Takuya Kurahashi1. 1. Department of Nutrition Science, Faculty of Nursing and Nutrition, University of Nagasaki, Siebold, Manabino, Nagayo, Nagasaki 851-2195, Japan.
Abstract
Understanding the photophysical properties of metal salen complexes is not straightforward because the emission efficiency is altered irregularly upon structural modifications. The present study prepared zinc salen complexes with systematic structural variations to pinpoint critical factors to determine the emission efficiency. One of the important experimental observations is the regiochemistry of a phenolate substituent affecting emission efficiency from a salicylidene fluorophore, which is nicely assigned as arising from the photoexcited electronic structure of metal salen complexes. Another significant finding is the thermal fluctuation of a salen ligand arising from the mismatched ligand-metal interaction, which has a significant impact on fluorescence lifetime. The present study sheds light on hidden factors that alter photophysical properties of a metal salen complex, which provide valuable insights into designing new photoactive salen ligands.
Understanding the photophysical properties of metal salen complexes is not straightforward because the emission efficiency is altered irregularly upon structural modifications. The present study prepared zinc salen complexes with systematic structural variations to pinpoint critical factors to determine the emission efficiency. One of the important experimental observations is the regiochemistry of a phenolate substituent affecting emission efficiency from a salicylidene fluorophore, which is nicely assigned as arising from the photoexcited electronic structure of metal salen complexes. Another significant finding is the thermal fluctuation of a salen ligand arising from the mismatched ligand-metal interaction, which has a significant impact on fluorescence lifetime. The present study sheds light on hidden factors that alter photophysical properties of a metal salen complex, which provide valuable insights into designing new photoactive salen ligands.
Metal salen complexes are well known as
a useful framework for
catalysts and materials.[1,2] Metal salen complexes
are readily prepared by mixing two independently prepared organic
components (salicylaldehyde and amine) and metal ions, generating
a wide variety of stereochemically and electronically distinct complexes.
Such synthetic modularity is the key for their utility.Some
of metal salen complexes show moderate fluorescence without
any apparent photoactive group, which is attractive from the viewpoint
to expand the utility of metal salen complexes as photoactive catalysts
and materials. According to the early studies,[3,4] the
minimum fluorescence unit is the salicylidene ring consisting of the
phenolate and the azomethine groups, but the complexation with redox
inactive metal ion such as zinc and aluminum is required to attain
fluorescence[5,6] (Chart ).
Chart 1
Salicylidene ring as a minimum fluorescence
unit.
The fluorescence from metal salen complexes has
already found applications
as organic light-emitting diodes[7] and sensors
for amines,[8] nitro compounds,[9] phosphates,[10,11] fluorides,[12] and metal ions.[13−21] Mechanistic details have also been of interest, and fluorescence
properties such as emission wavelength and emission efficiency have
been investigated for a variety of metal salen complexes.[22−37] Previous studies have shown that the emission wavelength could be
modulated by incorporating substituents of different electron-donating
ability such as dimethylamino and ester groups to the phenolate moiety
of metal salen complexes, which may be reasonably explained by density
functional theory-calculated highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO)
and lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) levels.[26,27,37] However, the drastic difference
in fluorescence quantum yields ranging from 0.2 to 14.4%[26] is apparently difficult to rationalize by HOMO
and LUMO considerations.The present study investigates fluorescence
quantum yields and
fluorescence lifetimes of zinc salen complexes upon systematic structural
modifications to clarify critical structural factors. One of the interesting
findings is the positive effect of substituents at the 3- and 5- positions
of the phenolates, which is identified as the very characteristic
feature for the photoexcitation of a salen complex, leading to a new
mechanistic proposal. Another important finding is that the ligand
moiety of a metal salen complex is thermally fluctuating to significantly
different degree depending on the ligand structure. The present study
shows that the ligand fluctuation is a dominant factor for the emission
efficiency in the case of a metal salen complex. These two findings,
which are not evident from the previous experimental and theoretical
studies, are thus of great value in understanding photophysical properties
of a metal salen complex.
Results and Discussion
Characterization of Zinc Complexes
Familiar four-coordinate
salen complexes with zinc are insoluble in common organic solvents,
and then, the present study employs five-coordinate zinc complexes,
as shown in Chart and those in Charts and 4 (vide infra), which were characterized
with 1H, 13C NMR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry,
and elemental analysis. According to the previous study,[38] the Zn(L3,5-) complex has a monomeric Zn center coordinated by three nitrogen
ligands and two oxygen ligands. The other zinc complexes utilized
in this study are also monomeric, as indicated by mass spectrometry
(Figure S1–S13).
Chart 2
Zinc complexes with
systematic structural variations.
Chart 3
Zinc complexes to investigate the regiochemical effect
on the emission
efficiency.
Chart 4
Zinc complexes to investigate the steric effect.
Electrochemical Properties and the Emission Wavelength
HOMO and LUMO energy levels of the present fluorophores are estimated
by measuring redox potentials. Figure shows cyclic voltammograms of Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) complexes, which have a propylene and
ethylene linker, respectively. Both Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) show the first oxidation wave at the same oxidation
potential of 0.35 V, which comes from the one-electron oxidation of
the phenolate moiety of a common structure. On the other hand, the
reduction waves of Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) appear at different potentials of −2.91 and −2.70
V, respectively. The difference in the reduction waves possibly arise
from the one-electron reduction of the imino group that is adjacent
to the propylene or ethylene linker as the only structural difference
in Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L′ 3,5-).
Figure 1
Cyclic voltammograms
of Zn(L3,5-) (black
line) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) (red line) in acetonitrile containing 0.1 M of
Bu4NOTf at 298 K under an argon atmosphere. The starting
point of scans are indicated by the circles, and the direction of
scans are indicated by the arrows.
Cyclic voltammograms
of Zn(L3,5-) (black
line) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) (red line) in acetonitrile containing 0.1 M of
Bu4NOTf at 298 K under an argon atmosphere. The starting
point of scans are indicated by the circles, and the direction of
scans are indicated by the arrows.Effects of substituted phenolates were investigated.
As shown in Figure , an oxidation potential
is significantly increased in the order of MeO (0.14 V) < t-Bu (0.35 V) < Ph (0.38 V) < Cl (0.53 V) < MeCO
(0.81 V) as a substituent at the 5-positions, indicating that the
HOMO energy level is increased in this order. In contrast, reduction
waves, which correspond to the LUMO energy level, are observed in
a narrower range (−2.72 to −2.91 V) irrespective of
a substituent on the phenolates. The relatively large difference in
oxidation potentials upon exchanging substituents on the phenolate
is reasonable because the one-electron oxidation of the salen-type
metal complex occurs at the phenolate moiety.[39]
Figure 2
Cyclic
voltammograms of zinc complexes in acetonitrile containing
0.1 M of Bu4NOTf at 298 K under an argon atmosphere. The
starting point of scans are indicated by the circles, and the direction
of scans are indicated by the arrows.
Cyclic
voltammograms of zinc complexes in acetonitrile containing
0.1 M of Bu4NOTf at 298 K under an argon atmosphere. The
starting point of scans are indicated by the circles, and the direction
of scans are indicated by the arrows.Figure a shows
absorption and emission spectra of the Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L′ 3,5-) complexes. Among several solvents tested
(see Figure ), pyridine
was utilized to systematically compare the photophysical properties
of the present zinc complexes. An emission wavelength maximum is shifted
from 472 nm for Zn(L3,5-) to 483 nm for Zn(L′ 3,5-). The observed shift to a longer wavelength is consistent with the
HOMO–LUMO band gaps, as estimated from CV measurements in which
the difference between the oxidation and the reduction peak potentials
of Zn(L3,5-) (3.26 V)
is larger than that of Zn(L′ 3,5-) (3.05 V). Replacing the linkers from propylene
in Zn(L3,5-) to ethylene
in Zn(L′ 3,5-) shifts the reduction peak potential from −2.91 to −2.70
V without changing the oxidation peak potential, which is identified
as a key factor for the difference in an emission wavelength maximum
between Zn(L3,5-) and
Zn(L′ 3,5-).
Figure 3
Absorption
(dotted line) and fluorescence spectra (solid line)
of (a) Zn(L3,5-), Zn(L′ 3,5-) and (b) Zn(L3-), Zn(L3-), Zn(L3-), and Zn(L3-) in pyridine at 298 K. The
fluorescence spectrum of Zn(L′ 3,5-) is magnified 10-folds.
Figure 7
Solvent effects on the
fluorescence properties, as summarized in Table S1 (Supporting Information). The red bars
show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative to the left
axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes τ
(ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.
Absorption
(dotted line) and fluorescence spectra (solid line)
of (a) Zn(L3,5-), Zn(L′ 3,5-) and (b) Zn(L3-), Zn(L3-), Zn(L3-), and Zn(L3-) in pyridine at 298 K. The
fluorescence spectrum of Zn(L′ 3,5-) is magnified 10-folds.Figure b shows
absorption and emission spectra of zinc complexes having a different
substituent on phenolates. The shifts of an emission wavelength maximum
are also in good agreement with the difference between the oxidation
and the reduction peak potentials or the HOMO–LUMO band gaps.
As shown in Figure , the emission wavelength maxima in cm–1 are almost
proportional to the Eox (oxidation peak
potential) – Ered (reduction peak
potential) values in V.
Figure 4
Plots of λem (cm–1) vs Eox – Ered (V).
Plots of λem (cm–1) vs Eox – Ered (V).
Factors to Determine the Fluorescence Efficiency and Fluorescence
Lifetime
Quantum yields of the present zinc complexes are
significantly different, 1.1% for Zn(L′ 3,5-) to 21% for Zn(L3,5-), as summarized in Table . In contrast to the emission wavelength,
the trend of quantum yields is not explained by the HOMO–LUMO
energy levels or the redox potentials. Then, the correlation between
a structural feature and emission efficiency was investigated in more
detail.
Table 1
Photophysical and Electrochemical
Data of Zinc Complexesa
λmax (nm)b
ε (M–1 cm–1)b
λem (nm)c
ϕ (%)d
τ (ns)e
kr (ns–1)f
knr (ns–1)f
Eox (V)g
Ered (V)g
Zn(L′3,5-t-Bu)
389
1.38 × 104
480
1.1
1.06
0.010
0.93
0.35
–2.70
Zn(L3,5-t-Bu)
373
1.39 × 104
472
21
5.06
0.042
0.16
0.35
–2.91
Zn(L3-t-Bu,5-MeO)
392
1.41 × 104
503
7.6
2.55
0.030
0.36
0.14
–2.82
Zn(L3-t-Bu,5-Ph)
382
1.35 × 104
477
20
3.98
0.050
0.20
0.38
–2.81
Zn(L3-t-Bu,5-Cl)
375
1.42 × 104
463
17
5.06
0.034
0.16
0.53
–2.72
Zn(L3-t-Bu,5-MeCO)
354
1.59 × 104
450
13
1.47
0.088
0.59
0.81
–2.77
Zn(L3-t-Bu)
366
1.31 × 104
456
16
3.51
0.046
0.24
Zn(L)
363
1.41 × 104
443
4.6
1.78
0.026
0.54
Zn(L3-Me)
367
1.41 × 104
457
13
3.22
0.040
0.27
Zn(L4-Me)
362
1.36 × 104
443
5.3
1.46
0.036
0.65
Zn(L5-Me)
375
1.31 × 104
464
13
4.33
0.030
0.20
Zn(L6-Me)
372
1.25 × 104
455
3.3
1.03
0.032
0.94
Structures of zinc complexes are
shown in Charts , 3, and 4.
Absorption spectra were measured
in pyridine.
Fluorescence
spectra were measured
in deoxygenated pyridine with excitation at λex =
390 nm.
Fluorescence quantum
yields using
9,10-diphenylanthracene as a standard (ϕ = 100%).
Fluorescence lifetimes measured
in deoxygenated pyridine with λex = 375 nm.
The radiative (kr) and non-radiative (knr)
decay constants are calculated as follows; kr = ϕ/τ, knr = (1 –
ϕ)/τ.
Anodic
oxidation peak potentials
(Eox) and cathodic reduction peak potentials
(Ered) measured in deoxygenated acetonitrile,
which are reported against the Fc/Fc+ couple.
Structures of zinc complexes are
shown in Charts , 3, and 4.Absorption spectra were measured
in pyridine.Fluorescence
spectra were measured
in deoxygenated pyridine with excitation at λex =
390 nm.Fluorescence quantum
yields using
9,10-diphenylanthracene as a standard (ϕ = 100%).Fluorescence lifetimes measured
in deoxygenated pyridine with λex = 375 nm.The radiative (kr) and non-radiative (knr)
decay constants are calculated as follows; kr = ϕ/τ, knr = (1 –
ϕ)/τ.Anodic
oxidation peak potentials
(Eox) and cathodic reduction peak potentials
(Ered) measured in deoxygenated acetonitrile,
which are reported against the Fc/Fc+ couple.One of the interesting observations is electronic
properties of
a phenolate substituents, which alter emission efficiency in a moderate
manner (red bars, as shown in Figure ). As compared to the hydrogen atom in Zn(L3-), the incorporation of the tert-butyl group in Zn(L3,5-) enhances the emission efficiency. The same is true for the phenyl
group in Zn(L3-), suggesting that aliphatic and aromatic substituents have positive
effect on the emission efficiency. The Zn(L3,5-) and Zn(L3-) complexes give the best result regarding
an emission efficiency. Upon the incorporation of a Cl substituent
in Zn(L3-), the emission efficiency is only slightly increased as compared
to the Zn(L3-) complex.
The incorporation of the MeO and MeCO substituents into Zn(L3-) and Zn(L3-) rather decreases the emission
efficiency.
Figure 5
Electronic properties of substituents and fluorescence outcomes,
as summarized in Table . The red bars show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative
to the left axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes
τ (ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.
Electronic properties of substituents and fluorescence outcomes,
as summarized in Table . The red bars show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative
to the left axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes
τ (ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.Figure also shows
fluorescence lifetimes (blue bars), which almost parallels fluorescence
quantum yields (red bars). The t-Bu and Ph substituents
yield a longer fluorescence lifetime as compared to the Zn(L3-) complex, and the MeO and MeCO substituents
give a negative effect on the fluorescence lifetime. This observation
indicates that the emission efficiency is mainly determined by the
fluorescence lifetime in the present system. As elucidated from the
electrochemical parameters listed in Table , the MeO and MeCO substituents are electron-donating
and electron-withdrawing groups (Eox =
0.14 and 0.81 V, respectively), both of which induce the relaxation
of the photoexcited state, resulting in a shorter fluorescence lifetime
and a lower emission efficiency. In contrast, the t-Bu, Ph, and Cl substituents with the Eox range between 0.35 and 0.53 V apparently contribute to a longer
lifetime of the photoexcited state.To further investigate the
role of the substituents on the photoexcited
state, the regiochemistry of the substituents on the salicylidene
rings was investigated using zinc complexes having a methyl group
at a different position (Chart ). The photophysical data are summarized in Table . As shown in Figure , the methyl groups at the
3- and 5-positions improve the fluorescence lifetime and the fluorescence
quantum yield, as compared to the non-substituted complex. However,
the methyl groups at the 4- and 6-positions have no positive effect.
This observation indicates that the photoexcited state of the present
system has a unique electronic structure possessing a relaxation pathway
through the 3- and 5-postions of the salicylidene ring. Interestingly,
the relaxation pathway could be interrupted by incorporating a proper
substituent such as alkyl, aryl, and chloro groups. It was confirmed
that repeated fluorescence measurements did not change fluorescence
intensity of the Zn(L) complex, indicating that a non-substituted
phenolate moiety in Zn(L) is not photochemically modified under the
measurement conditions.
Figure 6
Positions of the methyl groups and fluorescence
outcomes, as summarized
in Table . The red
bars show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative to the
left axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes
τ (ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.
Positions of the methyl groups and fluorescence
outcomes, as summarized
in Table . The red
bars show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative to the
left axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes
τ (ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.Table also lists
radiative (kr) and non-radiative (knr) decay constants that are calculated from
quantum yield (ϕ) and fluorescence lifetime (τ) values.
The Zn(L3-) complex shows a larger kr value among
others, suggesting that the MeCO substituent at the 5-position gives
an unfavorable effect on emission. Regarding the non-radiative pathway,
the Zn(L′3,5-) and Zn(L6-Me) complexes show larger knr values. The methyl group at the 6-position in Zn(L6-Me) generates severe steric hindrance with the neighboring
azomethine group to give a negative impact on the salicylidene chromophore,
which might be a reason for the faster non-radiative decay. The low
emission efficiency of Zn(L′3,5-) is investigated in more detail in the next section.Solvent effects were investigated, and the results are shown in Figure (the data are included in Table S1). The fluorescence properties in pyridine, toluene, and acetone
are almost the same, indicating that the difference in solvent polarity
between toluene and acetone has no impact in the present system. The
present study employs Lewis basic pyridine as a measurement solvent
to avoid any unexpected effect from the Lewis acidic Zn center,[40] but the results shown in Figure indicates that the Lewis basicity of pyridine
is not an important factor. The use of the protic methanol solvent
significantly decreases the emission efficiency.Solvent effects on the
fluorescence properties, as summarized in Table S1 (Supporting Information). The red bars
show fluorescence quantum yields ϕ (%) relative to the left
axis shown in red. The blue bars show fluorescence lifetimes τ
(ns) relative to the right axis shown in blue.
Another Aspect Related to the Emission Efficiency
The
previous section systematically investigates a variation of the substituents
on the light-absorbing salicylidene ring to clarify the structural
factors that affect the emission efficiency. However, the structure
of a light-absorbing moiety is not the only factor. The most remarkable
example is largely different emission efficiency from Zn(L′ 3,5-) and Zn(L3,5-) (1.1 and 21%, respectively, as shown
in Table ), although
the light-absorbing π-conjugated system is exactly the same
(Chart ). The difference
in the emission efficiency could not be ascribed to the HOMO–LUMO
band gap because the electrochemical properties of Zn(L′ 3,5-) and Zn(L3,5-), which show excellent correlation with
emission wavelength, cannot explain largely different emission efficiency.The Zn(L′ 3,5-) and Zn(L3,5-) complexes
only differ in a length of the methylene bridges in a triamine moiety.
Then, the ethylene and propylene bridges in a triamine moiety were
investigated with 1H NMR spectroscopy. Figure shows structural models for
Zn(L′) and Zn(L), which are reproduced from the previous X-ray
structures.[38,40] The coordination geometry of
Zn(L′) is square-pyramidal, while the Zn(L) complex adopts
a less strained trigonal bipyramidal structure. The metal-free L′
and L ligands are symmetric but lose the symmetry upon complexation
with the zinc ion. The left and right halves of the ligand in both
Zn(L′) and Zn(L) are positioned in a different environment. Figure a shows variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of the non-substituted Zn(L′) complex
having ethylene linkers. The Zn(L′) complex gives two triplet
signals at 3.47 and 2.57 ppm (298 K), which are readily assigned as
arising from the ethylene linkers. These signals are slightly shifted
downfield upon raising the temperature from 253 to 363 K. The left
and right halves of the linker moiety are not resolved, and the 1H NMR signals are averaged in the NMR timescale.
Figure 8
Coordination
geometries of Zn(L′) and Zn(L), which have
ethylene and propylene linkers, respectively.
Figure 9
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a)
non-substituted
Zn(L′) having ethylene linkers and (b) non-substituted Zn(L)
having propylene linkers (10 mM, pyridine-d5).
Coordination
geometries of Zn(L′) and Zn(L), which have
ethylene and propylene linkers, respectively.Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a)
non-substituted
Zn(L′) having ethylene linkers and (b) non-substituted Zn(L)
having propylene linkers (10 mM, pyridine-d5).The 1H NMR spectra of the Zn(L) complex
having propylene
linkers are strikingly different (Figure b). At 298 K, the only observable feature
in the aliphatic region is two signals at 4.46 and 3.23 ppm, which
are significantly broadened upon increasing the temperature. These
two signals are assigned as arising from −CH2–
adjacent to the −C̅N– moiety using correlation
spectroscopy (COSY) and nuclear Overhauser effect spectroscopy (NOESY)
experiments (Figure S14–S16). Remarkably,
the −CH2– signals adjacent to the −C̅N–
moiety are separately observed in Zn(L) below 323 K, which is in clear
contrast to the averaged single signal in Zn(L′) over the entire
temperature range.The temperature dependence of the 1H NMR signals in
the region from 1.4 to 3.0 ppm is more informative. As shown in Figure b, the 1H NMR spectrum at 253 K shows eight resolved signals, as indicated
with red arrows, which are assigned as arising from four methylenes.
These signals are broadened out to disappear at 273 K and are finally
merged into only two averaged signals at 2.47 and 1.81 ppm above 323
K. According to these observations, the Zn(L) complex forms a more
rigid conformation than the Zn(L′) complex. The left and right
halves of Zn(L), which are completely fixed in a different environment
upon cooling to 253 K, are exchanging around zinc ion upon heating
to 363 K giving averaged signals. In contrast, the Zn(L′) complex
is thermally fluctuating even at 253 K without heating. The difference
between Zn(L) and Zn(L′) in solution probably comes from a
less strained and a strained coordination geometries for Zn(L) and
Zn(L′), respectively.To confirm the interpretation described
above, zinc complexes having
different steric bulk, as shown in Chart , are investigated with variable-temperature 1H NMR spectroscopy. According to the structural models in Figure , the incorporation
of the bulky tert-butyl groups at the 3-positions
would disturb the interconversion of the left and right halves of
Zn(L) and Zn(L′), while the tert-butyl groups
at the 5-positions would not have such a steric effect. The Zn(L′ 5-) complex shows a variable-temperature
behavior that is identical to that of non-substituted Zn(L′)
(Figure a). However,
the Zn(L′ 3-)
complex shows different variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra,
in which one of the methylene signals is significantly broadened upon
cooling (Figure b). The tert-butyl groups at the 3-positions indeed
alter thermal properties of Zn(L′) having ethylene linkers,
as expected from the structural model.
Figure 10
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a) Zn(L′ 5-) and (b) Zn(L′ 3-) (10 mM, pyridine-d5).
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a) Zn(L′ 5-) and (b) Zn(L′ 3-) (10 mM, pyridine-d5).Figure shows
variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of Zn(L5-) and Zn(L3-). While the variable-temperature behavior of Zn(L)
and Zn(L5-) is the same
(Figure a), the
Zn(L3-) complex shows
significant difference (Figure b). The methylene signals adjacent to the azomethine
group (−C̅N–CH2−), which are
broadened out at 323 K in Zn(L5-), are still observed upon heating to 363 K for Zn(L3-). The tert-butyl groups
at the 3-positions also alter thermal properties of Zn(L) having propylene
linkers.
Figure 11
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a) Zn(L5-) and (b) Zn(L3-) (10 mM, pyridine-d5).
Variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra of (a) Zn(L5-) and (b) Zn(L3-) (10 mM, pyridine-d5).Sterically demanding tert-butyl
groups at the
3-position suppress thermal fluctuation of a ligand in both Zn(L)
and Zn(L′). However, the steric bulk on the phenolate is not
so effective as to change the difference in thermal properties between
Zn(L) and Zn(L′). Even with the aid of sterically demanding tert-butyl groups, the Zn(L′ 3-) complex having ethylene linkers are still
fluctuating actively at low temperature of 253 K, which is comparable
to the thermal fluctuation of the Zn(L) complex having propylene linkers
without any steric bulk at high temperature of 363 K, as indicated
from variable-temperature 1H NMR spectra in Figures b and 9b. This observation shows that the ligand framework (ethylene vs
propylene linkers) is of prime importance for thermal fluctuation
of a ligand, which determines fluorescence efficiency of flexible
π-conjugated ligands like salen ligands.In order to investigate
the effect of thermal fluctuation of a
ligand on the emission efficiency, variable-temperature fluorescence
measurements were carried out for Zn(L5-) and Zn(L3-) bearing tert-butyl groups at 5- or 3-positions,
respectively, on otherwise the same salen platform. As indicated from
variable-temperature 1H NMR measurements in Figure , the Zn(L5-) complex is thermally more fluctuating
than the Zn(L3-). As
shown in Figure , upon lowering the temperature from 303 K to 273 K, the fluorescence
from thermally fluctuating Zn(L5-) is increased by 1.3, while the fluorescence from less-fluctuating
Zn(L3-) is not altered
in the same temperature range. The observed difference in the temperature
dependence of the emission efficiency possibly originates from the
difference in thermal fluctuation between Zn(L5-) and Zn(L3-). In the temperature range from 273 to 243 K, the
fluorescence intensity is decreased upon cooling for both Zn(L5-) and Zn(L3-) in common.
Figure 12
Temperature dependence
of fluorescence intensity from thermally
fluctuating Zn(L5-)
and less-fluctuating Zn(L3-). Each fluorescence measurement was repeated three times to obtain
averaged values and standard deviations.
Temperature dependence
of fluorescence intensity from thermally
fluctuating Zn(L5-)
and less-fluctuating Zn(L3-). Each fluorescence measurement was repeated three times to obtain
averaged values and standard deviations.
Mechanistic Considerations
The present study shows
a clear correlation between Eox – Ered and λem, as shown in Figure . The Eox of salen complexes comes from the one-electron oxidation
of the phenolate moiety, as indicated from the detailed studies on
phenoxyl radicals from salen complexes by us[39] and others.[41−44] The Ered of salen complexes bearing
redox-inactive metal is assigned as arising from one-electron reduction
of the azomethine moiety, which is indeed not redox-innocent.[45,46] Then, the most probable photoexcitation pathway is a transition
from the phenolate moiety as an electron donor to the azomethine moiety
as an electron acceptor, as shown in Figure .
Figure 13
Mechanistic proposal for the photoexcitation
of a salen complex.
Mechanistic proposal for the photoexcitation
of a salen complex.This simple picture is useful to explain some puzzling
observations
on the photophysical properties of a salen complex described above.
One is the regiochemistry of substituents on the salicylidene rings.
Incorporation of a methyl group into the 3- or 5-position has positive
effect on the fluorescence lifetime and the emission efficiency (Figure ). This observation
is explained by the proposed electronic structure of the photoexcited
state, in which the transient radical appears at the 3- and 5-positions.
The substituents at the 3- and 5-positions could interact with the
photoexcited radical to alter photophysical properties of salen ligands.
As indicated from the fluorescence lifetime measurements in Figure , the interaction
of the photoexcited radical with tert-butyl, phenyl,
and chloro substituents in addition to methyl gives positive effect
on the lifetime of the excited radical, in contrast to the negative
impact induced by methoxyl and acetyl substituents.The other
is the difference between the ethylene and propylene
bridges in a triamine moiety, which is a determinant factor for the
emission efficiency although this moiety has no light-absorbing π-conjugation.
The present variable-temperature 1H NMR studies reveals
that the ligand framework gives significant difference in thermal
fluctuation of a ligand around metal ion, which is much more suppressed
for the propylene bridge than that for the ethylene bridge. According
to the proposed singlet excited state shown in the inset of Figure , the bond rotation
between the phenolate and the azomethine group is accelerated by thermal
fluctuation, resulting in faster quenching of photoexcited radicals
that are distributed on the phenolate and the azomethine.The
present result on zinc salen complexes is compared with fluorescence
from related compounds. One of the examples is an aluminum salophene
complex,[29] which has an o-phenylene diamine linker instead of an ethylene or propylene linker
in the present case. Aluminum salophene complexes show Eox (1.38–1.42 V) and Ered (−1.50––1.75 V), which are quite different
from the Eox (0.14–0.81 V) and Ered (−2.70––2.91 V) values
for the present zinc complexes. This is probably because aluminum
salophene complexes with Al3+ are cationic in contrast
to neutral Zn2+ salen complexes. However, the Eox – Ered values fall
within the range from 2.92 to 3.16 V with the λem values of 20,600–20,800 cm–1.[29] According to the correlation in Figure , the Eox – Ered values of 2.92
to 3.16 V correspond to the λem values of 19,500–21,000
cm–1, which are in nice agreement with the experimental
λem values. The same correlation for zinc salen and
aluminum salophen complexes indicates that the photoexcitation pathway
occurs on the common salicylidene moiety without contribution from
π-conjugate o-phenylene linkers. The suggestion
from the present study is that the rigid o-phenylene
linkers may contribute to high emission efficiency of aluminum salophene
complexes by suppressing the thermal fluctuation of a salicylidene
chromophore.Other interesting examples are indium[37] or aluminum[26] salen
complexes bearing
different substituents at the 5-position of the phenolate with t-Bu at the 3-position in common. The emission wavelength
is altered in the order H < t-Bu < Ph <
OMe in both indium and aluminum salen complexes, which is the same
trend as the present zinc complexes. Indium and aluminum salen complexes
bearing t-Bu at the 3- and 5-positions show similar
emission wavelengths at 484 and 480 nm, as compared with 472 nm for
the present zinc complex, although the solvent utilized for the fluorescence
measurement is different. According to these observations, the salicylidene
moiety determines the emission wavelength, and the difference in metal
ions has negligibly small impact. In contrast, the emission efficiency
is affected by the choice of metal ions; 36 and 13% for indium and
aluminum complexes bearing the same salicylidene chromophore, respectively.
The hypothesis from the present study is that the indium ion has some
beneficial properties (size or biding affinity) to suppress the thermal
fluctuation of a salicylidene chromophore in the salen framework.
Conclusions
Salicylidene chromophores from metal salen
complexes show significantly
different emission efficiency, which is not readily predictable from
the ligand structure. The present study investigates hidden factors
that affect the photophysical properties of the salen framework. One
of the new findings is the position of a substituent on the salicylidene
ring that affects the fluorescence lifetime in a manner indicative
of the photoexcited phenoxyl radical. The most critical factor is
thermal fluctuation of a salen ligand arising from the mismatched
ligand–metal interaction, which has devastatingly negative
impact on the emission efficiency of a salicylidene chromophore.
Experimental Section
Instrumentation
1H and 13C NMR
spectra of zinc complexes were measured in a borosilicate glass tube
(5 mm OD) on a JNM-ECS400 400 MHz spectrometer (JEOL) or JNM-ECA600
600 MHz NMR spectrometer (JEOL). Variable-temperature 1H NMR measurements were carried out using the JNM-ECA600 600 MHz
NMR spectrometer (JEOL). 1H and 13C NMR chemical
shifts in CDCl3 were referenced to CHCl3 (7.240
ppm) and 13CDCl3 (77.0 ppm). The 1H NMR spectrum in pyridine-d5 were referenced
to the residual pyridine signal (7.190 ppm). Cyclic voltammograms
were measured with a model 2325 electrochemical analyzer (BAS) using
an Ag/Ag+ reference electrode, a glassy-carbon working
electrode, and a platinum-wire counter electrode. Measurements were
carried out for the 0.5 mM solution in electrochemical-grade CH3CN containing 0.1 M Bu4NOTf at a scan rate of 50
mV s–1 at 298 K under an Ar atmosphere unless otherwise
noted. The sample solutions were deoxygenated by bubbling Ar gas for
10 min. The E values were referenced to the E1/2 value of ferrocene, which was measured under
identical conditions after each measurement. Absorption spectra were
recorded in spectroscopy-grade pyridine using a quartz cell (l = 0.1 cm) on an Agilent 8453 spectrometer (Agilent Technologies)
equipped with a temperature-control cell unit. Absorption spectra
were measured for 0.5 mM solutions. Fluorescence spectra were measured
in spectroscopy-grade pyridine using a quartz cell (l = 1.0 cm) on a Shimazu RF-5300PC spectrofluorometer. Low-temperature
fluorescence measurements were carried out using an USP-203 low-temperature
chamber (UNISOKU) that is installed into the sample room of the Shimazu
RF-5300PC spectrofluorometer. The details are shown in Figure S23. Fluorescence lifetimes were measured
using an EasyLife lifetime fluorescence spectrometer (Horiba). The
sample solutions for fluorescence measurements were deoxygenated by
bubbling Ar gas for 15 min. Fluorescence spectra were measured at
298 K with excitation at λex = 390 nm for deoxygenated
pyridine solutions with absorbance = 0.01 at 390 nm. Fluorescence
lifetimes were measured at 298 K with excitation at λex = 375 nm using a 400 nm filter. Fluorescence measurements were carried
out three times independently to obtain averaged values and standard
deviations. Fluorescence quantum yields were determined using 9,10-diphenylanthracene
as a standard (ϕ = 100%[47]). Fluorescence
lifetime measurements of anthracene as a standard compound in cyclohexane
using the present experimentation gave a value of 5.18 ns, which is
in good agreement with the authorized value of 5.3 ns.[48] Elemental analyses were conducted on a MicroCorder
JM10 (J-SCIENCE LAB).
Materials
Spectroscopy-grade pyridine, toluene, acetone,
acetonitrile, and methanol for fluorescence measurements were purchased
from Kanto Chemical. Anhydrous solvents were purchased from Kanto
Chemical. 2,2-Diamino-N-methyldiethylamine and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine were purchased from Tokyo Chemical
Industry. 3,5-Di-tert-butylsalicylaldehyde was purchased
from Fujifilm Wako Chemical. 3-tert-Butylsalicylaldehyde
was purchased from Aldrich. Preparations of 3-tert-butyl-5-methoxysalicylaldehyde, 3-tert-butyl-5-phenylsalicylaldehyde,
and 3-tert-butyl-5-chlorosalicylaldehyde were described
previously.[39] 3-, 4-, and 5-Methylsalicylaldehydes
and salicylaldehyde were purchased from Tokyo Chemical Industry. Preparation
of 6-methylsalicylaldehyde was described elsewhere.[44] Diethylzinc (1.0 M in toluene) was purchased from Tokyo
Chemical Industry. Zinc acetate dihydrate was purchased from Kanto
Chemical. Other reagents were purchased from Fujifilm Wako Chemical
or Kanto Chemical. Membrane filters (Millex-FG, 0.20 μm, 25
mm, hydrophobic PTFE) were purchased from Merck.
Preparation of 3-tert-Butyl-5-acetylsalicylaldehyde
3-tert-Butylsalicylaldehyde (5.00 g, 28.1 mmol)
was added carefully to the slurry of 1.3 equiv of acetic anhydride
(3.50 mL, 37.0 mmol) and AlCl3 (11.97 g, 89.8 mmol) at
room temperature. After stirring at room temperature for 2 h, the
resulting mixture was poured into 1.0 M HCl/H2O (100 mL)
containing cold ice. The aqueous solution was extracted with CH2Cl2 (100 mL × 3). The combined organic layer
was washed with brine (100 mL) and was then dried over MgSO4. After evaporation of the solvent and drying in vacuo, concentrated
HCl (5 mL) in acetone was added to the solid, and the resulting solution
was refluxed for 3 h. After extracting with CH2Cl2 (100 mL × 3), the combined organic layer was washed with brine
(100 mL) and was dried over MgSO4. The title compound was
obtained as pale yellow solid (2.52 g, 11.4 mmol) after precipitation
from methanol at −20 °C. 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 12.226 (s, 1H), 9.919 (s, 1H), 8.136 (s, 1H),
8.033 (s, 1H), 2.571 (s, 3H), 1.410 (s, 9H).13C
NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 196.951, 195.800, 164.915,
138.950, 133.537, 133.339, 128.831, 119.789, 35.009, 29.003, 26.148.
Preparation of Zn(L′ 3,5-)
3,5-Di-tert-butylsalicylaldehyde
(4.395 g, 18.8 mmol) was added to the solution of 2,2-diamino-N-methyldiethylamine (1.099 g, 9.38 mmol) in EtOH (20 mL).
The resulting solution was stirred at 110 °C for 1 h. The solvent
was removed by evaporation, and the residue was dried in vacuo at
80 °C for 6 h. The resulting yellow solid was dissolved in anhydrous
toluene (40 mL). Then, the toluene solution of Et2Zn (1.0
M, 11.3 mL, 11.3 mmol) was carefully added under an Ar atmosphere
to the yellow solution. The resulting solution was stirred at 30 °C
for 12 h. Then, the reaction solution was poured to saturated NaHCO3 aqueous solution (100 mL), and the organic layer was washed
with saturated NaHCO3 aqueous solution (50 mL). After drying
over MgSO4, the toluene solution was passed through a pad
of celite and then a membrane filter (0.20 μm pore size). The
yellow solid after evaporation and drying in vacuo was purified by
refluxing in EtOH (80 mL) for 30 min. Filtration of hot EtOH solution
gave the title compound (3.259 g, 5.315 mmol) after drying in vacuo
at 80 °C for 12 h.1H NMR (CDCl3,
600 MHz): δ 8.172 (s, 2H), 7.398 (d, J = 2.4
Hz, 2H), 6.927 (d, J = 2.4 Hz, 2H), 3.915 (m, 2H),
3.318 (m, 2H), 2.975 (m, 2H), 2.605 (m, 2H), 2.289 (s, 3H), 1.343
(s, 18H), 1.294 (s, 18H).13C NMR (150 MHz, CDCl3): δ 171.522,
168.927, 141.524, 134.554, 129.326, 129.010, 117.042, 60.704, 58.885,
42.933, 35.532, 33.799, 31.395, 29.231.Anal. calcd for C35H53N3O2Zn: C, 68.56; H,
8.71; N, 6.85; found: C, 68.51; H, 8.81;
N, 7.09.HRMS calcd for C35H53N3O2Zn H+m/z 612.3507;
found, 612.3490. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S1.
Preparations of Zn(L3,5-)
3,5-Di-tert-butylsalicylaldehyde (798
mg, 3.40 mmol) was added to the solution of 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (247 mg, 1.70 mmol) in EtOH (8 mL). The resulting
solution was stirred at 110 °C for 30 min. Then, triethylamine
(2.37 mL) and zinc acetate dihydrate (746 mg, 3.40 mmol) were added
to the solution. The resulting solution was heated at 110 °C
for 1 h. After cooling, the solvent was removed by evaporation, and
the residue was dried in vacuo. The residue dissolved in CH2Cl2 (50 mL) was washed with saturated NaHCO3 (50 mL × 3). After drying over MgSO4, the solution
was passed through a pad of celite and then a membrane filter (Millex-FG,
0.20 μm, 25 mm, hydrophobic PTFE). The solvent was removed by
evaporation, and the residue was dried in vacuo. The title compound
(922 mg, 1.44 mmol) was obtained by precipitation from hot ethanol.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.059 (s,
2H), 7.268 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 6.849 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 4.576 (m, 2H), 3.395 (m, 2H), 2.688 (broad),
2.266 (s, 3H), 2.006 (broad), 1.909 (broad), 1.365 (s, 18H), 1.251
(s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
169.406,
167.661, 140.440, 133.095, 128.214, 127.755, 117.518, 38.486, 35.334,
33.697, 31.478, 29.412.Anal. calcd for C37H57N3O2Zn: C, 69.30; H, 8.96; N, 6.55;
found: C, 69.24; H, 8.89;
N, 6.44.HRMS calcd for C37H57N3O2Zn H+m/z 640.3820;
found, 640.3801. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S3.
Preparations of Zn(L 3-)
The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (44.4 mg, 0.075 mmol) was obtained from 3-tert-butyl-5-methoxysalicylaldehyde (461 mg, 2.21 mmol)
and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (160 mg, 1.10
mmol), after precipitation from diethyl ether at −20 °C.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.016 (s,
2H), 6.911 (d, J = 3.2 Hz, 2H), 6.398 (d, J = 3.2 Hz, 2H), 4.549 (m, 2H), 3.701 (s, 6H), 3.400 (m,
2H), 2.703 (broad), 2.269 (s, 3H), 2.015 (broad), 1.922 (broad), 1.337
(s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
167.085,
166.982, 146.559, 142.822, 120.479, 116.776, 113.016, 56.140, 38.466,
35.258, 29.175.Anal. calcd for C31H45N3O4Zn: C, 63.21; H, 7.70; N, 7.13; found:
C, 63.13; H, 7.69;
N, 7.10.HRMS calcd for C31H45N3O4Zn H+m/z 588.2780;
found, 588.2761. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S2.The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (22.1 mg, 0.0324 mmol) was obtained from 3-tert-butyl-5-phenylsalicylaldehyde (216.8 mg, 0.852 mmol)
and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (61.9 mg, 0.426
mmol), after precipitation from diethyl ether at −20 °C.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.162 (s,
2H), 7.506 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 4H), 7.482 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 4H), 7.352 (dd, J = 7.3, 7.3
Hz, 4H), 7.204 (d, J = 7.3 Hz, 2H), 7.179 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 4.604 (m, 2H), 3.477 (m, 2H), 2.771 (broad),
2.321 (s, 3H), 2.068 (broad), 1.976 (broad), 1.402 (s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 171.104,
167.692, 142.062, 141.633, 131.198, 128.979, 128.489, 126.148, 125.353,
124.480, 118.819, 38.502, 35.273, 29.367.Anal. calcd for C41H49N3O2Zn: C, 72.29; H,
7.25; N, 6.17; found: C, 72.27; H, 7.31;
N, 6.18.HRMS calcd for C41H49N3O2Zn H+m/z 680.3194;
found, 680.3183. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S4.
Preparations of Zn(L3-)
The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (483.0 mg, 0.805 mmol) was obtained from 3-tert-butyl-5-chlorosalicylaldehyde (490.8 mg, 2.31 mmol)
and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (167.6 mg,
1.15 mmol), after purification by sonification of the suspension in
diethyl ether.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz):
δ 7.962 (s, 2H), 7.079 (d, J = 3.0 Hz, 2H),
6.868 (d, J = 3.0 Hz, 2H), 4.490 (m, 2H), 3.416 (m,
2H), 2.275 (s, 3H), 1.944 (broad), 1.296 (s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 169.865,
166.605, 143.500, 130.984, 129.958, 119.156, 115.805, 38.471, 35.273,
29.030.Anal. calcd for C29H39Cl2N3O2Zn (H2O)0.1: C, 58.08;
H, 6.59; N, 7.01; found: C, 57.99; H, 6.61; N, 6.99.HRMS calcd
for C29H39Cl2N3O2Zn H+m/z 596.1789;
found, 596.1772. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a
wide m/z range is shown in Figure S5.The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (156.1 mg, 0.252 mmol) was obtained from 3-tert-butyl-5-acetylsalicylaldehyde (128.3 mg, 0.582 mmol)
and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (42.3 mg, 0.291
mmol), after precipitation by sonification of the suspension in diethyl
ether.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ
8.138 (s, 2H), 7.840 (d, J = 2.3 Hz, 2H), 7.675 (d, J = 2.3 Hz, 2H), 4.517 (m, 2H), 3.512 (m, 2H), 3.289 (broad),
3.049 (broad), 2.460 (s, 6H), 2.322 (s, 3H), 1.971 (broad), 1.318
(s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
195.984,
175.526, 167.416, 141.343, 136.385, 129.499, 122.262, 118.192, 38.532,
35.105, 29.168, 25.755.Anal. calcd for C33H45N3O4Zn (H2O)0.4: C, 63.90; H, 7.44; N, 6.77;
found: C, 63.98; H, 7.36; N, 6.69.HRMS calcd for C33H45N3O4Zn H+m/z 612.2780;
found, 612.2764. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S6.
Preparations of Zn(L)
The title compound was prepared
according to the procedure as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (475.1 mg, 1.11 mmol)
was obtained from salicylaldehyde (587.0 mg, 4.80 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (349.1 mg, 2.40 mmol), after precipitation
from dichloromethane (2.0 mL) and hexane (6.0 mL).1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.072 (s, 2H), 7.147 (ddd, J = 8.7, 7.8, 1.8 Hz, 2H), 7.031 (dd, J = 7.8, 1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.734 (d, J = 8.7 Hz, 2H),
6.459 (dd, J = 8.7, 7.8 Hz, 2H), 4.442 (s, 2H), 3.440
(s, 2H), 2.592 (s, 4H), 2.188 (s, 3H), 1.990 (s, 2H), 1.901 (s, 2H).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 171.747,
168.105, 134.656, 133.340, 123.134, 118.926, 113.004, 58.485, 38.425,
26.582.Anal. calcd for C21H25N3O2Zn (H2O)0.5: C, 59.23; H, 6.15;
N, 9.87;
found: C, 59.20; H, 5.97; N, 9.77.HRMS calcd for C21H25N3O2Zn H+m/z 416.1316;
found, 416.1302. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S7.
Preparations of Zn(L3-Me)
The title
compound was prepared according to the procedure as described for
Zn(L3,5-). The title
compound (548.6 mg, 1.22 mmol) was obtained from 3-methylsalicylaldehyde
(369.3 mg, 2.71 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine
(197.0 mg, 1.36 mmol), after precipitation from dichloromethane (8.0
mL) and hexane (30 mL).1H NMR (CDCl3,
400 MHz): δ 8.064 (s, 2H), 7.088 (d, J = 6.9
Hz, 2H), 6.921 (dd, J = 7.8, 1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.369 (dd, J = 7.8, 6.9 Hz, 2H), 4.543 (m, 2H), 3.419 (m, 2H), 2.598
(broad), 2.178 (s, 3H), 2.122 (s, 6H), 2.006 (broad), 1.886 (broad).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 170.538,
167.202, 132.942, 132.101, 130.968, 117.641, 111.918, 58.149, 38.257,
26.505, 16.881.Anal. calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn (H2O)0.2: C, 61.60;
H, 6.61; N, 9.37;
found: C, 61.53; H, 6.57; N, 9.33.HRMS calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn H+m/z 444.1629;
found, 444.1627. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S8.
Preparations of Zn(L4-Me)
The title
compound was prepared according to the procedure as described for
Zn(L3,5-). The title
compound (418.7 mg, 0.941 mmol) was obtained from 4-methylsalicylaldehyde
(387.7 mg, 2.85 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine
(206.8 mg, 1.42 mmol), after sonification of the suspension in diethyl
ether.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ
8.019 (s, 2H), 6.913 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 2H), 6.565 (d, J = 1.2 Hz, 2H), 6.286 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.2
Hz, 2H), 4.417 (m, 2H), 3.403 (m, 2H), 2.571 (broad), 2.186 (s, 6H),
2.170 (s, 3H), 1.961 (broad), 1.900 (broad).13C
NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 171.701,
167.661, 144.036, 134.518, 123.210, 116.723, 114.626, 58.501, 38.379,
26.643, 21.624.Anal. calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn: C, 62.10; H, 6.57; N, 9.45; found:
C, 62.05; H, 6.60;
N, 9.40.HRMS calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn H+m/z 444.1629;
found, 444.1625. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S9.
Preparations of Zn(L5-Me)
The title
compound was prepared according to the procedure as described for
Zn(L3,5-). The title
compound (391.9 mg, 0.881 mmol) was obtained from 5-methylsalicylaldehyde
(372.1 mg, 2.73 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine
(198.5 mg, 1.37 mmol), after sonification of the suspension in diethyl
ether.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ
8.019 (s, 2H), 6.972 (dd, J = 8.6, 2.3 Hz, 2H), 6.804
(d, J = 2.3 Hz, 2H), 6.664 (d, J = 8.6 Hz, 2H), 4.427 (m, 2H), 3.406 (m, 2H), 2.556 (broad), 2.169
(s, 6H), 2.155 (s, 3H), 1.970 (broad), 1.871 (broad).13C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ 169.819,
168.120, 134.687, 134.075, 122.950, 121.451, 118.222, 58.164, 38.379,
26.643, 20.033.Anal. calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn: C, 62.10; H, 6.57; N, 9.45; found:
C, 62.07; H, 6.65;
N, 9.35.HRMS calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn H+m/z 444.1629;
found, 444.1614. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S10.
Preparations of Zn(L6-Me)
The title
compound was prepared according to the procedure as described for
Zn(L3,5-). The title
compound (79.0 mg, 0.177 mmol) was obtained from 6-methylsalicylaldehyde
(155.4 mg, 1.14 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine
(82.9 mg, 0.57 mmol), after sonification of the suspension in diethyl
ether.1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ
8.496 (s, 2H), 7.003 (dd, J = 8.6, 7.2 Hz, 2H), 6.590
(d, J = 8.6 Hz, 2H), 6.230 (dd, J = 7.2 Hz, 2H), 4.494 (m, 2H), 3.426 (m, 2H), 2.604 (broad), 2.366
(s, 6H), 2.198 (s, 3H), 1.955 (broad).13C NMR (100
MHz, CDCl3): δ 172.695,
164.601, 140.226, 133.233, 122.139, 117.289, 115.330, 58.271, 38.349,
26.811, 20.079.Anal. calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn (H2O)0.1: C, 61.85;
H, 6.59; N, 9.41;
found: C, 61.87; H, 6.64; N, 9.33.HRMS calcd for C23H29N3O2Zn H+m/z 444.1629;
found, 444.1614. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S11.The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (510.4 mg, 0.945 mmol) was obtained from 3-tert-butylsalicylaldehyde (450.3 mg, 2.53 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (183.5 mg, 1.26 mmol), after precipitation
from dichloromethane (5 mL) and hexane (30 mL).1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.059 (s, 2H), 7.182 (dd, J = 7.4, 1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.923 (dd, J = 7.8,
1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.380 (dd, J = 7.8, 7.4 Hz, 2H), 4,559
(m, 2H), 3.416 (m, 2H), 2.716 (broad), 2.283 (s, 3H), 2.030 (broad),
1.938 (broad), 1.339 (s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz,
CDCl3): δ 171.386,
167.522, 141.235, 132.956, 129.552, 118.915, 111.532, 38.454, 35.051,
29.267.Anal. calcd for C29H41N3O2Zn (H2O)0.6: C, 64.52; H, 7.88;
N, 7.88;
found: C, 64.40; H, 7.65; N, 7.77.HRMS calcd for C29H41N3O2Zn H+m/z 528.2568;
found, 528.2575. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S12.
Preparations of Zn(L5-)
The title compound was prepared according to the procedure
as described for Zn(L3,5-). The title compound (216.6 mg, 0.403 mmol) was obtained from 5-tert-butylsalicylaldehyde (267.3 mg, 1.50 mmol) and 3,3-diamino-N-methyldipropylamine (108.9 mg, 0.750 mmol), after precipitation
from dichloromethane (2 mL) and hexane (30 mL).1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz): δ 8.074 (s, 2H), 7.182 (dd, J = 7.4, 1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.923 (dd, J = 7.8,
1.8 Hz, 2H), 6.380 (dd, J = 7.8, 7.4 Hz, 2H), 4,559
(m, 2H), 3.416 (m, 2H), 2.716 (broad), 2.283 (s, 3H), 2.030 (broad),
1.938 (broad), 1.339 (s, 18H).13C NMR (100 MHz,
CDCl3): δ 169.696,
168.419, 135.175, 131.196, 130.322, 122.664, 117.639, 58.268, 38.581,
33.464, 31.417, 26.541.Anal. calcd for C29H41N3O2Zn (H2O)0.5: C, 64.74; H, 7.87; N, 7.81;
found: C, 64.84; H, 7.75; N, 7.82.HRMS calcd for C29H41N3O2Zn H+m/z 528.2568;
found, 528.2559. The low-resolution mass spectrum in a wide m/z range is shown in Figure S13.
Authors: Barnali Naskar; Ritwik Modak; Dilip K Maiti; Michael G B Drew; Antonio Bauzá; Antonio Frontera; Chitrangada Das Mukhopadhyay; Snehasis Mishra; Krishna Das Saha; Sanchita Goswami Journal: Dalton Trans Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 4.390
Authors: Sang Woo Kwak; Hyoshik Kwon; Ji Hye Lee; Hyonseok Hwang; Min Kim; Yongseog Chung; Youngjo Kim; Kang Mun Lee; Myung Hwan Park Journal: Dalton Trans Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 4.390