| Literature DB >> 35414876 |
Kristopher M Koskela1, Stephen J Quiton2, Shaama Mallikarjun Sharada1,2, Travis J Williams1,3, Richard L Brutchey1.
Abstract
Oxide dissolution is important for metal extraction from ores and has become an attractive route for the preparation of inks for thin film solution deposition; however, oxide dissolution is often kinetically challenging. While binary "alkahest" systems comprised of thiols and N-donor species, such as amines, are known to dissolve a wide range of oxides, the mechanism of dissolution and identity of the resulting solute(s) remain unstudied. Here, we demonstrate facile dissolution of both bulk synthetic and natural mineral ZnO samples using an "alkahest" that operates via reaction with thiophenol and 1-methylimidazole (MeIm) to give a single, pseudotetrahedral Zn(SPh)2(MeIm)2 molecular solute identified by X-ray crystallography. The kinetics of ZnO dissolution were measured using solution 1H NMR, and the reaction was found to be zero-order in the presence of excess ligands, with more electron withdrawing para-substituted thiophenols resulting in faster dissolution. A negative entropy of activation was measured by Eyring analysis, indicating associative ligand binding in, or prior to, the rate determining step. Combined experimental and computational surface binding studies on ZnO reveal stronger, irreversible thiophenol binding compared to MeIm, leading to a proposed dissolution mechanism initiated by thiol binding to the ZnO surface with the liberation of water, followed by alternating MeIm and thiolate ligand additions, and ultimately cleavage of the ligated zinc complex from the ZnO surface. Design rules garnered from the mechanistic insight provided by this study should inform the dissolution of other bulk oxides into inks for solution processed thin films. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35414876 PMCID: PMC8926287 DOI: 10.1039/d1sc06667f
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1ORTEP plot of the X-ray crystal structure of Zn(SPh)2(MeIm)2 (4).
Fig. 2Stacked room-temperature solution 1H NMR spectra in acetonitrile-d3 of the aromatic region and H2O peak for aliquots taken as a function of time from the dissolution of ZnO with MeIm and thiophenol at 75 °C. Acetonitrile-d2 is labeled as *. Full spectra are provided in the ESI.†
Fig. 3Eyring plot derived from the dissolution of ZnO with MeIm (3 eq.) and thiophenol (2.4 eq.) in acetonitrile-d3 from 30–75 °C.
Fig. 4(a) Calculated Gibbs free energies (ΔG) at 30 °C associated with formation of possible intermediate steps constituting dissolution of bulk ZnO with thiophenol and MeIm, calculated using a reference (ZnO)12 cluster model (B3LYP functional, def2-SVP basis with def2-ECP on zinc). The most favorable pathway is depicted in blue and unfavorable intermediates are shown in red. (b) Intermediate geometries: 1 and 1′ represent binding of thiophenol (with concomitant Zn–OH formation) and MeIm to (ZnO)12, respectively. Structures 2 and 2′ represent binding of MeIm and thiophenol (with H2O removal) to 1, respectively. Structures 3 and 3′ represent binding of thiophenol (with H2O removal) and MeIm to 2, respectively. Structure 4 refers to the molecular solute state corresponding to formation of the experimentally verified Zn(SPh)2(MeIm)2 complex. Model visualizations are created using the Envision package.[46] The potential energy representation is created using the ‘Energy Leveller’ program developed by Furness.[47]
Description of intermediate geometries. For 2′, 3, and 3′ the sulfur atom of the bound thiophenolate ligand coordinates to more than one zinc center on the surface. The bond distance to the second zinc atom is provided in parentheses. Apart from structure 3, all ligands are bound to the same Zn atom in intermediate states. In 3, the only converged optimization calculation yields a structure in which one of the two thiophenol ligands is bound to a second, neighboring Zn atom
| Label | Ligands | Δ | Zn–S (Å) | Zn–N (Å) | Zn–O (Å) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PhSH | −119.9, −112.9 | 2.280 | — | 1.900, 1.961 |
| 1′ | MeIm | −90.2, −83.8 | — | 2.075 | 1.923, 2.004 |
| 2 | PhSH, MeIm | −225.7, −210.8 | 2.372 | 2.124 | 1.924, 2.004 |
| 2′ | PhSH, PhSH | −104.0, −96.4 | 2.281, 2.610 (2.357) | — | 1.984, 1.996 |
| 3 | 2 PhSH, MeIm | −122.9, −108.8 | 2.301, 2.793 (2.347) | 2.044 | 1.926 |
| 3′ | PhSH, 2 MeIm | −58.3, −37.3 | 2.440 (2.660) | 2.100, 2.064 | 1.855 |
| 4 | 2 PhSH, 2 MeIm | −726.9, −703.9 | 2.338, 2.312 | 2.114, 2.116 | — |