ChemComm
Please do not adjust margins
Page 4 of 4
COMMUNICATION
Journal Name
decreases the driving force for ET to the catalyst (kET), but at the mediator that serves as an electron shuttle betweeVnietwhAertQicleDOnalinned
same time increases the driving force for reduction of the enzyme. Optimum performance requirDesOI:a10.c10a3r9e/fCu9lCCb0a1la15n0cAe
mediator (kCS). Thus, while the mediators that are easier to among the rates of charge separation, ET to the enzyme and
reduce (lower LUMO energies) exhibit a higher quantum charge recombination, which can be achieved by tuning the
efficiency for photoreduction by the QDs, they are less effective energy of the mediator LUMO. The versatility of this modular
at reducing the enzyme and producing hydrogen. In contrast, system makes it attractive for additional studies with other
charge recombination becomes more rapid as the LUMO energy photosensitizer materials and with other biological or manmade
is increased, which lowers the net yield of photoreduction in the catalysts for PCET processes such as CO2 reduction.
absence of enzyme. In the presence of enzyme, however, ET to
the enzyme is competitive with charge recombination and thus structure determination. Funding for this work was provided by
efficient hydrogen production can be achieved. the National Science Foundation (grants CHE1807865 and
The authors thank Dr. John Bacsa for help with X-ray crystal
Further insight on the optimum parameters for hydrogen DMR1808288 to RBD) and by the Division of Chemical
production is provided by considering the solution potential Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences, Office of Basic Energy
achieved under illumination at steady state. Fig. 3C shows the Sciences of the U.S. Department of Energy (grant DE-FG05-
production of reduced mediator as a function of illumination time 95ER20175 to MWA).
for DQ03, DQ43, and DQ53 mediators with and without
hydrogenase present. The reduced mediator concentration
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts to declare.
increases initially then reaches a constant value; a lower steady
state population is reached in the presence of hydrogenase, due
to ET to the enzyme. It is clear that in all cases the system reaches
steady state (constant mediator•+ concentration) within an hour.
Therefore, we determined the steady state solution potential by
measuring the concentration of reduced mediator from the
radical absorbance after 5000 sec of illumination. The Nernst
equation was then used to calculate the solution potential from
the relative concentration of mediator•+/mediator++, yielding the
values shown in Table 1. For comparison, at pH 7.1 the hydrogen
couple is at -419 mV. The most efficient mediators DQ03, DQ53
and DQ43 reach steady state solution potentials near or more
negative than the hydrogen couple. In contrast, with DQ42 and
DQ52 the steady state solution potentials are significantly more
positive than the hydrogen couple and therefore proton reduction
is not as favorable for the 2C linker mediators.
The hydrogen production efficiency peaks with DQ53 even
though it does not have the most negative reduction potential.
DQ53•+ concentration levels close to those observed for DQ03•+
are achieved when the solution contains solely dots and mediator
(Fig. 3C). When the enzyme is present, however, steady state
illumination produces a barely observable population of DQ53•+,
indicating that its consumption by the enzyme is rapid. Based on
this evidence, it is likely that the conditions are not fully
optimized for hydrogen production in the case of DQ53.
Utilization of a photosensitizer with a longer-lived exciton, such
as a nanorod, would increase the QEhyd produced with DQ53,
since it would increase QErad. The lower QEhyd observed with
DQ43 is in part due to inefficient ET to the enzyme despite its
more negative reduction potential, resulting in a higher steady
state population of mediator•+ compared to DQ53 (Fig. 3C).
Slower ET to the enzyme for DQ43 might be an indication of
entrance into the Marcus inverted regime, wherein having an
increased driving force slows ET to the enzyme, resulting in a
Notes and references
1
K. A. Brown, D. F. Harris, M. B. Wilker, A. Rasmussen, N.
Khadka, H. Hamby, S. Keable, G. Dukovic, J. W. Peters, L.
C. Seefeldt and P. W. King, Science, 2016, 352, 448-450.
M. Đokić and H. S. Soo, Chem. Commun., 2018, 54, 6554-
6572.
B. L. Greene, C. A. Joseph, M. J. Maroney and R. B. Dyer, J.
Am. Chem. Soc., 2012, 134, 11108-11111.
K. A. Brown, M. B. Wilker, M. Boehm, H. Hamby, G.
Dukovic and P. W. King, ACS Catalysis, 2016, 6, 2201-2204.
K. A. Brown, S. Dayal, X. Ai, G. Rumbles and P. W. King, J.
Am. Chem. Soc., 2010, 132, 9672-9680.
T. W. Woolerton, S. Sheard, Y. S. Chaudhary and F. A.
Armstrong, Energy Environ. Sci., 2012, 5, 7470-7490.
B. Chica, C.-H. Wu, Y. Liu, M. W. W. Adams, T. Lian and
R. B. Dyer, Energy Environ. Sci., 2017, 10, 2245-2255.
M. S. Kodaimati, K. P. McClelland, C. He, S. Lian, Y. Jiang,
Z. Zhang and E. A. Weiss, Inorg. Chem., 2018, 57, 3659-
3670.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
H. Zhu, N. Song, H. Lv, C. L. Hill and T. Lian, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2012, 134, 11701-11708.
10 E. A. Weiss, ACS Energy Lett, 2017, 2, 1005-1013.
11 M. D. Peterson, S. C. Jensen, D. J. Weinberg and E. A.
Weiss, ACS Nano, 2014, 8, 2826-2837.
12 A. J. Morris-Cohen, M. D. Peterson, M. T. Frederick, J. M.
Kamm and E. A. Weiss, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 2012, 3, 2840-
2844.
13 J. Chen, K. Wu, B. Rudshteyn, Y. Jia, W. Ding, Z.-X. Xie, V.
S. Batista and T. Lian, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2016, 138, 884-
892.
14 S. H. R. Brienne, P. D. W. Boyd, P. Schwerdtfeger, G. A.
Bowmaker and R. P. Cooney, J. Mol. Struct., 1995, 356, 81-
94.
15 S. Yasui, K. Itoh, A. Ohno and N. Tokitoh, Org Biomol
Chem, 2006, 4, 2928-2931.
16 S. Yasui, K. Itoh, A. Ohno and N. Tokitoh, Org. Biomol.
Chem., 2006, 4, 2928-2931.
lower than expected QEhyd
.
In this report, we have optimized the hydrogen production
efficiency of a hybrid photocatalytic system consisting of a
nanocrystalline semiconductor (CdSe QD) photosensitizer and a
hydrogenase enzyme (Pf SHI). The performance was optimized
by tuning the structure and reduction potential of the redox
17 H. Zhu, Y. Yang, K. Wu and T. Lian, Annu. Rev. Phys.
Chem., 2016, 67, 259-281.
18 B. L. Greene, C.-H. Wu, P. M. McTernan, M. W. W. Adams
and R. B. Dyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2015, 137, 4558–4566.
19 S. Kundu and A. Patra, Chem. Rev., 2017, 117, 712-757.
4 | Chem. Commun., 2019, 00, 1-4
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 20xx
Please do not adjust margins