Flexible metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) undergo structural transformations in response to physical and chemical stimuli. This is hard to control because of feedback between guest uptake and host structure change. We report a family of flexible MOFs based on derivatized amino acid linkers. Their porosity consists of a one-dimensional channel connected to three peripheral pockets. This network structure amplifies small local changes in linker conformation, which are strongly coupled to the guest packing in and the shape of the peripheral pockets, to afford large changes in the global pore geometry that can, for example, segment the pore into four isolated components. The synergy among pore volume, guest packing, and linker conformation that characterizes this family of structures can be determined by the amino acid side chain, because it is repositioned by linker torsion. The resulting control optimizes noncovalent interactions to differentiate the uptake and structure response of host-guest pairs with similar chemistries.
Flexible metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) undergo structural transformations in response to physical and chemical stimuli. This is hard to control because of feedback between guest uptake and host structure change. We report a family of flexible MOFs based on derivatized amino acid linkers. Their porosity consists of a one-dimensional channel connected to three peripheral pockets. This network structure amplifies small local changes in linker conformation, which are stronn class="Chemical">gly coupled to the guest packing in and the shape of the peripheral pockets, to afford large changes in the global pore geometry that can, for example, segment the pore into four isolated components. The synergy among pore volume, guest packing, and linker conformation that characterizes this family of structures can be determined by the amino acid side chain, because it is repositioned by linker torsion. The resulting control optimizes noncovalent interactions to differentiate the uptake and structure response of host-guest pairs with similar chemistries.
Flexible metal–organic
frameworks (MOFs) are a class of
crystalline porous materials formed by coordination bonds between
organic linkers and n class="Chemical">metal ions or clusters where the framework structure
changes upon external stimuli. Flexible MOFs can adapt their pore
shape and chemistry to suit process requirements in separation,[1−3] sensing,[4,5] storage,[6,7] and catalysis
applications.[8] These structural changes
occur through a variety of mechanisms, including the conformational
change of an organic linker,[9−11] a modification of the coordination
environment of the metal ions in the secondary building unit (SBU),[12,13] the hinge motion of coordinated carboxylate groups,[14−17] or the movement of interpenetrated networks relative to each other.[18,19] In contrast with rigid porous materials, porous hosts such as flexible
frameworks,[20] interpenetrated cages,[21] and synthetic receptors[22] can change their pore volume and shape when they interact with guests,
producing a feedback between guest uptake and host structure that
is difficult to control. Control of guest uptake by rigid materials
through chemical modification, for example, addition of functional
groups to the linkers in rigid MOFs, is well understood in terms of
the resulting fixed changes to pore shape[23] and guest interactions[24,25] and offers an opportunity
to direct the response of flexible systems.[26] The complex feedback in the flexible case requires consideration
of the host–guest system in understanding the observed structural
and chemical response.
One effective method for synthesizing
flexible porous materials
employs peptide-based linkers that can adopt several conformations
through the changes in torsion angles around their sp3 carbon
(Cα of the amino acids forming the peptide).[27−31] These porous hosts have conformational energy landscapes
with certain analogies to those of protein structures and perform
chemical functions in response to changes in their pore content.[31] However, the structural and compositional diversity
of these families of MOFs remains limited if only naturally occurring
peptide molecules are used as linkers. The coordination chemistry
of the terminal n class="Chemical">carboxylate and amino groups prevents the formation
of many well-known SBUs and restricts the number and nature of accessible
topologies.
To expand the linker–metal coordination chemistry
while
retaining conformational and side chain diversity, we have developed
a family of linkers (Xn class="Chemical">Pyr) where an amino acid (X) is coupled with
a pyrazole (Pyr) compound through an amide bond, forming molecules
which terminate in both carboxylic and pyrazole groups that each have
extensive framework-forming chemistry.[32−35] This preserves the conformational
space associated with oligopeptides, through the presence of the sp3 carbon, while the coordination modes of the terminal groups
facilitate the formation of a variety of SBUs. Chemical diversity
is also maintained, as linkers based on all amino acid residues are
potentially accessible. In biological systems, this diversity in functionalization
of amino acids determines the response of protein structures to their
chemical environment through torsional control of side chain position
and extended backbone structure.[36,37] A specific
example is the substitution of glycine (Gly) with alanine (Ala) in
α-helices, which stabilizes a folded structure over a fully
flexible denatured state[38−40] because Gly has higher conformational
entropy than Ala, while Ala increases the side chain–side chain
interactions that favor folded states.[41,42] The peptide-derived
XPyr linkers afford new isoreticular flexible MOFs, with the formula
ZnXPyr, on the basis of coordination chemistry distinct from that
available to peptides, and contain large one-dimensional pores with
a complex geometry where narrow pockets and wider channels coexist.
Linker conformational change both reconfigures the global pore shape
and locally relocates the amino acid derived side chain to recognize
chemically similar guests. The structural response of each framework
to guests is distinct, coupling their organization in the pockets
to the resulting pore volume and the overall number of guests taken
up.
Results and Discussion
Structure of ZnGlyPyr•(DMF)
H2GlyPyr
(Figure a), synthesized
via ann class="Chemical">amide coupling reaction involving a protected glycine moiety
(see section S2 in the Supporting Information, Figures S1–S9), was reacted solvothermally
with Zn(NO3)2·6H2O in N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) to give ZnGlyPyr•(DMF):
containing 1.2 DMF per formula unit (see section
S3 in the Supporting Information). Single crystal X-ray diffraction
(SCXRD) data collected at 100 K showed that ZnGlyPyr•(DMF)
crystallizes in trigonal space group R3c, with unit cell dimensions a = 28.7263 Å, c = 10.1348 Å, V = 7242.8 Å3. Removing the modeled DMF guests and calculating the accessible
pore volume gives a value of 4411 Å3 (60.9%). The
bulk phase purity of ZnGlyPyr•(DMF) was confirmed by powder
X-ray diffraction (PXRD) (Figure S12).
ZnGlyPyr•(DMF) is not soluble in common organic solvents such
as MeOH, benzene, and toluene (Figures S13–S15).
Figure 1
Linker conformation determining the nonuniform pore topology of
ZnGlyPyr•(DMF). (a) The linker H2GlyPyr and the
tetrahedral ZnO2N2 coordination environment
of the Zn(II) ions in the ZnGlyPyr framework. (b) The [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ helical rods (shaded light green) connected to the
bent ribbons (shaded orange) of kinked H-bonded (GlyPyr)2– linkers both running along the c axis. (c) Two
kinked mirror-image conformers, C1 and C2 of (GlyPyr)2– (φ = 87.3° and ψ = −145.6° for C1 and
φ = −87.3° and ψ = 145.6° for C2), arranged
in an antiparallel alternating manner along the c axis, forming infinite H-bonded ribbons, which connect each [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ chain to three other chains to form a honeycomb net.
The bend in the ribbons is defined by the angle ρ arising from
the linker conformation. (d) The channel running along the c axis of ZnGlyPyr•(DMF) molecules in the pore are
omitted for clarity. The accessible void can be divided into a central
channel (green) and three peripheral pockets (orange). Atom colors:
C, black; H, gray; O, red; N, blue; Zn, indigo.
Linker conformation determining the nonuniform pore topology of
ZnGlyPyr•(n class="Chemical">DMF). (a) The linker H2GlyPyr and the
tetrahedral ZnO2N2 coordination environment
of the Zn(II) ions in the ZnGlyPyr framework. (b) The [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ helical rods (shaded light green) connected to the
bent ribbons (shaded orange) of kinked H-bonded (GlyPyr)2– linkers both running along the c axis. (c) Two
kinked mirror-image conformers, C1 and C2 of (GlyPyr)2– (φ = 87.3° and ψ = −145.6° for C1 and
φ = −87.3° and ψ = 145.6° for C2), arranged
in an antiparallel alternating manner along the c axis, forming infinite H-bonded ribbons, which connect each [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ chain to three other chains to form a honeycomb net.
The bend in the ribbons is defined by the angle ρ arising from
the linker conformation. (d) The channel running along the c axis of ZnGlyPyr•(DMF) molecules in the pore are
omitted for clarity. The accessible void can be divided into a central
channel (green) and three peripheral pockets (orange). Atom colors:
C, black; H, gray; O, red; N, blue; Zn, indigo.
The pyrazole and n class="Chemical">carboxylic acid groups of the linker are both
deprotonated and coordinate to Zn(II) ions in tetrahedral ZnO2N2 units (Figure a). These tetrahedra are connected via both the pyrazolate
and carboxylate groups in μ2 bridging modes to form
infinite [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ helical rods, half left
handed and half right handed, which run along the crystallographic c axis (Figure b). Each helical [Zn(Pyr)(COO)]∞ rod is
connected to three opposite handed rods via infinite ribbons of NH···OC
H-bonded linkers, generating a honeycomb net (Figure c). The framework topology is etb(43,44) with a one-dimensional pore running parallel to the c axis defined by six rods and six ribbons. The (GlyPyr)2– linker adopts two nonsuperimposable kinked mirror-image
conformations (conformers 1 and 2, denoted C1 and C2, respectively,
in Figure ). These
conformers are accessed by opposite rotations about the N–Cα
and Cα–C bonds of the Gly unit (torsion angles φ
and ψ in Figure c) by 92.7° and 34.4°, respectively, from their equilibrium
values of 180° in the lowest energy conformation of the free
linker, at a torsional energy cost of 10.8 kJ/mol (Figure S17). The two (GlyPyr)2– conformers
are arranged antiparallel to each other along the pore direction (Figure b and Figure S18). This arrangement of kinked mirror-image
linkers imposes a bent configuration on the infinite ribbons which
protrude alternately in and out of a regular hexagon (Figure c). The trefoil-shaped pore
imposed by the linker conformation can be considered as a central
channel, which could hold an 8.2 Å diameter cylinder, connected
to three adjoining peripheral pockets, which could each fit a 5.4
Å cylinder (Figure d). The deviation of the pore shape from the regular hexagon is quantified
by the angle ρ of the bent ribbons, which is determined by the
linker conformation (ρ is defined in section S4 in the Supporting Information and Figures S19 and S20). The as-synthesized ZnGlyPyr•(DMF) has
a ρ value of 132.2°, a significant distortion from the
180° angle of a hexagonal pore constructed from straight linkers
in the free linker equilibrium conformation.
Isoreticular ZnAlaPyr•(DMF)
The narrowest part
of the trefoil-shaped pore of the ZnGlyPyr framework, referred to
hereafter as the pinch point, is located at the entrance connecting
the peripheral pocket to the central channel, where the n class="Chemical">glycine Cα
resides (Figure c).
As amino acid substituents will occupy this pinch point position,
they can be expected to control the structural and uptake response
to guests if an isoreticular series can be prepared. The contrasting
structure-determining roles of Gly and Ala in α-helix-based
proteins and the role of linker conformation in determining both the
pore shape and the side chain location in ZnGlyPyr motivated the synthesis
of ZnAlaPyr. l-H2AlaPyr (Figure a) was prepared through replacement of glycine
with l-alanine in the linker synthesis and was reacted with
Zn(NO3)2·6H2O and a small amount
of hydrochloric acid in DMF to produce ZnAlaPyr (see sections S5 and S6 in the Supporting Information, Figures S21–S30). The linker retained
its chirality after MOF formation, and ZnAlaPyr crystallized in the
lower symmetry space group R3. The (l-AlaPyr)2– linker adopts two conformations which are no longer
symmetry-related, unlike the Gly analogue, and are both present in
the asymmetric unit (Figure b,c). The as-made material ZnAlaPyr•(DMF) is isoreticular
to ZnGlyPyr•(DMF), with a unit cell volume of 7308 Å3 and a ρ value of 135.4°. The ZnXPyr framework
directs the Ala side chains into the channel space, reducing the overall
void volume (56.4% in ZnAlaPyr in comparison to 61.2% in ZnGlyPyr)
(Figure d and Figure S31). The opposing methyl groups on either
side of the pinch point now significantly reduce the shortest wall-to-wall
distance across the pore from 5.5 to 3.1 Å (Figure d and Figure S32; all interatomic distances are quoted with the van der
Waals (vdW) radii of the atoms subtracted).
Figure 2
Side chain variation
in ZnGlyPyr resulting in the synthesis of
isoreticular ZnAlaPyr•(DMF). (a) Structure of l-H2AlaPyr. (b) SCXRD structure of ZnAlaPyr•(DMF) showing
the two linker conformers of (l-AlaPyr)2– (colored as blue and light blue schematics, respectively) arranged
in an antiparallel fashion along the c axis. These
two (l-AlaPyr)2– conformers are not symmetry-related
(φ = 71.8° and ψ = −139.5° for conformer
1; φ = −91.1° and ψ = 138.2° for conformer
2). (c) View of the pore structure of ZnAlaPyr•(DMF) on the ab plane and its schematic representation with the two types
of linker conformers. (d) Schematic constructed from the left-hand
side of one pore of ZnGlyPyr (shaded red) and the right-hand side
of one pore of ZnAlaPyr (shaded blue), illustrating the narrowing
of the pinch point between the central channel and pockets produced
by the Ala methyl side chain. The C···C distance is
measured between the two closest C atoms across the pinch point (with
the vdW radii of the atoms taken into account) for each structure.
The solvent-accessible surface with probe radius 1.2 Å illustrates
the resulted change in pore size and shape by the methyl side chain.
Atom colors: Zn, indigo; C, gray; H, light gray; N, blue; O, red.
DMF molecules in the structures are omitted for clarity.
Side chain variation
in ZnGlyPyr resulting in the synthesis of
isoreticular n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr•(DMF). (a) Structure of l-H2AlaPyr. (b) SCXRD structure of ZnAlaPyr•(DMF) showing
the two linker conformers of (l-AlaPyr)2– (colored as blue and light blue schematics, respectively) arranged
in an antiparallel fashion along the c axis. These
two (l-AlaPyr)2– conformers are not symmetry-related
(φ = 71.8° and ψ = −139.5° for conformer
1; φ = −91.1° and ψ = 138.2° for conformer
2). (c) View of the pore structure of ZnAlaPyr•(DMF) on the ab plane and its schematic representation with the two types
of linker conformers. (d) Schematic constructed from the left-hand
side of one pore of ZnGlyPyr (shaded red) and the right-hand side
of one pore of ZnAlaPyr (shaded blue), illustrating the narrowing
of the pinch point between the central channel and pockets produced
by the Ala methyl side chain. The C···C distance is
measured between the two closest C atoms across the pinch point (with
the vdW radii of the atoms taken into account) for each structure.
The solvent-accessible surface with probe radius 1.2 Å illustrates
the resulted change in pore size and shape by the methyl side chain.
Atom colors: Zn, indigo; C, gray; H, light gray; N, blue; O, red.
DMF molecules in the structures are omitted for clarity.
Structural Flexibility of ZnGlyPyr and ZnAlaPyr
The
structural response of both frameworks was explored by exchanging
the DMF molecules in the pores of the as-made materials with a library
of 17 different liquid guests (see section S7 in the Supporting Information), giving the unit cell dimensions
from PXRD after each exchange. Data were also obtained for the guest-free
frameworks by exchanging n class="Chemical">DMF with methanol and removing the guests
by heating at 373 K under vacuum (see section S10 in the Supporting Information). To select the library of
guests, 18 descriptors based on molecular size, shape, and intermolecular
interactions were defined and calculated for 2982 known organic compounds
with boiling points above 39 °C. Principal component analysis
was then used to combine these descriptors into two generic orthogonal
components (PC1 and PC2), providing a representation of the maximum
separation of potential liquid guests in chemical space in two dimensions
(Figure a). The selection
of guests covers a broad range of this chemical space and allows the
comparison of the structural response for each material with guests
that have either very different (e.g., benzene vs MeOH) or very similar
(e.g., benzene vs toluene) PC1 and PC2 values. These results are shown
in Figure b (Tables S2 and S3), which displays the range of
unit cell volumes obtained for all guests tested. ZnGlyPyr has a large
volume range of 6363–7958 Å3, while ZnAlaPyr
shows a much narrower range of 7189–7778 Å3. The guest-free structure of ZnGlyPyr lies between the volume extrema
at 7285 Å3, which suggests that guests can trigger
either an expansion or a contraction of the structure on the basis
of their interactions with the framework and their packing inside
the pore. ZnAlaPyr, meanwhile, has a guest-free structure with a volume
lower than all those of guest-loaded structures at 6950 Å3.
Figure 3
Structural response of ZnXPyr (X = Gly, Ala) to a library of guests.
(a) The two-dimensional map of chemical space constructed using the
principal components PC1 and PC2. The map guided the selection of
molecules in the guest library used to investigate structural flexibility.
(b) Comparison of the refined PXRD unit cell volumes of ZnGlyPyr (red)
and ZnAlaPyr (blue) when they contain different liquid guests. The
unit cell volume for both desolvated structures is also given (lightly
shaded). The horizontal dashed lines in red and blue indicate the
volume extrema observed for ZnGlyPyr and ZnAlaPyr, respectively.
Structural response of ZnXPyr (X = n class="Chemical">Gly, Ala) to a library of guests.
(a) The two-dimensional map of chemical space constructed using the
principal components PC1 and PC2. The map guided the selection of
molecules in the guest library used to investigate structural flexibility.
(b) Comparison of the refined PXRD unit cell volumes of ZnGlyPyr (red)
and ZnAlaPyr (blue) when they contain different liquid guests. The
unit cell volume for both desolvated structures is also given (lightly
shaded). The horizontal dashed lines in red and blue indicate the
volume extrema observed for ZnGlyPyr and ZnAlaPyr, respectively.
The refinement of SCXRD data collected from the
frameworks exposed
to the different guests shows that the frameworks retain their connectivity
and R3c or R3 symmetry
in all cases (Tables S7 and S8). They respond
to the guests by modifying both the volume and shape (Figures S40 and S41) of their pores through conformational
change of the linker (Figure a), which determines the bend of the ribbons (Figure b,c) and the degree of distortion
from a regular hexagon: ρ ranges from 116.9° to 137.4°
(Figure S42). These changes modify the
dimensions of the central channel (6.2 to 9.2 Å) and peripheral
pocket (4.2 to 6.0 Å). The pore size changes are larger than
those seen in highly flexible peptide MOFs (3 Å in ZnGlyPyr in
comparison to 1.6 Å inZnGGH, GGH = glycine–glycine-l-histidine)[31] but are driven by
small adjustments in the torsion angles (ω(C–Namide
bond), 178.6° to 193.3°; φ, 79.6° to 92.7°;
ψ, −140.6° to −146.7°), whereas torsion
angles in ZnGGH change by 150°. This arises from the etb topology, where the local changes in the conformation
at each (GlyPyr)2– linker are globally amplified
by the 6-fold geometry of the pore and the sensitivity of the pore
volume and shape to even a small linker conformational change.
Figure 4
Variation of
linker conformation in ZnGlyPyr with guests. (a) Overlay
showing the changing conformation of the (GlyPyr)2– linkers in the ZnGlyPyr structures, based on SCXRD structures of
ZnGlyPyr containing different liquid guests. This change in linker
conformation produces an extensive transformation in pore size and
shape from a contracted pore in ZnGlyPyr•(o-Xylene) to the most expanded form in ZnGlyPyr•(Benzene),
as illustrated by the solvent-accessible voids. (b) Variation of bend
of the H-bonded ribbons (ρ) with linker torsion φ for
different liquid guests. (c) Variation of unit cell volume with ρ
in these structures (Table S10).
Variation of
linker conformation in ZnGlyPyr with guests. (a) Overlay
showing the changing conformation of the n class="Chemical">(GlyPyr)2– linkers in the ZnGlyPyr structures, based on SCXRD structures of
ZnGlyPyr containing different liquid guests. This change in linker
conformation produces an extensive transformation in pore size and
shape from a contracted pore in ZnGlyPyr•(o-Xylene) to the most expanded form in ZnGlyPyr•(Benzene),
as illustrated by the solvent-accessible voids. (b) Variation of bend
of the H-bonded ribbons (ρ) with linker torsion φ for
different liquid guests. (c) Variation of unit cell volume with ρ
in these structures (Table S10).
Aromatic guests produce the greatest unit cell
volume range for
ZnGlyPyr, with both unusually large (n class="Chemical">benzene) and unusually small
(all other aromatics) volumes in comparison to other guests. The volumes
observed for ZnAlaPyr with these aromatic guests lie in a much narrower
range, which is also in line with the ZnAlaPyr structures observed
for all other liquid guests and the absence of contraction below the
guest-free volume, in contrast to ZnGlyPyr (Figure b). The volume change and guest uptake in
ZnGlyPyr, and its contrast with ZnAlaPyr for a particular guest, do
not however simply relate to guest chemistry, because the feedback
between guest uptake and host structure is determined by the host–guest
system in each case. This can be understood by considering the refined
SCXRD structures of both hosts with toluene and benzene.
Toluene
inn class="Chemical">ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene) sits in a narrow peripheral
pocket (Figure a)
formed by a large bend (ρ = 118.0°) in the H-bonded ribbons
produced by a torsional distortion of the linker that is greater than
with nonaromatic guests. This results in pronounced shrinkage of the
unit cell volume to 6539 Å3 (PXRD) from 7285 Å3 of the guest-free structure. The Cα···Cp (the carbon on the pyrazolate ring connecting to the amide
group) distance at the pinch point becomes 3.7 Å, just wide enough
to accommodate the toluene (Figure a inset and Figure S43).
The plane of the aromatic ring is rotated 20° from parallel to
the channel direction, forming π–π interactions
with the pyrazolate rings of the framework on one side and C–H
to π interactions with the linker Cα on the other. The
methyl groups in ZnAlaPyr, which are located at the pinch point, prevent
ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene) from displaying the same response. The hypothetical
structure of ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene) (Figure b), modeled at the same unit cell volume
as for ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene), shows that the CMe···Cp distance at the pinch point is 3.0 Å, which is insufficient
for a toluene molecule. In order to accommodate the guests, the observed
unit cell volume of ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene) (Figure c) is therefore significantly expanded to
7354 Å3 by a change in ρ to 128.9° that
widens the central channel and the pocket simultaneously. The CMe···Cp distance at the pinch point
becomes 4.1 Å and allows the toluene to rotate around the channel
direction (c axis) by 60° in comparison to ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene),
affording a T-shaped π–π interaction with two adjacent
pyrazolate rings (the toluene aromatic ring plane remains almost parallel
to the channel direction, rotated by 11° from it, Figure S52). Vapor sorption shows that this expansion
affords a larger toluene uptake by ZnAlaPyr (40.4 wt %) than by ZnGlyPyr
(34.2 wt %) (Figure e). The methyl side chain, rather than reducing guest uptake through
simple volume exclusion, is relocated to allow the guest to occupy
its optimal position in the pocket. This requires a conformational
change in the linker that, while it is driven by the local interaction
with the guest, necessarily alters the global pore volume as both
the pockets and the central channel expand.
Figure 5
Linker conformation and
side chain–guest interaction control
structural response of ZnXPyr (X = Gly, Ala). (a) Refined SCXRD structure,
guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and solvent-accessible
void (below and right) for ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene). Only the guest
molecules in one pocket of the channel are shown for clarity. (b)
DFT-minimized structure of ZnAlaPyr calculated at a fixed unit cell
volume of 6200 Å3. This is close to the unit cell
volume of ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene) (6202 Å3) and
therefore provides an approximation to the structure of ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene)
were it to adopt the same structure as its Gly analogue. The size
of one toluene molecule is shown on the bottom right to demonstrate
that this structure would be unable to fit a toluene molecule in the
peripheral pocket because of the added side chain methyl group. (c)
SCXRD structure, guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and
solvent-accessible surface (below and right) for the experimentally
observed ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene) structure. (d) Single-crystal X-ray
structure, guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and solvent-accessible
surface (bottom and right) for ZnGlyPyr•(Benzene). Atom colors:
C, gray; H, light gray; N, blue; O, red; Zn, indigo. (e) Toluene vapor
sorption isotherms for ZnGlyPyr (red) and ZnAlaPyr (blue) at 293 K.
(f) Benzene vapor sorption isotherms for ZnGlyPyr (red) and ZnAlaPyr
(blue) at 293 K.
Linker conformation and
side chain–guest interaction control
structural response of ZnXPyr (X = n class="Chemical">Gly, Ala). (a) Refined SCXRD structure,
guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and solvent-accessible
void (below and right) for ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene). Only the guest
molecules in one pocket of the channel are shown for clarity. (b)
DFT-minimized structure of ZnAlaPyr calculated at a fixed unit cell
volume of 6200 Å3. This is close to the unit cell
volume of ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene) (6202 Å3) and
therefore provides an approximation to the structure of ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene)
were it to adopt the same structure as its Gly analogue. The size
of one toluene molecule is shown on the bottom right to demonstrate
that this structure would be unable to fit a toluene molecule in the
peripheral pocket because of the added side chain methyl group. (c)
SCXRD structure, guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and
solvent-accessible surface (below and right) for the experimentally
observed ZnAlaPyr•(Toluene) structure. (d) Single-crystal X-ray
structure, guest packing in one peripheral pocket (inset), and solvent-accessible
surface (bottom and right) for ZnGlyPyr•(Benzene). Atom colors:
C, gray; H, light gray; N, blue; O, red; Zn, indigo. (e) Toluene vapor
sorption isotherms for ZnGlyPyr (red) and ZnAlaPyr (blue) at 293 K.
(f) Benzene vapor sorption isotherms for ZnGlyPyr (red) and ZnAlaPyr
(blue) at 293 K.
ZnGlyPyr•(n class="Chemical">Benzene)
(Figure d) shows the
largest unit cell volume of all the structures
studied (7958 Å3, ρ = 137.4°), resulting
from a very wide peripheral pocket where the Cα···Cp distance increases to 6.2 Å. This expanded pocket is
accessed by the most extended linker conformation observed, which
allows several different orientations of the benzene rings. Three
different benzene environments are observed crystallographically (Figure d inset), including
one where the plane of the aromatic ring is perpendicular to the channel
direction (orange molecule in Figure d). In contrast to the lower volume aromatic structures
discussed above, ZnGlyPyr organizes the benzene guests into a more
extended unit through host–guest–guest interactions
directly connected to the linker conformation. π–π
interactions between a pyrazolate ring on the walls of the framework
and one of the benzene sites (green in Figure d) locate this first molecule within the
peripheral pocket. T-shaped π–π interactions with
this site then localize the other two guest sites that extend toward
the central channel (orange and cyan in Figure d). Such central channel species are disordered
in the other refined structures, reflecting the more extensive dynamic
possibilities in that less constrained part of the structure, and
emphasize the specific extended intermolecular interactions that produce
this commensurate packing[45,46] of the benzene guests
in ZnGlyPyr. The extra methyl group in ZnAlaPyr would require a more
significant expansion of the pore (predicted volume ∼8300 Å3) to accommodate these benzene sites. This is disfavored because
it would distort the metal–linker binding (see section S13 in the Supporting Information); thus,
ZnAlaPyr adopts a lower volume structure with benzene (7370 Å3, ρ = 130.2°) very similar to that found for toluene
and exhibits lower (40.0 wt %) benzene uptake than ZnGlyPyr (54.3
wt %) (Figure f).
The adsorption of benzene vapors inn class="Chemical">ZnGlyPyr shows a two-step feature,
indicating a phase transition process. In situ PXRD
experiments were conducted to track the structural changes during
this sorption process (see section S14 in
the Supporting Information). The unit cell refinement against the
PXRD patterns at different benzene loadings confirmed the structural
transformations from the guest-free structure with unit cell volume
7241 Å3 to a small-volume phase (6468 Å3) at P/P0 = 0.77 and
then to a large-volume phase (7920 Å3) at P/P0 = 1. Rietveld refinement
of the structure model at P/P0 = 0.77 and in situ SCXRD desolvation experiments
of ZnGlyPyr•(Benzene) (see section S10 in the Supporting Information) revealed that the partially loaded
phase with benzene has the same structure feature as ZnGlyPyr•(Toluene),
where the primary adsorption site lies in the same position as toluene
in the pocket of the trefoil-shaped pore (Figure S57). This further confirms that ZnGlyPyr can adapt its pore
shape and geometry when the guest loading is varied.
The coupling
of the trefoil-shaped pore with side chain chemistry
in the ZnXPyr frameworks induces complex guest responses realized
by modifying the torsional state of the linkers. The arrangement of
guests in the peripheral pockets of the framework determines the accessible
pore volume and total guest uptake by locally defining the optimal
linker conformation. The interaction of guests with both the side
chain and the rest of the pore surface chemistry gives extreme sensitivity
of response to the host–guest system. Uptake of n class="Chemical">toluene by
ZnAlaPyr is thus higher than by ZnGlyPyr because a guest interaction
with the methyl side chain drives the overall pore expansion via changes
in linker torsions. ZnAlaPyr, however, adsorbs considerably less benzene
than ZnGlyPyr because the methyl side chain would require an unfavorable
conformational change to accommodate the specific benzene packing
seen for ZnGlyPyr. The distinct packing of benzene in ZnGlyPyr contrasts
with that of all the other aromatics studied and reflects its specific
match to a linker conformation that both optimizes local contact to
the pore surface in the pocket and the extensive guest organization
further into the central channel via the now-expanded pinch point.
This is not observed for larger aromatics in ZnGlyPyr or for any guests
in ZnAlaPyr, reflecting the decisive role of a host–guest chemical
match within the pockets of the trefoil-shaped pores.
CO2 Adsorption and In Situ PXRD
Studies
Further differences in the behavior of ZnGlyPyr and
n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr were observed upon the adsorption and desorption of CO2 at 195 K. While both materials show similar saturated uptakes,
50.7 and 46.5 wt %, respectively, and display two-step adsorption
isotherms (Figure a,b), the pressure of CO2 at which the second step occurs
is significantly different (40 mbar vs 200 mbar, respectively), and
the final removal of CO2 results in two completely different
guest-free structures. This behavior was monitored in situ using PXRD (see section S16 in the Supporting
Information): unit cell volumes indicating the structural changes
are shown in Figure c,d and Tables S13 and S14. At low loadings
of CO2 (20–40 mbar, stage B in Figure c,d), ZnGlyPyr and ZnAlaPyr
shrank to volumes of 5279.5 and 5106.5 Å3, respectively,
significantly smaller than those of the original desolvated materials
(stage A, 7285/6950 Å3) or any observed with liquid
guests (6363–7958 Å3). Both frameworks then
expanded after exposure to CO2pressures above the gate
pressure observed in each isotherm (stage C; 6119 Å3 for ZnGlyPyr at 100 mbar and 6766 Å3 for ZnAlaPyr
at 300 mbar). During desorption, both materials showed a transition
to small-volume structures (stage D: 5388.1 Å3 for
ZnGlyPyr at 25 mbar and 5106.8 Å3 for ZnAlaPyr at
20 mbar), with a hysteresis in structure change similar to that in
the adsorption–desorption isotherm. Exposing the samples to
high vacuum, 10–5 mbar, at 195 K (stage E) was insufficient
to remove all CO2 from the pores; therefore at the end
of each experiment the temperature was raised to 298 K (stage F) under
high vacuum to complete CO2 removal (Figures S59 and S60). At this point, the most significant
divergence in the structural behavior of the two frameworks was observed.
For ZnGlyPyr, the framework expands to the volume of the initial desolvated
material (stage F, Figure c), while the removal of CO2 from ZnAlaPyr leaves
the framework highly contracted in a new guest-free phase (stage F, Figure d) of much smaller
volume (5059 Å3) in comparison to that accessed by
desolvating structures containing liquid guests (6950 Å3). This new small-volume ZnAlaPyr guest-free phase was not converted
back to the original guest-free structure by heating at 450 K (Figure S62).
Figure 6
Sorption of CO2 by ZnXPyr (X
= Gly, Ala) leading to
a new guest-free structure for X = Ala. (a) CO2 adsorption–desorption
isotherm for ZnGlyPyr (red spheres) at 195 K up to 1 bar. (b) CO2 adsorption–desorption isotherm for ZnAlaPyr (blue
triangles) at 195 K up to 1 bar. Solid markers denote adsorption and
open markers desorption. Insets: isotherms plotted on a log10 scale. (c) Unit cell volumes of ZnGlyPyr (red spheres) obtained
from Pawley refinements[47] based on in situ PXRD data as a function of CO2 pressure.
(d) Unit cell volumes of ZnAlaPyr (blue triangles) obtained from Pawley
refinements based on in situ PXRD data as a function
of CO2 pressure. Solid markers denote adsorption and open
markers desorption. Symbols A–F indicate the different stages
of ZnXPyr during adsorption/desorption of CO2.
Sorption of CO2 by n class="Chemical">ZnXPyr (X
= Gly, Ala) leading to
a new guest-free structure for X = Ala. (a) CO2 adsorption–desorption
isotherm for ZnGlyPyr (red spheres) at 195 K up to 1 bar. (b) CO2 adsorption–desorption isotherm for ZnAlaPyr (blue
triangles) at 195 K up to 1 bar. Solid markers denote adsorption and
open markers desorption. Insets: isotherms plotted on a log10 scale. (c) Unit cell volumes of ZnGlyPyr (red spheres) obtained
from Pawley refinements[47] based on in situ PXRD data as a function of CO2 pressure.
(d) Unit cell volumes of ZnAlaPyr (blue triangles) obtained from Pawley
refinements based on in situ PXRD data as a function
of CO2 pressure. Solid markers denote adsorption and open
markers desorption. Symbols A–F indicate the different stages
of ZnXPyr during adsorption/desorption of CO2.
To understand this behavior, complete structural models for
ZnGlyPyr
and n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr at low CO2 loadings were obtained by Rietveld
refinement[48] (Figure a,b and Figures S63 and S67). CO2 molecules were modeled with partial occupancies
in both frameworks, equally distributed between the central channel
and each peripheral pocket (Figures S64 and S70). Both compounds retained the same etb framework
topology but had pore shapes highly distorted from a regular hexagon
(ρ at 104.5° and 103.3°, respectively). These structures
were accessed by the (GlyPyr)2– and (AlaPyr)2– linkers becoming more kinked by change in the ω
torsion about the amide bond by 20° and 16°, respectively,
in comparison to their starting desolvated structures. In contrast
to the liquid guest-containing structures, the two components of the
porosity are now isolated from each other, as there are boundaries
between the central channel and the three pockets that the contained
CO2 guests cannot cross, shown by the solvent-accessible
surfaces in Figure b. This segments the original single-pore geometry into four isolated
components by a linker conformation change. Analysis of all MOF entries
in the Cambridge Structural Database (see section S17 in the Supporting Information) suggests such a segmentation
of the pore in response to changes in guests has not been previously
observed. This segmentation of the pore demonstrates that the linker
conformation is strongly coupled to the pore geometry (volume, shape,
and connectivity) by the network structure and driven by the fit between
the guests in the pocket and the shape of that pocket.
Figure 7
Response of ZnXPyr to
removal of CO2. Calculated E–V curves and the structures of
ZnXPyr (X = Gly, Ala) with and without CO2. (a) The structures
of ZnGlyPyr at a low pressure of CO2 (P = 40 mbar, obtained from Rietveld refinements against in
situ PXRD patterns) and after removal of CO2.
The composition given below the CO2 structure is the refined
value from the diffraction data at 40 mbar. For comparison, the composition
at the same pressure obtained from gravimetric gas adsorption is ZnGlyPyr·1.49CO2. The C···C distance is measured between the
two closest C atoms across the pinch point. (b) The structures of
ZnAlaPyr at a low pressure of CO2 (P =
20 mbar) and after removal of CO2, obtained from Rietveld
refinements against in situ PXRD patterns. The composition
given below the CO2 structure is the refined value from
the diffraction data at 20 mbar. For comparison, the composition at
the same pressure obtained from gravimetric gas adsorption is ZnAlaPyr·1.19CO2. The C···C distance is measured between the
two closest methyl groups of the Ala moieties across the pinch point.
In both (a) and (b) the solvent-accessible surfaces, calculated without
guests, are shown below and to the right of each pore. The inset shows
the interactions across one peripheral pocket in a space-filling representation.
(c) Energy calculated using DFT for the relaxed framework structures
of ZnGlyPyr (red circles) and ZnAlaPyr (blue triangles) sampled at
differing unit cell volumes including vdW interactions. The arrows
indicate the unit cell volumes observed experimentally at a low pressure
of CO2 and after full removal of CO2 at 298
K from the two frameworks. (d) The two contributions to the total
energy shown in (c) for ZnGlyPyr (red circles) and ZnAlaPyr (blue
triangles)—interactions excluding vdW (solid lines) and the
vdW components (dashed lines).
Response of ZnXPyr to
removal of n class="Chemical">CO2. Calculated E–V curves and the structures of
ZnXPyr (X = Gly, Ala) with and without CO2. (a) The structures
of ZnGlyPyr at a low pressure of CO2 (P = 40 mbar, obtained from Rietveld refinements against in
situ PXRD patterns) and after removal of CO2.
The composition given below the CO2 structure is the refined
value from the diffraction data at 40 mbar. For comparison, the composition
at the same pressure obtained from gravimetric gas adsorption is ZnGlyPyr·1.49CO2. The C···C distance is measured between the
two closest C atoms across the pinch point. (b) The structures of
ZnAlaPyr at a low pressure of CO2 (P =
20 mbar) and after removal of CO2, obtained from Rietveld
refinements against in situ PXRD patterns. The composition
given below the CO2 structure is the refined value from
the diffraction data at 20 mbar. For comparison, the composition at
the same pressure obtained from gravimetric gas adsorption is ZnAlaPyr·1.19CO2. The C···C distance is measured between the
two closest methyl groups of the Ala moieties across the pinch point.
In both (a) and (b) the solvent-accessible surfaces, calculated without
guests, are shown below and to the right of each pore. The inset shows
the interactions across one peripheral pocket in a space-filling representation.
(c) Energy calculated using DFT for the relaxed framework structures
of ZnGlyPyr (red circles) and ZnAlaPyr (blue triangles) sampled at
differing unit cell volumes including vdW interactions. The arrows
indicate the unit cell volumes observed experimentally at a low pressure
of CO2 and after full removal of CO2 at 298
K from the two frameworks. (d) The two contributions to the total
energy shown in (c) for ZnGlyPyr (red circles) and ZnAlaPyr (blue
triangles)—interactions excluding vdW (solid lines) and the
vdW components (dashed lines).
Refinement of the structure of the new small-volume, guest-free
ZnAlaPyr phase showed that the segmented structure is retained, with
further shrinkage of the pores in comparison to the n class="Chemical">CO2-loaded material, resulting in the smallest central channel (2.5
Å) and narrowest peripheral pockets (1.2 Å) observed. There
are short CMe···CMe contacts
of 0.5 Å (with the vdW radii of the atoms taken into account)
between the two closest Me groups at the pinch point, accessed via
highly bent ribbons with a ρ value of 104.4°. This small-volume
guest-free phase of ZnAlaPyr behaves very similarly to the original
desolvated ZnAlaPyr in CO2 sorption at 195 K, as shown
by the isotherm collected using this new phase as the starting material
(Figure S73). Interestingly, rapid removal
of CO2 from the material with a high CO2 loading
at 1000 mbar and 195 K resulted in a sample that contains both large-
and small-volume structures (Figure S74). The small-volume phase was transformed to the previously described
solvated phases ZnAlaPyr·MeOH and ZnAlaPyr•(Benzene) by
immersing the sample in MeOH and benzene, respectively (Figure S75). After desolvation of both solvated
samples at 100 °C for 1 h, the original large-volume guest-free
structure was obtained.
Computational Analysis of Guest-Free ZnGlyPyr
and ZnAlaPyr
The observed pore segmentation of both materials
upon CO2 sorption and the resulting new small-volume guest-free
structure
unique to n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr can be further understood with Density Functional
Theory (DFT) calculations of the energy of the guest-free frameworks
at different unit cell volumes (see section S18 in the Supporting Information). The resulting energy–unit
cell volume (E–V) curves
(Figure c) and the
competition between the two constituent energy contributions, the
elastic deformation of the framework, and the attractive vdW interactions
(solid and dashed lines, respectively, in Figure d) reveal a clear difference between the
two materials. ZnGlyPyr (red circles) has a global minimum at V = 7167 Å3, corresponding well to the experimentally
observed desolvated material (V = 7285 Å3 at 298 K), and a second higher energy minimum at V = 4237 Å3, suggesting a potential, but
not experimentally observed, highly contracted guest-free material
(closed form with no guests present). In contrast, ZnAlaPyr (blue
triangles) shows two minima of almost equal energy at 6799 and 4961
Å3. They correspond to the experimentally observed
guest-free structures at 6950 Å3 (after removal of
MeOH at 298 K) and 5059 Å3 (after removal of CO2 at 298 K). Thus, different guest molecules permit navigation
of the energy landscape of ZnAlaPyr to drive the material into one
of the two structures that are stable upon guest removal.
The E–V curves for the guest-free structures
allow a rationalization of the differences between the ZnGlyPyr and
n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr frameworks during removal of CO2. In both materials,
CO2–host interactions overcome linker conformational
energy penalties to afford cell volumes considerably smaller than
those seen for liquid guests (Figure ), forming a distinct set of structures where the peripheral
pockets are isolated from the central channel to form a four-component
pore topology as they encapsulate the CO2 guests (Figure ). When CO2 is removed from the pores of the two materials, each framework follows
the E–V curve downhill toward
the nearest local energy minimum (Figure c). Guest-free ZnGlyPyr cannot be stabilized
with the linker in the highly kinked conformation due to the torsional
strain and relaxes to the large volume minimum, corresponding to the
single-component pore desolvated structure also formed by removal
of the larger guests (Figure a). Conversely, ZnAlaPyr accesses the small-volume guest-free
form with four isolated pore components (Figure b) very close in volume to the CO2-containing start point because the Ala side chains produce stabilizing
attractive Me···Me vdW interactions that overcome the
higher linker torsional energy required to place them in these positions.
Conclusion
The ZnXPyr family of flexible MOFs derived from
the amino acid
residues X = n class="Chemical">Gly, Ala have an unusual trefoil-shaped porosity where
a pinch point connects a central channel to three peripheral pockets.
The pockets restructure through a linker conformational adjustment
to both fit and be fitted by the guest packing: e.g., encapsulating
CO2 in a segmented porosity that arises from an extremely
strained linker torsional state. This coupling of the local linker
conformation, global pore geometry, and guest packing determines the
ZnXPyr guest uptake and host structure response. The contrast in host
volume change of and guest uptake by ZnGlyPyr between benzene and
toluene shows how the host–guest chemistry precisely controls
the response of the whole system.
The feedback among the pore
structure, linker conformation, and
guest packing also allows strong side chain control of the host response
to the pore species. For example, the second guest-free structure
observed only in ZnAlaPyr is stabilized by methyl–methyl interactions
and n class="Chemical">ZnAlaPyr adsorbs more toluene than ZnGlyPyr, but less benzene.
This side chain regulation of host–guest systems governed by
single bond rotations has analogies in proteins, such as the contrast
between the structure-forming role of Ala in α-helices and the
diverse structural response associated with Gly. This indicates an
opportunity to construct flexible frameworks that build in strong
coupling of the guest and host from a synergy between the linker conformational
change and pore reconfiguration to direct function. This can exploit
side chain chemistries that span the diversity accessible to proteins
to maximize control.
Authors: Sihai Yang; Xiang Lin; William Lewis; Mikhail Suyetin; Elena Bichoutskaia; Julia E Parker; Chiu C Tang; David R Allan; Pierre J Rizkallah; Peter Hubberstey; Neil R Champness; K Mark Thomas; Alexander J Blake; Martin Schröder Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2012-06-03 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: J Rabone; Y-F Yue; S Y Chong; K C Stylianou; J Bacsa; D Bradshaw; G R Darling; N G Berry; Y Z Khimyak; A Y Ganin; P Wiper; J B Claridge; M J Rosseinsky Journal: Science Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Alexandros P Katsoulidis; Dmytro Antypov; George F S Whitehead; Elliot J Carrington; Dave J Adams; Neil G Berry; George R Darling; Matthew S Dyer; Matthew J Rosseinsky Journal: Nature Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: C Martí-Gastaldo; D Antypov; J E Warren; M E Briggs; P A Chater; P V Wiper; G J Miller; Y Z Khimyak; G R Darling; N G Berry; M J Rosseinsky Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2014-02-23 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Yu Chen; Sarah Guerin; Hui Yuan; Joseph O'Donnell; Bin Xue; Pierre-Andre Cazade; Ehtsham Ul Haq; Linda J W Shimon; Sigal Rencus-Lazar; Syed A M Tofail; Yi Cao; Damien Thompson; Rusen Yang; Ehud Gazit Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 15.419