8870 J. Phys. Chem. A, Vol. 104, No. 39, 2000
Chou et al.
SCHEME 2
For all studied 3FAI HB species appreciable population in
the normal triplet state is expected. Accordingly, a key question
regarding the double proton transfer in the triplet state, i.e., T
f T′ (prime denotes the tautomer species) is intriguing. We
have attempted to perform the triplet-triplet absorption mea-
surement in the concentrated 3FAI. Unfortunately, since the
spectral profiles remain unchanged during the time-dependent
spectral evolution this issue cannot be resolved at this stage.
On one hand, the result may indicate the prohibition of the T
f T′ proton transfer reaction. On the other hand, it might
indicate that ESDPT in the triplet state takes place at a time
scale much shorter than the system response time of 30 ns so
that the observed transient spectra mainly correspond to the T1′
f Tn′ transition. Further studies focusing on the dynamics of
proton transfer reaction in the triplet state for 3FAI HB
complexes are currently in progress.
is also reasonable to assume a similar radiative decay rate
between 3FMPP and 3FAI(tautomer) HB complexes in cyclo-
hexane. Giving the emission yield and decay rate of 3FMPP to
be 0.085 and 8.1 × 107 s-1 (see Table 1), a radiative decay
rate kr of 6.9 × 106 s-1 was then deduced in cyclohexane. The
lifetime of the tautomer emission for each 3FAI/guest complex
has been measured and shown in Table 1. Consequently, Φc
was calculated to be 0.053, 0.077, and 0.054 for 3FAI dimer,
3FAI/acetic acid and 3FAI/lactam, respectively. The relatively
smaller Φc value with respect to that of 3FMPP can be
rationalized by the HB effect in 3FAI(tautomer)/guest com-
plexes, which may induce additional radiationless decay chan-
nels. On the basis of the relation of Φpt ) Φobs /Φc, Φpt was
then calculated to be 0.40 and 0.55 for 3FAI dimer and 3FAI/
acetic acid complex, respectively. Φpt can be further expressed
as Φpt ) kpt/(kpt + kA) according to Scheme 2. Since the rate of
Snπ* f Sππ* IC is commonly independent of solvents it is
reasonable to adopt same kA (IC) rate of 4.37 × 1012 s-1
estimated in methanol for three studied 3FAI HB complexes.
Accordingly, an intrinsic proton-transfer rate kpt of 2.91 × 1012
s-1 (343 fs-1) and 5.34 × 1012 s-1 (187 fs-1) was deduced for
3FAI dimer and 3FAI/acetic acid complex, respectively. These
values are qualitatively in agreement with the rate of proton
transfer of g1.0 × 1012 s-1 reported in the case of 7AI dimer.9,10
Assuming similar rate of IC and Φc upon the N-H deuterium
substitution, the deuterium isotope-dependent tautomer emission
intensity can thus be rationalized by the slower deuterium
transfer rate relative that of proton. As a result, kpt for deuterium
transfer is less competitive with respect to the rate of IC. For
example, giving Φobs of 0.03 (vide supra) for the 3FAI(D)/acetic
Conclusion
In summary the 1nπ* configuration is concluded to be in the
lowest excited singlet state for both normal monomer and HB
complexes in 3FAI. An Sππ* f Snπ* IC rate has been estimated
to be ∼230 fs-1 in methanol. ESDPT of 3FAI in alcohols,
similar to that of the 7AI/alcohols complex, requires a geo-
metrical adjustment of the guest molecule on a time scale of
few hundred picoseconds and thus can hardly compete with the
Sππ* f Snπ* IC. On the other hand, the intact dual HB formation
in the cases of 3FAI dimer, 3FAI/acetic acid and 3FAI/lactam
complexes leads to a fast ESDPT which is comparable with
the rate of Sππ* f Snπ* IC. Accordingly, the steady-state
tautomer emission intensity reveals a remarkable deuterium
isotope effect. The introduction of a carbonyl functional group
at the C3 position thus presents the first case among 7AI
analogues to demonstrate the competitive IC/ESDPT reaction
in which the fast Sππ* f Snπ* IC serves as an internal clock to
examine the dynamics of ESDPT.
Acknowledgment. This work was supported by the National
Science Council, Taiwan, R.O.C. (NSC87-2119-M-194-002).
References and Notes
(1) Taylor, C. A.; El-Bayoumi, A. M.; Kasha, M. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 1969, 65, 253
(2) Ingham, K. C.; El-Bayoumi, M. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1971, 93,
5023.
(3) Ingham. K. C.; El-Bayoumi, M. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1974, 96,
1674.
(4) Watson, J. D.; Crick, F. H. C. Nature (London) 1953, 171, 964.
(5) Watson, D. G.; Sweet, R. M.; Marsh, R. E. Acta Crystallogr. 1965,
19, 573.
(6) Douhal, A.; Kim, S. K.; Zewail, A. H. Nature 1995, 378.
(7) Folmer, D. E.; Poth, L.; Wisniewski, E. S.; Castleman, A. W., Jr.
Chem. Phys. Lett. 1998, 287, 1.
(8) Chachisvillis, M.; Fiebig, T.; Douhal, A.; Zewail, A. H. J. Phys.
Chem. A. 1998, 102, 669.
(9) Takeuchi, S.; Tahara, T. J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 7740.
(10) Fiebig, T.; Chachisvillis, M.; Manger, M.; Zewail, A. H.; Douhal,
A.; Garcia Ochoa, I.; de La Hoz Ayuso, A.J. Phys. Chem. A 1999, 103,
7419.
(11) McMorrow, D.; Aartsma, T. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1986, 125, 581.
(12) Moog, R. S.; Bovino, S. C.; Simon, J. D. J. Phys. Chem. 1988, 92,
6545.
acid(D) complex, kD was then estimated to be ∼360 fs-1
.
pt
Similar method gives a kD value of 675 fs-1 for the 3FAI(D)
pt
dimer. Note that in this study negligible deuterium isotope
effect was observed in the steady-state tautomer emission
intensity for the 7AI dimer where kpt is apparently .kA, al-
though significant deuterium transfer dynamics have been
reported.10
Interestingly, Φobs for the 3FAI/lactam complex is only ca.
6.7% of that measured in 3FAI/acetic acid (see Table 1). If the
assumption of a similar Φc holds among three studied 3FAI
HB complexes, a smaller kpt value of 2.4 × 1011 s-1 (4.2 ps-1
)
was then estimated for the 3FAI/lactam HB complex. The
ESDPT reaction in 3FAI/lactam can be ascribed as a noncata-
lytic type16c,d where both host and guest should undergo
tautomerism simultaneously during ESDPT. The more ender-
gonic reaction may empirically lead to a higher formation free
energy of the activated complex, i.e., an existence of higher
energy barrier. Further investigation focusing on the ultrafast
time-resolved ESDPT dynamics is necessary to resolve this
issue.
(13) Koijnenberg, J.; Huizer, A. H.; Varma, C. A. O. J. Chem. Soc.,
Faraday Trans. 2 1988, 84 (8), 1163.
(14) (a) Moog., R. S.; Maroncelli, M. J. Phys. Chem. 1991, 95, 10359.
(b) Chapman, C. F.; Maroncelli, M. J. Phys. Chem. 1992, 96, 8430. (c)
Mentus, S.; Maroncelli, M. J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 3860.
(15) (a) Negreie, M.; Bellefeuille, S. M.; Whitham, S.; Petrich, J. W.;
Thornburg, R. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 7419. (b) Negrerie, M.;
Gai, F.; Bellefeuille, S. M.; Petrich, J. W. J. Phys. Chem. 1991, 95, 8663.
(c) Negrerie, M.; Gai, F.; Lambry, J.-C.; Martin, J.-L.; Petrich, J. W. J.
Phys. Chem. 1993, 97, 5046. (d) Chen, Y.; Rich, R. L.; Gai, F.; Petrich, J.