ricinus communis involves a pH-dependent carrier system in addition to diffusion. Plant Physiol 150(4):2081–2091

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Deletage-Grandon C, Chollet JF, Faucher M, Rocher F, Komor E, Bonnemain JL (2001) Carrier-mediated uptake and phloem systemy of a 350-Dalton chlorinated xenobiotic with an α-amino acid function. Plant Physiol 125(4):1620–1632

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Kleier DA (1988) Phloem mobility of xenobiotics: I. Mathematical model unifying the weak acid and intermediate permeability theories. Plant Physiol 86(3):803–810

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Brudenell AJP, Baker DA, Grayson BT (1995) Phloem mobility of xenobiotics: tabular review of physicochemical properties governing the output of the Kleier model. Plant Growth Regul 16(3):215–231

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Tegeder M, Rentsch D (2010) Uptake and partitioning of amino acids and peptides. Mol Plant 3(6):997–1011

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Xia Q, Wen YJ, Wang H, Li YF, Xu HH (2014) β-Glucosidase involvement in the bioactivation of glycosyl conjugates in plants: synthesis and metabolism of four glycosidic bond conjugates in vitro and in vivo. J Agric Food Chem 62(46):11037–11046

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We were grateful to Prof. Ri-Yuan Tang for guidance in organic synthesis.

Funding

The authors would like to thank the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFD0200300, 2017YFD0200307), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31672044), and the Scientific Project in Guangzhou City (Grant No. 201707020013).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

HHX and SJZ designed the protocol of the study; SJZ synthesized the compounds, analyzed the results, and wrote the manuscript; XML performed the uptake experiment; HXW and CZ coordinated the study and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Chen Zhao or Hanhong Xu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zheng, S., Lin, X., Wu, H. et al. Synthesis, bioactivities and phloem uptake of dipeptide-chlorantraniliprole derivatives. BMC Chemistry 14, 22 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13065-020-00673-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Chlorantraniliprole
  • Phloem-mobile pesticides
  • Dipeptide
  • Insecticidal activity