10.1002/anie.201903367
Angewandte Chemie International Edition
COMMUNICATION
organic framework material CZJ-6-400B (Figure S15). The
hydrophobic nature is important in catalysis, which would protect
the active sites from toxic hydrophilic species.15
and the catalytic properties are much superior to those of the
carbonized material.
In summary, we developed an effective strategy to transform
instable MOFs into stable organic framework materials under
decarboxylative coupling reaction conditions. As an illustrated
example of CZJ-6, the fragile coordination bonds were replaced
with stable covalent C-C bonds under mild annealing conditions,
which resulted in a highly stable organic framework material with
inherited framework skeleton, porosity and catalytic properties
from the parent MOF. Enlightened by the results of this work, we
expect that numerous highly stable organic framework materials
with inherited properties from the parent MOFs will be created
for applications in various fields.
N2 sorption measurements were carried out to study the
textual characters of MOF CZJ-6, organic framework material
CZJ-6-400B and NPC material CZJ-6-800B (Figure S16). CZJ-6,
CZJ-6-400B and CZJ-6-800B take up 530, 103 and 134 cm3 g-1
N2 at 77 K and 1 bar, resulting microporous BET surface areas
of 394, 145 and 415 m2/g, respectively. Pore size distribution
analysis showed that there are two kinds of micropores for CZJ-
6-400B (1.15 and 1.30 nm) and CZJ-6-800B (1.05 and 1.25 nm)
(Figure S17). These values are very close to those of MOF CZJ-
6 (1.20 and 1.35 nm), which suggest that the pore characters of
CZJ-6 were successfully inherited in the daughter materials
CZJ-6-400 and CZJ-6-800. The slight shrinkage of pore sizes
should be resulted from decarboxylation of metalloporphyrin
ligands and further carbonization at elevated temperature. CO2
adsorption isotherms showed that CZJ-6, CZJ-6-400B and CZJ-
6-800B take up 51.9, 68.3 and 110.2 mg/g CO2 at 273K,
respectively (Figure S18). To get better understanding of the
adsorption behaviors, isosteric heats of CO2 adsorption (Qst) for
these materials were calculated based on Clausius−Clapeyron
equation from CO2 adsorption isotherms at 273 and 298 K.16 At
the initial stage, the Qst value for CZJ-6-400B (26.4 KJ/mol) is
higher than those for CZJ-6 (21.5 KJ/mol) and CZJ-6-800B (22.9
KJ/mol). These results indicate that there are stronger
interactions between the pore surfaces of CZJ-6-400B and CO2
molecules at low pressure, which might be ascribed to the
hydrophobic pore nature and the binding affinity of CO2 for the
open porphyrin copper(II) sites.12
Acknowledgements
We are grateful for the financial support of the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 21373180, 21525312
and 21872122).
Keywords: Metal-organic frameworks • Organic framework
materials • Decarboxylative coupling reaction • Coordination
bonds • Covalent bonds
[1]
(a) H.-C. Zhou, S. Kitagawa, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 5415-5418; (b)
A. Schoedel, M. Li, D. Li, M. O’Keeffe, O. M. Yaghi, Chem. Rev. 2016,
116, 12466-12535; (c) G. Maurin, C. Serre, A. Cooper, G. Férey, Chem.
Soc. Rev. 2017, 46, 3104-3107.
[2]
(a) J. A. Mason, M. Veenstra, J. R. Long, Chem. Sci. 2014, 5, 32-51; (b)
Z. Bao, G. Chang, H. Xing, R. Krishna, Q. Ren, B. Chen, Energy
Environ. Sci. 2016, 9, 3612-3641; (c) Q.-G. Zhai, X. Bu, X. Zhao, D.-S.
Li, P. Feng, Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50, 407-417; (d) H. Furukawa, K. E.
Cordova, M. O’Keeffe, O. M. Yaghi, Science 2013, 341, 1230444-
1230457; (e) T. Islamoglu, S. Goswami, Z. Li, A. J. Howarth, O. K.
Farha, J. T. Hupp, Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50, 805-813; (f) W. P. Lustig,
S. Mukherjee, N. D. Rudd, A. V. Desai, J. Li, S. K. Ghosh, Chem. Soc.
Rev. 2017, 46, 3242-3285; (g) M. Zhao, S. Ou, C.-D. Wu, Acc. Chem.
Res. 2014, 47, 1199-1207; (h) X. Lian, Y. Fang, E. Joseph, Q. Wang, J.
Li, S. Banerjee, C. Lollar, X. Wang, H.-C. Zhou, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2017,
46, 3386-3401; (i) A. H. Chughtai, N. Ahmad, H. A. Younus, A. Laypkov,
F. Verpoort, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2015, 44, 6804-6849; (j) L. Jiao, Y. Wang,
H.-L. Jiang, Q. Xu, Adv. Mater. 2017, 30, 1703663; (k) M. Yoon, R.
Srirambalaji, K. Kim, Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 1196-1231; (l) T. Drake, P.
Ji, W. Lin, Acc. Chem. Res. 2018, 51, 2129-2138.
To evaluate the stability and the accessibility of CuII-
porphyrin sites in the organic framework materials, we examined
the catalytic properties of CZJ-6-TB in cross dehydrogenative
coupling (CDC) esterification reaction between C(sp3)-H and
carboxylic acid.17 As shown in Table S2, molecular Cu-TDPPP
catalyzed the CDC esterification reaction between benzoic acid
and 1,4-dioxane to afford ester product with 75% yield. However,
Cu-TDPPP almost degraded after catalysis, because of self-
oxidative reaction.2g When MOF CZJ-6 was used as a catalyst,
the solid was completely dissolved after catalysis,
accompanying degradation of CuII-porphyrin. In contrast, the
organic framework materials CZJ-6-TB exhibited high stability in
catalyzing the CDC reaction. The catalytic activity of CZJ-6-
400B (92% ester yield) is also much higher than that of MOF
catalyst CZJ-6 (73% yield). Because low annealing temperature
would result in low-degree polymerization, CZJ-6-350B was
partially decomposed when catalyzing the CDC reaction, leading
to low ester yield (44%). However, excessively higher
temperature let CuII-porphyrin suffer from severe decomposition,
resulting in decreased ester yields (46-62%), while the
carbonized material CZJ-6-800 only resulted in 8% ester yield.
No obvious leaching of CuII-porphyrin was observed in the
supernatants for CZJ-6-TB (T ≥ 400 oC) after catalysis as
confirmed by UV-vis spectra and ICP-OES (Figures S19 and
S20). FT-IR spectrum showed that CuII-porphyrin in CZJ-6-400B
remained intact after catalysis (Figure S21). The above results
revealed that the chemical stability of organic framework
material CZJ-6-400B is much higher than that of the parent MOF
[3]
[4]
(a) N. C. Burtch, H. Jasuja, K. S. Walton, Chem. Rev. 2014, 114,
10575-10612; (b) M. D. Toni, R. Jonchiere, P. Pullumbi, F.-X. Coudert,
A. H. Fuchs, ChemPhysChem 2012, 13, 3497-3503; (c) J. J. Low, A. I.
Benin, P. Jakubczak, J. F. Abrahamian, S. A. Faheem, R. R. Willis, J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 15834-15842.
(a) B. Liu, H. Shioyama, T. Akita, Q. Xu, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130,
5390-5391; (b) W. Xia, A. Mahmood, R. Zou, Q. Xu, Energy Environ.
Sci. 2015, 8, 1837-1866; (c) S. J. Yang, S. Nam, T. Kim, J. H. Im, H.
Jung, J. H. Kang, S. Wi, B. Park, C. R. Park, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013,
135, 7394-7397; (d) T. K. Kim, K. J. Lee, J. Y. Cheon, J. H. Lee, S. H.
Joo, H. R. Moon, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 8940-8946; (e) K. J.
Lee, J. H. Lee, S. Jeoung, H. R. Moon, Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50,
2684-2692; (f) A. Indra, T. Song, U. Paik, Adv. Mater. 2018, 30,
1705146; (g) Y. V. Kaneti, J. Tang, R. R. Salunkhe, X. Jiang, A. Yu, K.
C.-W. Wu, Y. Yamauchi, Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1604898; (h) B. Y.
Guan, X. Y. Yu, H. B. Wu, X. W. Lou, Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1703614; (i)
J. Liu, D. Zhu, C. Guo, A. Vasileff, S.-Z. Qiao, Adv. Energy Mater. 2017,
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.