Self-organization of coil-ring-coil structures into tubular supramolecular polymer brushes: Synthesis, morphology, and growth

Macromolecules

Volumn 43, Issue 20, 2010, Pages 8379-8388

  Fritzsche, Martin ^a   Jester, Stefan Sven ^a   Höger, Sigurd ^a   Klaus, Christina ^b   Dingenouts, Nico ^b   Linder, Peter ^c   Drechsler, Markus ^d   Rosenfeldt, Sabine ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^c INSTITUT LAUE LANGEVIN   (France)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BAYREUTH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGGREGATE GROWTH; AMINO GROUP; BLOCK STRUCTURES; CARBODIIMIDES; COIL STRUCTURES; CRYOGENIC TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; DRIVING FORCES; MACROCYCLES; MACROCYCLICS; OBLATE SHAPE; OXIDATIVE DIMERIZATION; SELF-ORGANIZATIONS; SHAPE-PERSISTENT MACROCYCLES; SMALL-ANGLE NEUTRON SCATTERING; SOLVOPHOBIC INTERACTIONS; SUPRAMOLECULAR POLYMERS;

ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY; BRUSHES; CARBOXYLIC ACIDS; MORPHOLOGY; NEUTRON SCATTERING; SOLUBILITY; SUPRAMOLECULAR CHEMISTRY; TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY;

AGGLOMERATION;

EID: 77958189504     PISSN: 00249297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ma1016242     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Waser, R. Nanoelectronics and Information Technology: Materials, Processes and Devices, 2 nd ed.; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2005.
2. Rai-Choudhury, P., Ed.; Handbook of Microlithography, Micromachining and Microfabrication; Institution of Engineering and Technology: London, 2004; Vols. 1 and 2.
3. Ozin, G. A.; Arsenault, A. C.; Cademartiri, L. Nanochemistry, 2 nd ed.; RSC Publishing: London, 2009.
4. Alexandridis, P.; Lindman, B. Amphiphilic Block Copolymers; Elsevier Science B.V.: Amsterdam, 2000.
5. Lee, M.; Jeong, Y.-S.; Cho, B.-K.; Oh, N.-K.; Zin, W.-C. Chem. Eur. J. 2002, 8, 876-883
6. Ryu, J.-H.; Oh, N.-K.; Lee, M. Chem. Commun. 2005, 1770-1772
7. Kim, J.-K.; Lee, E.; Kim, M.-C.; Sim, E.; Lee, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 17768-17770
8. Tang, C.; Lennon, E. M.; Fredrickson, G. H.; Kramer, E. J.; Hawker, C. J. Science 2008, 322, 429-432
9. Yu, H.; Kobayashi, T. Molecules 2010, 15, 570-603
10. Reviews about rod-coil block copolymers: Lee, M.; Cho, B.-K.; Zin, W.-C. Chem. Rev. 2001, 101, 3869-3892
11. Klok, H.-A.; Lecommandoux, S. Adv. Mater. 2001, 13, 1217-1229
12. Mao, G.; Ober, C. K. Acta Polym. 1997, 48, 405-422
13. Zubarev, E. R.; Pralle, M. U.; Li, L.; Stupp, S. I. Science 1999, 283, 523-526
14. Zubarev, E. R.; Pralle, M. U.; Sone, E. D.; Stupp, S. I. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 4105-4106
15. For some recent examples of complex superstructures formed by rod-coil block copolymers see, for example: Halperin, A. Macromolecules 1990, 23, 2724-2731
16. Chen, J. T.; Thomas, E. L.; Ober, C. K.; Mao, G.-P. Science 1996, 273, 343-346
17. Jenekhe, S. A.; Chen, X. L. Science 1999, 283, 372-375
18. Klok, H.-A.; Langenwalter, J. F.; Lecommandoux, S. Macromolecules 2000, 33, 7819-7826
19. Engelkamp, H.; Middelbeek, S.; Nolte, R. J. M. Science 1999, 284, 785-788
20. Raez, J.; Manners, I.; Winnik, M. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 10381-10395
21. Whitesides, G. M.; Mathias, J. P.; Seto, C. T. Science 1991, 254, 1312-1319
22. Lehn, J.-M. Supramolecular Chemistry; VCH: Weinheim, 1995.
23. Klug, A. Angew. Chem. 1983, 95, 579-596
24. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1983, 22, 565 - 582.
25. Klug, A. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B 1999, 354, 531-535
26. An overview gives: Bong, D. T.; Clark, T. D.; Granja, J. R.; Ghadiri, M. R. Angew. Chem. 2001, 113, 1016-1041
27. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 988 - 1011.
28. Percec, V.; Johansson, G.; Ungar, G.; Zhou, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 9855-9866
29. Percec, V. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London A 2006, 364, 2709-2719
30. Peterca, M.; Percec, V.; Dulcey, A. E.; Nummelin, S.; Korey, S.; Ilies, M.; Heiney, P. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 129, 6713-6728
31. Pasternack, R. F.; Gibbs, E. J.; Sibley, S.; Woodard, L.; Hutchinson, P.; Genereux, J.; Kristian, K. Biophys. J. 2006, 90, 1033-1042
32. Schönherr, H.; Paraschiv, V.; Zapotoczny, S.; Crego-Calama, M.; Timmerman, P.; Frank, C. W.; Vancso, G. J.; Reinhoudt, D. N. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 5024-5027
33. Kawasaki, T.; Tokuhiro, M.; Kimizuka, N.; Kunitake, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 6792-6800
34. van Gorp, J. J.; Vekemans, J. A. J. M.; Meijer, E. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 14759-14769
35. Yagai, S.; Kinoshita, T.; Kikkawa, Y.; Karatsu, T.; Kitamura, A.; Honsho, Y.; Seki, S. Chem. Eur. J. 2009, 15, 9320-9324
36. Jonkheijm, P.; Hoeben, F. J. M.; Kleppinger, R.; van Herrikhuyzen, J.; Schenning, A. P. H. J.; Meijer, E. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 15941-15949
37. Jeukens, C. R. L. P. N.; Jonkheijm, P.; Wijnen, F. J. P.; Gielen, J. C.; Christianen, P. C. M.; Schenning, A. P. H. J.; Meijer, E. W.; Maan, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 8280-8281
38. Akutagawa, T.; Ohta, T.; Hasegawa, T.; Nakamura, T.; Christensen, C. A.; Becher, J. Proc. Nat. Am. Soc. 2002, 99, 5028-5033
39. Rapaport, H.; Kim, H. S.; Kjaer, K.; Howes, P. B.; Cohen, S.; Als-Nielsen, J.; Ghadiri, M. R.; Leisterowitz, L.; Lahav, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 1186-1191
40. Fenniri, H.; Deng, B.-L.; Ribbe, A. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 11064-11072
41. Moralez, J. G.; Raez, J.; Yamazaki, T.; Motkuri, R.; Kovalenko, A.; Fenniri, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 8307-8309
42. Jin, W.; Fukushima, T.; Kosaka, A.; Niki, M.; Ishii, N.; Aida, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 8284-8285
43. Balakrishnan, K.; Datar, A.; Zhang, W.; Yang, X.; Tammene, N.; Huang, J.; Zuo, J.; Yen, M.; Moore, J. S.; Zang, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 6576-6577
44. Cheng, X.; Ver Heyen, A.; Mamdouh, W.; Uji-i, H.; De Schryver, F.; Höger, S.; De Feyter, S. Langmuir 2007, 23, 1281-1286
45. Dingenouts, N.; Klyatskaya, S.; Rosenfeldt, S.; Ballauff, M.; Höger, S. Macromolecules 2009, 42, 5900-5902
46. Couet, J.; Biesalski, M. Small 2008, 7, 1008-1016
47. Ghadiri, M. R.; Granja, J. R.; Milligan, R. A.; McRee, D. E.; Khazanovich, N. Nature 1993, 366, 324-327
48. Gattuso, G.; Menzer, S.; Nepogodiev, S. A.; Stoddart, J. F.; Williams, D. J. Angew. Chem. 1997, 109, 1615-1617
49. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1997, 36, 1451 - 1454.
50. Sonoda, M.; Yamaguchi, Y.; Tahara, K.; Hirose, K.; Tobe, Y. Tetrahedron 2008, 64, 11490-11494
51. Höger, S.; Ramminger, A.-D.; Rosselli, S.; Wagner, T.; Silier, B.; Wiegand, S.; Häussler, W.; Lieser, G.; Scheumann, V. Angew. Chem. 2001, 113, 3233-3237
52. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 3137 - 3141.
53. Höger, S.; Rosselli, S.; Ramminger, A.-D.; Wagner, T.; Lieser, G. Chem. Eur. J. 2003, 9, 3481-3491
54. Gielen, J. C.; Ver Heyen, A.; Klyatskaya, S.; Vanderlinden, W.; Höger, S.; Maan, J. C.; De Feyter, S.; Christianen, P. C. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 14134-14135
55. Hui, J. K.-H.; Frischmann, P. D.; Tso, C.-H.; Michal, C. A.; MacLachlan, M. J. Chem. Eur. J. 2010, 16, 2453-2460
56. Naddo., T.; Che, Y.; Zhang, W.; Balakrishnan, K.; Yang, X.; Yen, M.; Zhao, Y.; Moore, J. S.; Zang, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 6978-6979
57. Balci, S.; Bittner, A. M.; Hahn, K.; Scheu, C.; Knez, M.; Kadri, A.; Wege, C.; Jeske, H.; Kern, K. Electrochim. Acta 2006, 51, 6251-6257
58. Zhao, D.; Moore, J. S. Chem. Commun. 2003, 807-818
59. A polar hydroxy group at the periphery can also favor the aggregation of rigid phenylene-ethynylene rings: Lin, C.-H.; Tour, J. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 7761-7768
60. Brunsveld, L.; Folmer, B. J. B.; Meijer, E. W.; Sijbesma, R. P. Chem. Rev. 2001, 131, 4071-4097
61. Ciferri, A. Supramolecular Polymers; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2005.
62. Pensec, S.; Nouvel, N.; Guilleman, A.; Creton, C.; Boué, F.; Bouteiller, L. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 2529 - 2534.
63. Milner, S. T. Science 1991, 251, 905-914
64. Zhang, M.; Müller, A. H. E. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2005, 43, 3461-3481
65. No diameter separation procedure is required, compared to carbon nanotubes, which are prepared in a comparably broad diameter distribution, as i.e. described in: Arnold, M. S.; Green, A. A.; Hulvat, J. F.; Stupp, S. I.; Hersam, M. C. Nature Nanotechnol. 2006, 1, 60-65
66. Polymer Handbook, 4 th ed.; Brandrup, J.; Immergut, E. H.; Grulke, E. A., Eds.; Wiley-Interscience: New York, 1999; Vol. 2, pp 300 - 305.
67. The strong solvent dependence of other aggregating systems and clustering systems is e.g. described in: Jonkheijm, P.; van der Schoot, P.; Schenning, A. P. J. H.; Meijer, E. W. Science 2006, 313, 80-83
68. Mössinger, D.; Chaudhuri, D.; Kudernac, T.; Lei, S.; De Feyter, S.; Lupton, J. M.; Höger, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 1410-1423
69. Ballauff, M.; Li, L.; Rosenfeldt, S.; Dingenouts, N.; Beck, J.; Krieger-Beck, P. Angew. Chem. 2004, 116, 5967-5970
70. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 5843 - 5846.
71. Walther, A.; Drechsler, M.; Rosenfeldt, S.; Harnau, L.; Ballauff, M.; Abetz, V.; Müller, A. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 4720-4728
72. It is worth mentioning that the introduction of phthalimido groups at the periphery of a shape-persistent macrocycle by treating the macrocyclic diol with phthalimide under Mitsunobu conditions was not successful.
73. Höger, S.; Meckenstock, A.-D.; Pellen, H. J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 4556-4557
74. Höger, S.; Meckenstock, A.-D. Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 1735-1736
75. Höger, S. Macromol. Symp. 1999, 142, 185-191
76. Balagurusamy, V. S. K.; Ungar, G.; Percec, V.; Johansson, G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 1539-1555
77. Höger, S.; Bonrad, K.; Mourran, A.; Beginn, U.; Möller, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 5651-5659
78. δ = δ 0 + (δ ∞ - δ 0) (4 K M tot + 1 - 8 K M tot + 1 4 K M tot)
79. Provencher, S. W. Biophys. J. 1976, 16, 27-41
80. The observation of only one species with a rather small hydrodynamic radius might be the result of a specific dimerization where the macrocycles are arranged face-to-face and rotated by 90°, so that the dendritic side groups efficiently block the top and bottom of the dimer and prevent a further growth of the aggregate. A similar observation has been made on other macrocycles. Cf.: Klyatskaya, S.; Dingenouts, N.; Rosenauer, C.; Müller, B.; Höger, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 3150-3151
81. Higgins, J. S.; Benoit, H. C. Polymers and Neutron Scattering; Clarendon: Oxford, 1994.
82. c, due to the definition of the radius of gyration.
83. 2 around each pixel, resulting in an averaged topography image. This image, in which only raw features are visible, is subtracted from the original topography data, yielding the enhanced visibility of the small features in the <20 nm size regime. The deconvolution was done with the SPIP software package, ImageMetrology.
84. As mentioned before, even after this storage time, no precipitation of the tubes from the solution could be observed, as it should happen if the network shown in Figure 6 d would already exist in solution.
85. Lateral dimensions (i.e., widths) of individual objects are typically overestimated by AFM due to a limited tip radius and an interaction range being typically larger than the measured dimensions. However, the width of particles within a periodic lattice is measured correctly via the lattice distance. For further details see, e.g.: García, R.; Pérez, R. Surf. Sci. Rep. 2002, 47, 197-301
86. In particular, as soft tapping conditions (i.e., small free amplitude and small damping) are chosen, the determined heights represent a good approximation for the tube diameter. Noteworthy, the force applied by the AFM tip in the amplitude-mode (AM) exerts a certain pressure on the sample and may cause a deformation of soft matter (cf.: Yang, C. W.; Hwang, I.-S.; Chen, Y. F.; Chang, C. S.; Tsai, D. P. Nanotechnology 2007, 18, 084009). Additionally, the influence of the substrate/molecule interaction on the tube cross section is not clear at present. Cf.: Djalali, R.; Li, S.-Y.; Schmidt, M. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 4282-4288
87. Börner, H. G.; Beers, K.; Matyjaszewski, K.; Sheiko, S. S.; Möller, M. Macromolecules 2001, 34, 4375-4383
88. For self-assembled monolayers of phenylene-ethynylene-butadiynylene macrocycles on HOPG see: Höger, S.; Bonrad, K.; Mourran, A.; Beginn, U.; Möller, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 5651-5659
89. Borissov, D.; Ziegler, A.; Höger, S.; Freyland, W. Langmuir 2004, 20, 2781-2784
90. Tahara, K.; Johnson, C. A., II; Fujita, T.; Sonoda, M.; De Schryver, F. C.; De Feyter, S.; Haley, M. M.; Tobe, Y. Langmuir 2007, 23, 10190-10197
91. Lei, S.; Tahara, K.; De Schryver, F. C.; Van der Auweraer, M.; Tobe, Y.; De Feyter, S. Angew. Chem. 2008, 120, 3006-3010
92. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 2964 - 2968.
93. Jester, S.-S.; Shabelina, N.; Le Blanc, S. M.; Höger, S. Angew. Chem. 2010, 122, 6237-6241
94. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 6101 - 6105.
95. At the present stage, we assume that different interaction strengths (as discussed above) lead to unlike adsorption behavior of aggregates of 2a on substrates that are different in polarity or able to support commensurate adlayers due to specific interatomic distances of the surface crystal lattice. Additionally, contact electrification can be discussed as an origin for the adsorbate-substrate interaction for the particular case of polystyrene on HOPG. The term "contact electrification" describes electrical charging of PS on a HOPG surface due to accessibility of respective acceptor states in PS from the Fermi level of HOPG. (see, e.g.: Gady, B.; Reifenberger, R.; Rimai, D. S. J. Appl. Phys. 1998, 84, 319-322). However, presently the role of contact electrification on the quantitative description of the adsorbate-substrate interactions of aggregates of 2a with HOPG is unclear