Paper
PCCP
in Table 2. This series correlates well with the ICT efficiency for assess the influence of substitution on the efficiency of the
compounds 12a-dMg and 12a-dZn (Fig. 4b). Therefore, the deactivation processes. Several factors were recognized. A substituent
substituents on the donor clearly play an important role, and in the position ortho to the donor center plays an important role in
sufficiently strong donors (e.g., phenothiazine in 12dZn and ICT for reasons that have heretofore not been fully revealed. Chloro,
12dMg) can suppress the effect of a substituent in the ortho methyl, hydrogen, or phenyl substituents were found to inhibit
position (see previous discussion).
efficient ICT processes, whereas alkylsulfanyl or alkoxy substituents
After the excitation, the charge transfer state is formed in ICT supported the ICT. The effect of an ortho substituent can be
when the donor and the acceptor are in conjugation; however, the eliminated through the introduction of a linker between the TPyzPz
radical anion and the radical cation are formed in PET (no macrocycle and the donor. Strong electron donors can also suppress
conjugation between the donor and the acceptor). A comparison the ‘‘ortho effect.’’ The ICT efficiency depends significantly on the
of the efficiencies of these two processes in TPyzPzs is interesting electron-donating properties of the donor, which may easily be
because both principles have been recognized in other classes of characterized using its oxidation potential. Phenothiazine-10-yl was
molecules for the development of a number of sensors or activable the strongest donor in the studied series. Conjugation of the donor
compounds.5,24,25 In this study, PET was demonstrated in with an acceptor (i.e., ICT) leads to a more efficient deactivation of
compounds with one N,N-diethylaminoethylsulfanyl substituent the excited states in TPyzPzs than in the case of an aliphatic linker
(10fMg, 10fZn, 12fMg, 12fZn, 14fMg, or 14fZn) or with eight such between the donor and the acceptor (i.e., PET). These factors should
substituents (15Mg, 15Zn). The first important observation is that a be further considered for the design of new fluorescence sensors
substituent in the ortho position has no effect on the PET efficiency. based on the ON–OFF switching in TPyzPzs.
All compounds from the 10f, 12f, 14f series with one donor center
were characterized by a similar sum of FD and FF (approximately
half the value of a compound without any donor—16Mg, 16Zn)
Acknowledgements
irrespective of the adjacent substituent (Fig. 4c). Apparently, the
The work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation
longer distance eliminates the ‘‘ortho’’ effect. However, the overall
ˇ´
ˇ
(P207-11-1200). The authors would like to thank Jirı Kunes
PET efficiency is significantly below that of ICT, as demonstrated by
a comparison with compound 12eZn, in which the donor (in
conjugation) is approximately at the same distance from the
acceptor and the ‘‘ortho effect’’ is limited (Fig. 4c). The sum of
FD and FF for the compound 12eZn is approximately one order of
magnitude less than those for compounds 10fMg, 10fZn, 12fMg,
12fZn, 14fMg, and 14fZn with PET. An intensification of the PET12
or ICT13 efficiency with an increasing number of donor centers has
been demonstrated in the literature. Thus, the decrease in the FD
and FF values in compounds 15Mg and 15Zn substituted with eight
donor centers for PET was unsurprising. However, the interesting
fact is that only the presence of eight donor centers in these
compounds brought the PET efficiency closer to that of the ICT
in 12eZn with one donor center.
Another experiment was performed to demonstrate the key
role played by the lone pair on the donor nitrogen in the
deactivation process of the PET in TPyzPzs. The fluorescence
quantum yield of compound 14fZn in THF is 0.13. The addition of
a small quantity of sulfuric acid (0.1% v/v) into this solution
increased FF to 0.23, a value comparable to that of compound
16Zn with no donor center. An increase of the sulfuric acid
concentration to 1% (v/v) or 2% (v/v) did not change the fluores-
cence intensity further, which indicates that the donor center was
fully protonated after the first addition. A similar recovery of
photophysical properties was noted for ICT in TPyzPzs15,26 or for
PET in Pc after protonation of the donor.27–29
ˇ
ˇ
and Zdenek Kucera for NMR measurements.
Notes and references
´
´
1 M. E. Daraio, P. F. Aramendıa and E. San Roman, Chem.
Phys. Lett., 1996, 250, 203–208.
¨
´
´
2 M. E. Daraio, A. Volker, P. F. Aramendıa and E. San Roman,
Langmuir, 1996, 12, 2932–2938.
3 I. Bruseghini, L. Fabbrizzi, M. Licchelli and A. Taglietti,
Chem. Commun., 2002, 1348–1349.
4 X. F. Zhang, J. Fluoresc., 2011, 21, 1559–1564.
5 Y. Urano, D. Asanuma, Y. Hama, Y. Koyama, T. Barrett,
M. Kamiya, T. Nagano, T. Watanabe, A. Hasegawa, P. L.
Choyke and H. Kobayashi, Nat. Med., 2009, 15, 104–109.
6 J. R. Lakowicz, Principles of fluorescence spectroscopy,
Springer, New York, 3rd edn, 2006.
7 P. Zimcik, M. Miletin, H. Radilova, V. Novakova, K. Kopecky,
J. Svec and E. Rudolf, Photochem. Photobiol., 2010, 86,
168–175.
8 I. Manet, F. Manoli, M. P. Donzello, E. Viola, A. Masi,
G. Andreano, G. Ricciardi, A. Rosa, L. Cellai, C. Ercolani
and S. Monti, Inorg. Chem., 2013, 52, 321–328.
9 M. P. Donzello, D. Vittori, E. Viola, I. Manet, L. Mannina,
L. Cellai, S. Monti and C. Ercolani, Inorg. Chem., 2011, 50,
7391–7402.
10 M. P. Donzello, Z. Ou, F. Monacelli, G. Ricciardi, C. Rizzoli,
C. Ercolani and K. M. Kadish, Inorg. Chem., 2004, 43,
8626–8636.
11 M. P. Donzello, Z. Ou, D. Dini, M. Meneghetti, C. Ercolani
and K. M. Kadish, Inorg. Chem., 2004, 43, 8637–8648.
Conclusions
This work focused on the structural factors that influence the
ICT or PET in TPyzPzs. A logically designed series of TPyzPzs 12 P. Zimcik, M. Miletin, Z. Musil, K. Kopecky, L. Kubza and
containing primarily one donor center was synthesized to
D. Brault, J. Photochem. Photobiol., A, 2006, 183, 59–69.
This journal is ©the Owner Societies 2014
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2014, 16, 5440--5446 | 5445