The rational design of materials with tailored properties is of paramount importance for a wide variety of biological, medical, electronic and optical applications. Here we report molecular level control over the spatial distribution of functional groups on surfaces utilizing self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of pH-switchable surface-appended pseudorotaxanes. The supramolecular systems were constructed from a poly(aryl ether) dendron-containing a dibenzo[24]crown-8 (DB24C8) macrocycle and a thiol ligand-containing a dibenzylammonium recognition site and a fluorine end group. The dendron establishes the space (dendritic effect) that each pseudorotaxane occupies on the SAM. Following SAM formation, the dendron is released from the surface by switching off the noncovalent interactions upon pH stimulation, generating surface materials with tailored physical and chemical properties.
The rational design of materials with tailored properties is of paramount importance for a wide variety of biological, medical, electronic and optical applications. Here we report molecular level control over the spatial distribution offunctional groups on surfaces utilizing self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of pH-switchable surface-appended pseudorotaxanes. The supramolecular systems were constructed from a poly(aryl ether) dendron-containing a dibenzo[24]crown-8 (DB24C8) macrocycle and a thiol ligand-containing a dibenzylammonium recognition site and a fluorine end group. The dendron establishes the space (dendritic effect) that each pseudorotaxane occupies on the SAM. Following SAM formation, the dendron is released from the surface by switching off the noncovalent interactions upon pH stimulation, generating surface materials with tailored physical and chemical properties.
The development of
self-assembly processes capable of generating
functional surfaces with well-defined and tunable properties promises
to have far-reaching consequences for biological and medical applications.[1−4] Furthermore, these self-assembly processes can lead to the preparation
and tailoring of intricate surfaces with unique properties for electronic
and optical applications.[5] The ability
of molecular compounds to self-assemble on surfaces, giving rise to
self-assembled monolayers (SAMs),[6,7] has been exploited
extensively over the past decade to modify and tailor the properties
of a wide range ofmetal, metal oxides and semiconductor surfaces.
Recently, mixed SAMs have been the subject of much interest from the
viewpoint of tailoring the spacing of chemical functional groups on
the surface, and ultimately controlling the surface wettability, friction,
and adhesion properties of surfaces and the density of biomolecules
in biochips, biosensors, and medical electronic devices.[8−14]Mixed SAMs rely on preparing SAMsfrom a solution of two or
more
molecular compounds, which usually have different end group functionalities.
This process has several limitations such as the fact that the ratio
of the two compounds in the monolayer is rarely identical to their
ratio in the solution, because of the preferential adsorption of one
of the components. This preferential adsorption means control over
not only the density but also the homogeneity offunctional groups
in mixed monolayers is not straightforward.[15] Thus, the formation of two-component monolayers has been reported
by several authors[16−18] to lead to phase-segregated heterogeneous mixed SAMs
with surface ratios different from solution ratios of the components.
If we can assemble molecular components in which functional groups
are deterministically arranged with special distributions on the molecular
scale, we will open access to a new class of surface materials with
designed and tailored physical and chemical properties. Starting from
this premise, we have devised pH-switchable supramolecular systems
that are able to self-assemble on surfaces and contain a molecular
component that can vary in steric bulkiness (Figure 1). Poly(aryl ether) dendrons with generations varying from
0 to n ([G0]–[G]) serve as ideal steric molecular components because of their precisely
controllable size, molecular weight, and hydrophobic and inert chemical
composition.[19] The dendrons act as space-filling
molecular moieties that establish the space that each pseudorotaxane
occupies on the surface. Furthermore, the dendrons are bound to the
surface by noncovalent interactions and can be released after SAM
formation simply by switching off the noncovalent interactions upon
raising the pH. Removal of the noncovalently bound dendron spacing
groups will expose functional groups on the surface. Thus, by carefully
selecting the dendron component, it should be possible to tailor at
the molecular level the density and spatial distribution offunctional
groups on material surfaces.
Figure 1
Schematic representation of an effective strategy
to control the
density and spatial distribution of functional groups on surfaces.
The strategy involves three main steps: (1) self-assembly of pH-switchable
supramolecular systems comprising a polyaryl dendron-containing dibenzo[24]crown-8
(DB24C8) and a dibenzylammonium (DBA) thread with a fluorine end functional
group and a thiol surface-active headgroup; (2) SAM formation of the
pH-switchable supramolecular systems on gold surfaces; (3) simultaneous
decomplexation of the DB24C8-functionalized dendrons from the SAM
on addition of a base and self-assembly of a second component (i.e.,
ClPrSH) on the vacant space previously occupied by the dendrons.
Schematic representation of an effective strategy
to control the
density and spatial distribution offunctional groups on surfaces.
The strategy involves three main steps: (1) self-assembly of pH-switchable
supramolecular systems comprising a polyaryl dendron-containing dibenzo[24]crown-8
(DB24C8) and a dibenzylammonium (DBA) thread with a fluorine end functional
group and a thiol surface-active headgroup; (2) SAM formation of the
pH-switchable supramolecular systems on gold surfaces; (3) simultaneous
decomplexation of the DB24C8-functionalized dendrons from the SAM
on addition of a base and self-assembly of a second component (i.e.,
ClPrSH) on the vacant space previously occupied by the dendrons.The supramolecular system is based
on host–guest inclusion
complex formation between a poly(aryl ether) dendron-containing dibenzo[24]crown-8
(DB24C8) and a dibenzylammonium (DBA) thread with a fluorine end functional
group and a thiol surface-active headgroup for strong anchoring onto
the gold surface upon SAM formation (Figure 1). The assembly and disassembly processes of the supramolecular system
based on DB24C8/DBApseudorotaxane can be controlled simply by acid–base
reactions.[20−24] The DB24C8⊃DBApseudorotaxane complex is self-assembled and
stabilized by [N+–H···O] and [N+C–H···O] hydrogen bonds, which are easily
destabilized by deprotonation and raising the pH, and re-established
by acidifying. Moreover, additional [C–H···O]
and π–π stacking interactions, as well as electrostatic
forces, also contribute to the stability of the pseudorotaxane’s
formation. In this study, three supramolecular systems were constructed
by the self-assembly of (i) DB24C8 with the DBA thiol derivative (DBA-SH),
(ii) [G1] poly(aryl ether) dendron-containing DB24C8 ([G1]-DB24C8)
with DBA-SH and (iii) [G2]-DB24C8 with DBA-SH. SAMs of these systems
were prepared on gold surfaces, followed by decomplexation and simultaneous
backfilling with 3-chloropropanethiol (ClPrSH) to form mixed monolayers
(Figure 1). This strategy was investigated
for its applicability and effectiveness on providing molecular level
control over density and spatial distribution offunctional groups
in a monolayer.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis
The
DBA-SH, DB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8, and [G2]-DB24C8
were synthesized via multistep synthetic routes. The synthesis ofDBA-SH was initiated with the alkylation of4-hydroxybenzaldehyde
by 11-bromoundecene in the presence ofK2CO3 and NaI to obtain aldehyde 1 (Scheme 1). Fluorobenzylamine was reacted with aldehyde 1 at an elevated temperature to afford the imine, which was subsequently
reduced to the secondary amine 2 with NaBH4. Amine-Boc protection was performed via reaction of 2 with Boc2O in the presence ofNEt3 and catalytic
amount of4-DMAP to obtain 3. Thioacetylation of 3 was performed via the addition ofthioacetic acid to the
alkene moiety of 3, with a catalytic amount ofAIBN to
afford the thioacetate 4. Boc deprotection ofthiocetate 4 was carried out under acidic conditions (TFA) to yield the
secondary amine 5. The thioacetate moiety in 5 was acid hydrolyzed (0.1 M HCl) to give the thiol 6, followed by protonation of the secondary amine with HPF6 to afford the desired DBA-SH as the hexafluorophosphate salt.
[G1]- and [G2]-dendritic alcohols and macrocycle 7 were synthesized according to literature procedures[11,12] (for further details, see the Supporting Information). Macrocycle 7 was base hydrolyzed (NaOH) to afford the desired carboxylic
acid functionalized crown ether 8. [G1]- and [G2]-dendritic
alcohols were DCC coupled to carboxylic acidfunctionalized crown
ether 8 with catalytic amount ofDMAP to afford the desired
esters [G1]-DB24C8 and [G2]-DB24C8 (Scheme 2).
The DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SHpseudorotaxanes were formed by complexation
ofDBA-SH with 2 equiv. of either DB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8 or [G2]-DB24C8
in HPLC MeCN and confirmed by 1H NMR spectroscopy (MeCN-d3, 300 MHz, 25 °C). By way of an example,
Figure 2 shows the partial 1H NMR
spectra ofDB24C8, DBA-SH and DB24C8⊃DBA-SH. The characteristic 1H NMR peaks corresponding to the α, β, γ
protons on the crown ether are shifted upfield from 4.10, 3.82, and
3.70 ppm to 3.96, 3.50, and 3.40 ppm, respectively, after the addition
ofDBA-SH, whereas the benzylic methylene protons are shifted downfield
from 3.80 to 3.90 ppm to 4.40–4.50 ppm. These are common shifts
observed when complexation between crown ether and DBA takes place.[9,13] By integrating the complexed and uncomplexed 1H NMR resonances
belonging to the α, β, γ protons on the crown ether,
it was determined that >95% ofDBA-SH complexed to DB24C8. Comparable
values of complexation above 95% were obtained between DBA-SH and
either [G1]-DB24C8 or [G2]-DB24C8.
Figure 2
Partial 1H NMR (300 MHz, MeCN-d3, 25 °C, 10 mM) spectra of DBA-SH, DB24C8,
and DB24C8⊃DBA-SH.
Partial 1H NMR (300 MHz, MeCN-d3, 25 °C, 10 mM) spectra ofDBA-SH, DB24C8,
and DB24C8⊃DBA-SH.
SAM Preparation and Characterization
SAMs of the DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH supramolecular
assemblies were formed by immersing freshly plasma cleaned Au substrates
in 10 mM MeCN solutions of the supramolecular complexes for 24 h.
In order to create the mixed SAMs, the freshly prepared SAMs of pH-switchable
supramolecular dendron-thiol ligand systems were immersed in a mixed
MeCN solution of 2 mM NEt3 and 1 mM ClPrSHfor 30 min.
It is important to note that the backfilling conditions with ClPrSH
have been previously demonstrated by us[12] not to affect the spatial distribution of a previously immobilized
thiol. Pure DBA-SH and ClPrSH SAMs, which were used as controls, were
prepared in MeCN solutions of 10 mM DBA-SH and 1 mM ClPrSH, respectively,
for 24 h.SAM formation was evaluated by ellipsometry, contact
angle (Table 1) and XPS (Figure 3 and Table 2). The advancing contact
angle (θadv) observed for pure monolayer ofDBA-SH
is 101 ± 1°, which is in good agreement with the literature
for fluorine-terminated monolayers (Table 1).[25] Note that the hysteresis (θadv – θrec) value of 33° suggests
the presence of a sparsely packed monolayer, which is likely due to
the electrostatic repulsions of the protonated amino group in DBA-SH.
The θadv of 83 ± 1° for ClPrSH SAM is consistent
with previous reports on chlorine-terminated SAMs,[26] where the hysteresis of 34° indicates once more the
presence of a loosely packed SAM. The lack of order in this monolayer
is most likely a result of the weak interactions between the short
alkyl chains of the ClPrSH SAM.[27]
Table 1
Advancing (θa) and
Receding (θr) Water Contact Angles and Ellipsometric
Thickness for the SAMs Formed
contact angle (deg)
thickness (nm)
SAM
θa
θr
ellipsometric
theoreticalb
DBA-SH
101 ± 1
68 ± 1
2.00 ± 0.08
2.40
ClPrSH
83 ± 1
49 ± 3
0.42 ± 0.01
0.51
DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
complexed
95 ± 3
44 ± 4
1.85 ± 0.10
2.27
mixeda
92 ± 1
57 ± 2
1.78 ± 0.08
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
complexed
91 ± 4
42 ± 3
1.70 ± 0.07
2.11
mixeda
89 ± 1
56 ± 3
1.65 ± 0.08
-
[G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
complexed
89 ± 3
43 ± 2
1.60 ± 0.05
1.69
mixeda
87 ± 2
55 ± 2
1.45 ± 0.05
DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed SAM that was
prepared by the initial formation of a supramolecular complex monolayer,
followed by simultaneous decomplexation and immersion in a ClPrSH
solution.
Calculated via
MD simulations.
Figure 3
XPS spectra
of (a) F (1s), (b) N (1s), (c) S (2p), and (d) Cl (2p)
for pure DBA-SH and mixed monolayers formed from DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH.
Table 2
Elemental Ratios in the SAMs Formed
from Complexed Molecules (complexed) and after Immersion in Mixed
Solution of NEt3 and ClPrSH (mixed) Obtained via the XPS
Data
DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
[G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
XPS ratio
complexed
mixed
complexed
mixed
complexed
mixed
Au/N
18.87 ± 4.64
16.67 ± 6.67
33.30 ± 7.77
33.56 ± 8.79
47.03 ± 7.93
46.34 ± 8.09
S/F
1.05 ± 0.05
2.00 ± 0.10
1.06 ± 0.10
3.09 ± 0.19
1.10 ± 0.06
4.18 ± 0.15
S/N
1.07 ± 0.07
2.03 ± 0.11
1.04 ± 0.11
3.06 ± 0.12
1.03 ± 0.05
4.12 ± 0.25
S/Cl
2.05 ± 0.13
1.52 ± 0.12
1.25 ± 0.20
Cl/F
0.98 ± 0.08
2.03 ± 0.19
3.34 ± 0.21
Cl/N
0.99 ± 0.09
2.01 ± 0.12
3.30 ± 0.18
XPS spectra
of (a) F (1s), (b) N (1s), (c) S (2p), and (d) Cl (2p)
for pure DBA-SH and mixed monolayers formed from DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH.DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed SAM that was
prepared by the initial formation of a supramolecular complex monolayer,
followed by simultaneous decomplexation and immersion in a ClPrSH
solution.Calculated via
MD simulations.The wettability properties of the monolayers formed
from the DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH supramolecular
assemblies are lower than for pure DBA-SH monolayer, with observed
θadv of 95 ± 3, 91 ± 2, and 87 ± 2°,
respectively. It is assumed that this decrease in wettability is due
to the concealment of the very hydrophobic fluorine end group by the
longer DBA-SH molecule and the terminal end groups belonging to the
crown ether or dendrons. The bulkiness of the supramolecular assemblies,
which are expected to induce steric effects and complex intermolecular
interactions during the self-assembly process, is most likely responsible
for the higher contact angle hysteresis observed when compared with
the pure DBA-SH SAM.After decomplexation ofDB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
[G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH monolayers by means of a base and simultaneous
immersion in a ClPrSH solution, the resulting mixed monolayers exhibit
θadv of 92 ± 3, 89 ± 2, and 87 ± 2°,
respectively. The θadv values obtained are between
those of pure DBA-SH (101 ± 1°) and ClPrSH (83 ± 1°)
SAMs, and thus consistent with the presence of a DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed
monolayer. Interestingly, the contact angle hysteresis obtained for
the mixed monolayers are between 12 and 14° lower than the respective
complexed monolayers and comparable to the pure DBA-SH and ClPrSHSAMs. Using the θadv measurements of the pure and
DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed monolayers in conjunction with the application
of the Cassie’s equation,[28] the
ratio of the two surfactants (DBA-SH and ClPrSH) on the mixed monolayers
was determined. Cassie’s eq 1 relates
the contact angle of a surface of mixed composition to those of pure
SAMsWhere θadv is the water advancing
contact angle on the mixed SAM, θadv1 and θadv2 are the contact angles related to the pure SAMs, in this
case, formed from DBA-SH and ClPrSH, respectively. x and y are the corresponding surface molar ratios
ofDBA-SH and ClPrSH, with x + y = 1. By employing this relationship between surface wettability
and the surface composition of the mixed SAMs, molar ratios (DBA-SH:ClPrSH)
in the mixed SAMs of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3 were obtained depending on
if they were initially formed from either DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH,
or [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH monolayers, respectively. A trend is
shown that indicates that the molar ratio between DBA-SH and ClPrSH
decreases as the steric bulk of the initial supramolecular complex
increases.The ellipsometric thickness observed for the different
monolayers
is shown in Table 1. The monolayer thicknesses
obtained for pure DBA-SH and ClPrSH are 2.00 ± 0.08 nm and 0.42
± 0.01 nm, respectively. These values are in good agreement with
the theoretical thicknesses of 2.40 and 0.51 nm, which were calculated
through molecular dynamics (MD) simulations for DBA-SH and ClPrSHSAMs on gold surface, respectively (see the Supporting
Information for simulation details).The SAMs of the
supramolecular complexes and subsequent mixed monolayers
exhibit lower thickness values when compared to pure DBA-SH SAM. Once
more, a trend is observed showing that with increasing the bulk of
the supramolecular assembly, the thickness values of the SAM of the
supramolecular complex monolayer diminish. The thicknesses obtained
from the MD simulations show the same trend (Table 1), with the snapshots illustrating that the bulky dendrons
drag the DBA-SH down to the surface and occupy a larger surface area
in the monolayer (Figure S2). Thus, the ellipsometric thickness decrease
can be rationalized by considering that the increased size of the
supramolecular assembly leads to the occupation of a larger surface
area per molecule, which in turn induces a decrease in the SAM density.
Consequently, the reduced monolayer densification is reflected in
lower ellipsometric thickness values. Another trend that can be observed
is that the thickness of the DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed monolayer decreases
with the steric bulkiness of the initial supramolecular complex. These
results can be regarded as a demonstration of an increased amount
of the shortest chain, i.e., ClPrSH, in the DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed SAM
by using supramolecular complexes with increasing bulk.To investigate
whether the presence of excess DB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8,
or [G2]-DB24C8 influenced the experimental obtained monolayer thicknesses,
freshly plasma-cleaned Au substrates were immersed for 24 h in 20
mM HPLC MeCN solutions of the three molecules. The ellipsometric thicknesses
of the DB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8, or [G2]-DB24C8 immersed substrates were
determined to be 0.20 ± 0.03 nm, 0.18 ± 0.05 nm, and 0.19
± 0.04 nm. These thicknesses are similar to those found in freshly
cleaned Au substrate (0.25 ± 0.06 nm), suggesting that the DB24C8,
[G1]-DB24C8, or [G2]-DB24C8 interact weakly with the gold surface
and are readily removed through rinsing with copious amounts of HPLC
MeCN.XPS further confirms the formation of the pure DBA-SH,
pure ClPrSH,
and complexed and mixed monolayers, showing signals from F (1s), N
(1s), and S (2p) on all surfaces (Figure 3).
The spectra display N (1s) peaks at 401.4 eV and F (1s) peaks at 688
eV. No peaks are observed in the P (2p) region in the pure DBA-SH
and complexed (DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, or
[G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH) monolayers, hence suggesting that the counteranion
PF6¯ is not present on the SAM surface.
Thus, the F (1s) peaks observed correspond to the fluorine end group
on the DBA-SH molecule. The S (2p) spectra for all the surfaces show
doublet peaks at 163.4 eV (S (2p1/2)) and 162.2 eV (S (2p3/2)), which are assignable to the thiolate-type sulfur bound
to the gold surface.[29]The presence
of the ClPrSH molecule in the mixed monolayers was
demonstrated by the appearance of an additional doublet peak between
202 and 199 eV, which corresponds to Cl (2p) (Figure 3d).[30] The Cl (2p1/2)
and Cl (2p3/2) double peak is observed at 201.4 and 199.8
eV, respectively, indicative of a chlorine bound to carbon.[31] In contrast with a decrease in the intensity
of the fluorine (Figure 3a) and nitrogen peaks
(Figure 3b), the chorine peak (Figure 3d) increases with the increased size of the supramolecular
assembly. In agreement with contact angle and ellipsometry analysis,
these results reflect the presence of a lower ratio ofDBA-SH:ClPrSH
in the mixed monolayers as the steric bulk of the initial supramolecular
complex increases.XPS was further used to determine the composition
(DBA-SH and ClPrSH)
of the mixed monolayers. By integrating the areas of the F (1s), N
(1s), S (2p), and Cl (2p) peaks, we were able to calculate the ratios
of the various elements (e.g., S/Cl, Cl/F, and Cl/N) on the complexed
and mixed monolayers as shown in Table 2. For
each monolayer, three independent samples were analyzed by XPS. The
samples were found to be reproducible with a moderately low variability.
For the mixed monolayers formed from DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, the S/Cl
ratio was determined as 2.05 ± 0.13 (i.e., a S:Cl ratio of 2:1).
In the same manner, Cl/F and Cl/N ratios were determined to be 0.98
± 0.08 (i.e., a Cl:F ratio of 1:1) and 0.99 ± 0.09 (i.e.,
a Cl:N ratio of 1:1), respectively. Because the ClPrSH consists of
1 Cl atom and 1 S atom, and the DBA-SH comprises 1 F atom, 1 N atom
and 1 S atom, the ratios above indicate that the mixed monolayers
formed from DB24C8⊃DBA-SH are composed of 1:1 ratio ofDBA-SH
and ClPrSH. Similar XPS analysis were performed on the mixed monolayers
formed from the [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH complex, and S/Cl, Cl/F
and Cl/N ratios of 1.52 ± 0.12, 2.03 ± 0.19, and 2.01 ±
0.12, respectively, were obtained. These results reveal the presence
of mixed monolayers ofDBA-SH and ClPrSH in a 1:2 ratio. Finally,
in the mixed monolayers formed from [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH complex,
the S/Cl, Cl/F, and Cl/N ratios are shown to be 1.25 ± 0.20,
3.34 ± 0.21, and 3.30 ± 0.18, respectively. These findings
are indicative of a 1:3 ratio of the DBA-SH and ClPrSH in the mixed
monolayer.The ratios of the mixed monolayers obtained by XPS
are in excellent
agreement with the ones derived from contact angle measurements and
interpreted by the Cassie equation. It is also important to note that
the XPS provides evidence of the formation of homogeneous mixed monolayers.
By comparing the Au/N and Au/F ratios of the complexed monolayers
with those of the mixed monolayer, the results show the presence of
similar ratios, implying that no desorption of the DBA-SH occurs upon
decomplexation and backfilling with ClPrSH. To further understand
the trends we are seeing in the relationship between the size of the
supramolecular assembly and the ratio of the DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed SAM,
the volumes ofDB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8 and [G2]-DB24C8 were investigated
(Table 3 and Figure 4). It can be seen that the ratio of the volumes (1:2.0:3.2) correlates
well with the corresponding ratio of the DBA-SH and ClPrSH in the
mixed monolayer. Our results imply that the surface ratio of two components
in mixed SAMs can be well-controlled via careful design of the initial
supramolecular complex.
Table 3
Volumes
Calculated from vdW Surfaces
DB24C8
[G1]-DB24C8
[G2]-DB24C8
V (nm3)
0.44
0.88
1.41
V/VDB24C8
1
2.0
3.2
Figure 4
vdW surfaces for (a) DB24C8, (b) [G1]-DB24C8,
and (c) [G2]-DB24C8,
respectively.
vdW surfaces for (a) DB24C8, (b) [G1]-DB24C8,
and (c) [G2]-DB24C8,
respectively.To demonstrate the absence of lateral
diffusion of the DBA-SH molecules
upon backfilling with ClPrSH on the gold surface and consequent formation
of nanoscale phase separated domains, we studied the nanometer-scale
mixing characteristics of the formed binary monolayers by voltammetry
as previously reported[17] using the reductive
desorption of the adsorbed thiol molecules. Linear sweep voltammetry
was performed with gold on mica as working electrodes that had SAMsformed on them with various constituents, including ClPrSH only, DBA-SH
only, DB24C8⊃DBA-SH and DB24C8⊃DBA-SH backfilled with
ClPrSH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH only, and [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
backfilled with ClPrSH, [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH only, and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
backfilled with ClPrSH.Linear sweep voltammograms were logged
with single-component monolayers
ofClPrSH and DBA-SH (Figure 5a). Two single
peaks were observed at −0.721 V (±0.0028 V) and −1.085
V (±0.007 V) and correspond to the reductive desorption of the
adsorbed ClPrSH and DBA-SH, respectively. The difference in the reductive
desorption potentials for pure ClPrSH SAMs and pure DBA-SH SAMs is
ascribed to the difference in the Gibbs energy of adsorption of the
thiols.[17] Because the absence of two distinct
reductive peaks in the DBA-SH:ClPrSH SAM indicates the nonexistence
of nanoscale phase-separated domains,[17,32] we investigated
the reductive desorption ofDBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed monolayers formed
from DB24C8⊃DBA-SH (Figure 5b), [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
(Figure 5c), and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
(Figure 5d). For comparison purposes, the voltammograms
of the complexed monolayers (i.e., DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH) are also plotted in Figure 5b–d, respectively.
Figure 5
Typical linear sweep
voltammograms for reductive thiol desorption
obtained for (a) pure DBA-SH and pure ClPrSH SAMs, (b) SAMs formed
with DB24C8⊃DBA-SH (i.e., complexed SAMs) and those backfilled
with ClPrSH (i.e., mixed SAMs), (c) SAMs formed with [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and those backfilled with ClPrSH, and (d) SAMs formed with [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and those backfilled with ClPrSH performed at a scan rate of 100 mV
s–1.
Typical linear sweep
voltammograms for reductive thiol desorption
obtained for (a) pure DBA-SH and pure ClPrSH SAMs, (b) SAMsformed
with DB24C8⊃DBA-SH (i.e., complexed SAMs) and those backfilled
with ClPrSH (i.e., mixed SAMs), (c) SAMsformed with [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and those backfilled with ClPrSH, and (d) SAMsformed with [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and those backfilled with ClPrSH performed at a scan rate of 100 mV
s–1.For SAMsformed with DB24C8⊃DBA-SH and those backfilled
with ClPrSH (Figure 5b), single cathodic peaks
were observed at approximately −1.158 ± 0.004 V and −1.146
± 0.011 V, respectively. Because, following backfilling, the
desorption of the DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed monolayers still displayed a
single peak, the results are consistent with the formation of a homogeneous
mixed SAM. The formation ofDBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed monolayers from [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
(Figure 5c) and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH (Figure 5d) also did not induce phase separation domains,
as revealed by the presence of single cathodic peaks for both mixed
SAMs. We observed single cathodic peaks at −1.12 ± 0.034
V and −1.11 ± 0.014 V for SAMsformed of [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and those backfilled with ClPrSH, respectively, whereas the SAMsformed
of [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH and those backfilled with ClPrSH exhibited
single cathodic peaks at −1.128 ± 0.005 V and −1.150
± 0.041 V, respectively. When a comparison is made between the
voltammograms of the different complexed and mixed SAMs and those
of pure ClPrSH and DBA-SH, the charge under the desorption peak for
the pure SAMs is significantly lower than that of the complexed and
mixed SAMs. The desorption charge consists of charge contributions
from both faradic processes and capacitance,[33] in which the latter increases for lower packing density in the SAM.[32,34] The lower charge being passed for pure SAMs can thus be explained
by the fact that one-component SAMs (i.e., pure ClPrSH and pure DBA-SHSAMs) allow better packing of the SAM, leading to a smaller contribution
of the charging current to the total desorption charge. In summary,
the fact that we see one single peak for all the mixed SAMs, with
no reductive peak observed at the lower potentials associated with
pure ClPrSH, confirms that we have a well-mixed binary monolayer without
domains and phase separation.[17,32]It is important
to highlight that the absence of diffusion, and
thus formation of domains, has been ensured by carrying out the backfilling
only for 30 min at room temperature while the dendron has been removed.
The simultaneous removal of the dendron and backfilling inhibits any
desorption or reorganization ofDBA-SH molecule. The results are supported
by XPS data, which showed no desorption of the DBA-SH molecule and
thus, no exchange takes place with ClPrSH. Furthermore, as previous
reported by several groups,[35−37] surface diffusion ofthiols at
room temperature is extremely slow, with only a raise in temperature
increasing such diffusion. The estimated diffusion coefficients are
generally reported around 1 × 10–17 to 1 ×
10–18 cm2 s–1 at elevated
temperatures (e.g., 90–100 °C).[38] Furthermore, studies carry out by Lahann and co-workers[39] also support our results because they have shown
that low-density SAMs are structurally stable for 4 weeks under a
variety of storage conditions:air at room temperature, argon at room
temperature and 4 °C, and ethanol at room temperature. Thus,
the linear sweep voltammetry studies and previous literature provide
supporting evidence for the absence of lateral diffusion and nanometer-scale
phase separation on the gold surfaces.
Conclusion
In
summary, a powerful and effective methodology for tailoring
the spacing of chemical functional groups on material surfaces has
been demonstrated through utilizing SAMs of pH-switchable pseudorotaxanes,
such as DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, or [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH.
Following SAM formation with the supramolecular complexes, the DB24C8-based
bulky group is released from the surface by switching off the noncovalent
interactions upon pH stimulation, exposing a low-density DBA-SH monolayer
on which the vacant space is backfilled with a second functional SAM,
i.e., ClPrSH. An incremental increase in the size of the bulky group
from DB24C8 to [G1]-DB24C8 and then to [G2]-DB24C8 has led to an incremental
decrease in the ratio of the DBA-SH:ClPrSH mixed SAM from 1:1 to 1:2
and then to 1:3, as demonstrated by contact angle and XPS analysis.
Molecular dynamics simulations also suggest that the volume of the
bulky group increases accordingly. This strategy was elegantly designed,
and is sufficiently flexible, to be applied to a broad range of nanoparticles
and other nanomaterials. Now that the validity of exploiting supramolecular
interactions for the design of surfaces with well-defined density
and spatial distribution offunctional groups has been established,
we anticipate that this strategy will play a significant role in the
future offunctionalized surface materials for wide variety of biological,
medical, electronic, and optical applications.
Experimental
Section
Materials
Commercially available chemicals were purchased
from Sigma-Aldrich and solvents from Fisher Scientific or VWR and
used as received. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) was carried out
on aluminum plates coated with silica gel 60 F254 (Merck 5554). For
the aryl-based compounds the TLC plates were air-dried and analyzed
under a short wave UV lamp (254 nm), whereas for the aliphatic compounds
the TLC plates were air-dried and developed in a KMnO4 dip.
Column chromatographic separations were performed on silica gel 120
(I24C8 Chrom 32–63, 60 Å).
Synthesis of DBA-SH
Compound 1
A slurry of4-hydroxybenzaldehyde
(2.09 g, 17.13 mmol), 11-bromoundecene (4.83 g, 20.72 mmol) and K2CO3 (4.76 g, 34.49 mmol) in acetone (50 mL) was
heated under reflux for 16 h. The resultant reaction mixture was allowed
to cool to room temperature and K2CO3 was filtered
off and the solvent removed in vacuo. The resultant crude solid was
dissolved in a minimum amount ofDCM and adsorbed onto silicafollowed
by purification by flash column chromatography (gradient elution;
0 to 20% EtOAc in hexane, increase in increments of 10% after each
100 mL of eluent) to yield a white solid (3.83 g, 81%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 9.86 (s, 1H), 7.81 (d, 2H, J = 8.75
Hz), 6.97 (t, 2H, J = 8.75 Hz), 5.86–5.72
(m, 1H), 5.01–4.89 (m, 2H), 4.01 (t, 2H, J = 6.55 Hz), 2.05–1.98 (m, 2H), 1.84–1.74 (m, 2H), 1.31–1.26
(m, 12H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm: 190.8, 165.1, 139.2, 132.0,
129.8, 114.7, 114.1, 68.4, 33.8, 29.5, 29.4, 29.3, 29.1, 28.9, 25.9. m/z (ESMS): 297 ([M + Na]+,
100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 297.1828;
calcd mass for C18H26O2Na, 297.1831.
Compound 2
4-Fluorobenzylamine (1.23 g,
9.84 mmol) was added to a solution of 1 (2.70 g, 9.85
mmol) in PhMe (15 mL) and stirred under reflux in a N2(g)
atmosphere for 20 h. The reaction mixture was allowed to cool to room
temperature and the solvent was removed in vacuo to afford a white
precipitate. A suspension ofNaBH4 (0.72 g, 19.74 mmol)
in MeOH (15 mL) was added dropwise to the white precipitate and the
resultant solution was heated under reflux in a N2(g) atmosphere
for 16 h. The reaction mixture was partitioned in 2 M HCl (20 mL)
and DCM (20 mL). The aqueous layer was extracted with DCM (2 ×
25 mL), dried (MgSO4), filtered and solvent removed in
vacuo. The resultant crude oil was purified by flash column chromatography
(eluent: hexane) to yield a colorless oil (3.21 g, 85%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.30–7.25 (m, 2H), 7.21 (d, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz), 6.99 (t, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz), 6.84 (d, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz), 5.86–5.73 (m, 1H), 5.03–4.90
(m, 2H), 3.92 (t, 2H, J = 6.50 Hz), 3.73 (s, 2H),
3.70 (s, 2H), 2.06–1.99 (m, 2H), 1.80–1.73 (m, 2H),
1.43–1.29 (m, 12H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm: 163.1, 160.7,
158.3, 139.2, 136.1, 129.7, 129.3, 115.2, 114.4, 114.1, 68.0, 52.6,
52.3, 33.8, 29.5, 29.4, 29.3, 29.1, 28.9, 26.1. m/z (ESMS): 384 ([M + Na]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 384.2696; calcd mass
for C25H35NOFNa, 384.2703.
Compound 3
A solution ofBoc2O (1.33 g, 5.94 mmol)
in THF (10 mL) was added dropwise at 0 °C
under a N2(g) atmosphere to a solution of compound 2 (1.90 g, 4.95 mmol), NEt3 (1.00 g, 9.90 mmol),
and 4-DMAP (catalytic amount) in THF (15 mL) and further stirred for
16 h at room temperature under a N2(g) atmosphere. The
reaction mixture was quenched with H2O (20 mL) and the
aqueous layer was extracted with EtOAc (2 × 20 mL), dried (MgSO4), filtered and concentrated in vacuo. The resultant crude
oil was purified by flash column chromatography (gradient elution;
from 0 to 10% EtOAc in hexane, increase in increments of 5% per 100
mL of eluent) and solvent was removed in vacuo to yield a colorless
oil (1.70 g, 71%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.15 (bs, 4H), 7.02
(t, 2H, J = 9.71 Hz), 6.87 (d, 2H, J = 9.71 Hz), 5.92–5.79 (m, 1H), 5.09–4.98 (m, 2H), 4.36–4.28
(bm, 4H), 3.98 (t, 2H, J = 6.43 Hz), 2.19–1.2.14
(m, 2H), 1.87–1.78 (m, 2H), 1.66–1.52 (m, 12H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C)
δC ppm: 163.3, 160.8, 158.5, 155.9, 139.2, 133.9,
129.7, 128.8, 115.4, 114.5, 114.1, 80.1, 68.1, 48.5, 48.0, 33.8, 29.5,
29.4, 29.3, 29.1, 28.5, 26.1. m/z 506 ([M + Na]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 506.3047; calcd mass for C30H42NO3NaF, 506.3046.
Compound 4
A solution of compound 3 (3.23 g, 6.68 mmol),
thioacetic acid (0.76 g, 10.00 mmol),
and AIBN (catalytic amount) in PhMe (10 mL) was heated under reflux
for 2 h. The reaction mixture was allowed to cool to room temperature
and saturated NaHCO3 (25 mL) was added to the mixture,
subsequently the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM (3 × 25
mL). The combined organic layers were dried (MgSO4), filtered
and concentrated in vacuo. The resultant crude oil was purified by
flash column chromatography (gradient elution; from 0 to 10% EtOAc
in hexane, increase in increments of 5% per 100 mL of eluent) and
the solvent was removed to yield a colorless oil (3.27 g, 84%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C)
δH ppm: 7.14 (bs, 4H), 7.02 (t, 2H, J = 8.72 Hz), 6.85 (d, 2H, J = 8.72 Hz), 4.35–4.28
(bm, 4H), 3.96 (t, 2H, J = 6.44 Hz), 2.88 (t, 2H, J = 7.26 Hz), 2.34 (s, 3H), 1.82–1.77 (m, 2H), 1.65–1.60
(m, 2H), 1.51–1.45 (m, 14H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm 196.0,
163.0, 158.4, 155.9, 133.9, 129.7, 115.4, 115.2, 114.5, 80.1, 67.8,
60.4, 48.4, 30.6, 29.5, 29.4, 29.3, 29.1, 28.8, 28.5, 26.1. m/z (ESMS): 582 ([M]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 582.3042; calcd mass
for C32H46NO4SF, 582.3029.
Compound 5
A solution ofTFA (8 mL) in
DCM (20 mL) was added dropwise at 0 °C under a N2(g)
atmosphere to a solution of compound 4 (2.30 g, 4.11
mmol) in DCM (30 mL). The resultant reaction mixture was further stirred
at room temperature for 6 h, followed by the removal of solvent in
vacuo. The resultant crude oil was purified by flash column chromatography
(gradient elution; from 0 to 75% EtOAc in hexane, increase in increments
of 25% per 100 mL of eluent) and the solvent was removed to yield
a colorless oil (1.44 g, 80%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.30–7.25
(m, 2H), 7.21 (d, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz), 6.99 (t, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz), 6.84 (d, 2H, J = 8.64 Hz),
3.92 (t, 2H, J = 6.50 Hz), 3.73 (s, 2H), 3.70 (s,
2H), 2.88 (t, 2H, J = 7.26 Hz), 2.34 (s, 3H), 2.06–1.99
(m, 2H), 1.80–1.73 (m, 2H), 1.43–1.29 (m, 14H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C)
δC ppm: 196.0, 163.1, 160.7, 158.2, 135.8, 131.9,
129.8, 129.3, 115.2, 114.4, 67.8, 52.4, 52.1, 30.6, 29.5, 29.4, 29.3,
29.2, 29.0, 28.5, 25.6, 21.0. m/z (ESMS): 460 ([M + Na]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 460.2679; calcd mass for C27H39NO2SF, 460.2686.
Compound 6
A solution
of compound 5 (0.96 g, 2.19 mmol) in 0.1 M HClmethanolic
solution (100 mL) was heated under reflux for 4 h under a N2 atmosphere. The resultant reaction mixture was concentrated in vacuo.
The resultant crude solid was dissolved in a minimum amount ofDCM
and adsorbed onto silicafollowed by purification via flash column
chromatography (gradient elution; 0 to 20% EtOAc in hexane, increase
in increments of 10% after 100 mL of eluent). The solvent was removed
and the resultant solid was recrystallized from EtOH to yield white
solid (0.71 g, 71%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3,
Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.46–7.42
(m, 2H), 7.34 (d, 2H, J = 8.60 Hz), 7.02 (t, 2H, J = 8.60 Hz), 6.84 (d, 2H, J = 8.60 Hz),
3.83 (t, 2H, J = 6.40 Hz), 3.78 (s, 2H), 3.73 (s,
2H), 2.52 (q, 2H, J = 7.10 Hz), 1.72–1.67
(m, 2H), 1.58–1.53 (m, 2H), 1.31–1.26 (m, 15H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C)
δC ppm: 164.4, 160.1, 132.1, 131.7, 131.6, 125.6,
121.2, 116.4, 115.1, 68.1, 49.3, 48.7, 34.1, 29.6, 29.5, 29.2, 28.3,
26.1, 24.8. m/z (ESMS): 460 ([M
– Cl]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 418.2570; calcd mass for C25H37NO2SF, 418.2580.
DBA-SH
To a solution
of compound 6 (0.59
g, 1.30 mmol) in DCM (20 mL) was added hexafluorophosphoric acid (60%
in water, 0.20 mL, 1.45 mmol) dropwise at 0 °C under a N2 atmosphere. The resultant reaction mixture was stirred for
a further 10 min at room temperature. After 10 min, H2O
(20 mL) was added and the aqueous layer was extracted with DCM (2
× 20 mL). The combined organic layers were dried (MgSO4), filtered and the solvent removed in vacuo. The resultant crude
solid was purified by flash column chromatography (gradient elution;
from 0 to 10% MeOH in DCM, increase in increments of 2.5% per 100
mL of eluent) and the solvent was removed to yield a white solid (0.68
g, 91%). (1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 1H NMR (300 MHz,
CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 8.53 (brs, 2H), 7.41–7.37 (m, 2H), 7.28 (d, 2H, J = 8.55 Hz), 7.03 (t, 2H, J = 8.55 Hz),
6.83 (d, 2H, J = 8.55 Hz), 3.89–3.84 (m, 4H),
3.80 (t, 2H, J = 6.55 Hz), 2.50 (q, 2H, J
= 7.30 Hz), 1.72–1.67 (m, 2H), 1.58–1.53 (m,
2H), 1.31–1.26 (m, 15H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm: 164.6,
160.2, 132.2, 131.6, 131.6, 125.7, 121.1, 116.3, 115.1, 68.1, 49.4,
48.8, 34.0, 29.5, 29.4, 29.1, 28.4, 26.0, 24.7. m/z (ESMS): 418 ([M – PF6]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found,
418.2589; calcd mass for C25H37NO2SF, 418.2580.
Synthesis of [G1]-DB24C8 and [G2]-DB24C8
Compound 8
A solution ofNaOH (0.22 g,
5.50 mmol) in H2O (1 mL) was added to a solution of compound 7 (1.44 g, 2.77 mmol) in EtOH (10 mL) and the resultant reaction
mixture was heated under reflux for 16 h. The reaction mixture was
allowed to cool to room temperature and acidified with 0.1 M HCl,
whereupon a white precipitate was formed that was collected by suction
filtration (1.07 g, 80%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.72 (dd,
2H, J = 1.98, J = 8.86 Hz), 7.57
(d, 1H, J = 1.98 Hz), 6.87–6.91 (m, 5H), 4.16–4.23
(m, 8H), 3.93–3.99 (m, 8H), 3.86–3.87 (m, 8H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C)
δC ppm: 170.9, 165.4, 152.1, 148.9, 148.3, 125.6,
124.8, 121.8, 121.4, 114.6, 114.0, 112.0, 71.5, 71.4, 71.3, 70.0,
69.8, 69.6, 69.5, 69.4. m/z (ESMS):
491 ([M – H]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 491.1913; calcd mass for C25H31O10, 491.1917.
[G1]-DB24C8
1-(3-(Dimethylamino)propyl)-3-ethyl-carbodiimide
hydrochloride (DCC) (1.11 g, 1.14 mmol) was added to an ice bath cooled
solution of compound 8 (0.50 g, 2.44 mmol), [G1]21 (0.48 g, 1.12 mmol) and catalytical amount of4-DMAP in
dry DCM (70 mL) under a N2(g) atmosphere over 5 min. The
solution was further stirred at room temperature under a N2(g) atmosphere for 20 h and the solvent was removed in vacuo. The resultant
crude solid was dissolved in a minimum amount ofDCM and absorbed
onto silicafollowed by purification via flash column chromatography
(graded elution: 0 to 10% EtOAc in hexane, increments of 5% per 150
mL of eluent used). The solvent was removed in vacuo to yield a white
solid (0.50 g, 54%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3,
Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.66 (d, 1H, J = 9.00 Hz), 7.55 (s, 1H), 7.24–7.41 (m, 8H), 6.87–6.91
(m, 5H), 6.66 (s, 2H), 6.58 (s, 1H), 5.25 (s, 2H), 4.95 (s, 4H), 4.05–4.18
(m, 8H), 3.92–3.97 (m, 8H), 1.31 (s, 18H). 13C NMR
(75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm: 190.0, 166.1, 160.2, 153.1, 151.1, 148.9, 148.3, 138.5,
133.7, 127.6, 125.6, 124.1, 122.8, 121.4, 114.5, 114.1, 112.0, 106.9,
101.5, 71.5, 71.4, 71.3, 70.0, 69.8, 69.6, 69.4, 66.4, 31.3. m/z (ESMS): 929 ([M]+, 100%). m/z (HRMS): found, 929.4502; calcd mass
for C54H66O12, 929.4452.
[G2]-DB24C8
According to the synthetic procedure described
for [G1]-DB24C8, compound 8 (0.25 g, 0.51 mmol), [G2]21 (0.54 g, 0.55 mmol), DCC (0.05 g, 0.66 mmol), and DMAP (catalytic
amount) were reacted in DCM (35 mL) and purified by flash column chromatography
(graded elution: 0 to 10% EtOAc in hexane, increments of 5% per 150
mL of eluent used) to afford white crystals (0.35 g, 24%). 1H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δH ppm: 7.66 (dd, 1H, J = 1.90, 9.00 Hz), 7.53
(d, 1H J = 1.90 Hz), 7.38 (d, 8H, J = 8.45 Hz), 7.34 (d, 8H, J = 8.50 Hz), 6.87–6.91
(m, 5H), 6.66 (s, 4H), 6.58 (s, 2H), 5.25 (s, 2H), 4.95 (s, 8H), 4.05–4.18
(m, 8H), 3.92–3.97 (m, 8H), 3.81 (d, 8H, J = 9.00 Hz), 1.31 (s, 36H). 13C NMR (75 MHz, CDCl3, Me4Si, 25 °C) δC ppm: 190.0, 166.1,
160.2, 153.1, 151.1, 148.9, 148.3, 138.5, 133.7, 127.6, 125.6, 124.1,
122.8, 121.4, 114.5, 114.1, 112.0, 106.9, 101.5, 71.5, 71.4, 71.3,
70.0, 69.8, 69.6, 69.4, 66.4, 31.3. m/z (ESMS), 1465 ([M + Na]+, 100%); m/z (HRMS): found, 1465.7309; calcd mass for C90H106O16Na, 1465.7379.
Compound Characterization
NMR
1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)
spectra were recorded on a Bruker AVIII300 (300.13 MHz) spectrometer. 13C NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker AVIII 400 (75.5 MHz)
using Pendent pulse sequences. All chemical shifts are quoted in ppm
to higher frequency from Me4Si using either deuterated
chloroform (CDCl3) or methanol (CD3OD) as the
lock and the residual solvent as the internal standard. The coupling
constants are expressed in hertz (Hz) with multiplicities abbreviated
as follows: s = singlet, d = doublet, dd = double doublet, t = triplet,
q = quartet, and m = multiplet.
Mass spectrometry (MS)
Electron impact mass spectroscopy
(EIMS) was performed on a VG Prospec. Low- and high-resolution electrospray
mass spectrometry was performed on a Micromass time-of-flight (TOF)
instrument using methanol as the mobile phase.
SAM Preparation
and Characterization
Preparation of SAMs
Polycrystalline
gold substrates
were purchased from George Albert PVD, Germany, and consisted of either
a 50 nm gold layer deposited onto glass covered with a thin layer
(5 nm) ofchromium as the adhesion layer (used for contact angle analysis)
or 100 nm thickness on 100–4 in.-silicon wafer, precoated with
titanium as the adhesion layer (for ellipsometry and XPS analysis).
The Au substrates were rinsed with HPLC EtOH and Ultra High Pure (UHP)
H2O (resistivity = 18 MΩ cm), dried with a stream
N2(g), exposed to UV light for 1 h, and submerged in HPLC
EtOH until they were used, which was no longer than 30 min. Prior
to being immersed in the DB24C8⊃DBA-SH, [G1]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH
and [G2]-DB24C8⊃DBA-SH solutions, the substrates were rinsed
thoroughly with copius amounts of HPLC EtOHfollowed by rinsing with
HPLC MeCN. The complexation between the dialkylammonium anion (DBA-SH)
and the DB24C8 derivatives (DB24C8, [G1]-DB24C8 and [G2]-DB24C8) was
carried out in HPLC MeCN (1 mM). To a solution ofDBA-SH (0.01 mmol)
in HPLC MeCN (1 mL) were added the DB24C8 derivatives (0.02 mmol),
and the resultant solution was stirred for 10 min. The Au substrates
were immersed in the solutions of the supramolecular complexes for
24 h, followed by thorough rinsing with HPLC MeCN and subsequently
submerged into a mixed HPLC MeCN solution of 2 mM NEt3 and
1 mM ClPrSHfor 30 min. The substrates were removed from the solution
and rinsed with copious amounts of HPLC MeCN and dried with a stream
N2(g).
Contact Angle Measurements
Dynamic
contact angles were
determined using a home-built contact angle apparatus, equipped with
a charged coupled device (CCD) KP-M1E/K camera (Hitachi) that was
attached to a personal computer for video capture. FTA Video Analysis
software v1.96 (First Ten Angstroms) was used for the analysis of
the contact angle of a droplet of UHQ H2O at the three-phase
intersection. The dynamic contact angles were recorded as a microsyringe
was used to quasi-statically add liquid to or remove liquid from the
drop. The drop was shown as a live video image on the PC screen and
digitally recorded for future analysis. The acquisition rate was 4
frames per second. The contact angles were determined from an average
offive different measurements made for each type of SAM. The errors
reported for the contact angle measurements are standard errors.
Ellipsometry Measurements
The thickness of the deposited
monolayers was determined by spectroscopic ellipsometry. A Jobin-Yvon
UVISEL ellipsometer with a xenon light source was used for the measurements.
The angle of incidence was fixed at 70°. A wavelength range of
280–800 nm was used. The DeltaPsi software was employed to
determine the thickness values and the calculations were based on
a three-phase ambient/SAM/Au model, in which the SAM was assumed to
be isotropic and assigned a refractive index of 1.50. The thickness
reported is the average of six measurements taken on each SAM. The
errors reported for the ellipsometry measurements are standard errors.
X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS)
XPS spectra
were obtained using an Escalab 250 system (Thermo VG Scientific) operating
with Avantage v1.85 software under a pressure of ∼5 ×
10–9 mbar. An Al Kα X-ray source was used
that provided a monochromatic X-ray beam with incident energy of 1486.68
eV. A circular spot size of ∼0.2 mm2 was employed.
The samples were attached onto a stainless steel holder using double-sided
carbon sticky tape (Shintron tape). Low resolution survey spectra
were obtained using a pass energy of 150 eV over a binding energy
range of 210 to 1200 eV obtained using 1 eV increments. The spectra
recorded were an average of 3 scans. The high resolution spectra were
obtained using a pass energy of 20 and 0.1 eV increments over a binding
energy range of 20–30 eV, centered at the binding energy characteristic
of the functional group. A dwell time of 20 ms was employed between
each binding energy increment. Sensitivity factors used in this study
were: S (2p), 2.08; Au (4f 7/2), 9.58; Au (4f 5/2), 7.54, C (1s),
1, F (1s) 5.1, O (1s) 2.6.
Electrochemistry
Electrochemical
studies were performed
with a Gamry 600 potentiostat and data acquisition software (Gamry
electrochemistry software version 5.61a) in a three-electrode Teflon
cell consisting of a saturated calomel reference electrode (SCE),
Pt wire counter electrode and the gold modified with different SAMs
as the working electrode. Linear sweep voltammetry was performed to
investigate the thiol reductive desorption. A starting potential of
+0.3 V and an end potential of +1.3 V at a scan rate 100 mV s–1 was used. The electrolyte was a 0.5 M KOH solution
prepared fresh each day. The voltammograms were performed in triplicate
with a new working electrodes modified with the relevant SAM for each
replicate. The geometric area was controlled by use of a 4 mm diameter
O-ring.
Authors: Matthew C Traub; Julie S Biteen; David J Michalak; Lauren J Webb; Bruce S Brunschwig; Nathan S Lewis Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2006-08-17 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Alice Pranzetti; Sophie Mieszkin; Parvez Iqbal; Frankie J Rawson; Maureen E Callow; James A Callow; Patrick Koelsch; Jon A Preece; Paula M Mendes Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Chun-Pong Chak; Shouhu Xuan; Paula M Mendes; Jimmy C Yu; Christopher H K Cheng; Ken Cham-Fai Leung Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2009-08-25 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Thamara Laredo; Jay Leitch; Maohui Chen; Ian J Burgess; John R Dutcher; Jacek Lipkowski Journal: Langmuir Date: 2007-04-28 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Eleonora Cantini; Xingyong Wang; Patrick Koelsch; Jon A Preece; Jing Ma; Paula M Mendes Journal: Acc Chem Res Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 22.384