Open Access Article
Lei Jiaab,
Zhe Xueab,
Rong-Rong Zhuab,
Tong Yanab,
Yu-Na Wangab,
Suo-Shu Zhangab,
Xiao Gengab,
Lin Du*ab and
Qi-Hua Zhao
*ab
aKey Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry for Natural Resource Education Ministry, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, People's Republic of China. E-mail: lindu@ynu.edu.cn; qhzhao@ynu.edu.cn
bSchool of Chemical Science and Engineering, School of Pharmacy, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, People's Republic of China
First published on 2nd December 2019
A 3D metal–organic framework {[Cd(5-Brp)(dpa)]·0.5DMF·H2O}n (1) was successfully synthesized and characterized, which markedly recognized iron ions under the induction of an amino group. With the concentration of Fe3+ increasing, the emission of 1 first declined, then enhanced with a red shift and was finally quenched, which was different from the reference compound [Cd(5-Brp)(bpp)(H2O)]n (2). This result drew our attention to amine induced ion-exchange. This peculiar phenomenon inspired us to construct an effective ion detector.
For ion detection, analyzing the change of fluorescence is a immediate and effective method. There are mainly five kinds of detection mechanisms: the collapse of the framework,12 the ion-exchange between the targeted ions and central metal ions of MOFs,13 the resonance energy transfer,14 the absorption competition,15 and the weak interaction between metal ions and the heteroatom within the organic ligands.16 Of course different mechanisms can also exist in the same detection process.15 Since lots of MOFs have the fluorescence excitation or emission wavelength which overlaps with the ultraviolet absorption wavelength range of iron ions, these complexes are often used to detect iron ions with the mechanism of absorption competition and resonance energy transfer.15,17 However, the detection of iron ions with the mechanism of ion-exchange is rarely reported up to now, especially caused by inducing group. In addition, the quenching process of iron ions by most metal–organic frameworks rarely contains any peak shifts or enhances, as is the case with the quenching process of reference complex 2 herein (Fig. S10, ESI†). Complex 1 and 2 both conform with the rule of absorption competition (Fig. S13, ESI†), but their fluorescent phenomena during iron ion detection were very different. We also analyzed the quenching process of complex 1 and found an obvious distinction between these two complexes, although their ancillary ligands were only slightly different.
In order to study this striking phenomenon in depth, 1 and 2 were characterized by XRD, PXRD, TGA, elemental analyses (Fig. S2 and S3, ESI†), etc. And the possible amine induced ion-exchange mechanism was discussed in this paper.
The complex 2 belonging to C2/c space group also crystallizes in the monoclinic crystal system. In addition, 2 was synthesized through a similar way with 1 except the bpp ligand substituted dpa ligand. Therefore complex 2 was selected as a comparison and its structure was shown in Fig. S1, ESI.†
What did cause the special luminescence phenomenon of complex 1? According to the mechanisms mentioned in the introduction, we have verified them separately. To further study the above interesting phenomenon, 5 mg complex 1 was immersed into 2 mL solution of Fe3+ (0.1 M) for 10 minutes. It was easy to find that the color of complex 1 turned from white to brown quickly and obviously (Fig. S5, ESI†). The residue was separated by centrifugation and washed by deionized water. The PXRD of obtained residue was collected and compared with complex 1. From the Fig. S6, ESI† we found the structure of complex 1 was not broken after immersed in Fe3+ solution for 10 minutes. First, we could exclude the redox reaction between complex 1 and iron ions because the Fe 2p XPS spectra remained unchanged after complex 1 immersed in Fe3+ ions (Fig. S7, ESI†). SEM with EDS was carried out and the result showed that there was no Fe(III) at the place where Cd(II) located and vice versa (Fig. 3). ICP-MS also showed that Cd2+ ions were released to solution after adding Fe3+ ions (Table S1†). Then we conjectured there might be a competition between Fe3+ and Cd2+ ions on the surface of complex 1, instead of the absorption of Fe3+ ions. We have also designed a test to prove the capture of Fe3+ ions. The powder of complex 1, 5-Brp and dpa were added into the mixed solution of Fe(NO3)3 and NaSCN, respectively. For dpa, the color of mixed solution turned to pale yellow from red rapidly. For complex 1, the color red also faded rapidly. But the color of mixed solution hardly changed for 5-H2Brp (Fig. S8, ESI†). The above result indicated that the ligand dpa and dpa in complex 1 both had a rather obvious interaction with Fe3+ ions. Then the maximum emission of dpa with different [Fe3+] in ethanol was recorded and we found a large shift from 425 to 525 nm (Fig. S9b, ESI†). Interestingly, this large shifted peak (at 525 nm) matched the new peak easily observed at about 525 nm in Fig. 2, which meant there was an interaction between Fe3+ ions and dpa in complex 1. Besides, the arising of this new peak implied the beginning of ion-exchange. Compared with the fluorescence perform of complex 2, it could be inferred that the secondary amine group rather than pyridine in ligand dpa played a decisive role. The FT-IR showed that there was no change at the peak of secondary amine, implying the connection between iron ion and the nitrogen atom from pyridine ring (Fig. S11, ESI†). And this kind of connection style was reported by Andrew Yeh and his co-authors in 1995.18 The PXRD of complex 1 immersed in different concentration of Fe3+ solution indicated the whole exchange process (Fig. S12, ESI†). Partial ion-exchange process can still retain the framework structure while the complete exchange can lead to destruction of the framework.13,19 Herein it could be indicated that the whole quenching process was divided into three stages. At first step low concentration of Fe3+ ions led to an absorption competition. With the increasing concentration of Fe3+ ions, exchange happened between Cd2+ and Fe3+ ions on the surface of complex 1. Finally, the above two metal ions completed the exchange. Then there occurred an absorption competition between the exchange product and surplus Fe3+ ions, leading the shift emission to fade.
![]() | ||
| Fig. 3 Element maps of 1 immersed in Fe3+ ions, (a) SEM image; (b) Cd (green); (c) Fe (blue); (d) overlap of above three images. | ||
The XRD data were collected with a Bruker SMART AXS APEX II single crystal diffractometer at 298 K with Mo-Kα radiation (λ = 0.71073 Å). Absorption correction was based on symmetry equivalent reflections by using the SADABS program.20 The crystal structures of 1 and 2 were solved by direct methods and refined on F2 by full-matrix least-squares methods with the SHELXL-2014 program and Olex2 program.21,22 All non-hydrogen atoms were refined anisotropically. The crystalline structure data of all samples are displayed in Table S2,† and details of bond lengths and angles are recorded in Tables S3–S6.†
:
1) in a 5 mL glass tube. The glass tube was sealed and heated at 120 °C for 48 hours in oven and then cooled slowly to room temperature at a rate of 5 °C per hour. The resulting colourless crystals were collected and washed with DMF and water. The yield of 1 was 52% based on 5-H2Brp. C19.5H16.5BrCdN3.5O5.5 (580.17): calcd C 40.33%, H 2.84%, N 8.45%; found C 40.30%, H 2.86%, N 8.43%. FTIR (KBr pellets): ν∼ = 3438.97 (s), 1602.55 (vs.), 1557.82 (s), 1350.38 (s), 1210.33 (s), 1060.35 (m), 1027.61 (m), 821.09 (m), 772.54 (m), 724.53 (m), 606.54 (w), 533.01 (w).
:
7) in a 5 mL glass tube. The glass tube was sealed and heated at 120 °C for 48 hours in oven and then cooled slowly to room temperature at a rate of 5 °C per hour. The resulting colourless crystals were collected and washed with DMF. The yield of 2 was 37% based on 5-H2Brp. C21H19BrCdN2O5 (571.71): calcd C 44.08%, H 3.32%, N 4.90%; found C 43.99%, H 3.40%, N 4.92%. FTIR (KBr pellets): ν∼ = 3442.96 (s), 1612.80 (vs.), 1560.71 (m), 1349.79 (s), 1226.26 (m), 1099.00 (m), 1022.81 (m), 845.00 (m), 795.04 (m), 732.57 (m), 572.72 (w).Footnote |
| † Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: PXRD, SEM, XPS, ICP-MS, FTIR, fluorescence, crystal structure data and photograph. CCDC 1916377 and 1916379 (for 1 and 2 respectively) contain the supplementary CIF data for this paper. For ESI and crystallographic data in CIF or other electronic format see DOI: 10.1039/c9ra07559c |
| This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2019 |