Ion current rectification is highly reported in aqueous electrochemical systems and sensors but lacks exploration in organic systems due to the additional complexity introduced by non-aqueous solvents. Herein, a detailed study on ion current rectification with highly polar and mildly polar aprotic organic solvents as a function of tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate supporting electrolyte concentration is presented. To explain our experimental results, we introduce a previously unreported phenomenon: the formation of a double-junction diode within the nanopore that arises due to a complex interplay between ion and solvent enrichment effects. Finite element simulations are used to explore this phenomenon and the subsequent effect on the rectifying behavior of conical quartz nanopores.
Ion current rectification is highly reported in aqueous electrochemical systems and sensors but lacks exploration in organic systems due to the additional complexity introduced by non-aqueous solvents. Herein, a detailed study on ion current rectification with highly polar and mildly polar aprotic organic solvents as a function of tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate supporting electrolyte concentration is presented. To explain our experimental results, we introduce a previously unreported phenomenon: the formation of a double-junction diode within the nanopore that arises due to a complex interplay between ion and solvent enrichment effects. Finite element simulations are used to explore this phenomenon and the subsequent effect on the rectifying behavior of conical quartz nanopores.
Ion current rectification (ICR) is a phenomenon
in which a current–voltage
trace exhibits non-ohmic behavior and the current measured at a potential
is unequal to that measured at the opposite potential.[1,2] Positive ICR occurs when the current measured at positive potentials
is greater than that at negative potentials, while negative ICR implies
the opposite. This phenomenon occurs only when nanopores exhibit an
asymmetry that can facilitate the necessary electrical double layer
(EDL) overlap and perm selectivity at the nanopore tip.[3] ICR is usually a result of an asymmetric conical/pyramidal
pore geometry, but it also occurs in symmetric cylindrical pores that
possess an asymmetric surface charge.[4,5] Although asymmetry
is a prerequisite for ICR to be observed, maximum rectification does
not always occur at the largest EDL overlap as many complex ion-transport
properties occur inside and outside of the nanopore tip. Several models
for ICR, focusing predominantly on aqueous systems, have been proposed.
Woermann described ICR in terms of transference numbers at the tip
where ion enrichment/depletion due to EDL overlap gives rise to high
and low conductivity states.[6] Siwy et al.[7,8] considered the formation of an electrostatic ion trap at a given
applied potential along the length of the nanopore where EDL overlap
occurs, again resulting in high and low conductivity states. Cervera
et al.[9,10] solved the Poisson–Nernst–Planck
equations to demonstrate ICR theoretically. Numerous fundamental studies
into the rectifying behavior of nanopores in aqueous electrolytes
have been carried out, notably on the effect of variables including
the electrolyte concentration and scan rate on the degree and direction
of rectification.[11−13] Changes in ICR upon interaction with an analyte can
be employed practically in sensing applications and are described
by Duleba et al.[14] in a recent review paper.
An interesting example, reported by Heaton and Platt, is a multiuse
nanopore platform whose rectifying behavior is changed by placing
a sheet of metal-immobilized paper on top of the nanopore.[15] While aqueous sensors are suitable for environmental[16−19] and biological applications,[20−22] they have limited use in industrial
settings that feature aprotic solvent production processes, such as
in pharmaceutical plants.[23] A deeper understanding
of the rectifying behavior of nanopores in non-aqueous electrolytes
is essential in the development of ICR sensors compatible with organic
solvents and will facilitate a wider range of applications than that
for which such sensors are currently developed.[14]The ion current rectification of conical nanopores
featuring an
organic electrolyte is both less explored and more complex than for
an aqueous electrolyte. Fundamental studies by Plett et al.[24] and Yin et al.[25] indicated
a significant deviation in the rectifying behavior of nanopores in
aprotic organic solvents compared to water, where the degree of ICR
is dependent on the polarity of the solvent used. Both authors attributed
this to the generation of an effective positive surface charge by
the adsorption of solvent molecules to the nanopore wall.[24,25] Subsequently, in mildly polar aprotic organic solvents, nanopores
exhibit a lesser degree of rectification than in highly polar aprotic
organic solvents.Our group has previously reported the inversion
of rectification
at low electrolyte concentrations in aqueous KCl systems both experimentally
and theoretically, and we explained these phenomena through changes
in the position of ion enrichment and depletion peaks with the widening
EDL.[13] Following on from this study and
inspired by the work of Plett et al.[24] that
demonstrated solvent-induced positive surface charges in aprotic solvent,
we sought to investigate if an inversion of rectification at low electrolyte
concentrations was observable in non-aqueous systems using highly
polar (acetonitrile) and mildly polar (dichloromethane) aprotic organic
solvents with tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) as the
supporting electrolyte. However, unexpectedly, we found extreme changes
to the rectification behavior of the aprotic solvent containing pore,
even at moderately low ionic strengths, that could not adequately
be explained using existing models for ICR. Herein, we propose that
these unexpected results arise from a previously unreported phenomenon:
amplification of the ICR effect through solvent accumulation within
the pore and the formation of a double-junction diode. Our hypothesis
is supported by finite element simulations with COMSOL Multiphysics
using the Poisson–Nernst–Planck–Navier–Stokes
equations, which qualitatively replicate the significant inversions
in the ICR magnitude and directionality as a function of the electrolyte
concentration.
Materials and Methods
Materials and Reagents
Quartz capillaries (0.7 mm i.d.,
1 mm o.d., Sutter Instruments) were used in the fabrication of the
quartz nanopipettes. The electrolyte employed in organic ICR experiments
was tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (99%, Alfa Aesar) dissolved
in acetonitrile (99.9%, Fisher Scientific) and dichloromethane (99%,
Fisher Scientific). Nanopipette radii were measured using potassium
chloride (99%, Acros Organics) dissolved in Milli-Q water with Ag/AgCl
wires (prepared using Ag wires (99.9%, Merck)) as working and reference
electrodes. Pt wires (99.9%, Merck) were used as electrodes in organic
electrolyte systems. All current–voltage traces were measured
using a Biologic SP-200 potentiostat fitted with an ultralow current
option and high-speed scan. Measurements were performed with a filter
band width of 50 kHz, and a moving average filter (window size 11
points) was applied after measurement using EC-Lab software to filter
the noise numerically.
Fabrication of Nanopipettes
Quartz capillaries were
rinsed with deionized water and ethanol and dried overnight in an
oven at 80 °C. Once dried, nanopipette fabrication was carried
out using a Sutter P-2000 micropipette puller with five tunable parameters,
namely, heat (H), filament (F),
velocity (V), delay (D), and pull
(P). The following program was employed to fabricate
50 nm nanopipettes: line 1: H700, F4, V20, D170, and P0 and line 2:
H680, F4, V50, D170, and P200.
Characterization of Nanopipettes
Nanopipette radii
were determined by recording current–voltage traces using a
0.1 M KCl electrolyte in deionized water. Nanopipettes were back-filled
with electrolyte, and a Ag/AgCl wire working electrode was inserted.
The nanopipettes were placed in a bulk electrolyte bath containing
a Ag/AgCl wire reference electrode such that the tip was submerged,
and current–voltage traces were measured. The applied potential
was swept from −0.6 to 0.6 V with respect to the reference
electrode at a scan rate of 0.1 V s–1. A linear
fit was applied to the resulting CV using EC-Lab software, and the
slope was used to calculate the nanopipette radius based on eq .[26,27]where κ is the electrolyte
conductivity, θ is the cone angle, and R is
the nanopipette resistance. By inserting resistance, the inverse of
conductivity (obtained from the slope of the CV), the nanopipette
radius (r) can be determined, assuming a constant
cone angle between nanopipettes and excluding the effect of the nanopipette
wall surface charge.
ICR Measurements
Nanopipettes were backfilled with
tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) of varying concentrations
in acetonitrile (MeCN) and dichloromethane (DCM). A Pt wire working
electrode was inserted into the nanopipettes, which were placed in
a bulk electrolyte bath of the same concentration containing a Pt
wire reference electrode. Current–voltage traces were measured
using a Biologic SP-200 potentiostat with an ultralow current probe.
The applied potential was swept from −1 to 1 V with respect
to the reference electrode at a scan rate of 0.1 V s–1. Experimental error bars were calculated from at least five data
points as the standard error. Sample CVs are shown in Figure S3.
Finite Element Simulations
COMSOL Multiphysics 6.0
was used to solve Poisson–Nernst–Planck and Navier–Stokes
equations, using the following physics modules: transport of diluted
species (tds), electrostatics (es), and creeping flow (spf). The basic
nanopipette geometry was modeled as 2D axisymmetric with a pipette
height of 5 μm, a pipette radius of 50 nm, and a half-cone angle
of 10°, shown in Figure S1. The bulk
electrolyte was modeled as a square of width of 2.5 μm. A region
for finer meshing of the electrical double layer (EDL) with a width
of 5 nm was input as well as a small rectangular region at the nanopipette
tip with a height of 5 nm. The nanopipette wall was assumed to have
a width of 2 nm. Mesh refinement was performed until there was no
change in RR with a decreasing element size. The meshing is shown
in Figure S1. Boundary conditions were
applied at the nanopipette wall, interior bulk solution, and exterior
bulk solution as shown in Table S1 and Figure S1. The dielectric constants for MeCN and DCM were taken to
be 37.5 and 8.93, respectively. The diffusion coefficients were based
on reported values where NEt4+ was 0.96 ×
10–9 m2 s–1 and BF4– was 0.82 × 10–9 m2 s–1.[28]The Nernst–Planck equation was used to simulate the
flux of ions arising from diffusion, migration, and convection:where Ji is the flux of an ion, Di is
the diffusion coefficient of an ion, ci is the ion concentration, zi is the
ion charge, R is the ideal gas constant, T is the
temperature, ϕ is the electric potential, and u is the fluid velocity.The Poisson equation was used to solve
the distribution of the
electric field:where ϕ is the electric
potential, ε is the dielectric permittivity, zi is the ion charge, and ci is the ion concentration.The Navier–Stokes equation
was used to solve the fluid velocity
and pressure distribution:where u is
the fluid velocity, ρ is the solvent density, η is the
solvent viscosity, p is the applied pressure, zi is the ion charge, ci is the ion concentration, and ϕ is the electric potential.
Results and Discussion
ICR in a Weakly Polar Organic Solvent
Figure shows the experimental rectification
ratio (RR), obtained from current–voltage curves using eq at various concentrations
of TEATFB in dichloromethane (DCM).The direction of rectification
is generally positive in DCM, and it initially increases with a decreasing
electrolyte concentration due to the widening of the EDL and the corresponding
increasing perm selectivity at the tip. A small peak appears at around
1 mM where rectification inverts beyond unity before returning to
its initial positive state. After this inversion, rectification continues
to increase until reaching a maximum. The positive rectification observed
has been attributed previously to the formation of a weak positive
charge at the nanopore surface that arises from the orientation of
the solvent layer at the nanopore surface with a positive dipole moment
pointing outward into the solution.[24] In Figure , the theoretical
RR, calculated by assuming a nanopore surface charge of 0.1 mC m–2, is compared to the experimental RR values, showing
a qualitative agreement except at concentrations around 1 mM. The
theoretical results show a rectification inversion at <0.01 mM,
similar to the rectification inversion observed in aqueous systems
at low electrolyte concentrations and herein referred to as classical
inversion.[13] This inversion could not be
collected experimentally as the conductivity of the solution was too
low to give a measurable current.
Figure 1
Experimental data (blue) and theoretical
data (black) showing the
change in the rectification ratio (RR) with a decreasing electrolyte
concentration (mM) in dichloromethane (DCM) in 50 nm glass nanopipettes
using tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) as the supporting
electrolyte. All theoretical calculations assumed a uniform surface
charge distribution of 0.1 mC m–2 on the nanopore
surface.
Experimental data (blue) and theoretical
data (black) showing the
change in the rectification ratio (RR) with a decreasing electrolyte
concentration (mM) in dichloromethane (DCM) in 50 nm glass nanopipettes
using tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) as the supporting
electrolyte. All theoretical calculations assumed a uniform surface
charge distribution of 0.1 mC m–2 on the nanopore
surface.
ICR in a Highly Polar Organic Solvent
Figure shows the experimental change
in the RR with a decreasing concentration of TEATFB in acetonitrile
(MeCN). The experimental results are similar to those obtained for
DCM, although the rectification inversion circa 1 mM is fivefold larger
in magnitude. The classical rectification inversion occurs at a higher
electrolyte concentration than in DCM, indicating that the surface
charge in the MeCN system is larger. This agrees with previous hypotheses
by Plett et al.[24] and Yin et al.[25] relating solvent polarity to the degree of rectification.
For the theoretical calculations, shown in Figure , the nanopore wall assumed a larger surface
charge than in the DCM system, shown in Figure . This is in accordance with hypotheses by
Plett et al.[24] and Yin et al.[25] stating that solvents of higher polarity impart
a larger effective surface charge on the nanopore wall. Hence, in
the theoretical calculations, shown in Figure , the nanopore wall assumed a uniform surface
charge distribution of 1 mC m–2, giving close agreement
at all concentrations outside of the 0.1 to 5 mM window where an extreme
and unexpected rectification inversion above unity is experimentally
observed.
Figure 2
Experimental data (red) and theoretical data (black) showing the
change in the rectification ratio (RR) with a decreasing electrolyte
concentration (mM) in acetonitrile (MeCN) in 50 nm glass nanopipettes
using tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) as the supporting
electrolyte. All theoretical calculations assumed a uniform nanopore
surface charge distribution of 1 mC m–2.
Experimental data (red) and theoretical data (black) showing the
change in the rectification ratio (RR) with a decreasing electrolyte
concentration (mM) in acetonitrile (MeCN) in 50 nm glass nanopipettes
using tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEATFB) as the supporting
electrolyte. All theoretical calculations assumed a uniform nanopore
surface charge distribution of 1 mC m–2.The rectification inversion that occurs at <0.1
mM in MeCN can
be explained by plotting the normalized cation enrichment/depletion
(taken as the concentration of TEA+ divided by the bulk
electrolyte concentration) along the nanopipette central axis z. At large electrolyte concentrations (Figure A), both enrichment and depletion
occur further inside the nanopipette, giving rise to classical rectification
behavior (excluding 1 mM). At the rectification maximum (0.1 mM),
ion enrichment and depletion peaks widen and shift deeper within the
nanopore while counteracting enrichment/depletion peaks appear at
the pore mouth, resulting in reaching a maximum in the positive rectification
(Figure B). Finally,
at the rectification inversion beyond unity (0.01 mM), the enrichment/depletion
peaks at the nanopore tip become dominant over the enrichment/depletion
peaks further within the pore, leading to inverse rectification (Figure C). This is in agreement
with previous studies in aqueous systems.[13]
Figure 3
Simulated
normalized cation enrichment ([TEA+]/[Bulk])
along the nanopipette central axis (z) at positive
potential (red) and depletion at negative potential (black) at TEATFB
concentrations of (A) 10 mM (pre-rectification maximum), (B) 0.1 mM
(rectification maximum), and (C) 0.01 mM (post-rectification inversion)
in MeCN using a 50 nm glass nanopipette, assuming a uniform surface
charge of 1 mC m–2 on the nanopipette wall.
Simulated
normalized cation enrichment ([TEA+]/[Bulk])
along the nanopipette central axis (z) at positive
potential (red) and depletion at negative potential (black) at TEATFB
concentrations of (A) 10 mM (pre-rectification maximum), (B) 0.1 mM
(rectification maximum), and (C) 0.01 mM (post-rectification inversion)
in MeCN using a 50 nm glass nanopipette, assuming a uniform surface
charge of 1 mC m–2 on the nanopipette wall.The deviation of the theoretical results from experimental
data
in MeCN and DCM indicates that modeling a uniform distribution of
surface charge throughout the nanopipette is, unlike in aqueous nanopore
systems, insufficient. Consequently, an effective positive surface
charge due to dipole alignment cannot be considered to be solely responsible
for the rectifying behavior of the nanopore. We postulated that the
extreme rectification inversion observed between 5 and 0.1 mM could
be the result of the formation of a double-junction diode in the nanopore.
The double-junction diode forms as ions, carrying solvent molecules
that directly impact the surface charge, accumulate/deplete in the
nanopore at given applied potentials (Figure A). Plett et al.[24] (eq ) reported that
the effective surface charge (σeff) of a nanopore
can be directly related to the dipole density (ν) in a layer
of thickness (l) along the nanopore wall with an
inverse Debye length (κ).
Figure 4
Schematic representations
of (A) the accumulation of TEA+ cations in the nanopore
tip, resulting in a region of solvent accumulation,
at a positive applied potential. (B) TEA+ cation with an
MeCN solvation sphere.
Schematic representations
of (A) the accumulation of TEA+ cations in the nanopore
tip, resulting in a region of solvent accumulation,
at a positive applied potential. (B) TEA+ cation with an
MeCN solvation sphere.It follows that, in areas of ion enrichment, there
is also an enrichment
of solvent arising from the solvation shell, which, for a MeCN bulk
solvent, contains 8 to 10 MeCN molecules (Figure B).[29−31] The regions of the pore with
solvent enrichment adopts a larger effective surface charge (σeff) due to the larger dipole density (ν). As a result,
in accumulation conditions at positive potential, the nanopore wall
contains a region with a larger surface charge (accumulation diode),
and in depletion conditions at negative potential, the nanopore wall
contains a region with a lower surface charge (depletion diode). As
the bulk electrolyte concentration changes, the position of these
regions within the nanopore changes (Figure ), facilitating sudden switches between positively
and negatively rectifying states and enhanced rectification, similar
to those previously reported in diodic nanopore systems.[32−35] In aqueous systems, the solvent enrichment is not anticipated to
be important because the surface charge of the nanopore is given by
the protonation/deprotonation of surface groups and not by the solvent
dipole alignment.The double-junction diode theory was implemented
in the model by
manually including a band of higher positive charge at positive potentials
and a lower positive charge at negative potentials. This is schematically
represented in Figure A at a single electrolyte concentration. The position of the bands
was selected from the ion enrichment and depletion curves at each
electrolyte concentration as obtained from the linear surface charge
model (Figure ). The
double-junction diode boundaries at positive and negative potentials
were selected as shown in Figure S2 and
are summarized for each electrolyte concentration in Tables S2 and S3. Surface charge values were selected based
on the height of the normalized enrichment/depletion peaks (Figure , Table S4, and Figure S2). A rectangle
function with a smoothing factor of 300 nm was used to apply the non-uniform
surface charge distribution onto the pore surface as sudden step changes
in the surface charge prevent convergence of the simulation at high
surface charge values. Figure B shows the experimental change in the RR as a function of
the electrolyte concentration, compared to Figure C (Table S4) showing
the theoretical change in RR with a decreasing electrolyte concentration
upon the inclusion of accumulation and depletion diodes. The model
achieved a significantly closer qualitative agreement to the experimental
data than assuming a uniform surface charge distribution (Figure C) with the RR inverting
beyond unity around 1 mM, suggesting that the double-junction diode
theory is a viable explanation for the observed triple inversion in
both the DCM and MeCN systems. It was also shown that the surface
charge in the double-junction diode region has a significant effect
on the direction and degree of rectification. Thus, the smaller inversion
in the DCM system can be explained by a smaller surface charge on
the nanopore wall due to its smaller dipole density (ν) in accordance
with eq , as described
by Plett et al.[24]
Figure 5
(A) Schematic of the
accumulation and depletion double-junction
diodes (at applied potentials of +1 and −1 V, respectively)
in the theoretical model of rectification in MeCN at an electrolyte
concentration of 1 mM. (B) Experimental and (C) theoretical data showing
the RR as a function of the electrolyte concentration upon inclusion
(solid) and exclusion (dashed) of the diode regions. All data is measured
in 50 nm glass nanopipettes using solutions of TEATFB in MeCN as the
bulk electrolyte.
(A) Schematic of the
accumulation and depletion double-junction
diodes (at applied potentials of +1 and −1 V, respectively)
in the theoretical model of rectification in MeCN at an electrolyte
concentration of 1 mM. (B) Experimental and (C) theoretical data showing
the RR as a function of the electrolyte concentration upon inclusion
(solid) and exclusion (dashed) of the diode regions. All data is measured
in 50 nm glass nanopipettes using solutions of TEATFB in MeCN as the
bulk electrolyte.It is also important to consider a recent study
by Polster et al.[36] and an earlier study
by Berne et al.[37] where MeCN molecules
have been shown to form
lipid-like bilayers on silica surfaces, meaning that, in neat MeCN,
the surface exhibits an effective negative charge. Polster et al.[36] hypothesized that, at certain concentrations
of lithium perchlorate (LiOCl4), the effective surface
charge becomes positive due to the interaction of the supporting electrolyte
ions with the MeCN bilayer. The outcome of the theoretical calculations
assuming this hypothesis would remain the same however as an effective
positive surface charge in the presence of a supporting electrolyte
is assumed, the magnitude of which is affected by the concentration
of ions in given regions at the silica surface.While the theoretical
model was able to qualitatively replicate
the experimental data regardless of the surface charge applied in
the accumulation and depletion regions (Figure S4), it was however unable to quantitatively account for extreme
degrees of the double-junction diode inversion in MeCN (Figure B). The experimental data exhibits
rectification ratios up to approximately threefold larger than observed
in the simulations at the highest point (2 mM), and we attribute this
to the inability of the model to converge at surface charges greater
than 0.02 C m–2. We speculate that the double-junction
diode operates in a positive feedback loop due to the mutual reliance
of the surface charge on the degree of ion/solvent accumulation and
vice versa (eq ), meaning
that the real surface charge in the accumulation diode must be significantly
higher than is possible to incorporate into our simulations. Furthermore,
the position of ion enrichment/depletion may also be dependent on
the surface charge magnitude; therefore, the positions of the bands
used in the model are a simplification and can introduce an error
in the simulations. Additionally, when a dielectric material is exposed
to an external electric field, a partially compensating electric field
is produced within the material due to the polarization of atoms,
resulting in an induced surface charge on the other side of the wall.[38,39] Due to the intrinsic neutrality of the glass surface in the aprotic
organic solvent, induced charge electro-osmosis (ICEO) may arise on
the outer wall of the nanopipette, which will significantly impact
the ICR observed in these systems.[40,41] Developing
a method to model this will allow for more accurate quantitative modeling
of ICR in MeCN and DCM.
Conclusions
This work presents for the first time the
complex interplay between
ion and solvent enrichment in conical nanopores in DCM and MeCN and
its resulting effect on surface charge and ICR. At moderately low
electrolyte concentrations, extreme inversions in the rectification
direction are observed. We explain these observations through implementation
of a previously undescribed double-junction diode theory where regions
of increased (accumulation diode) and decreased (depletion diode)
surface charges arise at positive and negative potentials due to the
direct relationship between ion-associated solvent shell accumulation/depletion
and the surface charge in an aprotic organic electrolyte. This theory
is qualitatively supported by finite element simulations. This work
is one of few publications exploring ICR in organic electrolytes and
provides a vital in-depth understanding of the complex processes that
arise in these systems. Understanding these systems is essential in
expanding the scope of ICR-based nanopore sensors toward operation
in organic electrolytes.
Authors: Timothy Plett; Wenqing Shi; Yuhan Zeng; William Mann; Ivan Vlassiouk; Lane A Baker; Zuzanna S Siwy Journal: Nanoscale Date: 2015-11-02 Impact factor: 7.790