Benzyl methacrylate (BzMA) is polymerized using a poly(lauryl methacrylate) macromolecular chain transfer agent (PLMA macro-CTA) using reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (RAFT) polymerization at 70 °C in n-dodecane. This choice of solvent leads to an efficient dispersion polymerization, with polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA) occurring via the growing PBzMA block to produce a range of PLMA-PBzMA diblock copolymer nano-objects, including spheres, worms, and vesicles. In the present study, particular attention is paid to the worm phase, which forms soft free-standing gels at 20 °C due to multiple inter-worm contacts. Such worm gels exhibit thermo-responsive behavior: heating above 50 °C causes degelation due to the onset of a worm-to-sphere transition. Degelation occurs because isotropic spheres interact with each other much less efficiently than the highly anisotropic worms. This worm-to-sphere thermal transition is essentially irreversible on heating a dilute solution (0.10% w/w) but is more or less reversible on heating a more concentrated dispersion (20% w/w). The relatively low volatility of n-dodecane facilitates variable-temperature rheological studies, which are consistent with eventual reconstitution of the worm phase on cooling to 20 °C. Variable-temperature (1)H NMR studies conducted in d26-dodecane confirm partial solvation of the PBzMA block at elevated temperature: surface plasticization of the worm cores is invoked to account for the observed change in morphology, because this is sufficient to increase the copolymer curvature and hence induce a worm-to-sphere transition. Small-angle X-ray scattering and TEM are used to investigate the structural changes that occur during the worm-to-sphere-to-worm thermal cycle; experiments conducted at 1.0 and 5.0% w/w demonstrate the concentration-dependent (ir)reversibility of these morphological transitions.
Benzyl methacrylate (BzMA) is polymerized using a poly(lauryl methacrylate) macromolecular chain transfer agent (PLMA macro-CTA) using reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (RAFT) polymerization at 70 °C in n-dodecane. This choice of solvent leads to an efficient dispersion polymerization, with polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA) occurring via the growing PBzMA block to produce a range of PLMA-PBzMA diblock copolymer nano-objects, including spheres, worms, and vesicles. In the present study, particular attention is paid to the worm phase, which forms soft free-standing gels at 20 °C due to multiple inter-worm contacts. Such worm gels exhibit thermo-responsive behavior: heating above 50 °C causes degelation due to the onset of a worm-to-sphere transition. Degelation occurs because isotropic spheres interact with each other much less efficiently than the highly anisotropic worms. This worm-to-sphere thermal transition is essentially irreversible on heating a dilute solution (0.10% w/w) but is more or less reversible on heating a more concentrated dispersion (20% w/w). The relatively low volatility of n-dodecane facilitates variable-temperature rheological studies, which are consistent with eventual reconstitution of the worm phase on cooling to 20 °C. Variable-temperature (1)H NMR studies conducted in d26-dodecane confirm partial solvation of the PBzMA block at elevated temperature: surface plasticization of the worm cores is invoked to account for the observed change in morphology, because this is sufficient to increase the copolymer curvature and hence induce a worm-to-sphere transition. Small-angle X-ray scattering and TEM are used to investigate the structural changes that occur during the worm-to-sphere-to-worm thermal cycle; experiments conducted at 1.0 and 5.0% w/w demonstrate the concentration-dependent (ir)reversibility of these morphological transitions.
It is well-known that
self-assembly of AB diblock copolymers occurs
in appropriate selective solvents.[1−13] This is typically conducted in dilute solution (<1%) and usually
involves post-polymerization processing methods such as a solvent
switch,[4] a pH switch,[14] or thin film rehydration.[15] The
precise diblock copolymer morphology that is generated mainly depends
on the relative volume fractions of the two blocks, because this dictates
the so-called packing parameter.[16] The
most commonly reported copolymer morphologies are spheres, worms/cylinders,
or vesicles.[6] However, there are many studies
describing spheres and vesicles, while relatively few papers are focused
on worms/cylinders. Presumably, this is simply because the worm/cylinder
morphology occupies the narrowest region of the phase diagram.[2,10,17] Nevertheless, there has been
considerable recent activity focused on the production of block copolymer
worms/cylinders, often based on semicrystalline core-forming blocks.[18−21]We[22−29] and others[30−40] have recently shown that polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA)
offers a potentially decisive option for the formation of diblock
copolymer nano-objects.[41,42] For example, spherical,
worm-like, or vesicular blockcopolymer morphologies can be efficiently
generated directly in either water,[22−25,28,31−34] alcohol,[26,27,30,35−40] or n-alkanes[29,43] at relatively high
solids (up to 25%) during the synthesis of the copolymer chains. The worm phase is particularly interesting, because such particles
can either act as thickeners or form free-standing gels, depending
on the copolymer concentration. Recently, Blanazs et al. have shown
that a semi-concentrated aqueous dispersion of methacrylic diblock
copolymer worms undergoes a worm-to-sphere morphological transition
on cooling from 20 to 5 °C.[44] This results in thermo-reversible degelation, which allows
facile sterilization via cold ultrafiltration because this protocol
removes any micrometer-sized bacteria that may be present. Such worm
gels are also highly biocompatible, and both the gel strength and
the critical gelation temperature can be tuned;[45] thus they are expected to have biomedical applications
in the context of cell storage media.In the present work, we
revisit a new RAFT non-aqueous dispersion
polymerization formulation that enables a range of poly(lauryl methacrylate)–poly(benzyl
methacrylate) [PLMA–PBzMA] diblock copolymer nano-objects to
be prepared in n-heptane.[29] Working at a fixed solids concentration of 20% w/w in n-dodecane, a phase diagram has been constructed that reveals the
effect of varying the mean degrees of polymerization (DP) of the stabilizer
and core-forming blocks on the final copolymer morphology. Using n-dodecane in place of n-heptane facilitates
studies of the worm gel phase, because the problem of in situ solvent
evaporation is avoided. Furthermore, we demonstrate that PLMA-PBzMAdiblock copolymer worm gels undergo reversible degelation
on heating (see Figure 1). Transmission
electron microscopy (TEM), dynamic light scattering (DLS), gel rheology,
variable temperature 1H NMR spectroscopy, and small-angle
X-ray scattering (SAXS) are used to characterize this phase transition,
and a physical mechanism for worm disintegration is suggested.
Figure 1
(A) RAFT synthesis
of poly(lauryl methacrylate) (PLMA) macro-CTA
via RAFT solution polymerization in toluene at 70 °C, followed
by RAFT dispersion polymerization of benzyl methacrylate (BzMA) in n-dodecane at 70 °C. (B) Schematic representation of
the change in morphology that occurs on increasing the PBzMA target
degree of polymerization when using a relatively short PLMA macro-CTA.
(C) Thermo-responsive solution behavior exhibited by 20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer nanoparticles
in n-dodecane. A free-standing gel is formed at 20
°C, which becomes a free-flowing solution when heated to 70 °C
(see main text for an explanation of this phase transition).
(A) RAFT synthesis
of poly(lauryl methacrylate) (PLMA) macro-CTA
via RAFT solution polymerization in toluene at 70 °C, followed
by RAFT dispersion polymerization of benzyl methacrylate (BzMA) in n-dodecane at 70 °C. (B) Schematic representation of
the change in morphology that occurs on increasing the PBzMA target
degree of polymerization when using a relatively short PLMA macro-CTA.
(C) Thermo-responsive solution behavior exhibited by 20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer nanoparticles
in n-dodecane. A free-standing gel is formed at 20
°C, which becomes a free-flowing solution when heated to 70 °C
(see main text for an explanation of this phase transition).
Experimental Section
Materials
Monomers were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
(UK) and passed through basic alumina prior to use. n-Dodecane (≥90% technical grade), CDCl3, and all
other reagents were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (UK) and were used
as received, unless otherwise noted. THF and toluene were purchased
from Fisher Scientific (UK), while CD2Cl2 and d26-dodecane were purchased from Goss Scientific
(UK).
Synthesis of Poly(lauryl methacrylate) Macro-Chain Transfer
Agent
The synthesis of PLMA macro-CTAs has been described
in detail elsewhere,[29] and therefore only
one representative formulation is briefly discussed here. A typical
synthesis of PLMA16 macro-CTA was conducted as follows.
A 100 mL round-bottomed flask was charged with lauryl methacrylate
(LMA; 30 g; 118 mmol), cumyl dithiobenzoate (CDB; 3.22 g; 11.8 mmol),
2,2′-azobis(isobutyronitrile) (AIBN; 387 mg, 2.37 mmol; CDB/AIBN
molar ratio = 5.0), and toluene (50.4 g). The sealed reaction vessel
was purged with nitrogen and placed in a preheated oil bath at 70
°C for 11 h. The resulting PLMA (LMA conversion = 79%; Mn = 4900 g mol–1, Mw = 5400 g mol–1, Mw/Mn = 1.19) was
purified by precipitation into excess methanol. The mean degree of
polymerization (DP) of this macro-CTA was calculated to be 16 using 1H NMR spectroscopy by comparing the integrated signals corresponding
to the CDB aromatic protons at 7.1–8.1 ppm to that assigned
to the two oxymethylene protons of PLMA at 3.7–4.2 ppm.
Synthesis
of Poly(lauryl methacrylate)–Poly(benzyl methacrylate)
(PLMA–PBzMA) Diblock Copolymer Particles
A typical
RAFT non-aqueous dispersion polymerization synthesis of PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer worms at 20% w/w solids
was carried out as follows. Benzyl methacrylate (BzMA; 0.450 g; 2.55
mmol), AIBN initiator (4.50 mg; 0.027 mmol; dissolved at 1.0% w/w
in BzMA), and PLMA16 macro-CTA (0.30 g; 1.10 mmol; macro-CTA/initiator
molar ratio = 5.0) were dissolved in n-dodecane (4.0
mL; 3.00 g). The reaction mixture was sealed in a 10 mL round-bottomed
flask and purged with nitrogen gas for 25 min while being immersed
in an ice bath to reduce solvent evaporation. The deoxygenated solution
was then placed in a preheated oil bath at 70 °C for 16 h (final
BzMA conversion = 98%; Mn = 10 800
g mol–1, Mw/Mn = 1.25). The same diblock copolymer formulation
was scaled up for rheological studies. In further syntheses, the mean
DP of the PBzMA block was systematically varied by adjusting the amount
of added BzMA monomer under otherwise identical reaction conditions.
Gel Permeation Chromatography
Molecular weight distributions
were assessed by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) using THF eluent.
The GPC setup comprised two 5 μm (30 cm) Mixed C columns, a
WellChrom K-2301 refractive index detector operating at 950 ±
30 nm, a Precision detector PD 2020 light scattering detector (with
scattering angles of 90° and 15°), and a BV400RT solution
viscosity detector. The mobile phase contained 2.0% v/v triethylamine
and 0.05% w/v butylhydroxytoluene, and the flow rate was fixed at
1.0 mL min–1. A series of 10 near-monodisperse poly(methyl
methacrylate) standards (Mp values ranging
from 1280 to 330 000 g mol–1) were used for
calibration.
1H NMR Spectroscopy
1H NMR spectra
were recorded in either CD2Cl2 or CDCl3 using a Bruker AV1-400 or AV1-250 MHz spectrometer. Typically 64
scans were averaged per spectrum. For variable-temperature 1H NMR studies, 0.50 mL of a 20% w/w dispersion of PLMA16–PBzMA37 worms was diluted to 10% w/w using n-dodecane (0.50 mL) prior to centrifugation at 8000 rpm
for 8 h. The sedimented worms were then redispersed with the aid of
an ultrasonic bath using d26-dodecane
(2.0 mL) to produce a 5.0% w/w dispersion. 1H NMR spectra
were recorded at various temperatures ranging from 25 to 149 °C
(32 scans per spectrum, delay time = 0.10 s) using a Bruker AV1-500
MHz spectrometer.
Dynamic Light Scattering
Dynamic
light scattering (DLS)
studies were performed using a Zetasizer Nano-ZS instrument (Malvern
Instruments, UK) at a fixed scattering angle of 173°. Copolymer
dispersions were diluted in n-dodecane prior to light
scattering studies at 25 °C. Temperature-dependent DLS studies
were performed using the same Zetasizer Nano-ZS instrument, which
was equipped with a Peltier cell. Copolymer dispersions were diluted
in n-dodecane and equilibrated for 5 min at 10 °C
intervals in a 20 °C–90 °C–20 °C thermal
cycle. In both sets of experiments, the intensity-average diameter
and polydispersity of the diblock copolymer particles were calculated
at a given temperature by cumulants analysis of the experimental correlation
function using Dispersion Technology Software version 6.20. Data were
averaged over 13 runs each of 30 s duration.
Transmission Electron Microscopy
Transmission electron
microscopy (TEM) studies were conducted using a Philips CM 100 instrument
operating at 100 kV and equipped with a Gatan 1 k CCD camera. Diluted
block copolymer solutions (< 0.50% w/w) were placed on carbon-coated
copper grids and exposed to ruthenium(IV) oxide vapor for 7 min at
20 °C prior to analysis.[46] This heavy
metal compound acted as a positive stain for the core-forming PBzMA
block to improve contrast. The ruthenium(IV) oxide was prepared as
follows: ruthenium(II) oxide (0.30 g) was added to water (50 g) to
form a black slurry; addition of sodium periodate (2.0 g) with stirring
produced a yellow solution of ruthenium(IV) oxide within 1 min.
Rheology Measurements
An AR-G2 rheometer equipped with
a variable-temperature Peltier plate and a 40 mL 2° aluminum
cone was used for all experiments. The loss and storage moduli (G″ and G′, respectively)
were measured as a function of temperature at a heating rate of 1.0
°C per minute, a fixed strain of 1.0%, and an angular frequency
of 10 rad s–1 so as to assess the gel strength and
critical gelation temperature (CGT). During temperature sweeps, the
temperature was varied at 5 °C intervals, with an equilibration
time of 5 min being allowed prior to each measurement. A frequency
sweep from 0.1 to 100 rad s–1 was conducted at 20
°C using a fixed strain of 1.0% and an equilibration time of
1 min between each measurement. In all cases, the sample gap was 58
μm.
Small-Angle X-ray Scattering Measurements
SAXS patterns
were collected at a synchrotron source (ESRF, station BM26, Grenoble,
France) using monochromatic X-ray radiation (wavelength λ =
0.1 nm, with q ranging from 0.023 to 1.3 nm–1, where q = 4π sin θ/λ is the
length of the scattering vector and θ is one-half of the scattering
angle) and a 2D Pilatus 1M CCD detector. Glass capillaries of 2 mm
diameter were used as a sample holder. Time-resolved SAXS patterns
were recorded at a rate of 2 frames per minute during thermal cycles
performed on the samples (heating from 20 °C to 160 °C at
a rate of 5 °C min–1, equilibrating for 5 min,
and then cooling back to 20 °C at 5 °C min–1). The sample temperature was controlled by a heating/cooling capillary
holding stage (Linkam Scientific Instruments Ltd., Tadworth, England).
Scattering data were reduced by Nika SAS macros for Igor Pro (integration,
normalization, and background subtraction) and were further analyzed
using Irena SAS macros for Igor Pro.[47] Glassy
carbon was used for the absolute intensity calibration.[48] Measurements were conducted on 1.0% w/w and
5.0% w/w dispersions of PLMA16–PBzMA37 particles in n-dodecane.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis
of PLMA Macro-CTAs
RAFT solution polymerization
of LMA was conducted in toluene at 70 °C. This afforded low polydispersity
PLMA macro-CTAs in high yield with a mean degree of polymerization
(DP) of 16, 18, or 21 (see Supporting Information Table S1). Each macro-CTA was formed using cumyl dithiobenzoate
as a CTA. In all LMA polymerizations, the reaction was quenched at
73%–84% conversion, so as to avoid monomer-starved conditions
and hence ensure retention of the RAFT end-groups.[49] This is a prerequisite for high blocking efficiencies and
hence well-defined PLMA–PBzMAdiblock copolymers. Each PLMA
macro-CTA had a polydispersity (Mw/Mn) of less than 1.25, which is consistent with
previous studies reporting well-controlled RAFT syntheses.[29]
Block Copolymer Syntheses and Phase Diagram
BzMA monomer
was polymerized using each of the relatively short, low polydispersity
PLMA macro-CTAs (DP = 16, 18, or 21) in turn via RAFT dispersion polymerization
in n-dodecane to generate a series of well-defined
PLMA–PBzMAdiblock copolymers at 20% w/w solids (see Supporting Information Figure S1 and Table S2).
In all cases, more than 94% BzMA conversion was achieved within 16
h at 70 °C, as judged by 1H NMR spectroscopy. TEM
studies indicated that spherical, worm-like, or vesicular morphologies
can be accessed when chain-extending PLMA16 and PLMA18 macro-CTAs (see Figure 2). However,
only spherical morphologies were obtained when using a longer PLMA21 macro-CTA. This indicates that the upper limit degree of
polymerization for the stabilizer block to form higher order morphologies
(i.e., either worms or vesicles) is relatively low for this PLMA–PBzMA/n-dodecane formulation. We reported similar results for
the synthesis of the same diblock copolymer via RAFT dispersion polymerization
in n-heptane at 90 °C.[29] In this earlier study, a detailed phase diagram was constructed
for a fixed PLMA stabilizer DP of 17, with variables being the mean
DP of the PBzMA core-forming block and the total solids at which the
syntheses were conducted. It was shown that lower concentrations (≤15%
w/w solids) typically led to mixed phases, with the formation of pure
phases requiring somewhat higher concentrations (>17.5% w/w). Thus,
in the present work, we chose to construct a different phase diagram,
whereby all syntheses were conducted at 20% w/w solids and the two
variables were the mean DPs of the PLMA and PBzMA blocks. Three PLMA
macro-CTAs with DPs of 16, 18, and 21 were utilized, while the DP
of the PBzMA block was systematically varied from 20 to 80 (see Figure 2 and Supporting Information Table S2). As anticipated, the worm phase region is relatively narrow
(e.g., less than 10 BzMA units for PLMA18–PBzMA). The worms have relatively well-defined
mean widths (10–20 nm), but are rather polydisperse in length
(100–1000 nm). This suggests that the mechanism of worm formation
during the RAFT polymerization of BzMA most likely involves the one-dimensional
aggregation and fusion of monomer-swollen spheres. Similar observations
have been reported for various other diblock copolymer worm systems
in the literature.[23,27,29,30,34]
Figure 2
Phase diagram
constructed for PLMA–PBzMA diblock copolymer nanoparticles
prepared by RAFT dispersion polymerization of BzMA in n-dodecane at 20% w/w solids using AIBN at 70 °C (PLMA/AIBN molar
ratio = 5.0). The post mortem diblock copolymer morphologies were
determined by TEM. Note that higher order morphologies (worms and
vesicles) can be obtained when using PLMA16 and PLMA18 macro-CTAs, but not when using the PLMA21 macro-CTA.
TEM images (a), (b), and (c) correspond to examples of the three pure
morphologies (spheres, worms, or vesicles), respectively, and the
individual block copolymer compositions are indicated within the phase
diagram.
Phase diagram
constructed for PLMA–PBzMAdiblock copolymer nanoparticles
prepared by RAFT dispersion polymerization of BzMA in n-dodecane at 20% w/w solids using AIBN at 70 °C (PLMA/AIBN molar
ratio = 5.0). The post mortem diblock copolymer morphologies were
determined by TEM. Note that higher order morphologies (worms and
vesicles) can be obtained when using PLMA16 and PLMA18 macro-CTAs, but not when using the PLMA21 macro-CTA.
TEM images (a), (b), and (c) correspond to examples of the three pure
morphologies (spheres, worms, or vesicles), respectively, and the
individual block copolymer compositions are indicated within the phase
diagram.Focusing on the worm phase boundary,
we previously reported that
PLMA17–PBzMA worms
were obtained in n-heptane at 20% w/w solids when x = 50–60.[29] Inspecting
Figure 2, the worm phase appears to be located
within x = 35–40 for this hypothetical diblock
composition at 20% w/w in n-dodecane. This implies
a significant shift in the worm phase boundaries on switching from n-heptane to n-dodecane, which in turn
suggests that each n-alkane solvent requires the
construction of a detailed phase diagram to ensure reproducible targeting
of pure diblock copolymer morphologies.Tube inversion tests
confirm that the worms form transparent free-standing
physical gels at 20 °C, whereas the spherical and vesicular dispersions
remain free-flowing, low-viscosity fluids (see Supporting Information Figure S2). Presumably, gelation is
the result of multiple inter-worm interactions. These worm gels also
proved to be thermo-responsive, with degelation occurring on heating
the dispersion. The rest of this Article is focused on the detailed
study of this unexpected thermal transition.Variable-temperature
dynamic light scattering (DLS) studies showing
the variation of hydrodynamic diameter (blue ▲) and polydispersity
(red ■) for a 0.10% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 dispersion in n-dodecane on heating from
20 to 90 °C (filled symbols) and on cooling from 90 to 20 °C
(open symbols). Representative transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
images obtained for the same dilute dispersion are shown as insets.
These data confirm the irreversible nature of the worm-to-sphere transition
that occurs on heating PLMA16–PBzMA37 under these conditions.
Characterization of Dilute Dispersions of Diblock Copolymer
Worms
To examine the physical mechanism of degelation, DLS
studies were conducted on a highly dilute (0.10% w/w) PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm dispersion in n-dodecane
(see Figure 3). An apparent sphere-equivalent
hydrodynamic diameter of 170 nm (DLS polydispersity = 0.37) was observed
at 20 °C, which is consistent with the presence of worm-like
particles. However, heating this dilute dispersion resulted in a dramatic
reduction in the apparent hydrodynamic diameter, from 167 nm at 60
°C to around 60 nm at 90 °C. The nanoparticle polydispersity
at 90 °C is also reduced to around 0.14, which is characteristic
of spheres rather than worms. The dimensions of these particles remained
relatively constant on cooling to 20 °C (hydrodynamic diameter
= 46 nm; DLS polydispersity = 0.13), suggesting that this thermal
transition is essentially irreversible when conducted in sufficiently
dilute solution. TEM studies of the same dilute dispersion conducted
before and after the 20–90–20 °C thermal cycle
confirmed an irreversible change in morphology for
the PLMA16–PBzMA37 particles (at least
on a time scale of several hours). A well-defined worm morphology
is observed at 20 °C before the heating cycle (see image (a)
in Figure 3), whereas a predominantly spherical
morphology exists at 20 °C after the heating cycle (see image
(b) in Figure 3). Presumably, degelation occurs
on heating once a critical fraction of worms has been converted into
spheres, because this reduction in particle anisotropy inevitably
leads to a catastrophic reduction in the number of inter-particle
contacts.
Figure 3
Variable-temperature
dynamic light scattering (DLS) studies showing
the variation of hydrodynamic diameter (blue ▲) and polydispersity
(red ■) for a 0.10% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 dispersion in n-dodecane on heating from
20 to 90 °C (filled symbols) and on cooling from 90 to 20 °C
(open symbols). Representative transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
images obtained for the same dilute dispersion are shown as insets.
These data confirm the irreversible nature of the worm-to-sphere transition
that occurs on heating PLMA16–PBzMA37 under these conditions.
Variation of storage moduli (G′, blue squares)
and loss moduli (G″, red squares) for a PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm gel at 20% w/w during a thermal
cycle of heating from 20 to 90 °C (filled symbols) and cooling
from 90 to 20 °C (open symbols) at a rate of 1.0 °C per
minute. Data were recorded at 1.0% strain using an angular frequency
of 10 rad s–1 and an equilibration time of 5 min
between each measurement.
Characterization of Concentrated Dispersions of Diblock Copolymer
Worms
Rheological studies were performed on a representative
worm gel (20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 in n-dodecane). At 20 °C, G′ was
found to be relatively independent of frequency (see Supporting Information Figure S3), indicating that the worm
gel can be considered a “true” gel. Additionally, variable-temperature
studies were conducted to characterize the thermo-responsive behavior
of this gel. The critical gelation temperature (CGT) is defined as
the point at which the G′ and G″ curves cross over. On heating to 47 °C, a CGT was observed
at approximately 47 °C (see Figure 4).
The gel had reformed at 20 °C, with the G′
and G″ curves intersecting at approximately
the same CGT during the cooling cycle. This suggests a reversible
thermal transition. However, the final gel strength (G′ ≈ 87 Pa) was substantially reduced when compared
to the original gel strength (G′ ≈
2300 Pa), which indicates significant hysteresis under these conditions.
Figure 4
Variation of storage moduli (G′, blue squares)
and loss moduli (G″, red squares) for a PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm gel at 20% w/w during a thermal
cycle of heating from 20 to 90 °C (filled symbols) and cooling
from 90 to 20 °C (open symbols) at a rate of 1.0 °C per
minute. Data were recorded at 1.0% strain using an angular frequency
of 10 rad s–1 and an equilibration time of 5 min
between each measurement.
It is perhaps noteworthy that the critical temperature (>70
°C)
required for the worm-to-sphere transition suggested by the DLS studies
shown in Figure 3 is somewhat higher than that
indicated by the rheological studies (CGT ≈ 47 °C) shown
in Figure 4. It is possible that this discrepancy
may be simply the result of the differing copolymer concentrations
(0.10% w/w for DLS vs 20% w/w for rheology). However, the mean particle
size reported by DLS will only decrease significantly once almost
all of the worms have been converted into spheres, because the scattered
light intensity is proportional to the sixth power of the particle
dimensions. In contrast, it is likely that only a minor fraction of
worms need to be converted into spheres to cause degelation in the
rheology studies. Thus, these two techniques are understandably sensitive
to different stages of the worm-to-sphere transition.Systematic
dilution of a 20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm
gel in n-dodecane was undertaken to
estimate the critical gelation concentration (CGC). This dispersion
failed a tube inversion test at approximately 11% w/w, indicating
degelation at this concentration. This is significantly higher than
the CGC of approximately 3–4% w/w observed for aqueous diblock
copolymer worm gels reported by Verber et al.[45] One possible explanation for this unexpected difference is that
the aqueous worms may have a significantly greater mean contour length
than the worms described herein.[50,51]TEM images
recorded for a 20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm gel. Initially, worms are observed at 20 °C on
dilution to 0.01% w/w solids [see image (A)]. On heating this 20%
w/w gel to 90 °C, degelation occurs. Allowing the hot 20% w/w
worm gel to cool from 90 to 20 °C (followed by dilution to 0.01%
w/w solids prior to preparing a TEM grid) reveals mainly a worm phase
[see image (B)], with a minor population of isolated spheres (see
red arrows).TEM studies of the original
20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm gel (after
dilution of this dispersion to 0.01% w/w
using n-dodecane) reveal a pure worm phase at 20
°C, as expected (see Figure 5A). Heating
this 20% w/w worm gel to 90 °C causes degelation, indicating
a worm-to-sphere transition.[52] Cooling
this concentrated dispersion to 20 °C led to regelation. After
dilution to 0.01% w/w solids, TEM studies confirmed the reformation
of worms, albeit with a minor population of spheres (see Figure 5B). Thus, the worm-to-sphere thermal transition
appears to be reasonably reversible for concentrated copolymer dispersions,
in marked contrast to the irreversible behavior observed for highly
dilute dispersions (see Figure 3). In unpublished
work, we have recently observed a similarly strong concentration dependence
for aqueous diblock copolymer worm gels/dispersions. Presumably, this
reflects the highly cooperative nature of the sphere-to-worm transition,
which requires the self-assembly of many spheres to form a single
worm. Such multiple fusion events are much less likely to occur for
highly dilute dispersions, at least within normal experimental time
scales (hours/days).
Figure 5
TEM images
recorded for a 20% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 worm gel. Initially, worms are observed at 20 °C on
dilution to 0.01% w/w solids [see image (A)]. On heating this 20%
w/w gel to 90 °C, degelation occurs. Allowing the hot 20% w/w
worm gel to cool from 90 to 20 °C (followed by dilution to 0.01%
w/w solids prior to preparing a TEM grid) reveals mainly a worm phase
[see image (B)], with a minor population of isolated spheres (see
red arrows).
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra recorded
for 5.0%
w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer
worms in d26-dodecane.Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectroscopy
studies were
undertaken using d26-dodecane to examine
the molecular basis for the worm-to-sphere transition. On heating
above 70 °C, the aromatic signals assigned to the BzMA residues
at 6.7–7.4 ppm become increasingly intense relative to the
two oxyethylene protons assigned to the PLMA block at 4.0 ppm (see
Figure 6). This spectral change proved to be
reversible on cooling and suggests solvent plasticization of the core-forming
block at elevated temperature. Similar effects have been reported
by Price and co-workers for polystyrene-core diblock copolymer micelles
dispersed in n-octane.[53] The same workers also reported an irreversible worm-to-sphere
transition on heating a dilute dispersion of polystyrene–polyisoprene
diblock copolymer worms in N,N′-dimethylacetamide.[1] However, no attempt was made to study this thermal
transition for relatively concentrated copolymer gels/dispersions,
where the change in morphology becomes more or less reversible (as
in the present work).
Figure 6
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra recorded
for 5.0%
w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer
worms in d26-dodecane.
Thus, these variable-temperature 1H NMR studies confirm
that the PBzMA block becomes partially plasticized in hot d26-dodecane, which must cause a subtle shift
in the relative volume fractions of the stabilizer and core-forming
blocks. Because the worm phase occupies only a narrow phase region,
this in turn induces a morphological transition. However, these observations
immediately suggest an apparent paradox. Assuming a constant degree
of solvation for the PLMA stabilizer chains, greater solvation of
the core-forming PBzMA block due to its plasticization would be expected
to increase its relative volume fraction, and so reduce the molecular curvature of the copolymer chains. This should produce
a worm-to-vesicle transition, rather than the worm-to-sphere transition that is actually observed (see
Figure 3). We believe that this apparent discrepancy
can be explained as follows. The partial solvation of the core-forming
PBzMA block indicated by the variable-temperature 1H NMR
studies most likely involves surface plasticization of the sterically stabilized worms. Thus, the ingress of solvent
into the worms leads to those segments of the core-forming PBzMA block
that are closest to the PLMA stabilizer chains becoming preferentially
solvated. This causes an increase in the effective stabilizer block
DP (and a concomitant reduction in the effective core-forming block
DP) and hence higher molecular curvature for the diblock copolymer
chains. This hypothesis is physically realistic and accounts for the
observed worm-to-sphere transition; it is supported by 1H NMR studies of a polystyrene-based diblock copolymer in d18-octane reported by Heatley and co-workers.[54] [N.B. Surface plasticization can also be invoked
to account for the worm-to-sphere transition observed for the aqueous
worm gel formulation previously reported by Blanazs et al.[44]]More recently, LaRue and co-workers used
a combined theoretical
and experimental approach to explore the thermally induced worm-to-sphere
transition exhibited by a polystyrene–polyisoprene diblock
copolymer in n-heptane, which is a selective solvent
for the polyisoprene block.[55] Static light
scattering (SLS) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) were used to characterize
this transition, which was described as “reversible”.
However, although the worm-to-sphere transition induced by heating
from 25 to 35 °C was relatively fast, the reported SLS data actually
showed that the sphere-to-worm transition was still substantially
incomplete even after 36 days at 25 °C. Bearing in mind
the DLS studies reported in the present work, this is almost certainly
because of the dilute solution conditions (<0.10%) required for
the SLS experiments. In contrast, our rheology studies summarized
in Figure 4 were performed at 20% w/w and indicate
relatively good reversibility for the worm-to-sphere-to-worm transition
exhibited by PLMA16–PBzMA37 on much shorter
time scales (minutes). More specifically, the CGT values observed
for the heating and cooling cycles are very similar, but a somewhat
weaker worm gel is obtained (final G′ ≈
102 Pa, as compared to an initial G′
of ∼103 Pa).The radius of gyration of the PLMA
corona block (Rg) was found to be 1.3
nm in all cases.The q range available
for worm contour length analysis means that a reliable upper limit
value cannot be calculated.Uncertainties are smaller than the
number of significant figures quoted.SAXS is a powerful technique for characterizing the
morphologies
of various types of colloidal dispersions.[44,56−58] It is statistically much more robust than TEM, because
the X-ray scattering data are averaged over millions of particles
in solution. Moreover, unlike SLS and DLS, SAXS can be performed at
relatively high copolymer concentrations.[44] Accordingly, a series of absolute intensity SAXS measurements were
recorded for PLMA16–PBzMA37 copolymer
particles at both 1.0 and 5.0% w/w.In a typical I(q) versus q plot, the low q (Guinier) region is particularly
useful for assessing the particle morphology. A gradient of zero indicates
a spherical morphology, whereas a negative gradient of unity is obtained
for rods.[59] In the present study, the PLMA16–PBzMA37 worms are highly anisotropic but
relatively flexible, so a negative gradient close to (but less than)
unity is expected. Previously, Blanazs et al.[44] utilized SAXS to study the thermally induced worm-to-sphere transition
for PGMA–PHPMA diblock copolymer nanoparticles in aqueous solution
and observed excellent reversibility at a copolymer concentration
of 10% w/w.SAXS patterns obtained for PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock copolymer nano-objects in n-dodecane
as
a function of temperature are shown in Figure 7A. At 20 °C, the scattering pattern obtained at 5.0% w/w copolymer
has a negative gradient slightly lower than unity in the low q region and also a local minimum in intensity at high q (∼0.50 nm–1), indicating a mean
worm cross-section of approximately 13 nm. Heating to 160 °C
leads to a substantial change in this SAXS pattern: the gradient at
low q tends to zero, and the feature at q ≈ 0.50 nm–1 disappears. On returning to
20 °C, a negative gradient at low q is again
observed (albeit marginally lower than the original gradient), and
the minimum at q ≈ 0.50 nm–1 is almost completely recovered.
Figure 7
(a) Representative
SAXS patterns recorded for 5.0 and 1.0% w/w
PLMA16–PBzMA37 copolymer dispersions
in n-dodecane recorded during a 20–160–20
°C thermal cycle. The 1.0% w/w data are offset by a factor of
0.1 for clarity. Gradients of zero and negative unity (dashed gray
lines) are also shown as a guide to the eye. (b) Representative SAXS
patterns (symbols) for the same 1.0% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 copolymer dispersion in n-dodecane recorded
during heating from 20 °C to 160 °C. In this case, SAXS
patterns are offset a factor of 0.1 (90 °C) and 0.01 (160 °C)
for clarity, fits to the data (solid lines) are shown, and the results
of this analysis are summarized in Table 1.
The inset shows all three scattering patterns plotted on the same
scale.
These observations suggest
fairly good reversibility for the worm-to-sphere-to-worm
transition over the experimental time scale (hours). In contrast,
the same thermal cycle conducted at 1.0% w/w provides good evidence
for the same worm-to-sphere transition, albeit accompanied by a significant
reduction in reversibility (as judged by the less steep gradient at
low q and a small but discernible shift in the local
minimum at high q; see lower set of three SAXS patterns
shown in Figure 7A).Notwithstanding
the above qualitative observations, detailed SAXS
analysis requires relatively low copolymer concentrations to avoid
inter-particle interactions, which suppress the scattering intensity
at low q.[60,61] In practice, the scattering
patterns can be satisfactorily fitted at a copolymer concentration
of 1.0% w/w using an established model[62,63] for worm-like
micelles (see the Supporting Information for further details).Figure 7B shows
SAXS data obtained for 1.0%
w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 particles on heating
from 20 °C to 160 °C. At 20 °C, the scattering pattern
can be analyzed using the aforementioned worm model. Table 1 shows the key parameters obtained from the data
fit using this model. Notably, the total worm cross-section is 15.4
nm and the worm contour length exceeds 600 nm, indicating highly anisotropic
particles with a mean aspect ratio of more than 39; see Table 1. These values correlate well with TEM observations
(see Figure 5A). Another interesting observation
is that these PLMA16–PBzMA37 worms are
relatively stiff, because their Kuhn length (160 nm) is an order of
magnitude greater than the total worm cross-section. This is consistent
with the bottle brush-like structure of the PLMA stabilizer block.
Furthermore, both 1H NMR and SAXS studies indicate little
or no solvation of the worm core-forming PBzMA block at 20 °C
(see Figure 6 and Table 1, final column). The radius of gyration of 1.3 nm for the coronal
PLMA block indicated by SAXS is close to that estimated on the basis
of the mean DP of the PLMA block (∼1.0 nm; see the Supporting Information). On heating to 90 °C,
the mean worm cross-section does not vary (although the minimum at q ≈ 0.50 nm–1 virtually disappears).
However, the worm contour length is reduced from more than 600 to
∼350 nm, indicating partial worm disintegration. At this elevated
temperature, the degree of core solvation (xsol) increases to 0.29, suggesting ingress of n-dodecane into the PBzMA cores (also indicated by the 1H NMR studies shown in Figure 6). On further
heating to 160 °C, the SAXS pattern can now only be satisfactorily
fitted using parameters that approximate to isotropic particles (i.e., a total worm cross-section = 15.1 nm, worm contour
length = 17.3 nm, and worm Kuhn length = 16.8 nm). This indicates
that the vast majority of particles in the dispersion are now actually
spherical micelles, with only a relatively minor population of worms
remaining at 160 °C (as indicated by the upturn in the scattering
curve at very low q). At this temperature, the degree
of solvation in the cores of these copolymer particles is relatively
high (xsol = 0.48), which supports our
hypothesis that surface plasticization of the PBzMA core-forming block
is a key factor for the conversion of worms into spheres.
Table 1
Structural Parameters
Obtained from
Data Fitting to SAXS Patterns Recorded for 1.0% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 Diblock Copolymer Particles in n-Dodecane at Various Temperatures: Mean Worm Core Cross-Section
(2Rsw), Total Worm Cross-Section [2(Rsw + Rg)], Worm
Contour Length (Lw), Aspect Ratio [Lw/2(Rsw + Rg)], Worm Kuhn Length (bw), and Solvent Fraction in the Core of the Particle (xsol)
temp/°C
mean worm core cross-section (2Rsw)/nm
total worm cross-sectiona [2(Rsw + Rg)]/nm
worm contour length (Lw)/nm
aspect ratio [Lw/2(Rsw + Rg)]
worm Kuhn length (bw)/nm
solvent fraction in particle corec (xsol)
20
12.8 ± 1.7
15.4 ± 1.8
>600b
>39.0
160 ± 20
∼0
90
12.0 ± 1.9
14.7 ± 2.0
350 ± 48
23.8 ± 6.5
143 ± 7
0.29
160
12.5 ± 2.8
15.1 ± 2.9
17.3 ± 0.5
1.15 ± 0.25
16.8 ± 1.7
0.48
The radius of gyration of the PLMA
corona block (Rg) was found to be 1.3
nm in all cases.
The q range available
for worm contour length analysis means that a reliable upper limit
value cannot be calculated.
Uncertainties are smaller than the
number of significant figures quoted.
(a) Representative
SAXS patterns recorded for 5.0 and 1.0% w/w
PLMA16–PBzMA37 copolymer dispersions
in n-dodecane recorded during a 20–160–20
°C thermal cycle. The 1.0% w/w data are offset by a factor of
0.1 for clarity. Gradients of zero and negative unity (dashed gray
lines) are also shown as a guide to the eye. (b) Representative SAXS
patterns (symbols) for the same 1.0% w/w PLMA16–PBzMA37 copolymer dispersion in n-dodecane recorded
during heating from 20 °C to 160 °C. In this case, SAXS
patterns are offset a factor of 0.1 (90 °C) and 0.01 (160 °C)
for clarity, fits to the data (solid lines) are shown, and the results
of this analysis are summarized in Table 1.
The inset shows all three scattering patterns plotted on the same
scale.In principle, the PLMA16–PBzMA37 worms
could either undergo “sequential budding” of spheres
or a series of “random worm cleavage” events (see routes
A and B in Figure 8). However, the SAXS observations
described above combined with the appearance of a minor population
of spheres in Figure 5B suggest that the former
mechanism is more likely to be prevalent.
Figure 8
Schematic representation
of two possible mechanisms for the worm-to-sphere
transition that occurs on heating a dispersion of PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock worms in n-dodecane:
(A) sequential budding and (B) random worm cleavage.
Schematic representation
of two possible mechanisms for the worm-to-sphere
transition that occurs on heating a dispersion of PLMA16–PBzMA37 diblock worms in n-dodecane:
(A) sequential budding and (B) random worm cleavage.It is emphasized that the worm-to-sphere transition
described herein,
which occurs on heating a worm dispersion in an n-alkane solvent, is wholly complementary to that previously reported
for aqueous worms, which form spheres on cooling. This is presumably
related to the well-known upper critical solution temperature (UCST)
effect for hydrophobic polymers in organic solvents (e.g., polystyrene
in cyclohexane[64]), as opposed to the lower
critical solution temperature (LCST) effect that is widely reported
for many non-ionic water-soluble polymers in aqueous solution.[8,65−68] Finally, in view of the scalable nature of RAFT polymerization chemistry,[69,70] such thermo-sensitive block copolymer formulations may offer potential
applications as viscosity modifiers (thickeners) or lubricants for
next-generation engine oils.[71]
Conclusions
In summary, PLMA–PBzMAdiblock copolymer spheres, worms,
or vesicles can be readily prepared via polymerization-induced self-assembly
at 20% w/w solids in n-dodecane at 70 °C, provided
that the mean degree of polymerization of the PLMA stabilizer block
is relatively low. The worms form free-standing gels at 20 °C,
but undergo degelation on heating via a worm-to-sphere order–order
transition. Variable-temperature 1H NMR and SAXS studies
indicate that this is the result of a subtle change in the relative
volume fractions occupied by the stabilizer and core-forming blocks
caused by surface plasticization of the core-forming block. This thermally
induced change in copolymer morphology is essentially irreversible
on an experimental time scale of hours when conducted in highly dilute
solution (∼0.1% w/w), as judged by DLS and TEM studies. This
is because the self-assembly of each worm from the fusion of multiple
spheres is highly inefficient under these conditions. In contrast,
much more reversible behavior is observed at higher copolymer concentrations
(5.0–20% w/w), as judged by 1H NMR spectroscopy,
TEM, gel rheology, and SAXS studies. However, the latter technique
indicates a significant reduction in mean contour length for the reformed
worms, which is consistent with the reduced gel strength observed
for the reconstituted worm gel as judged by gel rheology.
Authors: Jennifer A Balmer; Oleksandr O Mykhaylyk; Steven P Armes; J Patrick A Fairclough; Anthony J Ryan; Jeremie Gummel; Martin W Murray; Kenneth A Murray; Neal S J Williams Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2010-12-20 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Nicholas J Warren; Oleksandr O Mykhaylyk; Daniel Mahmood; Anthony J Ryan; Steven P Armes Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Gregory N Smith; Matthew J Derry; James E Hallett; Joseph R Lovett; Oleksander O Mykhaylyk; Thomas J Neal; Sylvain Prévost; Steven P Armes Journal: Proc Math Phys Eng Sci Date: 2019-06-26 Impact factor: 2.704
Authors: Kate L Thompson; Charlotte J Mable; Jacob A Lane; Mathew J Derry; Lee A Fielding; Steven P Armes Journal: Langmuir Date: 2015-04-03 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: J R Lovett; L P D Ratcliffe; N J Warren; S P Armes; M J Smallridge; R B Cracknell; B R Saunders Journal: Macromolecules Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 5.985