Kyeongwoon Chung1, Min Sang Kwon1, Brendan M Leung1, Antek G Wong-Foy1, Min Su Kim2, Jeongyong Kim3, Shuichi Takayama4, Johannes Gierschner5, Adam J Matzger6, Jinsang Kim7. 1. Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan , Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States. 2. Center for Integrated Nanostructure Physics, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), and Department of Energy Science, Sungkyunkwan University , Suwon 440-746, Republic of Korea. 3. Center for Integrated Nanostructure Physics, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), and Department of Energy Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 440-746, Republic of Korea; Center for Integrated Nanostructure Physics, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), and Department of Energy Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 440-746, Republic of Korea. 4. Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States. 5. Madrid Institute for Advanced Studies, IMDEA Nanoscience , Calle Faraday 9, Campus Cantoblanco, 28049 Madrid, Spain. 6. Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States. 7. Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States; Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Chemistry, Department of Chemical Engineering, Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States.
Abstract
Thermodynamics drive crystalline organic molecules to be crystallized at temperatures below their melting point. Even though molecules can form supercooled liquids by rapid cooling, crystalline organic materials readily undergo a phase transformation to an energetically favorable crystalline phase upon subsequent heat treatment. Opposite to this general observation, here, we report molecular design of thermally stable supercooled liquid of diketopyrrolopyrrole (DPP) derivatives and their intriguing shear-triggered crystallization with dramatic optical property changes. Molten DPP8, one of the DPP derivatives, remains as stable supercooled liquid without crystallization through subsequent thermal cycles. More interestingly, under shear conditions, this supercooled liquid DPP8 transforms to its crystal phase accompanied by a 25-fold increase in photoluminescence (PL) quantum efficiency and a color change. By systematic investigation on supercooled liquid formation of crystalline DPP derivatives and their correlation with chemical structures, we reveal that the origin of this thermally stable supercooled liquid is a subtle force balance between aromatic interactions among the core units and van der Waals interactions among the aliphatic side chains acting in opposite directions. Moreover, by applying shear force to a supercooled liquid DPP8 film at different temperatures, we demonstrated direct writing of fluorescent patterns and propagating fluorescence amplification, respectively. Shear-triggered crystallization of DPP8 is further achieved even by living cell attachment and spreading, demonstrating the high sensitivity of the shear-triggered crystallization which is about 6 orders of magnitude more sensitive than typical mechanochromism observed in organic materials.
Thermodynamics drive crystalline organic molecules to be crystallized at temperatures below their melting point. Even though molecules can form supercooled liquids by rapid cooling, crystalline organic materials readily undergo a phase transformation to an energetically favorable crystalline phase upon subsequent heat treatment. Opposite to this general observation, here, we report molecular design of thermally stable supercooled liquid of diketopyrrolopyrrole (DPP) derivatives and their intriguing shear-triggered crystallization with dramatic optical property changes. Molten DPP8, one of the DPP derivatives, remains as stable supercooled liquid without crystallization through subsequent thermal cycles. More interestingly, under shear conditions, this supercooled liquid DPP8 transforms to its crystal phase accompanied by a 25-fold increase in photoluminescence (PL) quantum efficiency and a color change. By systematic investigation on supercooled liquid formation of crystalline DPP derivatives and their correlation with chemical structures, we reveal that the origin of this thermally stable supercooled liquid is a subtle force balance between aromatic interactions among the core units and van der Waals interactions among the aliphatic side chains acting in opposite directions. Moreover, by applying shear force to a supercooled liquid DPP8 film at different temperatures, we demonstrated direct writing of fluorescent patterns and propagating fluorescence amplification, respectively. Shear-triggered crystallization of DPP8 is further achieved even by living cell attachment and spreading, demonstrating the high sensitivity of the shear-triggered crystallization which is about 6 orders of magnitude more sensitive than typical mechanochromism observed in organic materials.
When molten organic
crystalline materials are cooled below their
melting temperature (Tm), exothermic crystallization
is usually observed and the molecules revert to the energetically
favorable crystalline phase. Even though some crystalline organic
materials can stay in a supercooled liquid state (above glass transition
temperature, Tg) or a glass state (below Tg) upon rapid cooling, these materials crystallize
upon subsequent heating.[1−4] Only a few crystalline organic molecules exhibit
thermally stable supercooled liquid without crystallization despite
their energetically more favorable crystalline phase and sufficient
mobility of the molecule above Tg.[5−8] In fact, the thermal stability of amorphous organic materials including
supercooled liquids and glasses is a subject of considerable commercial
importance. For example, conjugated organic glasses without good thermal
stability can derogate the reliability of organic electronic devices
due to device failure by crystallization during the operation.[9−11] In the field of drug delivery, pharmaceutical organic glasses have
been widely studied due to their advantageous solubility, bioavailability,
and consistent efficacy.[7,12] However, unlike those
widely researched and exploited organic glasses, organic supercooled
liquids have been investigated mainly in theoretical aspects such
as the glass transition phenomenon and structural relaxation dynamics.[2,13−16]Diketopyrrolopyrrole (DPP) derivatives have been widely used
as
high performance pigments[17] as well as
one of the frequently used building blocks for conjugated polymers
in electronic applications[18,19] due to strong intermolecular
interactions between the DPP units. During the investigation on DPP
derivatives as a monomeric unit of conjugated polymers, we observed
that a DPP molecule, DPP8, formed both a crystalline solid and a stable
supercooled liquid at room temperature. The stable supercooled liquid
DPP8 did not transform back to crystalline solid even under subsequent
heating and cooling cycles. It is an intriguing question what the
origin of thermally stable supercooled liquid is and what chemical
features make organic crystalline materials form an extraordinarily
stable supercooled liquid. We examined the mechanism and molecular
features allowing the stable supercooled liquid formation. For a systematic
investigation, a series of DPP derivatives with altered alkyl chain
length, DPP4, DPP8, DPP12, and DPP16, are synthesized and characterized
in terms of supercooled liquid formation and their thermal stability
(Figure 1A).
Figure 1
Schematic illustration of the thermally
stable supercooled liquid
and shear-triggered lighting-up crystallization of DPP8. (A) Chemical
structure of DPP8 and its derivatives. A subtle force balance between
two different intermolecular interactions acting in opposite directions
makes DPP8 exhibit small ΔG between supercooled
liquid and crystalline solid phases, resulting in intriguing thermally
stable supercooled liquid. Fluorescence images are from crystalline
solids of the derivatives. (B) Reversible phase transformation with
large optical property change between the two forms by means of independent
stimuli. (C) Nucleation is restricted in DPP8 supercooled liquid due
to an unattainable yet required large critical radius (r*), which results from small ΔG between two
phases, at 25 and 120 °C. However, when molten DPP8 was cooled
to −50 °C, subsequent heating developed crystallization.
(D) Shear-triggered lighting-up crystallization of DPP8. Photographs
(A, B, and D) were taken under 365 nm UV light.
Schematic illustration of the thermally
stable supercooled liquid
and shear-triggered lighting-up crystallization of DPP8. (A) Chemical
structure of DPP8 and its derivatives. A subtle force balance between
two different intermolecular interactions acting in opposite directions
makes DPP8 exhibit small ΔG between supercooled
liquid and crystalline solid phases, resulting in intriguing thermally
stable supercooled liquid. Fluorescence images are from crystalline
solids of the derivatives. (B) Reversible phase transformation with
large optical property change between the two forms by means of independent
stimuli. (C) Nucleation is restricted in DPP8 supercooled liquid due
to an unattainable yet required large critical radius (r*), which results from small ΔG between two
phases, at 25 and 120 °C. However, when molten DPP8 was cooled
to −50 °C, subsequent heating developed crystallization.
(D) Shear-triggered lighting-up crystallization of DPP8. Photographs
(A, B, and D) were taken under 365 nm UV light.Interestingly, the stable supercooled liquid DPP8 crystallizes
by shear force accompanied by dramatic optical property changes. Even
though the role of shear stress in crystallization has been investigated
both experimentally and theoretically, the relationship is still not
conclusive; several studies report shear-induced ordering with enhancing
nucleation rate, while others report suppression of crystallization
by shear force.[20−26] Macromolecules with a large aspect ratio such as isotactic polypropylene
and polystyrene can be crystallized by shear force due to chain alignment.[27−29] However, the shear-triggered crystallization of DPP8 with a remarkable
optical property change is an intriguing phenomenon observed from
organic small molecules.In a phenomenological view, shear-triggered
lighting-up crystallization
is quite similar to the mechanochromism of organic compounds.[30−34] Mechanochromic organic compounds show color and/or fluorescence
change when external forces such as pressure and shear are applied.
However, while mechanochromism is based on polymorphism or on an order-to-disorder
transformation (i.e., breaking the crystalline structure toward amorphous
or disrupting secondary bonding such as hydrogen bonding) by applied
mechanical force, the shear-triggered crystallization reported here
is a distinctive disorder-to-order transition.Our investigation
revealed that DPP8 has the highest thermal stability
of supercooled liquid among the derivatives, and the thermal stability
is ascribed to small Gibbs free energy difference between supercooled
liquid and crystalline solid that is originated from a subtle force
balance between aromatic interactions among the core units and van
der Waals interactions among the aliphatic side chains working in
opposite directions (Figure 1A). Furthermore,
we demonstrate direct writing of fluorescent patterns and propagating
fluorescence amplification, respectively, by applying shear to a supercooled
liquid DPP8 film at different temperatures. A threshold shear rate
of 0.03 s–1 and the corresponding shear stress of
0.90 kPa for shear-triggered crystallization were measured by rheometry,
which is a million times smaller than the typically required stress
range for mechanochromism observed in organic materials (1 GPa).[35,36] The high sensitivity of the shear-triggered crystallization was
further confirmed by crystallization of a supercooled DPP8 film even
by living cell attachment and spreading.
Results and Discussion
We designed and synthesized DPP8 as a monomeric unit of a series
of conjugated polymers. During the characterization of this compound,
we observed an interesting phenomenon. While crystalline DPP8 powder,
purified by recrystallization, melts at 134 °C as seen in the
differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) trace in Figure 2A, subsequent cooling of the molten DPP8 results in a supercooled
liquid phase stable down to 25 °C, equivalent to more than a
range of 100 °C below the melting temperature. The supercooled
liquid phase persists during the second and third DSC cycles without
showing any crystallization peaks. No crystallization is observed
even at a very slow cooling rate of 0.2 °C·min–1 (Figure 2A).
Figure 2
Thermal properties and single crystal
structure of DPP8. (A) DSC
trace at different cooling rates (heating rate: 10 °C·min –1). (B) DSC trace with different cooling temperatures
(scan rate: heating 10 °C·min –1, cooling
5 °C·min –1). A glass transition (Tg) was observed at 5 °C. Only after cooling
down to −50 °C, subsequent heating developed crystallization
begins at 72 °C followed by melting at 134 °C. (C) Single
crystal structure of DPP8. Weakly coupled DPP cores and lamellar-type
packing of the octyl side chains are observed.
Thermal properties and single crystal
structure of DPP8. (A) DSC
trace at different cooling rates (heating rate: 10 °C·min –1). (B) DSC trace with different cooling temperatures
(scan rate: heating 10 °C·min –1, cooling
5 °C·min –1). A glass transition (Tg) was observed at 5 °C. Only after cooling
down to −50 °C, subsequent heating developed crystallization
begins at 72 °C followed by melting at 134 °C. (C) Single
crystal structure of DPP8. Weakly coupled DPP cores and lamellar-type
packing of the octyl side chains are observed.In order to investigate the chemical features that make DPP8
so
special in forming such thermally stable supercooled liquid, we synthesized
three more DPP derivatives having butyl (DPP4), dodecyl (DPP12), and
hexadecyl side chains (DPP16) (Figure 1A).
The DPP core unit without alkyl chains is hardly soluble in organic
solvents due to strong intermolecular interactions and consequently
produces red fluorescent emission with negligible quantum yield due
to the well-known concentration induced self-quenching. However, the
introduction of the octyl chains in DPP8 makes DPP8 form weakly coupled
aromatic DPP cores together with lamellar-type octyl chain packing
as evident from the X-ray crystal structure (Figure 2C and Table S1). Strong hydrogen
bonding, π–π interaction, or halogen bonding is
not observed.Different from DPP8, molten DPP4 crystallizes
upon cooling (Figure 3A). The DPP4 crystal
shows red fluorescence, which
is largely red-shifted from the greenish yellow emission of the DPP8
crystal (Figure 1A and Figure 3B), and is ascribed to closely packed aromatic core units
just like the unsubstituted DPP core unit. The DPP4 crystal shows
strikingly different powder XRD pattern and single crystal structure
compared to DPP8 (Figure 3C and Figure S1); different from the weakly coupled
DPP8 aromatic cores, the DPP4 cores are closely packed with a distance
of ca. 3.5 Å (Figure S1). DPP12 and
DPP16 on the other hand show identical PL emission (Figure 1A and Figure 3B) and similar
powder XRD patterns as DPP8 (Figure 3C), implying
similarly weakly coupled aromatic cores and lamellar-type packing
of the side chains. The alkyl chain length represented in the lamellar
distance increases linearly from n = 8 to 12 to 16
in steps of ca. 3.4 Å as calculated from the sharp peaks at ca.
5° in the powder XRD trace (Figure 3C).
Even though the packing seems to be similar to that of DPP8, the thermal
stability of the supercooled liquid of DPP12 and DPP16 is not the
same as that of DPP8. While DPP8 did not show crystallization upon
subsequent heating until the cooling temperature reached −50
°C (Figure 2B), DPP12 showed crystallization
beginning at 57 °C and melting at 108 °C upon subsequent
heating after it was cooled down to 0 °C (Figure S2). Moreover, DPP16 needed to be cooled to only 20
°C in order to show a broad crystallization peak followed by
melting at 102 °C upon subsequent heating (Figure 3A).
Figure 3
Effects of molecular design on thermal, optical, molecular packing
properties, and ΔG characteristics. (A) DSC
trace (2nd cycle) of DPP derivatives (scan rate 10 °C·min –1). (B) Normalized PL of shear-triggered (DPP8 and
DPP12) and thermally driven (DPP4 and DPP16) crystals. (C) Powder
XRD traces. DPP8, -12, and -16 have similar lamellar packing patterns
in contrast to the drastically different diffraction pattern of DPP4.
(D) ΔG between the crystalline solid and supercooled
liquid phases of DPP derivatives (from the Hoffman equation, at 26
°C).
Effects of molecular design on thermal, optical, molecular packing
properties, and ΔG characteristics. (A) DSC
trace (2nd cycle) of DPP derivatives (scan rate 10 °C·min –1). (B) Normalized PL of shear-triggered (DPP8 and
DPP12) and thermally driven (DPP4 and DPP16) crystals. (C) Powder
XRD traces. DPP8, -12, and -16 have similar lamellar packing patterns
in contrast to the drastically different diffraction pattern of DPP4.
(D) ΔG between the crystalline solid and supercooled
liquid phases of DPP derivatives (from the Hoffman equation, at 26
°C).Apparently, the different alkyl
chain length of the DPP derivatives
triggers a distinctive difference in the thermal stability of their
supercooled liquids: DPP8 is most stable among the derivatives, and
when the alkyl chain is shorter (DPP4) or longer (DPP12 and -16) than
octyl, the thermal stability of the supercooled liquid diminishes.
From these results, we attribute the origin of the thermally stable
supercooled liquid of DPP8 to a delicate force balance between the
aromatic interactions and aliphatic van der Waals forces acting in
opposite directions (Figure 1A). If the alkyl
chain is short (DPP4), strong interactions among the DPP cores induce
crystallization upon cooling of the melt because the van der Waals
interactions among the short alkyl chain cannot provide strong enough
force to balance against the interactions. On the contrary, as the
alkyl chain gets longer (DPP12 and DPP16), the van der Waals interactions
among the lamellar packed alkyl side chains become stronger than the
interactions between the weakly coupled DPP cores, resulting in less
thermally stable supercooled liquid. Then, how does this delicate
force balance built in DPP8 suppress the crystallization of DPP8?In order to achieve a thermally stable supercooled liquid, nucleation
in the supercooled state should be forbidden. Otherwise, even though
molten organic crystalline materials may remain as supercooled liquid
at a reduced temperature due to the restricted molecular mobility
and the ensuing retarded crystal growth, they will eventually crystallize
upon subsequent heating. In homogeneous nucleation theory, the Gibbs
free energy of nucleation in a supercooled liquid is expressed as
the sum of the energy gain (driving force) by generating an energetically
more favorable crystalline nucleus and the energy loss by producing
the interface, driven by surface tension (see Supporting Information, Homogeneous Nucleation Theory). If
ΔG between supercooled liquid and crystalline
solid is very small, the critical radius of nucleation (r*), the minimum size of nucleus which can continue growing spontaneously,
largely increases so that nucleation is suppressed, promoting kinetically
entrapped supercooled liquid formation. In other words, a small ΔG between the supercooled liquid and crystalline solid states
results in unattainable yet required large critical radius r* so as to restrict nucleation. We hypothesize that the
supercooled liquid DPP8 is thermally stable because nucleation is
forbidden over such a large supercooling temperature range (over 100
°C) due to very small ΔG between the supercooled
liquid and the crystalline solid, which is originated from the subtle
force balance between the two different intermolecular interactions
acting in opposite directions as schematically illustrated in Figure 1, panels A and C. In other word, DPP8 is expected
to have a particularly small value of ΔG.The fact that nucleation is forbidden in the supercooled liquid
DPP8 was proven by means of a seeding test with the crystalline powder
(Movie S1 and Movie S2). When DPP8 crystalline powder was dropped onto the supercooled
liquid at 120 °C, the crystallites served as stable nuclei so
that crystallization propagated through the entire area of the connected
supercooled liquid due to the sufficient molecular mobility. In contrast,
the adjacent yet disconnected supercooled liquid domain did not show
crystallization due to the absence of nuclei. Seeding at 25 °C
on the other hand did not induce spontaneous propagation of crystallization
due to limited molecular mobility. However, when the temperature was
increased to ∼70 °C, crystallization began to propagate,
which means that in pristine supercooled liquid state nuclei are absent
even at 25 °C. Taken together with the thermal cycling experiments,
these findings demonstrate that nucleation is the limiting step in
DPP8 crystallization. If the required large critical radius r* which results from small ΔG between
two phases is responsible for the absent crystallization as suggested
(Figure 1C), there should be a threshold temperature
at which the required critical radius r* can be extremely
small due to large supercooling. Indeed, while the supercooled liquid
was stable down to −25 °C, cooling to −50 °C
and subsequent heating induced crystallization (Figure 2B).[37] When the crystallized DPP8
was melted again and cooled to room temperature, no crystallization
was observed upon subsequent heating, implying that crystallization
of DPP8 is independent of thermal history.Now, the question
is whether ΔG between
the supercooled liquid and the crystalline solid is indeed small.
The single crystal structure of DPP8 does not show close packing but
only weakly coupled aromatic DPP cores and lamellar-type octyl chain
packing (Figure 2C). ΔG between the two phases of DPP8 was estimated to be −2.63
kJ·mol–1 (−0.63 kcal·mol–1) at 26 °C by means of relative solubility measurements (Figure S3).[38] We also
used the Hoffman equation to calculate ΔG =
−5.67 kJ·mol–1 (−1.35 kcal·mol–1) at 26 °C (Figure S3).[39] ΔG can also
be estimated from a thermodynamic cycle (Hess’s law) utilizing
ΔG = ΔH – TΔS, where ΔH and ΔS can be deduced from heat capacity
via Kirchhoff’s law, giving ΔG = −6.24
kJ·mol–1 (−1.49 kcal·mol–1) at 26 °C from this third method (Figure S3). Hence, the three methods consistently gave a small ΔG value (2.63–6.24 kJ·mol–1), which is comparable to the ΔG between polymorphs[38] and is even much smaller than 50.21 kJ·mol–1 (12 kcal·mol–1) of the ΔG between cis- and trans-azobenzene, a well-known photoisomerizable compound.[40] Therefore, the thermally stable supercooled
liquid state of DPP8 is due to the unattainable yet required large
critical radius r* originating from a small ΔG between the supercooled liquid and crystalline solid states.The calculated ΔG values between supercooled
liquid and crystalline solid clearly represent the trend of thermal
stability of supercooled liquid of the derivatives (Figure 3D). ΔG of the derivatives
were calculated from the Hoffman equation.[39] DPP4 with the highest ΔG value from Hoffman
equation shows crystallization upon cooling of melt because the crystal
is much more stable than the supercooled liquid state (Figure 3A). DPP16 shows crystallization upon subsequent
heating after cooling to 25 °C. DPP12 shows crystallization upon
subsequent heating after cooling to 0 °C. DPP8, with the lowest
ΔG, exhibits the most stable supercooled liquid
compared to the rest of derivatives, which again implies that the
small ΔG of DPP8 provides the smallest driving
force for crystallization, whereas larger van der Waals interactions
between molecules (DDP12 and DDP16) or stronger core interactions
(DPP4) increase the driving force. Therefore, the subtle force balance
between the aliphatic side chains and the aromatic core of DPP8 is
the key feature to make its ΔG small enough
to suppress crystallization and ensuring a thermally stable supercooled
liquid.[41]Although the Gibbs free
energy difference between supercooled liquid
and crystalline solid of DPP8 is very small, the differences in the
optical properties are dramatic (Figure 4A).
The PL emission of the crystal is bright greenish yellow with emission
at λmax = 562 nm and a PL quantum yield of ΦPL = 0.55 in contrast to the dim orange-red emission of the
supercooled liquid having λmax = 629 nm and ΦPL = 0.02 (see Supporting Information, Photophysical Properties of DPP8).
Figure 4
Different optical property of the two
phases and shear-triggered
lighting-up crystallization of DPP8: role of shear and dual mode crystallization.
(A) Normalized fluorescence emission spectra and quantum yields of
DPP8 crystal and supercooled liquid at room temperature. (B) Shear
at the tip (white arrow) of the tree-shape supercooled DPP8 pattern
triggered crystallization and propagation through the entire tree
pattern at 120 °C. However, the two disconnected horizontal lines
stayed at the supercooled liquid state (scale bar: 1 cm). (C) Direct
writing of fluorescent patterns at 25 °C. The only shear-applied
area turned into greenish yellow crystals (scale bar: 1 cm). (D) Supercooled
liquid DPP8 before sonication and after sonication followed by heating
to 120 °C. Sonic wave was applied as a source of molecular agitation.
(E) In order to study the effects of intentionally introduced heterogeneous
nucleation sites, sea sands (white arrows) were mixed with DPP8 melt
followed by cooling to 25 °C and subsequent heating to 120 °C.
Fluorescence image under optical microscope was taken after 5 min
at 120 °C (scale bar: 0.5 mm). Photographs (B, C, and D) were
taken under 365 nm UV light.
Different optical property of the two
phases and shear-triggered
lighting-up crystallization of DPP8: role of shear and dual mode crystallization.
(A) Normalized fluorescence emission spectra and quantum yields of
DPP8 crystal and supercooled liquid at room temperature. (B) Shear
at the tip (white arrow) of the tree-shape supercooled DPP8 pattern
triggered crystallization and propagation through the entire tree
pattern at 120 °C. However, the two disconnected horizontal lines
stayed at the supercooled liquid state (scale bar: 1 cm). (C) Direct
writing of fluorescent patterns at 25 °C. The only shear-applied
area turned into greenish yellow crystals (scale bar: 1 cm). (D) Supercooled
liquid DPP8 before sonication and after sonication followed by heating
to 120 °C. Sonic wave was applied as a source of molecular agitation.
(E) In order to study the effects of intentionally introduced heterogeneous
nucleation sites, sea sands (white arrows) were mixed with DPP8 melt
followed by cooling to 25 °C and subsequent heating to 120 °C.
Fluorescence image under optical microscope was taken after 5 min
at 120 °C (scale bar: 0.5 mm). Photographs (B, C, and D) were
taken under 365 nm UV light.Interestingly, upon applying shear force, the dim orange-red
fluorescent
supercooled liquid transforms to bright greenish yellow fluorescent
crystals (Figure 4B,C, Figure 1B,D). We hypothesized that the shear force might induce rearrangement
and density fluctuation of DPP8 molecules and thereby help embryos
surpass the critical radius of nucleation to become active nuclei.[15] To verify the proposed role of shear force in
the shear-triggered crystallization of DPP, we investigated the effect
of molecular agitation on the crystallization of supercooled liquid
DPP8. In this experiment, sonic wave was applied as an external energy
source to induce rearrangement and density fluctuation of DPP8 molecules
through simple agitation of DPP8 molecules in the supercooled liquid.
Applied sonic wave helps nucleation in supercooled liquid DPP8 and
develops crystallization upon subsequent heating as shown in Figure 4D (also see Figure S4), supporting the hypothesis that rearrangement and density fluctuation
of DPP8 by external energy, such as shear force and sonic wave, can
stimulate nucleation.The role of shearing in the shear-triggered
crystallization was
further verified by adding sea sand, as a heterogeneous nucleation
site, to supercooled liquid DPP8. It has been well-known that the
nucleation is promoted when heterogeneous nucleation sites, such as
rough or scratched surface, are provided in the system.[42−44] Sea sand was mixed with molten DPP8, and the mixture was cooled
to room temperature followed by subsequent heating to 120 °C.
Even though DPP8 molecules have enough mobility at this temperature
and even in the presence of interfaces provided by sea sand, no crystallization
was observed (Figure 4E). Similarly, no crystallization
was observed even when hydrophobic particles, including rubber powders
from the same eraser used for the fluorescence pattern writing on
a DPP8 supercooled liquid film (see below and Figure 4C), were added as foreign interfaces to induce heterogeneous
nucleation (Figure S5). Therefore, heterogeneous
nucleation possibility by physical contact with the shearing tool
is unlikely in the shear-triggered crystallization of DPP8. It should
be noted that, under heterogeneous nucleation conditions, the provided
interface promotes stable nucleus formation by reducing the surface
energy term (second term of eq 1 in the Supporting Information). In supercooled liquid DPP8, however, crystallization
is absent even when such a rough hydrophobic interface is provided.
Therefore, it is highly plausible to attribute the restricted nucleation
to small ΔG between the two phases, resulting
in a small driving force for crystallization (first term in eq 1 in Supporting Information) as suggested.Consequently,
shear force is acting as a trigger for crystallization
via molecular agitation in this system. Both crystal structure and
PL features of the shear-triggered crystal essentially resemble the
original crystal powder of DPP8 (Figure S6). Because the crystal growth rate varies at different temperatures,
the shear-triggered lighting-up crystallization propagates in a very
different way depending on temperature. At 120 °C, crystallization
propagated through the entire connected area of supercooled liquid
and gave corresponding large fluorescence amplification even though
the shear was applied only at the tip of the supercooled liquid domain
(Figure 4B, Movie S3 and Movie S4). The shear-triggered crystallization
is observed as well for the supercooled highly viscous liquid DPP8
film at 25 °C. However, the propagation of crystallization is
restricted due to the limited molecular mobility at 25 °C, and
thus fluorescent patterning by direct writing on the supercooled liquid
DPP8 film was accomplished. In this case, only the shear-applied area
showed bright greenish yellow emission (Figure 4C). In addition, the transformation between the supercooled liquid
and the crystalline solid is completely reversible. Shear-triggered
crystals can be transformed to supercooled liquid by simple heating
over its Tm and subsequent cooling. Upon
heating, the crystalline part disappears with vanishing bright fluorescence
in a few seconds (Movie S5), and the transformed
supercooled liquid is crystallized again by applying shear force.Unlike the mechanochromism of organic materials, this shear-triggered
crystallization is a disorder-to-order transition. In this system,
the applied shear force does not change an energetically favorable
structure to another structure but triggers crystallization which
propagates spontaneously afterward. To test the sensitivity of the
shear-triggered crystallization, we used living cells as a shear force
source. When cells are seeded on a substrate, they spread and establish
focal contacts on the substrate.[45] These
focal adhesions transmit intracellular tension generated by the actin
cytoskeleton into traction force against extracellular substrate.[46] In the case of fibroblast cells, such as NIH-3T3
embryonic fibroblast and dermal fibroblast, average cell traction
force (CTF) per unit area has been reported in the range of 0.1–0.3
kPa over compliant polyacrylamide gel,[47] but local CTF per unit area can be in the 1–5 kPa range.[46,48,49] In this experiment, we used HS-5
bone marrow fibroblast cells, which belong to the larger family of
stromal fibroblast, seeded on DPP8 to induce local crystallization.
After 2-day incubation, the HS-5 cells attached and spread over a
supercooled liquid DPP8 film (Figure 5A) and
produced clear greenish yellow fluorescent marks against the orange
fluorescent supercooled liquid area without cells (Figure 5B). In order to visualize the alignment of cell
positions relative to the greenish yellow fluorescent signals from
the induced DPP8 crystals by cell adhesion, bright field image (Figure 5A) and fluorescence image (Figure 5B) were processed and merged in Figure 5C. The greenish yellow crystalline fluorescent signals were isolated
from Figure 5B and labeled as green, followed
by merging with gray bright field image, Figure 5A. In the resulting Figure 5C, the location
of crystalline fluorescence perfectly matches within the cell boundary
of HS-5 cells, which demonstrates that the shear-triggered crystallization
of supercooled liquid DPP8 is sensitive enough to detect cell attachment
and cell contraction.[50]
Figure 5
Shear-triggered crystallization
by living cell attachment. (A)
Bright field image and (B) fluorescence image of HS-5 cells on the
supercooled liquid DPP8 film after 2-day incubation. The background
orange fluorescence in panel B originated from the supercooled liquid
phase of DPP8, and traction force produced by cell focal adhesion
complex on a supercooled liquid DPP8 film triggered crystallization
resulting in greenish yellow fluorescence in panel B. (C) In order
to visualize the alignment of cell positions relative to the fluorescent
signals from the induced DPP8 crystals by cell adhesion, the greenish
yellow crystalline fluorescent signals were isolated from panel B
and labeled as green, and overlaid with panel A (scale bar: 100 μm).
Shear-triggered crystallization
by living cell attachment. (A)
Bright field image and (B) fluorescence image of HS-5 cells on the
supercooled liquid DPP8 film after 2-day incubation. The background
orange fluorescence in panel B originated from the supercooled liquid
phase of DPP8, and traction force produced by cell focal adhesion
complex on a supercooled liquid DPP8 film triggered crystallization
resulting in greenish yellow fluorescence in panel B. (C) In order
to visualize the alignment of cell positions relative to the fluorescent
signals from the induced DPP8 crystals by cell adhesion, the greenish
yellow crystalline fluorescent signals were isolated from panel B
and labeled as green, and overlaid with panel A (scale bar: 100 μm).In order to provide more quantitative
information, we additionally
conducted analysis on the threshold shear rate and shear stress of
the shear-triggered crystallization by using a rheometer. In this
experiment, the supercooled liquid DPP8 sample was sandwiched between
two parallel plates, and the nucleation in the supercooled liquid
DPP8 was examined under different applied shear rates, from 0.001
to 10 s–1 (shear stress from 0.03 to 273.84 kPa),
at ca. 29 °C (Figure 6A,B). Under each
shear rate condition, nucleation was confirmed by observing crystallization
propagation upon subsequent heating to 100 °C immediately after
the shearing process. As presented in Figure 6C, the shear rates up to 0.025 s–1 (shear stresses
up to 0.74 kPa) do not induce any crystallization but retain the thermally
stable supercooled liquid phase. The nucleation in the DPP8 supercooled
liquid phase is first confirmed at the shear rate of 0.03 s–1 (shear stress of 0.90 kPa) by massive crystallization propagation
upon subsequent heating. In the higher shear rate range (0.05–10
s–1), shear-triggered crystallization is similarly
observed. We note that this threshold shear stress value (0.90 kPa)
is comparable to the fibroblast cells’ traction force per unit
area (1–5 kPa), and implies that the shear-triggered crystallization
is about 6 orders of magnitude more sensitive than the mechanochromism
observed in organic materials; in the literature these organic materials
show color and/or fluorescence change at around 1 GPa.[35,36]
Figure 6
Sensitivity
of the shear-triggered crystallization. (A) Applied
shear rate and stress on the supercooled liquid DPP8 under a rheometer
(ca. 29 °C). Nucleation by shearing was first observed at the
applied shear rate of 0.03 s–1 (shear stress of
0.90 kPa). (B) Experimental rheometer setup to quantitatively analyze
the threshold shear rate to trigger nucleation. (C) Images of DPP8
sample on the bottom plate after applying each shear rate followed
by heating to 100 °C. No crystallization was observed up to the
shear rate of 0.025 s–1 (shear stress 0.74 kPa).
At the shear rate 0.03 s–1 and above, crystallization
was clearly observed due to crystal nucleation induced by the applied
shearing. Photographs (B and C) were taken under room light.
Sensitivity
of the shear-triggered crystallization. (A) Applied
shear rate and stress on the supercooled liquid DPP8 under a rheometer
(ca. 29 °C). Nucleation by shearing was first observed at the
applied shear rate of 0.03 s–1 (shear stress of
0.90 kPa). (B) Experimental rheometer setup to quantitatively analyze
the threshold shear rate to trigger nucleation. (C) Images of DPP8
sample on the bottom plate after applying each shear rate followed
by heating to 100 °C. No crystallization was observed up to the
shear rate of 0.025 s–1 (shear stress 0.74 kPa).
At the shear rate 0.03 s–1 and above, crystallization
was clearly observed due to crystal nucleation induced by the applied
shearing. Photographs (B and C) were taken under room light.
Conclusion
In summary, we have presented
that a subtle force balance between
core interactions and side chain interactions acting in opposite directions
can be a molecular design strategy to achieve a thermally stable supercooled
liquid of conjugated organic molecules. Applying shear force on the
thermally stable supercooled liquid can trigger spontaneous crystallization
with large optical property changes. We demonstrated these findings
by investigating rationally designed DPP derivatives. A crystalline
organic compound, DPP8, formed a thermally stable supercooled liquid
state even over a 100 °C supercooling range because of a small
Gibbs free energy difference, ΔG, between its
supercooled liquid and the crystalline solid states. Our investigation
shows that this phenomenon is derived from a subtle force balance
between aromatic core interactions and van der Waals interactions
among the aliphatic side chains. The supercooled liquid DPP8 was readily
transformed to its original crystal structure by means of applied
shear force accompanied by 25-times fluorescence enhancement and color
change. By adjusting the crystal growth rate through temperature control,
we demonstrated shear-triggered fluorescent fine patterning at room
temperature and propagating fluorescence amplification at 120 °C,
respectively, in a completely reversible manner, which can be potentially
adapted to a novel optical storage system. The lighting-up crystallization
of the supercooled liquid DPP8 film by living cell attachment and
spreading demonstrates the possibility of applying the phenomenon
to fluorescence sensor development having sensitive turn-on signaling.
Methods
Details on methods, materials, and synthesis are available in the Supporting Information.
Authors: N Q Balaban; U S Schwarz; D Riveline; P Goichberg; G Tzur; I Sabanay; D Mahalu; S Safran; A Bershadsky; L Addadi; B Geiger Journal: Nat Cell Biol Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 28.824
Authors: John L Tan; Joe Tien; Dana M Pirone; Darren S Gray; Kiran Bhadriraju; Christopher S Chen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-01-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Kyeongwoon Chung; Andrew McAllister; David Bilby; Bong-Gi Kim; Min Sang Kwon; Emmanouil Kioupakis; Jinsang Kim Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 9.825
Authors: Min Sang Kwon; Jake H Jordahl; Andrew W Phillips; Kyeongwoon Chung; Sunjong Lee; Johannes Gierschner; Joerg Lahann; Jinsang Kim Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2016-01-04 Impact factor: 9.825