ChemComm
Communication
Cu(110) but that the proton released from the transformation of the
cation to the alkene, instead of recombining and desorbing as
molecular hydrogen, is transferred via the substrate to the nearby
carboxylate fragment, turning it into the acid species (ESI‡). A
concerted b-H elimination pathway could also occur, although this
is expected to be less likely because of the molecular conformation
of NEP on the surface.
Our measurements clearly show that on both surfaces the
ester dissociates along the RCH(CH3)–OC(O)R bond. This is
different from what was reported for heterogeneous Cu catalysis11
and from the dissociation pathway suggested by calculations12 but
agrees with the suggested pathway for Boc-removal proposed in
ref. 18. Possible reasons for this could be the strength of
the interaction of the carboxylate/carboxylic moieties with the
Cu(110)/Au(111) surfaces, which are different from the Cu
clusters used in the calculation, or the stability of the specific
NEP cationic fragment after dissociation.
In conclusion, we have shown that the ester NEP dissociates
at room temperature on Cu(110) and at high temperature on
Au(111) but remains largely intact on low temperature Cu(110)
and room temperature Au(111), where it generates a chiral
hierarchical supramolecular structure. The products of dissocia-
tion have been clearly identified by comparison with biphenyl
carboxylic acid. Based on this, we have demonstrated that on
both surfaces the ester cleavage occurs along the RCH(CH3)–
OC(O)R bond. Moreover, we propose that an effective proton
transfer takes place on Au(111) to generate the acid and
complementary alkenes after the initial bond cleavage.
G.C. gratefully acknowledges financial support from EPSRC
through grant EP/G044864/1, The Royal Society through grant
no. RG100917 and the Warwick-Santander Fund. Some of the
equipment used in this research was obtained through Birmingham
Science City with support from Advantage West Midlands.
Fig. 2 STM image of NEP deposited onto Au(111). (a) and (b) Room tempera-
ture deposition. (b) Zoom of the triangular structures in (a) with the overlaid
molecular model of the packing. The blue outline highlights a single six-pronged
star. (c) and (d) Effect of annealing to 100 1C; the coverage is reduced and the
structures are composed of both whole molecules and molecular fragments. (d)
Zoom of an individual triangular cluster from (c) with the proposed model inset.
All images were acquired at ꢁ196 1C.
manner to form a three-pronged star which also includes three intact
molecules arranged between the prongs, Fig. 2(d). All of these
structures display the same chirality and are aligned with the
fragments along the [101] directions of the surface. As a consequence,
only two 601 mutually rotated orientations are possible. A few features
involving just the fragment species are also observed, such as two
three-pronged stars joined together or a six-pronged chiral propeller
displaying both R- and S-organisational chiralities. We note
that all of these structures can also be found in small percen-
tages on the room temperature high coverage sample, indicat-
ing that Au(111) still has residual catalytic activity although
significantly lower than that of Cu(110).
Also for Au(111) the nature of the fragments was investigated
by a comparative room temperature deposition of the biphenyl
carboxylic acid molecule. The corresponding STM measurements
show assemblies similar to the structures formed by the NEP
fragments as, for example, the three pronged stars (Fig. S10, ESI‡).
The fact that for both Cu(110) and Au(111) the STM images of
the NEP fragments appear very similar to the images obtained by
depositing the biphenyl carboxylic acid allows us to delineate a
hypothesis for the reaction mechanism. In particular, on room
temperature Cu(110) the acid is stable only in its deprotonated
Notes and references
1 S. Haq, et al., Nat. Chem., 2009, 1, 409–414.
2 M. Lingenfelder, et al., Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2007, 46, 4492–4495.
3 K.-H. Ernst, in Supramolecular Chirality, ed. M. CregoCalama and
D. N. Reinboudt, 2006, vol. 265, pp. 209–252.
4 V. Demers-Carpentier, et al., Science, 2011, 334, 776–780.
5 F. Masini, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2011, 133, 13910–13913.
6 S. De Feyter, et al., Langmuir, 1999, 15, 2817–2822.
7 G. Franc and A. Gourdon, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2011, 13,
14283–14292.
8 S. W. Hla, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 2000, 85, 2777–2780.
9 J. S. Carey, et al., Org. Biomol. Chem., 2006, 4, 2337–2347.
10 A. Maccoll, in Adv. Phys. Org. Chem., ed. V. Gold, Academic Press,
1965, vol. 3, pp. 91–122.
11 M. Zdrazil and M. Kraus, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun., 1974, 39,
3515–3521.
12 J. W. Evans, et al., J. Catal., 1984, 88, 203–213.
13 M. A. N. Santiago, et al., J. Catal., 2000, 193, 16–28.
14 K. Tahara, et al., CrystEngComm, 2011, 13, 5551–5558.
form,19–21 implying by comparison that the ester is being cleaved at 15 T. E. Jones and C. J. Baddeley, Surf. Sci., 2002, 519, 237–249.
16 A. G. Trant and C. J. Baddeley, Langmuir, 2011, 27, 1788–1795.
17 S. L. Silva, et al., Surf. Sci., 2000, 452, 79–94.
18 S. Boz, et al., Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 3179–3183.
the RCH(CH3)–OC(O)R bond to form the carboxylate and the
cation, the latter most probably further deprotonating to an alkene.
On the other hand, the biphenyl carboxylic acid molecule is not 19 B. G. Frederick, et al., Surf. Sci., 1993, 292, 33–46.
20 D. S. Martin, et al., Phys. Rev. B, 2002, 66, 155427.
21 T. Classen, et al., J. Phys. Chem. A, 2007, 111, 12589–12603.
22 Y. Wang, et al., Chem. Commun., 2012, 48, 534–536.
expected to deprotonate on Au(111) which means that the fragment
must also be in its acidic form on this surface. We therefore
tentatively suggest that on Au(111) NEP initially fragments as on 23 M. M. Knudsen, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2011, 133, 4896–4905.
c
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013
Chem. Commun., 2013, 49, 6477--6479 6479