In past studies, spin selective transport was observed in polymers and supramolecular structures that are based on homochiral building blocks possessing stereocenters. Here we address the question to what extent chiral building blocks are required for observing the chiral induced spin selectivity (CISS) effect. We demonstrate the CISS effect in supramolecular polymers exclusively containing achiral monomers, where the supramolecular chirality was induced by chiral solvents that were removed from the fibers before measuring. Spin-selective transport was observed for electrons transmitted perpendicular to the fibers' long axis. The spin polarization correlates with the intensity of the CD spectra of the polymers, indicating that the effect is nonlocal. It is found that the spin polarization increases with the samples' thickness and the thickness dependence is the result of at least two mechanisms: the first is the CISS effect, and the second reduces the spin polarization due to scattering. Temperature dependence studies provide the first support for theoretical work that suggested that phonons may contribute to the spin polarization.
In past studies, spin selective transport was observed in polymers and supramolecular structures that are based on homochiral building blocks possessing stereocenters. Here we address the question to what extent chiral building blocks are required for observing the chiral induced spin selectivity (CISS) effect. We demonstrate the CISS effect in supramolecular polymers exclusively containing achiral monomers, where the supramolecular chirality was induced by chiral solvents that were removed from the fibers before measuring. Spin-selective transport was observed for electrons transmitted perpendicular to the fibers' long axis. The spin polarization correlates with the intensity of the CD spectra of the polymers, indicating that the effect is nonlocal. It is found that the spin polarization increases with the samples' thickness and the thickness dependence is the result of at least two mechanisms: the first is the CISS effect, and the second reduces the spin polarization due to scattering. Temperature dependence studies provide the first support for theoretical work that suggested that phonons may contribute to the spin polarization.
In recent years, it
was established that electron transport through
homochiral molecules depends on the electron spin. This phenomenon,
named Chiral Induced Spin Selectivity (CISS) effect, means that chiral
molecules can serve as efficient spin filters.[1] During the past years, the CISS effect has been explored in biomolecules
like DNA,[2] oligopeptides,[3] proteins,[4] polymers,[5] as well as in chiral perovskites,[6−8] chiral supramolecular structures,[9] and
other molecules. In all cases, the materials are based on chiral building
blocks with specific configurations at the stereocenters and exciting
results were obtained with chiral supramolecular polymers.In
supramolecular polymerization processes of chiral molecules,
the chiral information on the monomer is often translated to the secondary
structural motif of the supramolecular polymer.[10] The formation of one-dimensional, helical polymers is one
of the commonly found motifs.[11−15] Depending on the enantiomer of the monomer used and its enantiomeric
excess, the polymers usually assemble with either an excess of right-
(P) or left-handed (M) helical screw
sense. With achiral monomers, a racemic mixture of P- and M-helices is observed.[10,12] However, next to chiral monomers, supramolecular (homo)chirality
has also been induced by other external stimuli such as mechanical
stress,[16−21] illumination with circularly polarized light,[22−25] or chiral solvents.[12,26−28] In cooperative systems,[29] through which small energy differences accumulate into large effects,
minor differences in solvation energy between P and M helical aggregates in chiral solvents can drive the supramolecular
aggregate of achiral monomers to favor one helicity over the other.[27] The secondary structural motif of the supramolecular
polymer can adapt opposite helicity depending on the enantiomer of
the chiral solvent used.[12,26] Moreover, with kinetically
stable supramolecular polymers, the chiral solvent can be removed,
while the preferred helicity remains yielding a chiral superstructure
without any chiral building block. Similar effects of the transfer
of asymmetry by chiral solvents have been exploited to bias the secondary
structural motif of nanotubes[30] and polymers,[31,32] or to enrich the enantiomeric excess in asymmetric synthesis.[33] These recent findings allow discovering whether
spin selection can be obtained solely due to chiral stacking of otherwise
achiral building blocks.There are numerous methods for monitoring
spin selective transport
through molecules; we rely mainly on magnetic-conductive atomic force
microscopy (mc-AFM).[34] The spin polarization
at a specific electric potential difference, V, is
expressed by P(V) = {[(Idown(V) – Iup(V))/(Idown(V) + Iup(V))]
× 100}, when Iup and Idown are the currents measured at a given potential for
the magnetic electrode magnetized with the north pole pointing towards
the surface or away from its surface, respectively. For temperature-dependent
spin transport studies, a device was fabricated, and the magnetoresistance
was measured.[35] Recent results on spin
transport through chiral supramolecular polymers showed spin polarization
values of up to 90%.[9] The measurements
were performed on polymers obtained from chiral monomers and from
mixtures of chiral and achiral monomers following the “sergeant-and-soldiers-principle”.[36] In the latter, a small quantity of chiral monomers
(sergeant) mixed with achiral monomers (soldier) dictates the net
helicity of the stacks. A direct correlation between net helicity
and spin polarization has been observed, proving that the CISS effect
is closely related to supramolecular chirality, and not only to the
number of stereocenters.[9] However, the
question remains whether the presence of stereocenters in the helical
structure is critical to the observation of spin polarization.In the present work, we demonstrate a case in which the CISS effect
does not originate from the chirality of the monomers but is solely
the result of the helical arrangement of monomers in supramolecular
polymers. We report on spin-dependent transport through chiral aggregates
of exclusively achiral monomers, assembled into chiral supramolecular
polymers using chiral solvents. The study focuses on triphenylene-2,6,10-tricarboxamide
(TTA) based supramolecular polymers with either octyl or decyl aliphatic
side chains ((n-8)- and (n-10)-TTA,
molecule 1 and 2). These achiral monomers
have been shown to assemble cooperatively into one-dimensional (1D)
aggregates, with their supramolecular helicity biased by chiral chlorinated
solvents (Figure ).[12] The study shows that both “up”
and “down” orientations of filtered spins can be obtained
with the same achiral monomer by drop-casting the samples from enantiomerically
pure solvent, followed by removing the solvent. In addition, we report
on a CISS-based magnetoresistance device that provides insight on
the temperature dependence of the spin transport.
Figure 1
Molecules and the chiral
solvents used. (A) Chemical structure
of the molecules 1 and 2 and the chiral
solvents (S)-CldMeOct and (R)-CldMeOct
used in this study. (B) Schematic representation of the solvent mediated
chiral self-assembled nanofibers formed with either P- or M-helicity. (C) High-resolution AFM image of
the supramolecular structures obtained from ()-1, drop-casted on silicon.
(D) CD spectra of 1 and 2 in (S)-CldMeOct, (R)-CldMeOct, and decalin (achiral)
(c = 75 μM, d = 1 mm, 20 °C).
Molecules and the chiral
solvents used. (A) Chemical structure
of the molecules 1 and 2 and the chiral
solvents (S)-CldMeOct and (R)-CldMeOct
used in this study. (B) Schematic representation of the solvent mediated
chiral self-assembled nanofibers formed with either P- or M-helicity. (C) High-resolution AFM image of
the supramolecular structures obtained from ()-1, drop-casted on silicon.
(D) CD spectra of 1 and 2 in (S)-CldMeOct, (R)-CldMeOct, and decalin (achiral)
(c = 75 μM, d = 1 mm, 20 °C).
Results and Discussion
The chiral
polymers were first analyzed spectroscopically in (S)- and (R)-1-chloro-3,7-dimethyloctane
(()/()) solution (see Supporting Information for synthesis and sample
preparation). The supramolecular chirality of the fibers was monitored
using circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy. The monomers 1 and 2 were dissolved in both enantiomers of the chiral
solvent () and () to
give the monomer–solvent mixtures ()-1, ()-1, ()-2, and ()-2. In chiral solvent (), the achiral monomers cooperatively
assemble into supramolecular polymers and display a positive Cotton
effect with a maximum at 266 nm at room temperature. In chiral solvent (), a mirror image
Cotton effect of opposite sign is obtained by cooperative assembly,
indicating the helical inversion of the screw sense of the polymers
in the enantiomeric solvent. The mirror symmetry of the CD spectra
of ()-1/2 and ()-1/2 suggests an enantiomeric nature of the supramolecular polymers (Figure D). Slight changes
in the intensity of the CD signal can be observed between polymers ()/()-1 and ()/()-2 (Figure D). Polymer 2 shows a lower CD intensity compared to 1, suggesting a small difference in the efficacy of transfer
of asymmetry from the solvent to the supramolecular stacks of 2. This could be a result of solvation differences caused
by the different lengths of the aliphatic side chains of the monomers.
In achiral solvent such as decalin, no preferred helicity was observed
(Figure D). By spin-coating 1 from (S)-1-chloro-2-methylbutane onto quartz
glass, it was shown that the supramolecular polymers are able to maintain
their preferred helical orientation in bulk (SI, Figure S10). With drying the samples for multiple hours under
ambient conditions, it is assumed that all chiral solvent is removed,
but it cannot be excluded that residual amounts of chiral solvent
remain in the films.Magnetic conducting atomic force microscopy
(mc-AFM) measurements
were performed to study the spin selectivity of electron transmission
through all the TTA polymers. A scheme representing the mc-AFM setup
is shown in Figure A. The supramolecular nanofibers are formed using ()-1/2 and ()-1/2 and drop-casted on a gold
coated nickel surface (Au/Ni), that is magnetized with its magnetization
perpendicular to the surface with the north-pole pointing either up
or down, followed by drying for few hours in an oven. The AFM tip
is maintained at ground while the potential on the Au/Ni is changed.
The current measurements are performed in a perpendicular setup respective
to the long axis of the fiber. However, it is expected that the current
will pass the fibers starting from a circular area underneath the
tip, following the most conducting path. Hence, some of the electrons
will follow partly the direction of the fibers’ long axis.
As shown in Figure B-E the current changes significantly when the magnetic electrode
was magnetized UP or DOWN. Each plot is the average of about 40–50
I vs V scans.
Figure 2
Spin polarization measured with the mc-AFM. (A) Schematic
representation
of the magnetic-conductive atomic force microscopy (mc-AFM) setup.
Panels B and C present the averaged current versus voltage (I–V) curves recorded for ()-1 and ()-1, respectively, with
the magnet north pole pointing up (red) or down (blue). Panels D and
E show the averaged I–V curves
for ()-2 and ()-2, respectively.
(Inset) Corresponding curves as a semi log plot. The sample thickness
in all the measurements was 5 ± 1 nm.
Spin polarization measured with the mc-AFM. (A) Schematic
representation
of the magnetic-conductive atomic force microscopy (mc-AFM) setup.
Panels B and C present the averaged current versus voltage (I–V) curves recorded for ()-1 and ()-1, respectively, with
the magnet north pole pointing up (red) or down (blue). Panels D and
E show the averaged I–V curves
for ()-2 and ()-2, respectively.
(Inset) Corresponding curves as a semi log plot. The sample thickness
in all the measurements was 5 ± 1 nm.In the case of the fibers formed in ()-solvent, higher current is observed
when the electrons are injected from the substrate magnetized UP (Figure B, D). The opposite
behavior is observed for the fibers formed in ()-solvent, where current is higher
when the substrate is magnetized in the DOWN direction (Figure C, E). All the plots observed
result from nonlinear dependence of the current on the voltage applied.
The corresponding semilog plots, that are presented in the insets,
demonstrate the nonlinearity of the process. Clearly two different
onsets of the currents are observed, each corresponds to a different
spin polarization. The distinct threshold for each spin indicates
that no spin flipping occurs during the conduction process. In the
case of films processed from () the lower threshold corresponds to the magnet pointing
down, i.e. the spins injected are polarized parallel to the electron’s
velocity and the opposite is true for fibers processed from (). To prove the
role of the chiral solvent in determining the supramolecular chirality
and thus the spin filtering, we performed control measurements for
fibers of 1 assembled in the achiral solvent decalin.
In this case, there is no difference in the I vs V curves when the magnetic field was directed UP or DOWN
(SI and Figure S1), suggesting no spin
selective transport through racemic mixtures of supramolecular polymers.
The calculated spin polarization, based on the results shown in Figure , is presented in Figure .
Figure 3
Spin polarization calculated
based on the results shown in Figure . (A, B) Spin polarization
as a function of applied bias for ()-1 and ()-1, respectively. (C, D) Spin polarization
as a function of applied bias for ()-2 and ()-2, respectively. The percentage of spin polarization
is calculated as {[(Idown – Iup)/(Idown + Iup)] × 100}. Iup and Idown are the currents measured
with the magnetic north pole pointing up and down, respectively.
Spin polarization calculated
based on the results shown in Figure . (A, B) Spin polarization
as a function of applied bias for ()-1 and ()-1, respectively. (C, D) Spin polarization
as a function of applied bias for ()-2 and ()-2, respectively. The percentage of spin polarization
is calculated as {[(Idown – Iup)/(Idown + Iup)] × 100}. Iup and Idown are the currents measured
with the magnetic north pole pointing up and down, respectively.The spin polarization for all four cases studied, (/)-1 and (/)-2, is about 40%. Please note that while in
the case
of the fibers formed in ()-solvent, the polarization has a negative sign; it
is positive for fibers made in ()-solvent. At very low voltage, since there
are different thresholds for each spin, the polarization is very high.
The origin for the fluctuations in the polarization at higher potential
are not clear and may result from variations in the thickness of the
fiber bundles when each thickness corresponds to different extend
of polarization. The superposition of curves obtained with fiber bundles
of different thicknesses may result in nonmonotonic curves. Moreover,
as pointed out above, the transfer of asymmetry from the chiral solvent
to the polymers 1 and 2 results in slight
differences in their CD intensities (Figure D). Although within the error of the measurements,
this difference coincides with the spin polarization of 2 being slightly lower than the spin polarization observed for 1 (Figure ).Intrigued by this result, we further aimed to correlate
the net
helicity of the supramolecular stacks with the observed spin polarization.
As changing the chain length of the aliphatic side chains only resulted
in minor differences of net helicity, we aimed to tune the net helicity
of the supramolecular stacks of 1 by changing the enantiomeric
excess (ee) of the solvent. To obtain solvent mixtures
of different ee, enantiopure (S)-1-chloro-2-methylbutane
((S)-ClMeBu) was mixed with commercially available
racemic ClMeBu. As shown in Figure A, in a racemic mixture of (R)- and
(S)-ClMeBu (0% ee), no CD signal
and no net helicity could be observed. Upon increasing the ee of ClMeBu mixtures to 20%, the CD intensity, monitored
at 266 nm, increases nonlinearly, due to a majority-rules effect.
At higher ee, the CD signal saturates to 40 mdeg.
A similar behavior is found here in the measured spin polarization
as determined at a voltage of 2 V (Figure B). All the results are given for a sample
thickness of 5 ± 1 nm. The spin polarization saturates as the
CD signal does. Hence, there is a direct correlation between the ee of the solvent, the CD signal of the polymers, and the
spin-polarization measured by mc-AFM.
Figure 4
Effect of ee of the solvent
on the CD and spin
polarization and the thickness dependent spin polarization. (A) The
intensity of the CD at 266 nm of 1, as a function of
the ee of the (S)-ClMeBu solvent.
The nonlinear dependence of CD signal indicates amplification of asymmetry
of the solvent chirality in the assembly processes. (B) Absolute value
of spin polarization at +2 V measured using mc-AFM-based I–V curves at different ee of the (S)-ClMeBu solvent. The same solutions were
used for the CD studies and for the formation of the nanofibers. All
the measurements were conducted for sample thickness of 5 ± 1
nm. The solid-gray lines in (A) and (B) are to guide the eye. The
dashed black line suggests the expected trend in the absence of amplification
of asymmetry. (C) Dependence of the spin polarization (absolute value)
of ()-1 on
the thickness of the layers. See the text for details on the thickness
dependence studies.
Effect of ee of the solvent
on the CD and spin
polarization and the thickness dependent spin polarization. (A) The
intensity of the CD at 266 nm of 1, as a function of
the ee of the (S)-ClMeBu solvent.
The nonlinear dependence of CD signal indicates amplification of asymmetry
of the solvent chirality in the assembly processes. (B) Absolute value
of spin polarization at +2 V measured using mc-AFM-based I–V curves at different ee of the (S)-ClMeBu solvent. The same solutions were
used for the CD studies and for the formation of the nanofibers. All
the measurements were conducted for sample thickness of 5 ± 1
nm. The solid-gray lines in (A) and (B) are to guide the eye. The
dashed black line suggests the expected trend in the absence of amplification
of asymmetry. (C) Dependence of the spin polarization (absolute value)
of ()-1 on
the thickness of the layers. See the text for details on the thickness
dependence studies.The layers of the supramolecular
fibers are formed with variability
in their thickness. Since the spin polarization is measured perpendicular
to the fibers’ long axis, it is expected that its values will
depend on the thickness of the samples, resulting from clustering
of multiple fibers together. The thickness dependence measurements
were performed with fibers prepared from (S)-CldMeOct
solvent. Samples of varied thicknesses between 3 ± 1 nm and 30
± 1 nm were made by increasing the sample quantity on the surface
by multiple drop-casting steps. Before performing each I vs V measurement, the thickness of the samples
was measured by AFM. A thickness dependence of the spin polarization
was indeed found, as shown in Figure C. However, interestingly even though the thickness
is varied by a factor of 10, the spin polarization increases by not
more than 30%. In the case of DNA and oligopeptides monolayers, it
was found that the spin polarization scales about linearly with the
thickness of the monolayer, up to about 12 nm.[37] Interestingly, also in Figure C, the slope of the dependence of the polarization
on the thickness changes at about the same thickness of about 15 nm.
This change in the slope may indicate that for samples above 15 nm
in thickness an additional mechanism becomes significant. Hence, the
weak dependency on the thickness observed here, for large thicknesses,
may result from two competing mechanisms. The first is the regular
CISS effect, which tends to increase about linearly with the molecular
length, and the second is the spin depolarization due to collisions
within the fibers. This spin depolarization seems to become significant
at thicknesses of about 15 nm. The recently observed spin polarization
as measured in spin transport through thick systems, where the thickness
reaches even hundreds of nanometers,[6,38] may also be
explained by the existence of these two mechanisms: the first keeps
inducing spin polarization, and the other causes its decay.To obtain insight into the temperature dependence of spin transport
in the fibers, we applied a spin-valve configuration in which the
magnetoresistance (MR) of the fibers is measured. Figure A presents a scheme of the
device structure. The crossbar geometry measures the resistance of
the device by the standard 4-probe configuration, when the magnetoresistance
is defined as MR (%) = , where RH=0 and RH are the zero-field
and infield
resistances, respectively.[35]Figure B, C show the magnetoresistance
curves for films formed using ()-1 and ()-1, respectively, as a function of the magnetic
field between −0.6 and 0.6 T at different temperatures. The
measurements were performed at a constant current of 0.5 mA. The low
MR values obtained are a result of the fibers being deposited on the
surface randomly, so that the layer had a large number of pin holes
through which current is flowing directly without passing through
the chiral fibers. This large “background current” is
the reason for the low values of MR. However, despite the signal being
small, the signal-to-noise ratio is excellent and the reproducibility
is high. Like in former studies with chiral molecules, an asymmetric
curve of the magnetoresistance as a function of magnetic field is
observed.[35] We found a correlation between
the mc-AFM results and the MR studies. For instance, in the case of ()-1, using the
mc-AFM, when the magnet is in DOWN configuration, the current has
a higher value. Consistently in the MR studies, the resistance is
lower for a negative magnetic field which corresponds to field DOWN.
MR devices constructed from achiral fibers when assembled in an achiral
solvent showed a symmetric nature of MR curves (SI, Figure S6), confirming that the chirality of the systems
leads to asymmetric MR curves.
Figure 5
Temperature-dependent magnetoresistance
studies. (A) Schematic
representation of the four-probe magnetoresistance (MR) measurement
setup with bottom gold and top Ni electrode. Panels B and C present
the magnetoresistance curves for films obtained from ()-1 and ()-1 respectively, as
a function of magnetic field between −0.6 and 0.6 T at different
temperatures. The measurements were performed at a constant current
of 0.5 mA. Panel D represents the normalized ΔMR values as a
function of temperature, where, ΔMR (%) = |MR (%)|–0.6T + |MR (%)|+0.6T.
Temperature-dependent magnetoresistance
studies. (A) Schematic
representation of the four-probe magnetoresistance (MR) measurement
setup with bottom gold and top Ni electrode. Panels B and C present
the magnetoresistance curves for films obtained from ()-1 and ()-1 respectively, as
a function of magnetic field between −0.6 and 0.6 T at different
temperatures. The measurements were performed at a constant current
of 0.5 mA. Panel D represents the normalized ΔMR values as a
function of temperature, where, ΔMR (%) = |MR (%)|–0.6T + |MR (%)|+0.6T.The possible role of phonons in the CISS effect was discussed recently.[39,40] It was proposed that phonons and polarons can enhance the spin polarization.
From Figure B,C the
temperature-dependent MR signals at magnetic fields of ±0.6 T
were extracted and are plotted in Figure D after normalization. The spin polarization
drops by about 50% by cooling the system from 200 to 4 K. The results
point to the possibility that indeed phonons enhance the spin polarization,
as suggested theoretically.
Conclusions
In this work we successfully
demonstrated that the CISS effect
can occur in supramolecular polymers exclusively consisting of achiral
monomers, when asymmetry results from an external, removable source
such as chiral solvents. The spin selectivity is shown to be related
to the excess of preferred handedness of the supramolecular polymers.
It was also shown that the degree of spin polarization observed for
electrons transferred through the fibers depends on the layer thickness
of the stacks. From the thickness-dependent studies, it is possible
to infer that at large thicknesses there are two spin related mechanisms
active. The first is the CISS effect that polarizes the spin, while
the second relates to scattering of the electrons, reducing the spin
polarization. Temperature-dependent studies provide the first support
for theoretical work that suggested that phonons may enhance the spin
polarization. These insights clarify our understanding of the CISS
effect being a result of chiral superstructures rather than only chiral
molecules. These conclusions open new pathways for the construction
of novel organic spintronic devices. The work further provided new
insights into the mechanism behind the CISS based phenomena.
Authors: Tom F A De Greef; Maarten M J Smulders; Martin Wolffs; Albert P H J Schenning; Rint P Sijbesma; E W Meijer Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Marcin L Ślęczkowski; Mathijs F J Mabesoone; Piotr Ślęczkowski; Anja R A Palmans; E W Meijer Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Fan Xu; Stefano Crespi; Gianni Pacella; Youxin Fu; Marc C A Stuart; Qi Zhang; Giuseppe Portale; Ben L Feringa Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2022-03-27 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Deb Kumar Bhowmick; Tapan Kumar Das; Kakali Santra; Amit Kumar Mondal; Francesco Tassinari; Rony Schwarz; Charles E Diesendruck; Ron Naaman Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 14.957
Authors: Chih-Hung Ko; Qirong Zhu; Francesco Tassinari; George Bullard; Peng Zhang; David N Beratan; Ron Naaman; Michael J Therien Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 12.779