| Literature DB >> 29997854 |
Seda Cekli1, Russell W Winkel1, Erkki Alarousu2, Omar F Mohammed2, Kirk S Schanze1.
Abstract
A series of variable band-gap donor-acceptor-donor (DAD) chromophores capped with platinum(ii) acetylide units has been synthesized and fully characterized by electrochemical and photophysical methods, with particular emphasis placed on probing triplet excited state properties. A counter-intuitive trend of increasing fluorescence quantum efficiency and lifetime with decreasing excited state energy (optical gap) is observed across the series of DAD chromophores. Careful study of the excited state dynamics, including triplet yields (as inferred from singlet oxygen sensitization), reveals that the underlying origin of the unusual trend in the fluorescence parameters is that the singlet-triplet intersystem crossing rate and yield decrease with decreasing optical gap. It is concluded that the rate of intersystem crossing decreases as the LUMO is increasingly localized on the acceptor unit in the DAD chromophore, and this result is interpreted as arising because the extent of spin-orbit coupling induced by the platinum heavy metal centers decreases as the LUMO is more localized on the acceptor. In addition to the trend in intersystem crossing, the results show that the triplet decay rates follow the Energy Gap Law correlation over a 1.8 eV range of triplet energy and 1000-fold range of triplet decay rates. Finally, femtosecond transient absorption studies for the DAD chromophores reveals a strong absorption in the near-infrared region which is attributed to the singlet excited state. This spectral band appears to be general for DAD chromophores, and may be a signature of the charge transfer (CT) singlet excited state.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 29997854 PMCID: PMC6008705 DOI: 10.1039/c5sc04578a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1Structures of the DAD molecules with increasing acceptor strength order.
Electrochemical data
|
| Frontier orbital energies/eV | HOMO–LUMO gap/eV | |||||
| red | ox1 | ox2 |
|
| Δ | Δ | |
|
| –2.10 | 0.27 | — | –3.00 | –5.37 | 2.37 | 2.37 |
|
| –1.84 | 0.45 | — | –3.26 | –5.55 | 2.29 | 2.30 |
|
| –1.83 | 0.28 | 0.40 | –3.27 | –5.38 | 2.11 | 2.04 |
|
| –1.74 | 0.30 | 0.45 | –3.36 | –5.40 | 2.03 | 1.96 |
|
| –1.65 | 0.12 | 0.36 | –3.45 | –5.22 | 1.77 | 1.61 |
|
| –1.96 | 0.04 | 0.23 | –3.14 | –5.14 | 2.00 | 1.90 |
|
| –1.85 | 0.03 | 0.27 | –3.25 | –5.13 | 1.88 | 1.80 |
CV data, conducted in dimethylformamide and referenced to Fc/Fc+ as an internal standard.
CV data, conducted in dichloromethane and referenced to Fc/Fc+ as an internal standard.
DPV data, conducted in dimethylformamide and referenced to Fc/Fc+ as an internal standard.
E LUMO = –(E[red + 5.1) eV.
E HOMO = –(E[ox + 5.1) eV.
Electrochemical gap = Eox – Ered.
Optical gap is found from the onset of absorption spectra.
Fig. 2Normalized absorption (left) and emission (right) spectra of TBTz, TBT and TPT.
Summary of the photophysical properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Δ | |
|
| 463 (4.95) | 515 | 0.07 | 0.17 | 3.9 | 0.83 | 0.20 | 4.19 | 1.38 (1.53) | 1.09 |
|
| 475 (4.84) | 542 | 0.14 | 0.50 | 6.2 | 0.57 | 0.52 | 1.10 | 1.49 (1.59) | 0.88 |
|
| 370, 518 (4.84, 4.63) | 660 | 0.38 | 3.89 | 2.62 | 0.24 | 2.14 | 0.112 | 1.22 | 0.88 |
|
| 370, 546 (4.71, 4.54) | 685 | 0.43 | 4.84 | 1.81 | 0.15 | 3.16 | 0.048 | 1.08 | 0.93 |
|
| 406, 638 (4.81, 4.48) | 835 | 0.009 | 0.28 | 0.18 | NA | 0.22 | 0.005 | 0.71 | 0.85 |
|
| 386, 559 (4.76, 4.53) | 709 | 0.29 | 2.25 | 1.78 | 0.36 | 2.38 | 0.15 | 1.20 | 0.75 |
|
| 389, 596 (4.78, 4.57) | 758 | 0.42 | 3.65 | 1.37 | 0.32 | 5.76 | 0.056 | 1.01 | 0.83 |
Measured in THF at room temperature.
Measured in THF using rhodamine B (φf = 0.69)29 as an actinometer.
Measured in THF using tetraphenylporphyrin (φf = 0.12)30 as an actinometer.
Measured by TCSPC in dry THF.
Measured by nanosecond transient absorption spectroscopy, in deoxygenated THF.
TPT is not a singlet oxygen sensitizer.
Measured by femtosecond transient absorption spectroscopy in THF. The fitting parameters and kinetics plots are shown in ESI (Fig. S8).
Calculated from kISC = φISC/τS where it is assumed that φISC ≈ φΔ.
T1 energy computed by DFT.
Measured in MeTHF at 77 K.
Energy difference between the experimental S1 energy found from the emission spectrum and the T1 energy calculated by DFT.
Estimated from the linear relationship presented in Fig. 6A and B.
Fig. 3Photophysical properties of the molecules (thiophene series are in orange, EDOT series are in blue). (a) Optical gap, (b) fluorescence quantum yield, (c) fluorescence lifetime, (d) singlet oxygen quantum yield.
Fig. 6The natural log of intersystem crossing rate vs. (a) singlet energy, (b) triplet energy. Black dashed lines are given as guides to the eye.37
Fig. 4(a) Normalized steady-state absorption spectra of selected molecules in THF at room temperature. (b) Normalized nanosecond transient absorption difference spectra, following nanosecond-pulsed 355 nm laser excitation pulse (4 mJ per pulse) in argon-purged THF.
Fig. 5Femtosecond transient absorption difference spectra of TBTz, TBT and TPT at indicated delay times following 355 nm laser excitation pulse (1.5 μJ per pulse) in THF and the temporal evolution of transient absorption at selected wavelengths.
Fig. 7Triplet state properties of the molecules (thiophene series are in orange, EDOT series are in blue) (a) triplet lifetime, (b) calculated triplet energy.
Fig. 8The natural log of the triplet decay rate (kT) of the studied DAD molecules (black squares) and the natural log of the non-radiative decay rate of triplet state from Köhler et al.19 work (red circles) are plotted against the triplet energy. The straight line corresponds to the linear fitting.