Huimin Guo1, Hongyu Xia1, Xiaolin Ma1, Kepeng Chen1, Can Dang1, Jianzhang Zhao1, Bernhard Dick2. 1. State Key Laboratory of Fine Chemicals, Department of Chemistry, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2, Linggong Road, Dalian 116024, P. R. China. 2. Institut für Physikalische und Theoretische Chemie, Universität Regensburg, Universitätsstr. 31, Regensburg 93053, Germany.
Abstract
Photooxidation utilizing visible light, especially with naturally abundant O2 as the oxygen source, has been well-accepted as a sustainable and efficient procedure in organic synthesis. To ensure the intersystem crossing and triplet quantum yield for efficient photosensitization, we prepared amidated alloxazines (AAs) and investigated their photophysical properties and performance as heavy-atom-free triplet photosensitizers and compared with those of flavin (FL) and riboflavin tetraacetate (RFTA). Because of the difference in the framework structure of AAs and FL and the introduction of carbonyl moiety, the absorption of FL at ∼450 nm is blue-shifted to ∼380 nm and weakened (ε = 8.7 × 103 for FL to ∼6.8 × 103 M-1 cm-1), but the absorption at ∼340 nm is red-shifted to ∼350 nm and enhanced by ∼50% (from ε = 6.4 × 103 for FL to ∼9.9 × 103 M-1 cm-1) in AAs. The intersystem crossing rates from the S1 to T1 are also enhanced in these AAs derivatives, while the fluorescence quantum yield decreases from ∼30 to ∼7% for FL and AAs, respectively, making the triplet excited state lifetime and the singlet oxygen quantum yield of AAs at least comparable to those of FL and RFTA. We examined the performance of these heave-atom-free chromophores in the photooxidation of sulfides to afford sulfoxides. In accordance with the prolonged triplet excited state lifetime and enhanced triplet quantum yield, 2-5-fold performance enhancements were observed for AAs in the photooxidation of sulfides with respect to FL. We proposed that the key reactive oxygen species of AA-sensitized photooxidation are singlet oxygen and superoxide radical anion based on mechanistic investigations. The research highlights the superior performance of AAs in photocatalysis and would be helpful to rationalize the design of efficient heavy-atom-free organic photocatalysts.
Photooxidation utilizing visible light, especially with naturally abundant O2 as the oxygen source, has been well-accepted as a sustainable and efficient procedure in organic synthesis. To ensure the intersystem crossing and triplet quantum yield for efficient photosensitization, we prepared amidated alloxazines (AAs) and investigated their photophysical properties and performance as heavy-atom-free triplet photosensitizers and compared with those of flavin (FL) and riboflavin tetraacetate (RFTA). Because of the difference in the framework structure of AAs and FL and the introduction of carbonyl moiety, the absorption of FL at ∼450 nm is blue-shifted to ∼380 nm and weakened (ε = 8.7 × 103 for FL to ∼6.8 × 103 M-1 cm-1), but the absorption at ∼340 nm is red-shifted to ∼350 nm and enhanced by ∼50% (from ε = 6.4 × 103 for FL to ∼9.9 × 103 M-1 cm-1) in AAs. The intersystem crossing rates from the S1 to T1 are also enhanced in these AAs derivatives, while the fluorescence quantum yield decreases from ∼30 to ∼7% for FL and AAs, respectively, making the triplet excited state lifetime and the singlet oxygen quantum yield of AAs at least comparable to those of FL and RFTA. We examined the performance of these heave-atom-free chromophores in the photooxidation of sulfides to afford sulfoxides. In accordance with the prolonged triplet excited state lifetime and enhanced triplet quantum yield, 2-5-fold performance enhancements were observed for AAs in the photooxidation of sulfides with respect to FL. We proposed that the key reactive oxygen species of AA-sensitized photooxidation are singlet oxygen and superoxide radical anion based on mechanistic investigations. The research highlights the superior performance of AAs in photocatalysis and would be helpful to rationalize the design of efficient heavy-atom-free organic photocatalysts.
Photooxidation utilizing
visible light, especially with naturally
abundant O2 as the oxygen source, has been well-accepted
as a sustainable and efficient procedure in synthesis chemistry, for
the low energy consumption, high product selectivity, low cost of
O2, and limited impact to the environment.[1] As the direct oxidation of organic substrates at the singlet
ground state with O2 (in triplet state) is spin-forbidden,
photosensitizers are commonly required to mediate the formation of
singlet oxygen (1O2) or substrate radicals as
reactive oxygen species (ROS) via photoinduced energy or electron
transfer or their combinations in light irradiation. Kinetically,
the concentration of the excited photosensitizer is vital for efficient
energy or charge transfer to O2 or the organic substrate
independent of the reaction mechanism, and this is determined by the
photophysical properties of the photosensitizer. One possible reason
for the limited efficiency of conventional organicchromophores in
photooxidation is their slow intersystem crossing (ISC) from the short-lived
spin-allowed singlet excited states to long-lived triplet excited
states for energy transfer, as compared with the competing fast internal
conversion and emission. Although this slow ISCcan be addressed by
the introduction of heavy atoms or halogen bonds,[2] it may be of more significance to design heavy-atom-free
organic photosensitizers of low toxicity, efficient ISC, and a high
triplet quantum yield.Flavin (FL) derivatives, a kind of nontoxic
organicchromophores
with the framework structure of isoalloxazines, are important function
moieties of redox-active enzymes for a large variety of thermal- or
photo-induced biological processes in both animals and plants.[3,4] Some FLs, such as riboflavin, may undergo tautomerization in protic
solvents when exposed to light irradiation, leading to the formation
of alloxazine (AA) derivatives.[5] On the
other hand, some AA derivatives, such as lumichrome, may also isomerize
to be in equilibrium with FLs through excited state proton transfer
in protic solvents.[6,7] In this sense, AAs are actually
directly related to FLs in many photophysical and photochemical processes,
including photooxidation.[8−11] Compared with FLs, the investigations on photophysical
and photochemical properties of AAs were relatively limited. The photophysical
properties of AAs are solvent-dependent.[11] The amide moiety is sensitive to acid–base properties of
the solvent and organic acids were found to catalyze the photoinduced
tautomerization of AAs to FLs.[12−15] In general, the fluorescence quantum yield of AAs
is one order lower than that of FLs because of their fast nonradiative
decay and ISC from singlet excited states,[16] while triplet quantum yields are ∼0.71 and is obviously superior
than those of FLs (∼0.57).[10] Considering
the vital role of sensitizer in triplet excited states for the sensitized
formation of 1O2, it is rather interesting to
explore the potential applications of AAs in photooxidation.The oxidation of sulfides has important applications in many fields,
including pharmaceutical production,[17] sulfur
removal from gasoline and diesel from hydrocracking,[18] environment remediation,[19] and
so on. Although some previously examined organic photosensitizers
produce highly oxidative ROS with uncontrolled reaction and poor product
selectivity,[20−25] riboflavin and riboflavin tetraacetate (RFTA) were reported to be
capable of selectively converting sulfides to corresponding sulfoxides,
where 1O2 was recognized as the major ROS.[26−30] Kinetically, the performance of these photosensitizers can be promoted
further if excited state quantum yields of the photosensitizer can
be enhanced deliberately. We recently showed that the triplet quantum
yield of FLcan be enhanced when attached to Ru(II).[31,32] Further, we also showed that the Br-introduced heavy atom effect
can also promote the singlet-triplet ISC, resulting in an enhanced
triplet excited state quantum yield and high catalytic performance
in photooxidation of sulfides.[33] Considering
the reported photophysical properties of AAs, especially the superior
triplet excited state quantum yields and singlet oxygen quantum yields
as compared with FL, it is interesting to examine the performance
of AAs as a sensitizer in photooxidation. To insure efficient ISC
of the sensitizer, we attached a carbonyl moiety that is capable of
functioning similar to heavy atoms to facilitate ISC[34] directly to the amide and imideN atoms and afforded AAs,
and expected enhanced catalytic performance of these heavy-atom-free
photosensitizers in the photoxidation of sulfides, which is of potential
industrial significance in pharmaceutical production, environment
remediation, and so on. We also expect that the findings would help
to rationalize the design of efficient heavy-atom-free organic photocatalysts.
Results
and Discussions
The AAs were synthesized according to Scheme . The absorption
spectra of AAs, namely, 3a, 3b, and 3c are constituted by
2 bands at ∼350 and ∼380 nm (Figure a–c). There are also 2 bands at ∼340
and ∼450 nm, respectively, with vibrational structures, on
the absorption spectra of FL and RFTA (Figure d,e).[35,36] Theoretical calculations
were carried out to interpret the absorption spectra of 3a, 3b, and 3c and also the reference compounds
FL and RFTA (Tables , S1–S3, Figures and S37–S39). The experimental finding for the absorption features of these
3 AAs and the reference compounds, FL and RFTA, in the visible light
region were well-reproduced by the density functional theory (DFT)/time-dependent
DFT (TD-DFT) results.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of the
AAs (3a, 3b, and 3c) and the
Molecular Structures of the Reference Sensitizers,
FL and RFTA
Reaction conditions: (i) alloxan,
boric acid, acetic acid glacial, 70 °C, 2 h; (ii) caprylyl chloride,
Et3N, dimethylformamide, 25 °C, 24 h.
Figure 1
Absorption spectra of (a) 3a, (b) 3b,
(c) 3c, (d) FL, and (e) RFTA in toluene, CH2Cl2, CH3CN, and CH3OH. c = 1 × 10–5 M, 20 °C.
Table 1
Selected Electronic Transitions That
Accounts for the Absorption of Amidated Alloxazines, Namely 3a, 3b, and 3c, in the UV–Vis
Range
transitions
energya
fb
compositionc
CId
character
3a: S0 → S1
3.39 eV/366 nm
0.0671
77 → 78
0.69300
π → π*, n → π*
3a: S0 → S3
3.88 eV/320 nm
0.2657
76 → 78
0.66946
π → π*, n → π*
77 → 79
0.14645
77 → 80
0.10979
3b: S0 → S1
3.40 eV/364 nm
0.0757
66 → 67
0.69374
π → π*, n → π*
3b: S0 → S3
3.90 eV/318 nm
0.2714
65 → 67
0.67110
π → π*, n → π*
66 → 68
0.18749
3c: S0 → S1
3.41 eV/363 nm
0.0707
64 → 67
0.12313
π → π*, n → π*
66 → 67
0.68101
3c: S0 → S3
3.90 eV/318 nm
0.2356
65 → 67
0.66754
π → π*, n → π*
66 → 68
0.17660
Selected
electronic transitions
with oscillator strength larger than 0.02 are presented.
Oscillator strength. Complete lists
of possible transitions can be found in Tables S1–S3.
Composition
of the electronic transition.
The CI coefficients are in absolute
values.
Figure 2
Wavefunction of molecular states of 3a, 3b, and 3c involved in the transitions mentioned in Table . The contour value
is ±0.02 a.u. The C, O, N, and H atoms are in gray, red, blue,
and white, respectively.
Absorption spectra of (a) 3a, (b) 3b,
(c) 3c, (d) FL, and (e) RFTA in toluene, CH2Cl2, CH3CN, and CH3OH. c = 1 × 10–5 M, 20 °C.Wavefunction of molecular states of 3a, 3b, and 3c involved in the transitions mentioned in Table . The contour value
is ±0.02 a.u. The C, O, N, and H atoms are in gray, red, blue,
and white, respectively.
Synthesis of the
AAs (3a, 3b, and 3c) and the
Molecular Structures of the Reference Sensitizers,
FL and RFTA
Reaction conditions: (i) alloxan,
boric acid, acetic acid glacial, 70 °C, 2 h; (ii) caprylyl chloride,
Et3N, dimethylformamide, 25 °C, 24 h.Selected
electronic transitions
with oscillator strength larger than 0.02 are presented.Oscillator strength. Complete lists
of possible transitions can be found in Tables S1–S3.Composition
of the electronic transition.The CI coefficients are in absolute
values.For 3a, the absorption at ∼380 nm involves
electron transitions from MO 77 to MO 78 (S0 → S1) (Figure , upper panel). This transition can be assigned to mixed π
→ π* transition within the AA π and π* symmetry
mainly localized on the benzopyrazine moiety and n → π*
transition involving nonbonding states on N1 and carbonyl O. The absorption
at ∼350 nm (S0 → S3) involves
transitions from MO 76 to MO 78, from MO 77 to MO 79, and from MO
77 to MO 80 and is also of mixed π → π* and n →
π* character, but also with contribution from carbonyl group
introduced by amidation. The removal of the additional carbonyl group
from N1 and N3 of 3a does not alter the orbital sequence
and the energy levels significantly (Table and Figure ), so the spectra of 3b and 3c exhibit absorption features similar to that of 3a,
with two bands in 300–500 nm (Figure b,c and Table ).The absorption spectra of AAs are different
from those of FL and
RFTA (Figure d,e).
For FL, the absorption bands at ∼450 and ∼330 nm are
of mixed character of π → π* transition within
FL and also the n → π* involving the imide moiety (Table S4 and Figure S40). The absorption spectrum of RFTA is similar to that of FL because
of the similarity in their molecular structures. After a close inspection
of the contour plots of wavefunctions involved in the excitations,
we noticed that the spacial distribution of highest occupied molecular
orbital (HOMO) and lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) of AAs
and FL are quite similar, except that C4 and N1 (2, Scheme ) states have no contribution
to the HOMO and LUMO of AAs, respectively (Figures and S40). In
this sense, the blue-shift of the absorption band at ∼450 nm
of FL to ∼380 nm in AAs, and the red-shift of the band at ∼330
nm of FL to ∼350 of AAscan be attributed to the different
conjugations within the FL and AA frameworks and the introduction
of the carbonyl moiety.We previously noticed the solvent-dependent
absorption of FL and
FL derivatives.[31,33] As the AAs are isomers of FL
derivatives, we also investigated their absorption in nonpolar solvents
including toluene and CH2Cl2 (DCM) and strong
polar solvents such as CH3CN (MeCN) and CH3OH
(MeOH) (Figure ).
As FL and RFTAcontain various functional groups, which will facilitate
the formation of interactions with the solvent molecules that affect
the absorption.[37] The similarity in the
structures of the AAs and FL also suggests the absorption of AA derivatives
is also solvent-dependent. However, this effect is less pronounced
in AAs (Figures and 2)[38] probably because
of the fact that the conjugation in AAs is mainly within the benzopyrazine
moiety and is thus less sensitive to the interactions with the amide
moieties.We also examined the room temperature emission of
AAs, FL, and
RFTA in toluene, CH2Cl2, CH3CN, and
CH3OH (Figure ). All three AAs show broad emission bands in the range from
400 to 600 nm with a similar shape, with λem,max at
448, 446, and 442 nm for 3a, 3b, and 3c, respectively. This is different from the emission spectra
of FL and RFTA featuring 2 emission bands in the range from 450 to
650 nm, with λem,max at 495 and 504 nm, for FL and
RFTA, respectively, with observable vibrational fine structures at
room temperature. For the AAs investigated, the emission is stronger
in CH3OH than in other less polar solvents such as CH2Cl2 and toluene, and there is a blue shift of ∼20
nm in CH3OH with respect to that in toluene. We attributed
these two features to the AA–solvent interactions.[11,38] Specifically, intermolecular interactions, such as hydrogen bonds
and π–π stacking, which are known to modulate the
emission properties of a chromophore, can be formed with CH3OH and toluene. The impact of such interactions on the emission properties
is also apparent for the emission of reference compounds, namely the
FL and RFTA (Figure d,e).
Figure 3
Emission spectra of 3a (a), 3b (b), 3c (c), FL (d), and RFTA (e) in toluene, CH2Cl2, and CH3OH. λex is 341 nm for 3a, 3b, and 3c, 435 and 442 nm for
FL and RFTA, respectively. c = 1.0 × 10–5 M, 20 °C.
Emission spectra of 3a (a), 3b (b), 3c (c), FL (d), and RFTA (e) in toluene, CH2Cl2, and CH3OH. λex is 341 nm for 3a, 3b, and 3c, 435 and 442 nm for
FL and RFTA, respectively. c = 1.0 × 10–5 M, 20 °C.DFT/TD-DFT calculations were also performed to analyze the fluorescent
emission properties of AAs and FL (Figure , Table ). The emission of FL rises from ∼450 nm with
the λem,max at 482 and 518 nm. As for AAs, the emission
rises from ∼400 nm, and the λem,max are at
475, 454, and 444 nm for 3a, 3b, and 3c, respectively (Figure a), in a reasonable agreement with experimental results
(Figure ). We projected
the energy consumed because of the structure reorganization (Ereorg) accompanying the electronic transition
from the first singlet excited state (S1) to the ground
state (S0) onto the S0 normal modes of the corresponding
compounds (Figure b) and analyzed the contribution of specific ground state normal
modes to Ereorg (Figure c). The calculated Ereorg for 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL are 4339, 4805, 2197, and 1876 cm–1, respectively.
The contribution from the C=C and C=N stretching modes,
which were known to account for the low fluorescent quantum yield
of AA and isoalloxazine derivatives, to Ereorg can be recognized in 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL (Figure b,c).[31−33] Furthermore, for 3a and 3b, the amide moieties also introduce new normal modes, such as mode
86 of 3a and mode 73 of 3b (Figure c), as alternative energy consumption
paths competing with the emissive decay, and may partially account
for the slight redshift of the emission spectra with respect to 3c.
Figure 4
Calculated emission spectra (a), projected Ereorg on the S0 vibrational normal modes (b), and
the displacement vectors for the S0 normal modes of 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL presenting domination
contribution to Ereorg at 298 K in CH2Cl2 (c). In (b), the contribution of S0 normal modes of 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL were marked and number in green, blue, red, and black, respectively,
and the corresponding displacement vectors of these modes can be found
in (c).
Table 2
Theoretical Emission
Properties of 3a, 3b, 3c, and
FL at 298 K
298 K
kica
kfb
kISC (S1 → T1)c
kISC (T1 → S0)d
kpe
ΦT (%)f
FL
9.61 × 108
5.50 × 107
4.79 × 102
4.99 × 102
1.42 × 10–1
4.71 × 10–5
3a
6.61 × 1011
8.78 × 106
1.77 × 107
4.74 × 106
1.28 × 10–1
2.68 × 10–3
3b
6.43 × 1011
1.06 × 107
8.58 × 106
2.17 × 106
1.68 × 10–1
1.33 × 10–3
3c
4.04 × 109
2.20 × 107
2.43 × 105
1.12 × 104
3.38 × 10–1
5.98 × 10–3
Rate constant for nonemissive decay
by internal conversion from S1 to S0 in s–1.
Fluorescent
emission rate constant
in s–1.
ISC rate constant from S1 to T1 in s–1.
ISC rate constant from
T1 to S0 in s–1.
Phosphorescent emission rate constant
in s–1.
Triplet quantum yield in percentage,
calculated as kISC(S1 →
T1)/(kic + kf + kISC(S1 →
T1)) × 100%.
Calculated emission spectra (a), projected Ereorg on the S0 vibrational normal modes (b), and
the displacement vectors for the S0 normal modes of 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL presenting domination
contribution to Ereorg at 298 K in CH2Cl2 (c). In (b), the contribution of S0 normal modes of 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL were marked and number in green, blue, red, and black, respectively,
and the corresponding displacement vectors of these modes can be found
in (c).Rate constant for nonemissive decay
by internal conversion from S1 to S0 in s–1.Fluorescent
emission rate constant
in s–1.ISC rate constant from S1 to T1 in s–1.ISC rate constant from
T1 to S0 in s–1.Phosphorescent emission rate constant
in s–1.Triplet quantum yield in percentage,
calculated as kISC(S1 →
T1)/(kic + kf + kISC(S1 →
T1)) × 100%.The calculated kf and kic of FL are 5.50 × 107 and 9.61 ×
108 s–1, respectively, and are significantly
superior than kISC(S1 →
T1), kISC(T1 →
S0), and kp, which are 4.79
× 102, 4.99 × 102, and 1.42 ×
10–1 s–1, respectively. In this
sense, emissive and nonemissive decay to S0 are the major
paths for the evolution of excited FL. For the small kISC(S1 → T1), only a small
portion of excited FL will evolve into T1. Furthermore,
the T1 to S0 nonradiative decay is also dominant
over emissive decay, as kISC(T1–S0) is 103 larger than kp. These finely explain the small triplet quantum yield
of FL. Compared with those of FL, the kic of AAs are at least 10 times larger, while kf are at nearly the same level. However, the kISC(S1–T1) are drastically
increased from 4.79 × 102 for FL to 1.77 × 107, 8.58 × 106, and 2.43 × 105 s–1 for 3a, 3b, and 3c, respectively. In this case, a significant portion of,
at least 103 times more, excited AAs would evolve to T1 via ISC and the T1 quantum yield of AAs is thus
about 1000 folds with respect to FL (Table ). Another interesting feature of the AAs
is that the kISC(T1–S0) are also increased by at least 100 folds with respect to
that of FL. We attributed this to the contribution of the carbonyl
group within the amide moiety to the spin–orbital coupling.
Furthermore, the calculated kISC(T1–S0) is still ∼10 times lower than
that of the corresponding kISC(S1–T1) ISC rates. This is different from the case
of FL, where kISC(T1–S0) is at the same level with the kISC(S1–T1). This difference may result
in the accumulation of more excited AAs in T1, which would
further evolve to S0 via competing nonradiative, radiative
decay processes or sensitization with O2. Kinetically,
the performance of a chromophore in O2 sensitization is
mainly determined by the concentration of excited sensitizers, and
is related to ISC and decay rates, etc. Although the kISC(T1–S0) are significantly
larger than kp for all of the 4 heavy-atom-free
organicchromophores, the relatively smaller kISC(T1–S0) as compared with the kISC(S1–T1) suggests
that AAs may potentially exhibit superior performance as O2 sensitizers. This difference between kISC(S1–T1) and kISC(T1–S0) ensures not only the population
of a large portion of excited chromophores to T1 but also
their accumulation at T1 where they are capable of transferring
energy/electrons for the conversion of substrates.We compared
the measured photophysical properties of 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL in Table . The emission of the four chromophores is
mainly fluorescent emission. Compared with FL, the emission of AAs
is significantly weakened according to the measured ΦF. We attributed this to both faster internal conversion and ISC rates
(Table ) in AAs originated
from the carbonyl groups within the amide moiety and the different
conjugations within the AA framework. Previously, the carbonyl group
is known to contribute positively to the spin–orbital coupling
and lead to fast ISC for the population and evolution of the organicchromophores in their low-lying triplet excites states,[39] which are commonly required for the sensitization
of O2 for the formation of singlet O2 as ROS.
This is supported by the calculated kISC(S1–T1) and kISC(T1–S0) (Table ). The observed increase of ΦΔ at the expense of ΦF of AAs with respect to FL
is similar to the reported photophysics of FL bromides where Br accounts
for the enhanced ISC.[33] The measured ΦΔ of AAs are at the same level as compared with those
of FL and RFTA, showing that the portion of excited AAs in T1 would be at least comparable to those of FL and RFTA, which accounts
for the renowned performance of FL and RFTA as sensitizers for photooxidation.[27,40] The measured singlet oxygen quantum yield (ΦΔ) of these 4 organicchromophores are 0.644, 0.715, 0.771, and 0.547
for 3a, 3b, 3c, and FL, respectively.
According to the measured ΦΔ in CH2Cl2, the performance of these 4 organicchromophores in
photooxidation would be superior or at least similar to that of [Ru(bpy)3]2+ with a ΦΔ of 0.57 and
that of RFTA, which was previously proposed to be efficient for photooxidation
and are about 20% higher than that of FL.[27,33] As inspired by the superior ΦΔ of AAs, we
then investigated the performance of these organicchromophores as
photosensitizers using the photooxidation of sulfides as a probe reaction
(Table ).
Table 3
Measured Photophysical Properties
of 3a, 3b, 3c, FL, and RFTA
λabs/nma
εb
λem/nmc
ΦFd
τF/nse
ΦΔf
τT/μsg
3a
350; 379
0.062;
0.040
448
0.063
0.0168
0.644
256
3b
348; 384
0.099; 0.068
446
0.066
0.0391
0.715
383
3c
347; 381
0.093; 0.067
442
0.068
0.0629
0.771
186
FL
334; 440
0.064; 0.087
495
0.285
0.2689
0.547
218
RFTA
348; 447
0.067; 0.092
504
0.300
6.2806
0.701
722
In CH2Cl2 (c =
1.0 × 10–5 M).
Molar absorption coefficient. ε:
105 M–1 cm–1.
Maximal emission wavelength in CH2Cl2 (c = 1.0 × 10–5 M).
The fluorescence quantum
yields
with anthracene (ΦF = 0.27, in ethanol) as the standard.
At 293 K, measured in air in
CH2Cl2.
Singlet oxygen quantum yields in
CH2Cl2; Ru(bpy)32+ was
used as standard (ΦΔ = 0.57, in CH2Cl2).
Measured
by transient absorption
in CH2Cl2 (4.0 × 10 –5 M).
Table 4
Photooxidation
of Thioanisole with
AAs, FL, and RFTA as Catalystsa
entry
reaction condition
yield (%)
1
0.5 mol % 3a, 300 min
52.2
2
0.5 mol % 3b, 300 min
100.0
3
0.5 mol % 3c, 300 min
72.2
4
0.5 mol % FL, 300 min
22.6
5
0.5 mol % RFTA, 300 min
75.0
6
0.5 mol % 3b, 300 min, CH3CN/H2O (v/v = 9:1)
100.0
7
2 mol % 3b, 200 min
100.0
8
1 mol % 3b, 200 min
100.0
9
no 3b, 300 min
0
10
0.5 mol % 3b, 300 min, no light
0
11
no 3b, 300 min,
no light
0
Reaction conditions:
The 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol thioanisole and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9 : 1), otherwise
specified. The liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250
W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress
of the reaction was monitored by thin-layer chromatography (TLC) analysis.
The product yields were determined by 1H NMR spectra of
the mixture at the end of the reaction.
In CH2Cl2 (c =
1.0 × 10–5 M).Molar absorption coefficient. ε:
105 M–1 cm–1.Maximal emission wavelength in CH2Cl2 (c = 1.0 × 10–5 M).The fluorescence quantum
yields
with anthracene (ΦF = 0.27, in ethanol) as the standard.At 293 K, measured in air in
CH2Cl2.Singlet oxygen quantum yields in
CH2Cl2; Ru(bpy)32+ was
used as standard (ΦΔ = 0.57, in CH2Cl2).Measured
by transient absorption
in CH2Cl2 (4.0 × 10 –5 M).Reaction conditions:
The 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol thioanisole and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9 : 1), otherwise
specified. The liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250
W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress
of the reaction was monitored by thin-layer chromatography (TLC) analysis.
The product yields were determined by 1H NMR spectra of
the mixture at the end of the reaction.We first inspected the photooxidation of 0.20 mmol
thioanisol in
3 mL of CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1)
solution with 0.5 mol % of AAs, FL, and RFTA as sensitizers (entries
1–5, Table ). Full conversion was achieved only when 3b was used
as the photosensitizer (entry 2, Table ), while the conversions with other chromophores are
at least 25% lower than that of 3b. It should be noted
that the conversion with RFTA for this reaction is 75.0% and is higher
than 3a, 3c, and FL with conversion of 52.2,
72.2, and 22.6%, respectively. In this sense, the performance of 3b is at least comparable to that of RFTA in sensitization
and the formation of ROS for the oxidation of thioanisol.[26,27,30,41] Although the photophysical properties of these AAs, FL, and RFTA
are strongly solvent-dependent, the conversion of an organic substrate
in photooxidation depends strongly on the solvability of both the
sensitizer and the substrate. As protonic solvents, such as C2H5OH, CH3OH, H2O, and so
forth, are known to stabilize the intermediate for the formation of 1O2 and keep the reaction proceed efficiently,[26,27,30] we also examined the performance
of 3b in CH3CN/H2O (v/v = 9:1)
(entry 6, Table )
and the conversion of thioanisole was also 100%. In this sense, 3b would exhibit comparable performance in CH3CN/H2O and CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v =
9:1) mixtures.[26,27,30,41] The optimized concentration of the catalyst
and reaction time were set as 0.5 mol % and 300 min (entries 2, 7–8, Table ) as they are already
enough to reach full conversion. The vital roles of 3b and light radiation were supported by parallel experiments without
catalyst or light irradiation or both, where the nonobservable conversion
of the substrate was found (entries 9–11, Table ). It should be noted that,
although 3c has a higher ΦT, its performance
in photooxidation is not excellent among 3 AAs. This can be attributed
to the complexity of the photooxidation of sulfides sensitized by
AAs and FL. The excited sensitizers can sensitize the formation of
not only singlet oxygen but also the substrate radicals by electron
transfer. In this sense, the overall measured performance is determined
by the contribution from all competing mechanisms. Although the performance
of 3b in CH3CN/H2O and CH2Cl2/CH3OH mixtures are similar (entries 2 and
6, Table ), we focused
our efforts on the photooxidation in CH2Cl2/CH3OH solutions where the absorption of 3b is reasonable,
considering the solvability of aromatic and aliphaticsulfides in
these systems. Parallel experiments were also performed using FL as
the catalyst under the same reaction conditions for comparison. According
to the product yield, the performance of 3b is significantly
higher than that of FL (Table ).
Table 5
Photooxidation of Various Sulfides
with 3b and FL as Catalystsa
Reaction conditions: the 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol sulfides and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1). The
liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250 W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress of the reaction
was monitored by TLC analysis, and the product yields were determined
by 1H NMR spectra of the mixture at the end of the reaction.
Reaction conditions: the 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol sulfides and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1). The
liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250 W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress of the reaction
was monitored by TLC analysis, and the product yields were determined
by 1H NMR spectra of the mixture at the end of the reaction.According to the product yields,
the full conversion of most of
the substrates, including 4-chlorothioanisole, 4-bromothioanisole,
benzyl phenyl sulfide, dibenzyl sulfide, and so forth, can be reached
in less than 300 min (entries 1–5, Table ). In this sense, the performance of 3b is already comparable or even superior than other reported
catalysts, such as Rose Bengal,[20] riboflavin
and RFTA,[27] bromo-flavin derivatives,[33] and so forth, which require longer reaction
time or the introduction of promoters. We noticed that the conversion
of 4-nitrothioanisole is still low (19.2%) even when the reaction
time was elongated to 1770 min (entry 6, Table ) and the conversion is only 15.1% when FL
was used as the sensitizer. Nitro-aromaticcompounds are conventionally
used as the radical/spin trap to investigate reaction mechanisms.[20,42] This ultralow conversion suggests the photooxidation of 4-nitrothioanisole
with 3b may involve a radical-based intermediate, which
is inevitably quenched by the NO2-containing substrate.
We also noticed that the conversion of cyclopropyl phenyl sulfidecan be fully converted in 500 min when 3b was used, while
the conversion with FL as the sensitizer is only 28.6% (Table , entry 7). According to the
conversion, 3b is already superior over previously reported
bromo-FL that reached a conversion of 80.6% within 1025 min[33] and the Pt(II)complex that fully converts the
substrate in 2880 min.[43] Furthermore, only
peaks of the substrate and desired product were observed in the 1H NMR spectrum of the final reaction mixture (Figures S29–S30), providing direct evidence
for the high selectivity of photooxidation sensitized by 3b.We also performed experiments to highlight the ROSs and the
mechanism
for the photooxidation of sulfides sensitized by 3b (Table ). The conversion
of thioanisole is only 33.3% in pure CH2Cl2,
and this value increases to 100% in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1) mixture (entries 1 and 2, Table ). This is due to the fact that
protons within the protonic solvents may help to stabilize the reaction
intermediates and promote the formation of 1O2 as ROS and in turn accelerates the photooxidation.[30,42] The difference in conversion when CH2Cl2 and
CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1) were used
as solvents also suggests that 1O2can be assigned
as one of the ROS in the photooxidation of thioanisole.[27] Another well-recognized ROS is O2•– radical and its existence and a potential
role in the reaction system can be identified by the decrease of the
product yield with the addition of benzoquinone.[44] In the parallel experiment with 5 mol % benzoquinone, the
substrate conversion was significantly decreased to 15.6% while that
without benzoquinone is 100%, suggesting that O2•– radical is also one of the ROS (entry 3, Table ). We also noticed that even in the parallel
experiments without CH3OH and with 5 mol % benzoquinone,
the substrate conversion was not zero, implying that the mechanism
would be very complicated (entries 1–3, Table ).[45] Therefore,
the photooxidation with 3b as the sensitizer was also
investigated in CH3OH, deuterated CH3OH, and
with 0.5 mol % DABCO that was used as a selective scavenger for 1O2 (entries 4–6, Table ). Without any scavenger, the substrate conversion
was 70% in CH3OH (entry 4, Table ), and this value was further decreased to
48.4% when 0.5 mol % DABCO was added to identify for 1O2 (entry 5, Table ), proving the ROS role of 1O2 in this
photooxidation.[43] We also investigated
the photooxidation with deuterated CH3OH as the solvent,[27] as deuterated solvents may promote the reactions
with 1O2 as ROS. The substrate yield reached
100% in deuterated CH3OH as compared with the yield of
70% when CH3OH was used, confirming again the ROS role
of 1O2 (Table , entry 6). According to these evidences, we proposed
that both 1O2 and O2•– are formed as ROSs in the photooxidation of sulfides sensitized
by 3b.
Table 6
Photooxidation of
Thioanisole with 3b as Catalysta
entry
catalysts
solvents
scavengers
reaction time (min)
yield (%)
1
3b
CH2Cl2
none
300
33.3
2
3b
CH2Cl2/CH3OH
none
300
100.0
3
3b
CH2Cl2/CH3OH
5 mol % benzoquinone
300
15.6
4
3b
CH3OH
none
300
70.0
5
3b
CH3OH
0.5 mol % DABCO
300
48.4
6
3b
deuterated
CH3OH
none
300
100.0
Reaction conditions: the 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol thioanisole and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1) unless
specified. The liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250
W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress
of the reaction was monitored by TLC analysis, and the product yields
were determined by 1H NMR spectra of the mixture at the
end of the reaction.
Reaction conditions: the 3.0 mL
reaction mixture was formed by mixing 0.02 mmol thioanisole and catalyst
in CH2Cl2/CH3OH (v/v = 9:1) unless
specified. The liquid mixture was exposed to 35 W xenon lamp (250
W/m2) at 20 °C under continuous stirring. The progress
of the reaction was monitored by TLC analysis, and the product yields
were determined by 1H NMR spectra of the mixture at the
end of the reaction.
Conclusions
We investigated photophysical properties and the photooxidation
performance as single-atom-free sensitizers of AAs and compared with
those of FL and RFTA. Because of the difference in the framework structure
of AAS and FL and the introduction of the amide moiety, the absorption
of FL at ∼450 nm is blue-shifted to ∼380 nm and weakened
with ε decrease from 8.7 × 103 for FL to ∼6.8
×103 M–1 cm–1 for
AAs, but the absorption at ∼340 nm is red-shifted to ∼350
nm and enhanced by more than 50% with ε increases from 6.4 ×
103 for FL to ∼9.9 × 103 M–1 cm–1 in AAs. The ISC rate from the S1 to T1 is also enhanced significantly in these AA derivatives
while the fluorescence quantum yield decreases from ∼30 to
∼7% for FL and AAs, respectively, making the triplet excited
state lifetime and the singlet oxygen quantum yield of AAs to be at
least comparable to those of FL and RFTA. We examined the performance
of these organicchromophores in the photooxidation of sulfides to
afford sulfoxides. In accordance with the elongated triplet excited
state lifetime and enhanced triplet quantum yield, 2–5 fold
performance enhancements were observed for AAs in the photooxidation
of sulfides with respect to FL. In the mechanistic investigations,
both 1O2 and O2•– were observed as ROS. The findings highlight the potential superior
performance of AAs in photocatalysis, and we expect these would help
to rationalize the design of efficient organic photocatalysts.
Experimental
Section
Scheme briefs
the synthesis of AAs. The theoretical calculations were performed
with Gaussian 16[46] and MOMAP.[47−51] Detailed information on synthesis, characterization, and theoretical
calculations can be found in the Supporting Information.
Authors: Ewa Sikorska; Igor Khmelinskii; Marcin Hoffmann; Isabel F Machado; Luis F V Ferreira; Krzysztof Dobek; Jerzy Karolczak; Alina Krawczyk; Małgorzata Insińska-Rak; Marek Sikorski Journal: J Phys Chem A Date: 2005-12-29 Impact factor: 2.781
Authors: Maria Marchena; Michał Gil; Cristina Martín; Juan Angel Organero; Francisco Sanchez; Abderrazzak Douhal Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2011-02-18 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Kirill A Korvinson; George N Hargenrader; Jelena Stevanovic; Yun Xie; Jojo Joseph; Veselin Maslak; Christopher M Hadad; Ksenija D Glusac Journal: J Phys Chem A Date: 2016-09-07 Impact factor: 2.781
Authors: Tetiana Pavlovska; David Král Lesný; Eva Svobodová; Irena Hoskovcová; Nataliya Archipowa; Roger Jan Kutta; Radek Cibulka Journal: Chemistry Date: 2022-06-24 Impact factor: 5.020
Authors: Charlotte G Monsour; Cassandra M Decosto; Bliss J Tafolla-Aguirre; Luis A Morales; Matthias Selke Journal: Photochem Photobiol Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 3.421
Authors: Elena Cuéllar; Alberto Diez-Varga; Tomás Torroba; Pablo Domingo-Legarda; José Alemán; Silvia Cabrera; Jose M Martín-Alvarez; Daniel Miguel; Fernando Villafañe Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 5.165