ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Temperature Dependence of Charge Separation and Recombination in Porphyrin Oligomer–Fullerene Donor–Acceptor Systems
My Activity

Figure 1Loading Img
  • Open Access
Article

Temperature Dependence of Charge Separation and Recombination in Porphyrin Oligomer–Fullerene Donor–Acceptor Systems
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

View Author Information
Physical Chemistry, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Kemivägen 3, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3TA, U.K.
Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Cite this: J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 25, 9863–9871
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/ja2019367
Published May 19, 2011

Copyright © 2011 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Electron-transfer reactions are fundamental to many practical devices, but because of their complexity, it is often very difficult to interpret measurements done on the complete device. Therefore, studies of model systems are crucial. Here the rates of charge separation and recombination in donor–acceptor systems consisting of a series of butadiyne-linked porphyrin oligomers (n = 1–4, 6) appended to C60 were investigated. At room temperature, excitation of the porphyrin oligomer led to fast (5–25 ps) electron transfer to C60 followed by slower (200–650 ps) recombination. The temperature dependence of the charge-separation reaction revealed a complex process for the longer oligomers, in which a combination of (i) direct charge separation and (ii) migration of excitation energy along the oligomer followed by charge separation explained the observed fluorescence decay kinetics. The energy migration is controlled by the temperature-dependent conformational dynamics of the longer oligomers and thereby limits the quantum yield for charge separation. Charge recombination was also studied as a function of temperature through measurements of femtosecond transient absorption. The temperature dependence of the electron-transfer reactions could be successfully modeled using the Marcus equation through optimization of the electronic coupling (V) and the reorganization energy (λ). For the charge-separation rate, all of the donor–acceptor systems could be successfully described by a common electronic coupling, supporting a model in which energy migration is followed by charge separation. In this respect, the C60-appended porphyrin oligomers are suitable model systems for practical charge-separation devices such as bulk-heterojunction solar cells, where conformational disorder strongly influences the electron-transfer reactions and performance of the device.

Copyright © 2011 American Chemical Society

Introduction

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The production of artificial photosynthetic systems to power solar fuel production is an interesting and promising idea, and to accomplish it, we must rely on molecular and supramolecular assemblies. (1) In natural photosynthesis, cascades of short-range energy-transfer and electron-transfer processes between well-arranged chromophores occur, (2-7) and a large variety of super- and supramolecular systems have been studied in order to mimic the natural process. In particular, those systems have been based on chlorophylls, (8, 9) porphyrins, (10-16) or phthalocyanines (17-22) as the electron donor and single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs), (23-26) fullerenes, (27-30) or graphene (31, 32) as the electron acceptor. A few systems employing a multiple porphyrin unit as a photoactive electron donor have also been published. (33-35) All of these studies were performed at room temperature, but probing the temperature dependence of electron-transfer reactions can give additional information concerning the their mechanism. Because of the experimental difficulties associated with performing temperature-dependent pump–probe experiments, only a few studies of the temperature dependence of fast electron-transfer reactions using femtosecond transient absorption spectroscopy have been reported to date. (36-39)
Here we present a study of the temperature dependence of the charge-separation and charge-recombination processes in an electron donor–acceptor system based on a series of zinc porphyrin oligomers (Pn, n = 1–4, 6) as electron donors and an appended fullerene as the electron acceptor (Figure 1). The butadiyne links between the porphyrin moieties in the oligomer chain allow for almost barrierless rotation of the individual porphyrins, giving rise to numerous different conformations that vary with respect to their porphyrin–porphyrin dihedral angles. It has previously been shown that these conformations greatly influence the photophysical properties displayed by the system and that the observed absorption spectrum is an average of those for the different conformations. (40) A recent study performed on the fullerene-appended porphyrin dimer P2C60 showed how selective excitation of twisted or planar conformations could be used to control the rate of electron transfer. (41) It was concluded that charge separation from twisted conformers of P2C60 resulted in an electron-transfer rate that was 4 times higher than for planar conformers. The main reason for this increase was associated with a stronger electronic coupling to the C60 in the twisted components. This might be because the excitation energy was localized closer to the fullerene in the twisted components than in the planar ones, where the energy is delocalized over both porphyrins.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Molecular structure of the porphyrin oligomer-based donor–acceptor system studied in this work. The aryl substituents (Ar) are 3,5-bis(octyloxy)phenyl groups.

In the present work, we show that excitation of twisted conformers in longer oligomers can have the opposite effect on the electron-transfer rate, as the excitation energy can be localized on a segment of the oligomer that is far away from the electron acceptor. From there, it first must migrate closer to the fullerene before charge separation can occur. Similar behavior has been observed in natural photosynthesis and bulk-heterojunction solar cells. In photosynthetic organisms, excitation can occur at any of the absorbing chromophores, from which the excitation energy is funneled to the reaction center through consecutive energy-transfer reactions before charge separation can occur. (42) Likewise, in bulk-heterojunction (polymer) solar cells, excitation can occur anywhere along the conjugated polymer chain, and the excitation energy migrates along the polymer backbone until it reaches a phase boundary, where charge separation occurs. (43) The system presented here can be seen as a simple model for these important practical charge-separation devices.
The charge separation and recombination were studied using both steady-state and time-resolved emission as well as femtosecond transient absorption in order to probe how these processes depend on the oligomer length. The measurements showed a biexponential behavior of the charge-separation process for all of the oligomers larger than the dimer. To explain this, we have proposed a model wherein both active conformers (which undergo rapid charge separation after excitation) and inactive conformers are excited. The latter must first relax into the active state before charge separation can occur, resulting in delayed charge separation from these conformers. From this model, quantum yields for the charge-separation process were extracted and compared to the values obtained from the quenching of the steady-state fluorescence. In addition, we also explored the temperature dependence of the charge separation and recombination, from which reasonable electron-transfer parameters (electronic couplings and reorganization energies) were extracted.

Experimental Section

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Materials

Unless otherwise specified, all of the measurements were made in freshly distilled 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (2MTHF, Sigma-Aldrich) with 1% pyridine (Sigma-Aldrich) added to avoid aggregation of the porphyrin oligomers. The synthesis of compounds P1C60 and P2C60 has been reported previously. (44) The synthesis of compounds P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60 is presented in the Supporting Information (SI).

Temperature Studies

For the temperature-dependent ground-state absorption, transient absorption, steady-state emission, and time-resolved emission studies, a temperature-controlled cryostat (Oxford Instruments) cooled with liquid nitrogen was used.

Steady-State Absorption and Emission Spectroscopy

Absorption spectra were measured on a Cary 5000 UV–vis–NIR spectrometer. The spectra were recorded between 350 and 900 nm at 600 nm/min with a 0.5 nm spectral bandwidth. The sample was contained in a 10 mm quartz cuvette. Fully corrected emission spectra were recorded on a Spex Fluorolog 3 spectrofluorometer equipped with a xenon lamp. To avoid aggregation and inner-filter effects, the absorption was adjusted to 0.05 at the excitation wavelength.

Transient Absorption Spectroscopy

A pump–probe setup was used to record transient absorption spectra. A Ti:sapphire oscillator (Tsunami, Spectra Physics) generating pulses with a width of ∼90 fs (fwhm) was used to seed a Ti:sapphire regenerative amplifier (Spitfire, Spectra Physics) that was pumped by a frequency-doubled diode-pumped Nd:YLF laser (Evolution-X, Spectra Physics) and produced pulses of ∼110 fs duration (fwhm) at a repetition rate of 1 kHz. The amplified laser beam (800 nm) was divided by a beamsplitter, and the two beams were subsequently used as the pump and probe beams. The pump beam was manipulated by an optical parametric amplifier (OPA) (TOPAS, Light Conversion Ltd.) to yield a wavelength of 495 nm (450 nm for P1C60) and was delayed relative to the probe pulse with an optical delay stage (range 0–1.6 ns). The probe beam was obtained by focusing the remaining IR light on a 3 mm sapphire plate, which generated a white-light continuum in the region 500–1000 nm. Alternatively, to generate probe light between 980 and 1040 nm, a TOPAS White OPA (Light Conversion Ltd.) was used. The probe light was subsequently divided into reference and probe beams, and the latter of these was overlapped by the pump at the sample. The probe and reference beams were focused on the entrance slit of a spectrograph and detected by a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera (iXon-Andor) operating synchronously with the 1 kHz laser. The transient spectra were obtained from the difference of the intensities of the probe light (divided by the intensity of the reference) with and without excitation of the sample by the pump beam. Typically 1000 spectra were averaged per delay time.
The transient absorption decays were generally fitted by a triexponential decay function with an offset: I(t) = α1 exp(−t1) + α2 exp(−t2) + α3 exp(−t3) + I0. For every compound at every temperature, two time profiles were fitted: one from the visible part of the spectrum, representing the Q-band bleaching, and one at 1015 nm, where mostly the radical species C60•– and Pn•+ dominate the transient absorption. In the fitting procedure, the two shortest lifetimes (τ1 and τ2) were fixed to the corresponding lifetimes of the first singlet excited state, which were obtained from the fluorescence lifetime measurements (related to charge separation). The two transient absorption decays were fitted individually with the free parameters α1, α2, α3, τ3, and I0 until a reasonable fit was obtained. For P1C60, a slightly different procedure was employed. Since with our laser system it was not possible to obtain 450 nm pump light and generate probe light at ∼1015 nm in parallel efficiently, only the recovery of the Q-band bleaching was used to determine the lifetime of the charge-separated state. Furthermore, since the fluorescence decay for P1C60 was monoexponential, the transient absorption decay could be successfully modeled using a biexponential decay function. The fitting parameters α1, α2, and τ2 were free, whereas τ1 was fixed to the corresponding fluorescence lifetime.

Time-Resolved Fluorescence Spectroscopy

Time-resolved emission measurements were performed using a streak camera system. The excitation pulse was provided by a Tsunami Ti:sapphire laser (Spectra-Physics) that was pumped by a Millennia Pro X laser (Spectra-Physics). The Tsunami output was tuned to either 990 or 900 nm and subsequently frequency-doubled to 495 (450 nm for P1C60). The emitted photons were passed through a spectrograph (Acton SP2300, Princeton Instruments) and finally registered by a streak camera (C5680, Hamamatsu) with a synchroscan unit (M5675, Hamamatsu). Every single frame was measured and stored individually, and the time-resolved fluorescence spectra were obtained from these frames after jitter correction. From these fluorescence spectra, time profiles were extracted by averaging over a selected wavelength region. The fluorescence lifetime decays were fitted with biexponential functions through deconvolution of the instrument response function.

Results and Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Photophysical Studies

The electronic ground-state absorption spectra of the donor–acceptor complexes PnC60 are essentially identical with the sum of the corresponding Pn and C60 reference components (Figure 2). The slight red shift in the absorption spectra of the fullerene-terminated oligomers is due to conjugation of the porphyrins with the p-phenylene linking unit. All of the compounds show strong Soret-band absorptions with maxima at 445 nm (P1C60), 460 nm (P2C60), 464 nm (P3C60), 465 nm (P4C60), and 466 nm (P6C60) flanked by minor shoulders at ∼495 nm for those compounds containing more than one zinc porphyrin unit. From previous studies it is known that for P2C60, the absorption at ∼495 nm belongs to the planar conformer (i.e., the conformer in which the porphyrin units are coplanar), whereas the band at 460 nm belongs to a wide distribution of conformers. (40, 41) This feature allows for nearly exclusive excitation of a planar oligomer in P2 (at 495 nm), but for the longer systems, an increasing number of other conformers are excited at 495 nm because the oligomer contains more subunits. In addition to the Soret-band absorption, sets of Q-bands between 550 and 850 nm (Figure 2) were observed for all systems. The Q-band is red-shifted from 640 to 800 nm and gains intensity as the oligomers get longer.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Ground-state absorption spectra of Pn (black) and PnC60 (red) (n = 1–4, 6) at room temperature. Each spectrum has been normalized and offset by (n – 1) × 0.25 absorbance units.

The influence of temperature on the absorption spectra was investigated for all of the PnC60 systems, and only minor changes in the shape of the UV–vis spectra were observed over the temperature range 300–170 K. Below 170 K, the formation of aggregates was observed, as indicated by a sharp absorption band that appeared in the narrow temperature range between 170 and 140 K and was red-shifted relative to the “normal” Q-band absorption. This formation of aggregates was in particular observed for the systems containing more than two porphyrin units (Figures S6.1–S6.5 in the SI), and studies of this phenomenon will be reported in detail elsewhere. (45) In the following, measurements at temperatures where aggregates were expected to form (below 170 K) are presented, but all of the analyses were restricted to temperatures above 170 K to ensure monomolecular behavior.

Charge Separation

Steady-state fluorescence measurements provided information on the overall quenching of the PnC60 complexes. Upon excitation at 495 nm (450 nm for P1 and P1C60), all of the studied donor–acceptor systems showed efficient quenching due to electron transfer from excited Pn to C60. (41) Table 1 shows the calculated quenching efficiencies for the whole series of molecules at temperatures between 140 and 300 K. Except for the two lowest temperatures, where aggregation occurred, the quenching efficiencies varied systematically with both the size of the oligomer and the temperature. The temperature-dependent emission spectra for P3C60 are shown in Figure 3, and those for the other complexes are presented in Figures S7.1–S7.4 in the SI. While the shapes of the emission spectra for P1C60 and P2C60 were unaffected by the temperature change (above 170 K), the corresponding spectra for the longer oligomers exhibited blue shifts, indicative of emission from an increasing number of nonrelaxed conformers as the temperature was lowered. This shows that 495 nm excitation of the longer oligomers produces a mixture of excited conformers, some of which are less prone to undergo charge separation. This behavior was even more evident when the charge-separation process was studied using time-resolved emission.
Table 1. Quenching Efficiencies for the PnC60 Compounds Relative to Pna
T/KP1C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
1400.9930.9650.8580.8840.782
1600.9950.9730.8180.8340.770
1800.9940.9720.8420.6880.438
2000.9930.9730.8680.7290.480
2200.9930.9750.8980.7670.519
2400.9930.9760.9050.7990.555
2600.9920.9760.9090.8190.585
2800.9920.9750.9100.8350.602
3000.9900.9700.8580.8400.610
a

Values at 300 K were calculated as 1 – If(PnC60)/If(Pn), where the If’s are the integrated fluorescence intensities from samples of PnC60 and Pn with equal absorbances at the excitation wavelength. At lower temperatures, the integrated intensities were related to the intensity recorded at 300 K.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Fluorescence spectra of P3C60 measured at different temperatures.

Measurements of temperature-dependent time-resolved fluorescence and transient absorption based on picosecond and femtosecond laser excitation, respectively, helped provide a more detailed understanding of the electron-transfer processes. Fluorescence decays give the most accurate measurement of the rate constant for charge separation, since the signal is directly related to the quenching process. Except in the case of P1C60, all of the decays were biexponential at all temperatures (Figure 4 and Figures S8.1–S8.4 in the SI). In general, as shown in Figure 4, the average fluorescence lifetime increased with the length of the porphyrin chain and decreased with increasing temperature. Table 2 presents the lifetimes obtained from fits to the biexponential expression I(t) = α1 exp(−t1) + α2 exp(−t2), in which both the pre-exponential factors (α1 and α2) and the lifetimes (τ1 and τ2) were optimized. The normalized pre-exponential factors were virtually temperature-independent, and their magnitudes scaled with the oligomer length (the average values of α1 were 0.80 for P2C60, 0.65 for P3C60, 0.51 for P4C60, and 0.27 for P6C60) The first, shorter lifetime (τ1) was slightly temperature-dependent and made a larger contribution for the shorter oligomer systems than for the longer ones. The second, longer lifetime (τ2) also decreased with increasing temperature for the compounds P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60, whereas for P2C60, no clear trend was seen (Table 2). Since the longer lifetime was significantly shorter than the intrinsic fluorescence lifetime for the corresponding Pn reference system (1450, 1210, 1100, 830, and 650 ps for n = 1–4 and 6, respectively) and the corresponding pre-exponential factor was on the same order of magnitude or even larger than that for the shorter lifetime, the longer-lived component cannot simply be explained as the result of impurities in free Pn.

Figure 4

Figure 4. (top) Fluorescence decays for the PnC60 compounds at 280 K (P1C60, black; P2C60, red; P3C60, green; P4C60, blue; P6C60, cyan). (bottom) Fluorescence decays for P3C60 at different temperatures.

Table 2. Temperature Dependence of the Fitted Lifetimes for P2C60, P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60 Excited at 495 nm and P1C60 Excited at 450 nma
 P1C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
T/Kτ1/psτ1/psτ2/psτ1/psτ2/psτ1/psτ2/psτ1/psτ2/ps
1406.43733788536158660269707
1606.23231158438101503167650
1805.9293325130697447102573
2005.423329423107437676519
2205.222361352035228557471
2405.021352291944625448402
2604.520363251813121536337
2804.419445231602921232300
3004.419489201192421626285
a

The normalized pre-exponential factors are listed in Table S8.1 in the SI.

Model for Charge Separation

The biexponential fluorescence decay observed for all of the PnC60 compounds with n ≥ 2 could be due to several factors, but here we will present a simple model that successfully explains both the oligomer-length dependence and the temperature dependence observed across the whole series of molecules. The fraction of the long-lived decay is larger for the longer oligomers and increases as temperature is lowered (see Figure 4). We know that the porphyrin oligomers have almost free rotation around the butadiyne bridges and that in the ground state all of the conformations are populated even at quite low temperatures. In the case of the longer oligomers, the more twisted conformers dominate the mixture for statistical reasons. In the excited state, the planar structure is stabilized, and if solvent viscosity and/or temperature allow, the excited oligomer planarizes. This process takes ∼100 ps in 2MTHF at room temperature for a single butadiyne bridge (i.e., in P2). (40) Now, upon excitation of PnC60, it is possible to localize the excitation energy in one part of the oligomer, as was demonstrated previously for P2. (41) The degree of localization depends on the excitation wavelength or, equivalently, different sets of conformers are selected by tuning the excitation energy. In the experiments presented here, the longest-wavelength peak of the Soret band (495 nm) was selected for excitation. This excites predominantly the planar conformer of P2, but for all of the longer oligomers, this excitation wavelength gives rise to a mixture of conformers, with longer oligomers having broader distributions of excited conformations. Since planarization follows excitation, a thermally activated process occurs in which excitation energy moves from being localized in one part of the oligomer to becoming more delocalized. In the PnC60 compounds, where a quencher is attached to one end of the oligomer, it is conceivable that a conformer wherein the excitation energy is localized close to the quencher could undergo rapid electron transfer, whereas another conformer with the excitation energy localized far away from the quencher would first need to transfer its energy to the “active” part of the oligomer before charge separation could occur. In a long oligomer, this could potentially become a very complex process, but in the suggested model shown in Figure 5, we simply divide the molecule into two excited-state populations, an inactive one (Pn*) that is excited “far away” from the quencher and an active one (Pn#) that is excited “close” to the quencher. This simplified model was chosen because a more rigorous treatment of the data involving additional excited-state populations was not needed to fit the measured decays.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Simplified Jablonski diagram showing excitation migration followed by charge separation. Rate constants and symbols are explained in the text.

The kinetic model (Figure 5) is a simple mixture of a consecutive first-order reaction and a first-order quenching. The former contribution stems from the “inactive” population and has a normalized contribution of 1 – f, where f is the fraction of the directly excited “active” population, which undergoes first-order (monoexponential) quenching. Mathematically, this leads to the normalized biexponential fluorescence decay function shown in eq 1:

where k is the rate constant for unquenched decay of the porphyrin oligomer (assumed to be the same for the active and inactive populations), k1 is the rate constant for transformation of the inactive (*) excited state into the active (#) excited state, and kCS is the charge-separation rate constant (Figure 5). As shown in eq 1, the pre-exponential factors in a biexponential fit of the decays are related to the excited fractions. However, it is only when no transformation between the inactive and active excited states occurs (i.e., when kCSk1) that the pre-exponential factors directly reflect the excited fractions. Conversely, in a situation where this transformation is much faster than the quenching (k1kCS) and faster than the time resolution of the experiment, a monoexponential decay is expected. This latter case corresponds to a donor wherein the excitation energy is fully delocalized over the whole chromophore.
The charge-separation rate constant is thus related to the short lifetime (kCS = τ1–1k), and its temperature dependence is expected to follow the Marcus equation (eq 2):Equation 2 shows that the rate constant for electron transfer is related to several parameters, such as the electronic coupling (V), the reorganization energy accompanying the redistribution of charge (λ), and the thermodynamic driving force for the electron-transfer process (ΔG°). This equation can be rewritten to show that a plot of ln(kCST1/2) versus 1/T should be linear; the electronic coupling V can be obtained from the intercept of this plot, and the slope gives the reorganization energy λ provided that the driving force ΔG° is known. The measured charge-separation rate constants were plotted in this way (Figure 6), and the fits to eq 2 were excellent for all of the oligomers. The two lowest temperatures were excluded from the fit because of the potential for aggregation (see above), although equally good fits were obtained even when these points were included. The data at the lowest temperatures were excluded to ensure that all of the measurements were made on homogeneous samples. The optimized values of the λ and V are found in Table 3. Consistent with our model for charge separation, it was found that the electronic coupling is on the same order of magnitude (20–40 cm–1) for all oligomer lengths. In fact, it was possible to get a reasonable fit of the data by treating V as a common (global) parameter in the fit to all of the oligomers (Figure S8.5 in the SI). This yielded V = 34 cm–1, which is a value consistent with charge separation over short distances. The edge-to-edge distance between the meso carbon of the porphyrin closest to the appended fullerene and the covalent attachment point of the fullerene is ∼9 Å. (46)

Figure 6

Figure 6. Plots of ln(kCST1/2) vs 1/T for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan). The lines are the individual fits to the linearized form of eq 2.

Table 3. (top) Driving forces (ΔG°),a Reorganization Energies (λ), and Electronic Coupling Values (V) for Charge Separation in PnC60 Obtained from Individual Fits of the Curves in Figure 6; (bottom) Reorganization Energies and Electronic Coupling Values for Charge Separation in PnC60 Obtained by Treating the Electronic Coupling as a Global Parameter
 P1C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
ΔG°/eVa–0.58–0.38–0.31–0.28–0.25
λ/eV0.850.630.660.730.68
V/cm–14421314339
 P1C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
λ/eV0.780.740.690.690.66
V/cm–13434343434
a

ΔG° values for P1C60, P2C60, and P4C60 were taken from ref 44. The values for P3C60 and P6C60 were obtained by interpolation and extrapolation of a plot of ΔG° vs 1/n, where n is the number of porphyrin units.

In the suggested charge-separation model, the long-lived fluorescence component (τ2) is assigned to energy transfer from the more distant, charge-separation-inactive domains of the oligomer. As shown in Table 2, this component was also temperature-dependent, and when the energy transfer was treated as an Arrhenius-activated process (Figure S8.6 in the SI), activation energies of 1–2 kcal/mol were obtained for the longer chains containing 3, 4, and 6 porphyrin units. For planarization of the excited perpendicular P2 in 2-MTHF, an activation energy of 2 kcal/mol was found, (40) and since these values have similar magnitudes, it seems likely that the energy-transfer process along the oligomer chain is in part accompanied by planarization. It might seem surprising that the temperature dependence of the long-lived component in P2C60 did not follow this trend, but since excitation at 495 nm in P2 almost exclusively populates the planar conformer, this minor (<20% at all temperatures) fluorescence decay component might have a different origin than for the longer oligomers.

Quantum Yield for Charge Separation

As a consequence of the restricted delocalization along the longer porphyrin oligomers, the quantum yield for charge separation becomes less than unity and decreases with decreasing temperature. Figure 7 shows the charge-separation quantum yield calculated in two ways: either directly from the quenching efficiencies (Table 1) or from the fitted lifetimes and pre-exponential factors. From the kinetic model (eq 1 and Figure 5), the quantum yield for charge separation can be expressed asand since the excited fractions (f and 1 – f) are related to the normalized pre-exponential factors available through fitting the decay, this can be written aswhere α1 is the pre-exponential factor for the decay of Pn* (the long-lived decay component). The agreement between the two ways of calculating the charge-separation quantum yields is reasonable and lends support to the suggested model for charge separation.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Quantum yields for the formation of the charge-separated state based on the steady-state (◼) and time-resolved (●) fluorescence measurements for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan) at different temperatures. The solid lines between filled squares are guides to the eye.

Charge Recombination

Transient absorption measurements based on femtosecond laser excitation provided evidence for the proposed mechanism for electron transfer between the excited oligoporphyrin and C60. As an example, Figure 8 shows the transient absorption spectrum of P3C60 75 ps after excitation, which shows characteristic features of the charge-separated state: P3•+ dominates the visible absorption, C60•– and P3•+ both contribute to the NIR absorption, (47, 48) and Q-band bleaching dominates the negative band in the 700–800 nm region. The kinetic analyses of these bands yielded rates corresponding to the fluorescence decay, showing the expected connection between charge separation and decay of the singlet excited state of the oligoporphyrin. From the decay of the radical absorption and/or the recovery of the Q-band shown in Figure 8, the lifetime of the charge-separated state could be determined (fitting parameters are given in Tables S9.1–S9.5b in the SI). This was done for all systems at temperatures between 140 and 300 K, and the results are collected in Table 4.

Figure 8

Figure 8. (top) Femtosecond transient absorption spectra of P3C60 at 200 K for a delay time of 75 ps. The NIR part of the spectrum was collected with probe light from an OPA and the visible part with a white-light continuum. (bottom) Transient absorption decay at 1015 nm (○; multiplied by a factor of 5 for better visibility), where the C60•– and P3•+ species dominate the absorption, and at 730 nm (●), showing the recovery of the Q-band absorption. The red solid lines show fits of the transient absorption decays.

Table 4. Lifetimes of the Charge-Separated States for P1C60, P2C60, P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60 upon Excitation at 495 nm (450 nm for P1C60) Obtained from the Transient Absorption Decays at 1015 nm and at the Wavelength of the Q-Band Bleaching Maxima (The Values for P1C60 Were Found from Q-Band Bleaching at 650 nm)
 τ/ps
T/KP1C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
1404557329049171112
1603496927948461005
180309640710734951
200274584696708903
220226493627689821
240208454554604786
260201373504567748
280191290483538658
300189276463499643
The lifetimes of the charge-separated states have weak temperature dependences for all of the oligomers, spanning from ∼200 ps for P1C60 at room temperature to 1 ns for P6C60 at 140 K. More importantly, the lifetimes of the charge-separated states at a given temperature have the same order of magnitude for all of the investigated systems, indicating that the positive charge is either localized close to the fullerene or delocalized over all of the porphyrin units and thus does not need to migrate over a large distance to recombine. Measuring femtosecond transient absorption decays at low temperature (in a liquid nitrogen cryostat) is quite challenging, and the quality of the data did not allow a thorough investigation of potential multiexponentiality arising from a scenario similar to that suggested for charge separation. However, since only almost-planar conformers or excitations localized closest to C60 lead to charge separation, no further structural relaxations are expected during charge recombination. This should lead to a single lifetime for the charge-separated state, and the recombination of the charge separated state was therefore fitted using only one exponential. The whole transient absorption decay was fitted to a triexponential decay function, where the two shortest lifetimes were fixed to the values obtained from the lifetimes of the fluorescence decays (corresponding to the charge separation). The procedure is explained in detail in the Experimental Section.
In Figure 9, the rate constants for charge recombination (kCR) are plotted against inverse temperature and fitted to the linearized form of eq 2. Reasonable fits with similar slopes over the whole temperature range (180–300 K) were found for all of the systems except P2C60, which showed a change in slope above 240 K. Such a temperature dependence might indicate a change in mechanism for the charge recombination. As shown in Table 5, for P2C60 and the longer systems, charge recombination to the lowest excited triplet state of the porphyrin oligomer is exergonic. From experimental estimates of the triplet energies and oxidation potentials, it is concluded that the driving force increases with increasing size of the oligomer. (44, 49) This might mean that recombination to the electronic ground state occurs in P1C60 and recombination to the porphyrin-localized triplet state occurs in P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60. In P2C60, a combination of charge recombination to the triplet and ground states, with the former dominating at high temperatures, would explain the change in slope. Naturally, it would be desirable to distinguish between these two mechanisms by comparing the residual transient absorption (or bleaching) at long times. However, experimental difficulties combined with quite substantial triplet formation in the longer systems due to the comparably low yield for charge separation (see above) did not allow a precise distinction between the two recombination possibilities. Recombination through the C60 triplet state (experimentally determined to be at 1.5 eV) is endergonic and not expected to contribute to the observed decay. (50, 51) This is further supported by the absence of the characteristic triplet C60 transient absorption that would have been expected at ∼700 nm if recombination through this channel had been significant. (51) Figure 10 summarizes the recombination processes. The Marcus parameters λ and V for recombination to either the ground state or the triplet state as calculated from the linear fits are summarized in Table 5.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Plots of ln(kCRT1/2) vs 1/T for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan). The samples were excited at 495 nm, and the rate constants were derived from the transient absorption decays (kCR = 1/τ). The lines are fits to the linearized form of eq 2.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Energy diagram for the charge-recombination processes. The energy of the charge-separated state is quite insensitive to the oligomer length, whereas for the longer oligomers the lowest triplet state of the oligomer is stabilized enough to become a feasible recombination channel.

Table 5. Driving Forces (ΔG°)a, Reorganization Energies (λ), and Electronic Coupling Values (V) for Charge Recombination in PnC60 Obtained from Individual Fits Assuming Recombination to the First Excited Triplet State or Directly to the Ground State
 P1C60P2C60P2C60P3C60P4C60P6C60
parameter  180–240 K240–300 K   
Assuming Recombination to the First Triplet Excited State
ΔG°/eV+0.12–0.13–0.13–0.24–0.30–0.33
λ/eV0.330.490.470.530.57
V/cm–14.511.54.23.83.52
Assuming Recombination to the Ground State
ΔG°/eV–1.29–1.30–1.30–1.31–1.31–1.31
λ/eV0.950.960.830.980.990.99
V/cm–18.15.813.15.04.54.0
a

ΔG° values for P1C60, P2C60, and P4C60 were taken from refs 44 and 49. The values for P3C60 and P6C60 were obtained by interpolation and extrapolation of a plot of ΔG° vs 1/n, where n is the number of porphyrin units.

Because of the large driving force for recombination to the ground state, the electron-transfer process along this pathway is in the inverted Marcus region (|ΔG°| > λ). For recombination to the triplet excited state, the driving forces are much smaller. Nevertheless, the lifetimes of the charge-separated states are quite short as a consequence of a comparatively large electronic coupling. In comparisons of the electronic couplings for charge separation and recombination, it is notable that these are smaller for the recombination reaction. This might be an additional indication that charge recombination occurs from a more delocalized state than charge separation.

Conclusion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

In this study of the temperature dependence of electron-transfer reactions in a series of porphyrin oligomer electron donors appended with a C60 electron acceptor, the following has been learned:
  • Charge separation from the excited donor occurs either directly from an active part of the oligomer or through excitation migration along the oligomer chain followed by charge separation.

  • Direct charge separation dominates in the short oligomers, while energy migration precedes charge separation in the longer oligomers, particularly at high temperatures.

  • Energy migration in the oligomers is thermally activated through dihedral conformational relaxation.

  • Factors 2 and 3 limit the yield for charge separation in the longer oligomers. A high quantum yield for charge separation in the longer oligomers requires fast energy migration and, presumably, nearly planar structures with a high degree of excitation-energy delocalization.

  • The energy migration model is supported by earlier observations of energy delocalization in porphyrin oligomers through measurements of fluorescence depolarization. (52) Transient fluorescent polarization anisotropy in oligomers such as P6 and P8 shows that light absorption generates an excited state that is initially delocalized over the whole oligomer but contracts rapidly on a time scale of less than 0.5 ps; interporphyrin torsional relaxation then leads to delocalization of the excited state on a time scale of ∼100 ps. The results reported here provide detailed information on the slower delocalization process. They are not sensitive to the initial ultrafast delocalization but demonstrate that exciton self-trapping must be much faster than electron transfer to C60.

  • The actual charge-separation and charge-recombination reactions are both temperature-dependent, as predicted by the Marcus theory. Reasonable values for the reorganization energies and electronic couplings were extracted from fits of the temperature variation of the time-resolved fluorescence and femtosecond transient absorption decays.

  • Charge recombination occurs directly to the electronic ground state in P1C60 and through the porphyrin-localized triplet state in P3C60, P4C60, and P6C60. In P2C60, a combination of charge recombination to the triplet and ground states takes place, with the former dominating at high temperatures.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Synthesis, NMR spectra, mass spectra, HPLC traces, ground-state absorption spectra, steady-state emission spectra, time-resolved fluorescence decays and fitting parameters, and transient absorption fitting parameters. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Authors
    • Harry L. Anderson - Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3TA, U.K.
    • Bo Albinsson - Physical Chemistry, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Kemivägen 3, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
  • Authors
    • Axel Kahnt - Physical Chemistry, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Kemivägen 3, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
    • Joakim Kärnbratt - Physical Chemistry, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Kemivägen 3, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
    • Louisa J. Esdaile - Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3TA, U.K.
    • Marie Hutin - Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3TA, U.K.
    • Katsutoshi Sawada - Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford OX1 3TA, U.K.

Acknowledgment

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This research was funded by the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Swedish Energy Agency, the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), and the Swiss National Science Foundation. We thank the EPSRC Mass Spectrometry Service (Swansea) for mass spectra.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 52 other publications.

  1. 1
    Guldi, D. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007, 9, 1400 1420
  2. 2
    Deisenhofer, J.; Michel, H. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 1991, 7, 1 23
  3. 3
    Barter, L. M. C.; Durrant, J. R.; Klug, D. R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 946 951
  4. 4
    Windsor, M. W. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2 1986, 82, 2237 2243
  5. 5
    Boxer, S. G.; Goldstein, R. A.; Lockhart, D. J.; Middendorf, T. R.; Takiff, L. J. Phys. Chem. 1989, 93, 8280 8294
  6. 6
    Huber, R. Eur. J. Biochem. 1990, 187, 283 305
  7. 7
    Clayton, R. K. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 1973, 2, 131 156
  8. 8
    Kelley, R. F.; Tauber, M. J.; Wasielewski, M. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 7979 7982
  9. 9
    Barazzouk, S.; Kamat, P. V.; Hotchandani, S. J. Phys. Chem. B 2005, 109, 716 723
  10. 10
    Zhang, T.-G.; Zhao, Y.; Asselberghs, I.; Persoons, A.; Clays, K.; Therien, M. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 9710 9720
  11. 11
    Ohtani, M.; Kamat, P. V.; Fukuzumi, S. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20, 582 587
  12. 12
    Guldi, D. M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2002, 22 36
  13. 13
    Fukuzumi, S.; Honda, T.; Ohkubo, K.; Kojima, T. Dalton Trans. 2009, 3880 3889
  14. 14
    Rizzi, A. C.; van Gastel, M.; Liddell, P. A.; Palacios, R. E.; Moore, G. F.; Kodis, G.; Moore, A. L.; Moore, T. A.; Gust, D.; Braslavsky, S. E. J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 4215 4223
  15. 15
    Jakob, M.; Berg, A.; Rubin, R.; Levanon, H.; Li, K.; Schuster, D. I. J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 5846 5854
  16. 16
    Harriman, A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 4985 4987
  17. 17
    Guldi, D. M. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007, 9, 1400 1420
  18. 18
    Quintiliani, M.; Kahnt, A.; Wölfle, T.; Hieringer, W.; Vázquez, P.; Görling, A.; Guldi, D. M.; Torres, T. Chem.—Eur. J. 2008, 14, 3765 3775
  19. 19
    El-Khouly, M. E.; Ito, O.; Smith, P. M.; D’Souza, F. J. Photochem. Photobiol., C 2004, 5, 79 104
  20. 20
    Kahnt, A.; Guldi, D. M.; de la Escosura, A.; Martinez-Diaz, M. V.; Torres, T. J. Mater. Chem. 2008, 18, 77 82
  21. 21
    Martinez-Diaz, M. V.; de la Torre, G.; Torres, T. Chem. Commun. 2010, 46, 7090 7108
  22. 22
    Kahnt, A.; Quintiliani, M.; Vázquez, P.; Guldi, D. M.; Torres, T. ChemSusChem 2008, 1, 97 102
  23. 23
    Guldi, D. M.; Rahman, G. M. A.; Sgobba, V.; Ehli, C. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2006, 35, 471 487
  24. 24
    Li, H.; Martin, R. B.; Harruff, B. A.; Carino, R. A.; Allard, L. F.; Sun, Y. P. Adv. Mater. 2004, 16, 896 900
  25. 25
    Iurlo, M.; Paolucci, D.; Marcaccio, M.; Paolucci, F. Chem. Commun. 2008, 4867 4874
  26. 26
    D’Souza, F.; Ito, O. Chem. Commun. 2009, 4913 4928
  27. 27
    Imahori, H.; Sakata, Y. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 2445 2457
  28. 28
    Kesti, T.; Tkachenko, N.; Yamada, H.; Imahori, H.; Fukuzumi, S.; Lemmetyinen, H. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2003, 2, 251 258
  29. 29
    Gust, D.; Moore, T. A.; Moore, A. L. Res. Chem. Intermed. 1997, 23, 621 651
  30. 30
    Martin, N.; Sanchez, L.; Illescas, B.; Perez, I. Chem. Rev. 1998, 98, 2527 2548
  31. 31
    Wojcik, A.; Kamat, P. V. ACS Nano 2010, 4, 6697 6706
  32. 32
    Guldi, D. M.; Sgobba, V. Chem. Commun. 2011, 47, 606 610
  33. 33
    Armaroli, N.; Accorsi, G.; Song, F.; Palkar, A.; Echegoyen, L.; Bonifazi, D.; Diederich, F. ChemPhysChem 2005, 6, 732 743
  34. 34
    Fukuzumi, S.; Kojima, T. J. Mater. Chem. 2008, 18, 1427 1439
  35. 35
    Hasobe, T.; Saito, K.; Kamat, P. V.; Troiani, V.; Qiu, H.; Solladie, N.; Kim, K. S.; Park, J. K.; Kim, D.; D’Souza, F.; Fukuzumi, S. J. Mater. Chem. 2007, 17, 4160 4170
  36. 36
    Goldsmith, R. H.; DeLeon, O.; Wilson, T. M.; Finkelstein-Shapiro, D.; Ratner, M. A.; Wasielewski, M. R. J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 4410 4414
  37. 37
    Kuciauskas, D.; Liddell, P. A.; Lin, S.; Stone, S. G.; Moore, A. L.; Moore, T. A.; Gust, D. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104, 4307 4321
  38. 38
    Kang, Y. K.; Duncan, T. V.; Therien, M. J. J. Phys. Chem. B 2007, 111, 6829 6838
  39. 39
    Lemmetyinen, H.; Tkachenko, N. V.; Efimov, A.; Niemi, M. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 11475 11483
  40. 40
    Winters, M. U.; Kärnbratt, J.; Eng, M.; Wilson, C. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 7192 7199
  41. 41
    Winters, M. U.; Kärnbratt, J.; Blades, H. E.; Wilson, C. J.; Frampton, M. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. Chem.—Eur. J. 2007, 13, 7385 7394
  42. 42
    Sundström, V.; Pullerits, T.; van Grondelle, R. J. Phys. Chem. B 1999, 103, 2327 2346
  43. 43
    Halls, J. J. M.; Pichler, K.; Friend, R. H.; Moratti, S. C.; Holmes, A. B. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1996, 68, 3120 3122
  44. 44
    Winters, M. U.; Dahlstedt, E.; Blades, H. E.; Wilson, C. J.; Frampton, M. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 4291 4297
  45. 45
    Kärnbratt, J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. Manuscript in preparation.
  46. 46

    For example, in a porphyrin dimer system with a porphyrin–porphyrin distance of 13 Å, we found V = 19 cm–1. See:

    Pettersson, K.; Wiberg, J.; Ljungdahl, T.; Mårtensson, J.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 319 326
  47. 47
    Gasyna, Z.; Andrews, L.; Schatz, P. N. J. Phys. Chem. 1992, 96, 1525 1527
  48. 48
    Guldi, D. M.; Hungerbuhler, H.; Janata, E.; Asmus, K. D. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1993, 84 86
  49. 49
    Kuimova, M. K.; Hoffmann, M.; Winters, M. U.; Eng, M.; Balaz, M.; Clark, I. P.; Collins, H. A.; Tavender, S. M.; Wilson, C. J.; Albinsson, B.; Anderson, H. L.; Parker, A. W.; Phillips, D. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2007, 6, 675 682
  50. 50
    Williams, R. M.; Zwier, J. M.; Verhoeven, J. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 4093 4099
  51. 51
    Guldi, D. M.; Asmus, K.-D. J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 1472 1481
  52. 52
    Chang, M.-H.; Hoffmann, M.; Anderson, H. L.; Herz, L. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 10171 10178

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 48 publications.

  1. Shrabanti Mondal, Uttam Chowdhury, Md Habib, Shriya Gumber, Ranjan Das, Thomas Frauenheim, Ritabrata Sarkar, Oleg V. Prezhdo, Sougata Pal. Quantum Dynamics of Charge Carriers in Fullerenes Encapsulated by Covalent Organic Polyhedra: Choice of Fullerene Matters. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2025, 147 (10) , 8145-8155. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.4c05856
  2. D. K. Andrea Phan Huu, Sangeeth Saseendran, Rama Dhali, Larissa Gomes Franca, Kleitos Stavrou, Andrew Monkman, Anna Painelli. Thermally Activated Delayed Fluorescence: Polarity, Rigidity, and Disorder in Condensed Phases. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2022, 144 (33) , 15211-15222. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.2c05537
  3. Muhammet Erkan Köse, Kirk S. Schanze. Prediction of Internal Reorganization Energy in Photoinduced Electron Transfer Processes of Molecular Dyads. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 2020, 124 (45) , 9478-9486. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.0c09533
  4. Austin L. Jones, Junlin Jiang, Kirk S. Schanze. Excitation-Wavelength-Dependent Photoinduced Electron Transfer in a π-Conjugated Diblock Oligomer. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2020, 142 (29) , 12658-12668. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.0c03678
  5. Austin L. Jones, Kirk S. Schanze. Free Energy Dependence of Photoinduced Electron Transfer in Octathiophene-Diimide Dyads. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 2020, 124 (1) , 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.9b08622
  6. Hafiz Muhammad Asif, Yunshan Zhou, Lijuan Zhang, Nusrat Shaheen, Di Yang, Jiaqi Li, Yi Long, Arshad Iqbal, and Yanqin Li . Covalent Synthesis of Two Hybrids Composed of Dawson-Type Polyoxometalate and Porphyrin with Remarkable Third-Order Optical Nonlinearities Reflecting the Effect of Polyoxometalates. Inorganic Chemistry 2017, 56 (16) , 9436-9447. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.6b03155
  7. Ajith R. Mallia, Abbey M. Philip, Vinayak Bhat, and Mahesh Hariharan . Persistent Charge-Separated States in Self-Assembled Twisted Nonsymmetric Donor–Acceptor Triads. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2017, 121 (9) , 4765-4777. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b11153
  8. Masaaki Mitsui, Aki Unno, and Syun Azechi . Understanding Photoinduced Charge Transfer Dynamics of Single Perylenediimide Dyes in a Polymer Matrix by Bin-Time Dependence of their Fluorescence Blinking Statistics. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2016, 120 (28) , 15070-15081. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b04114
  9. Maria A. Lebedeva, Thomas W. Chamberlain, and Andrei N. Khlobystov . Harnessing the Synergistic and Complementary Properties of Fullerene and Transition-Metal Compounds for Nanomaterial Applications. Chemical Reviews 2015, 115 (20) , 11301-11351. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00005
  10. Korina Kuhar, Lisa A. Fredin, and Petter Persson . Exploring Photoinduced Excited State Evolution in Heterobimetallic Ru(II)–Co(III) Complexes. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2015, 119 (24) , 7378-7392. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp510950u
  11. Mélina Gilbert Gatty, Axel Kahnt, Louisa J. Esdaile, Marie Hutin, Harry L. Anderson, and Bo Albinsson . Hopping versus Tunneling Mechanism for Long-Range Electron Transfer in Porphyrin Oligomer Bridged Donor–Acceptor Systems. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2015, 119 (24) , 7598-7611. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp5115064
  12. De Nyago Tafen and Oleg V. Prezhdo . Size and Temperature Dependence of Electron Transfer between CdSe Quantum Dots and a TiO2 Nanobelt. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2015, 119 (10) , 5639-5647. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp5110278
  13. Patrick Parkinson, Christiane E. I. Knappke, Nuntaporn Kamonsutthipaijit, Kanokkorn Sirithip, Jonathan D. Matichak, Harry L. Anderson, and Laura M. Herz . Ultrafast Energy Transfer in Biomimetic Multistrand Nanorings. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2014, 136 (23) , 8217-8220. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja504730j
  14. Luis G. C. Rego, Bruno C. Hames, Kahio T. Mazon, and Jan-Ole Joswig . Intramolecular Polarization Induces Electron–Hole Charge Separation in Light-Harvesting Molecular Triads. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2014, 118 (1) , 126-134. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp408955e
  15. Mélina Gilbert, Louisa J. Esdaile, Marie Hutin, Katsutoshi Sawada, Harry L. Anderson, and Bo Albinsson . Conformational Gating of Charge Separation in Porphyrin Oligomer-Fullerene Systems. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2013, 117 (50) , 26482-26492. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp4098342
  16. G. J. Dutton and S. W. Robey . Distance Dependence of Exciton Dissociation at a Phthalocyanine–C60 Interface. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2013, 117 (48) , 25414-25423. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp4104917
  17. Susmita Das, Aleeta M. Powe, Gary A. Baker, Bertha Valle, Bilal El-Zahab, Herman O. Sintim, Mark Lowry, Sayo O. Fakayode, Matthew E. McCarroll, Gabor Patonay, Min Li, Robert M. Strongin, Maxwell L. Geng, and Isiah M. Warner . Molecular Fluorescence, Phosphorescence, and Chemiluminescence Spectrometry. Analytical Chemistry 2012, 84 (2) , 597-625. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac202904n
  18. Harshad A. Mirgane, Kerba S. More, Naveena S. Veeranagaiah, Sheshanath V. Bhosale. Porphyrin-based covalently bonded nanoarchitectonics of organic donor-acceptor system for artificial photosynthesis: A review. Dyes and Pigments 2024, 225 , 112113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dyepig.2024.112113
  19. Jing Chen, Na Li, Lin Li, Chongling Wang, Dongxue Han, Tifeng Jiao. Construction of Amphiphilic Indocyanine–Green–Based Langmuir Film and Drop–Casting Film with Photoelectric Conversion Properties. Coatings 2023, 13 (8) , 1423. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13081423
  20. Boyang Mao, Benjamin Hodges, Craig Franklin, David G. Calatayud, Sofia I. Pascu. Self-Assembled Materials Incorporating Functional Porphyrins and Carbon Nanoplatforms as Building Blocks for Photovoltaic Energy Applications. Frontiers in Chemistry 2021, 9 https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2021.727574
  21. Maximilian Wolf, Dominik Lungerich, Stefan Bauroth, Maximilian Popp, Benedikt Platzer, Timothy Clark, Harry L. Anderson, Norbert Jux, Dirk M. Guldi. Panchromatic light funneling through the synergy in hexabenzocoronene–(metallo)porphyrin–fullerene assemblies to realize the separation of charges. Chemical Science 2020, 11 (27) , 7123-7132. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0SC02028A
  22. Betül Küçüköz, B. Adinarayana, Atsuhiro Osuka, Bo Albinsson. Electron transfer reactions in sub-porphyrin–naphthyldiimide dyads. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2019, 21 (30) , 16477-16485. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9CP03725J
  23. Bingzhe Wang, Stefan Bauroth, Avishek Saha, Muqing Chen, Timothy Clark, Xing Lu, Dirk M. Guldi. Tuning electron transfer in supramolecular nano-architectures made of fullerenes and porphyrins. Nanoscale 2019, 11 (22) , 10782-10790. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9NR02824B
  24. Afeefah U. Neelambra, Chinju Govind, Tessy T. Devassia, Guruprasad M. Somashekharappa, Venugopal Karunakaran. Direct evidence of solvent polarity governing the intramolecular charge and energy transfer: ultrafast relaxation dynamics of push–pull fluorene derivatives. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2019, 21 (21) , 11087-11102. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9CP00796B
  25. Yusen Luo, Maria Wächtler, Kevin Barthelmes, Andreas Winter, Ulrich S. Schubert, Benjamin Dietzek. Superexchange in the fast lane – intramolecular electron transfer in a molecular triad occurs by conformationally gated superexchange. Chemical Communications 2019, 55 (36) , 5251-5254. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9CC01886G
  26. Yusen Luo, Jens H. Tran, Maria Wächtler, Martin Schulz, Kevin Barthelmes, Andreas Winter, Sven Rau, Ulrich S. Schubert, Benjamin Dietzek. Remote control of electronic coupling – modification of excited-state electron-transfer rates in Ru(tpy) 2 -based donor–acceptor systems by remote ligand design. Chemical Communications 2019, 55 (16) , 2273-2276. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8CC10075F
  27. Aijian Wang, Laixiang Cheng, Fenggang Zhao, Wei Zhao, Weihua Zhu, Danhong Shang. Effect of covalent linkage between hexagonal boron nitride and porphyrins on the optical nonlinearities. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 2019, 775 , 1007-1015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.10.153
  28. Xu Liang, Mingfeng Qin, Lin Zhou, Tingting Liu, Minzhi Li, John Mack, Nobuhle Ndebele, Tebello Nyokong, Weihua Zhu. Porphyrin dimers with a bridging chiral amide-bonded benzo-moiety: Influence of positional isomerism on the molecular chirality. Dyes and Pigments 2018, 154 , 229-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dyepig.2018.02.043
  29. Kavita Garg, Ramakrishnan Shanmugam, Praveen C. Ramamurthy. New covalent hybrids of graphene oxide with core modified and -expanded porphyrins: Synthesis, characterisation and their non linear optical properties. Carbon 2017, 122 , 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2017.06.052
  30. Di Gao, Shawkat M. Aly, Paul-Ludovic Karsenti, Gessie Brisard, Pierre D. Harvey. Ultrafast energy and electron transfers in structurally well addressable BODIPY-porphyrin-fullerene polyads. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2017, 19 (4) , 2926-2939. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6CP08000F
  31. Anjul Khadria, Yovan de Coene, Przemyslaw Gawel, Cécile Roche, Koen Clays, Harry L. Anderson. Push–pull pyropheophorbides for nonlinear optical imaging. Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry 2017, 15 (4) , 947-956. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6OB02319C
  32. Di Gao, Shawkat M. Aly, Paul-Ludovic Karsenti, Gessie Brisard, Pierre D. Harvey. Increasing the lifetimes of charge separated states in porphyrin–fullerene polyads. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2017, 19 (35) , 24018-24028. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7CP04193D
  33. Lisa A. Fredin, Petter Persson. Computational characterization of competing energy and electron transfer states in bimetallic donor-acceptor systems for photocatalytic conversion. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2016, 145 (10) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4962254
  34. Aijian Wang, Wang Yu, Zhipeng Huang, Feng Zhou, Jingbao Song, Yinglin Song, Lingliang Long, Marie P. Cifuentes, Mark G. Humphrey, Long Zhang, Jianda Shao, Chi Zhang. Covalent functionalization of reduced graphene oxide with porphyrin by means of diazonium chemistry for nonlinear optical performance. Scientific Reports 2016, 6 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23325
  35. Panagiotis Dallas, Gregory Rogers, Ben Reid, Robert A. Taylor, Hisanori Shinohara, G. Andrew D. Briggs, Kyriakos Porfyrakis. Charge separated states and singlet oxygen generation of mono and bis adducts of C60 and C70. Chemical Physics 2016, 465-466 , 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2015.12.003
  36. Ievgen Obraztsov, Wlodzimierz Kutner, Francis D’Souza. Metalloporphyrins in Solar Energy Conversion. 2016, 171-262. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31172-2_6
  37. Maria A. Lebedeva, Thomas W. Chamberlain, Paul A. Scattergood, Milan Delor, Igor V. Sazanovich, E. Stephen Davies, Mikhail Suyetin, Elena Besley, Martin Schröder, Julia A. Weinstein, Andrei N. Khlobystov. Stabilising the lowest energy charge-separated state in a {metal chromophore – fullerene} assembly: a tuneable panchromatic absorbing donor–acceptor triad. Chemical Science 2016, 7 (9) , 5908-5921. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5SC04271B
  38. Francesco Nastasi, Fausto Puntoriero, Mirco Natali, Miriam Mba, Michele Maggini, Patrizia Mussini, Monica Panigati, Sebastiano Campagna. Photoinduced intercomponent excited-state decays in a molecular dyad made of a dinuclear rhenium(i) chromophore and a fullerene electron acceptor unit. Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences 2015, 14 (5) , 909-918. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4pp00301b
  39. Anna Szemik-Hojniak, Krzysztof Oberda, Irena Deperasińska, Yakov P. Nizhnik, Lucjan Jerzykiewicz. A negligible CT character of the lowest excited state of a novel complex of zinc tetraphenylporphyrin with axially bonded 2-(4-methoxy-trans-styryl)quinoline-1-oxide ligand: Experimental studies and TD DFT/CAM B3LYP [6-31G(d,p)] calculations. Polyhedron 2015, 88 , 190-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poly.2014.12.025
  40. Mohamed E. El‐Khouly, Shunichi Fukuzumi, Francis D'Souza. Photosynthetic Antenna–Reaction Center Mimicry by Using Boron Dipyrromethene Sensitizers. ChemPhysChem 2014, 15 (1) , 30-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201300715
  41. K. Yoosaf, Julien Iehl, Iwona Nierengarten, Mohamed Hmadeh, Anne‐Marie Albrecht‐Gary, Jean‐François Nierengarten, Nicola Armaroli. A Supramolecular Photosynthetic Model Made of a Multiporphyrinic Array Constructed around a C 60 Core and a C 60 –Imidazole Derivative. Chemistry – A European Journal 2014, 20 (1) , 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201303481
  42. Zhuang Dong Yuan, Jing Xia Wang, Ning Sheng. DABCO-Directed Self-Assembly of Pyrene-Centered Porphyrin Pentamers. Key Engineering Materials 2013, 575-576 , 123-129. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.575-576.123
  43. Wen‐Jing Shi, Mohamed E. El‐Khouly, Kei Ohkubo, Shunichi Fukuzumi, Dennis K. P. Ng. Photosynthetic Antenna‐Reaction Center Mimicry with a Covalently Linked Monostyryl Boron‐Dipyrromethene–Aza‐Boron‐Dipyrromethene–C 60 Triad. Chemistry – A European Journal 2013, 19 (34) , 11332-11341. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201300318
  44. Motoko S. Asano, Kazuma Okamura, Akihoro Jin-mon, Sadaharu Takahashi, Youkoh Kaizu. Enhanced intersystem crossing due to long-range exchange interaction in copper(II) porphyrin-free base porphyrin dimers: HOMO and spacer dependence. Chemical Physics 2013, 419 , 250-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2013.03.010
  45. Xiaoquan Lu, Yaqi Hu, Wenting Wang, Jie Du, Hongxia He, Ruixia Ai, Xiuhui Liu. A novel platform to study the photoinduced electron transfer at a dye-sensitized solid/liquid interface. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 2013, 103 , 608-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2012.11.013
  46. Rajendra R. Zope, Marco Olguin, Tunna Baruah. Charge transfer excitations in cofacial fullerene-porphyrin complexes. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2012, 137 (8) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4739272
  47. Juan-José Cid, Axel Kahnt, Purificación Vázquez, Dirk M. Guldi, Tomás Torres. Charge separation in a covalently-linked phthalocyanine-oligo(p-phenylenevinylene)-C60 system. Influence of the solvent polarity. Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry 2012, 108 , 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2011.11.011
  48. Bo Albinsson, Harry Anderson. Electron Transfer Through Butadiyne-Linked Porphyrin-Based Molecular Wires. 2012, 55-90. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11621-3

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Cite this: J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 25, 9863–9871
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/ja2019367
Published May 19, 2011

Copyright © 2011 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

Article Views

4585

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Molecular structure of the porphyrin oligomer-based donor–acceptor system studied in this work. The aryl substituents (Ar) are 3,5-bis(octyloxy)phenyl groups.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Ground-state absorption spectra of Pn (black) and PnC60 (red) (n = 1–4, 6) at room temperature. Each spectrum has been normalized and offset by (n – 1) × 0.25 absorbance units.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Fluorescence spectra of P3C60 measured at different temperatures.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. (top) Fluorescence decays for the PnC60 compounds at 280 K (P1C60, black; P2C60, red; P3C60, green; P4C60, blue; P6C60, cyan). (bottom) Fluorescence decays for P3C60 at different temperatures.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Simplified Jablonski diagram showing excitation migration followed by charge separation. Rate constants and symbols are explained in the text.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. Plots of ln(kCST1/2) vs 1/T for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan). The lines are the individual fits to the linearized form of eq 2.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Quantum yields for the formation of the charge-separated state based on the steady-state (◼) and time-resolved (●) fluorescence measurements for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan) at different temperatures. The solid lines between filled squares are guides to the eye.

    Figure 8

    Figure 8. (top) Femtosecond transient absorption spectra of P3C60 at 200 K for a delay time of 75 ps. The NIR part of the spectrum was collected with probe light from an OPA and the visible part with a white-light continuum. (bottom) Transient absorption decay at 1015 nm (○; multiplied by a factor of 5 for better visibility), where the C60•– and P3•+ species dominate the absorption, and at 730 nm (●), showing the recovery of the Q-band absorption. The red solid lines show fits of the transient absorption decays.

    Figure 9

    Figure 9. Plots of ln(kCRT1/2) vs 1/T for P1C60 (black), P2C60 (red), P3C60 (green), P4C60 (blue), and P6C60 (cyan). The samples were excited at 495 nm, and the rate constants were derived from the transient absorption decays (kCR = 1/τ). The lines are fits to the linearized form of eq 2.

    Figure 10

    Figure 10. Energy diagram for the charge-recombination processes. The energy of the charge-separated state is quite insensitive to the oligomer length, whereas for the longer oligomers the lowest triplet state of the oligomer is stabilized enough to become a feasible recombination channel.

  • References


    This article references 52 other publications.

    1. 1
      Guldi, D. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007, 9, 1400 1420
    2. 2
      Deisenhofer, J.; Michel, H. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 1991, 7, 1 23
    3. 3
      Barter, L. M. C.; Durrant, J. R.; Klug, D. R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 946 951
    4. 4
      Windsor, M. W. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2 1986, 82, 2237 2243
    5. 5
      Boxer, S. G.; Goldstein, R. A.; Lockhart, D. J.; Middendorf, T. R.; Takiff, L. J. Phys. Chem. 1989, 93, 8280 8294
    6. 6
      Huber, R. Eur. J. Biochem. 1990, 187, 283 305
    7. 7
      Clayton, R. K. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 1973, 2, 131 156
    8. 8
      Kelley, R. F.; Tauber, M. J.; Wasielewski, M. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 7979 7982
    9. 9
      Barazzouk, S.; Kamat, P. V.; Hotchandani, S. J. Phys. Chem. B 2005, 109, 716 723
    10. 10
      Zhang, T.-G.; Zhao, Y.; Asselberghs, I.; Persoons, A.; Clays, K.; Therien, M. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 9710 9720
    11. 11
      Ohtani, M.; Kamat, P. V.; Fukuzumi, S. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20, 582 587
    12. 12
      Guldi, D. M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2002, 22 36
    13. 13
      Fukuzumi, S.; Honda, T.; Ohkubo, K.; Kojima, T. Dalton Trans. 2009, 3880 3889
    14. 14
      Rizzi, A. C.; van Gastel, M.; Liddell, P. A.; Palacios, R. E.; Moore, G. F.; Kodis, G.; Moore, A. L.; Moore, T. A.; Gust, D.; Braslavsky, S. E. J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 4215 4223
    15. 15
      Jakob, M.; Berg, A.; Rubin, R.; Levanon, H.; Li, K.; Schuster, D. I. J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 5846 5854
    16. 16
      Harriman, A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 4985 4987
    17. 17
      Guldi, D. M. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007, 9, 1400 1420
    18. 18
      Quintiliani, M.; Kahnt, A.; Wölfle, T.; Hieringer, W.; Vázquez, P.; Görling, A.; Guldi, D. M.; Torres, T. Chem.—Eur. J. 2008, 14, 3765 3775
    19. 19
      El-Khouly, M. E.; Ito, O.; Smith, P. M.; D’Souza, F. J. Photochem. Photobiol., C 2004, 5, 79 104
    20. 20
      Kahnt, A.; Guldi, D. M.; de la Escosura, A.; Martinez-Diaz, M. V.; Torres, T. J. Mater. Chem. 2008, 18, 77 82
    21. 21
      Martinez-Diaz, M. V.; de la Torre, G.; Torres, T. Chem. Commun. 2010, 46, 7090 7108
    22. 22
      Kahnt, A.; Quintiliani, M.; Vázquez, P.; Guldi, D. M.; Torres, T. ChemSusChem 2008, 1, 97 102
    23. 23
      Guldi, D. M.; Rahman, G. M. A.; Sgobba, V.; Ehli, C. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2006, 35, 471 487
    24. 24
      Li, H.; Martin, R. B.; Harruff, B. A.; Carino, R. A.; Allard, L. F.; Sun, Y. P. Adv. Mater. 2004, 16, 896 900
    25. 25
      Iurlo, M.; Paolucci, D.; Marcaccio, M.; Paolucci, F. Chem. Commun. 2008, 4867 4874
    26. 26
      D’Souza, F.; Ito, O. Chem. Commun. 2009, 4913 4928
    27. 27
      Imahori, H.; Sakata, Y. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 2445 2457
    28. 28
      Kesti, T.; Tkachenko, N.; Yamada, H.; Imahori, H.; Fukuzumi, S.; Lemmetyinen, H. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2003, 2, 251 258
    29. 29
      Gust, D.; Moore, T. A.; Moore, A. L. Res. Chem. Intermed. 1997, 23, 621 651
    30. 30
      Martin, N.; Sanchez, L.; Illescas, B.; Perez, I. Chem. Rev. 1998, 98, 2527 2548
    31. 31
      Wojcik, A.; Kamat, P. V. ACS Nano 2010, 4, 6697 6706
    32. 32
      Guldi, D. M.; Sgobba, V. Chem. Commun. 2011, 47, 606 610
    33. 33
      Armaroli, N.; Accorsi, G.; Song, F.; Palkar, A.; Echegoyen, L.; Bonifazi, D.; Diederich, F. ChemPhysChem 2005, 6, 732 743
    34. 34
      Fukuzumi, S.; Kojima, T. J. Mater. Chem. 2008, 18, 1427 1439
    35. 35
      Hasobe, T.; Saito, K.; Kamat, P. V.; Troiani, V.; Qiu, H.; Solladie, N.; Kim, K. S.; Park, J. K.; Kim, D.; D’Souza, F.; Fukuzumi, S. J. Mater. Chem. 2007, 17, 4160 4170
    36. 36
      Goldsmith, R. H.; DeLeon, O.; Wilson, T. M.; Finkelstein-Shapiro, D.; Ratner, M. A.; Wasielewski, M. R. J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 4410 4414
    37. 37
      Kuciauskas, D.; Liddell, P. A.; Lin, S.; Stone, S. G.; Moore, A. L.; Moore, T. A.; Gust, D. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104, 4307 4321
    38. 38
      Kang, Y. K.; Duncan, T. V.; Therien, M. J. J. Phys. Chem. B 2007, 111, 6829 6838
    39. 39
      Lemmetyinen, H.; Tkachenko, N. V.; Efimov, A.; Niemi, M. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 11475 11483
    40. 40
      Winters, M. U.; Kärnbratt, J.; Eng, M.; Wilson, C. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 7192 7199
    41. 41
      Winters, M. U.; Kärnbratt, J.; Blades, H. E.; Wilson, C. J.; Frampton, M. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. Chem.—Eur. J. 2007, 13, 7385 7394
    42. 42
      Sundström, V.; Pullerits, T.; van Grondelle, R. J. Phys. Chem. B 1999, 103, 2327 2346
    43. 43
      Halls, J. J. M.; Pichler, K.; Friend, R. H.; Moratti, S. C.; Holmes, A. B. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1996, 68, 3120 3122
    44. 44
      Winters, M. U.; Dahlstedt, E.; Blades, H. E.; Wilson, C. J.; Frampton, M. J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 4291 4297
    45. 45
      Kärnbratt, J.; Anderson, H. L.; Albinsson, B. Manuscript in preparation.
    46. 46

      For example, in a porphyrin dimer system with a porphyrin–porphyrin distance of 13 Å, we found V = 19 cm–1. See:

      Pettersson, K.; Wiberg, J.; Ljungdahl, T.; Mårtensson, J.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 319 326
    47. 47
      Gasyna, Z.; Andrews, L.; Schatz, P. N. J. Phys. Chem. 1992, 96, 1525 1527
    48. 48
      Guldi, D. M.; Hungerbuhler, H.; Janata, E.; Asmus, K. D. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1993, 84 86
    49. 49
      Kuimova, M. K.; Hoffmann, M.; Winters, M. U.; Eng, M.; Balaz, M.; Clark, I. P.; Collins, H. A.; Tavender, S. M.; Wilson, C. J.; Albinsson, B.; Anderson, H. L.; Parker, A. W.; Phillips, D. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2007, 6, 675 682
    50. 50
      Williams, R. M.; Zwier, J. M.; Verhoeven, J. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 4093 4099
    51. 51
      Guldi, D. M.; Asmus, K.-D. J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 1472 1481
    52. 52
      Chang, M.-H.; Hoffmann, M.; Anderson, H. L.; Herz, L. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 10171 10178
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    Synthesis, NMR spectra, mass spectra, HPLC traces, ground-state absorption spectra, steady-state emission spectra, time-resolved fluorescence decays and fitting parameters, and transient absorption fitting parameters. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.