Open Access Article
This Open Access Article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence
Correction: Role of solute-solvent hydrogen bonds on the ground state and the excited state proton transfer in 3-hydroxyflavone. A systematic spectrophotometric study
Simone
Lazzaroni
ab,
Daniele
Dondi
a,
Alberto
Mezzetti
*c and
Stefano
Protti
*d
aRadchem Lab, Department of Chemistry, University of Pavia, Via Taramelli 10, Italy
bLaboratory of Applied Nuclear Energy, LENA, University of Pavia, Via Aselli 41, 27100 Pavia, Italy
cLaboratoire de Réactivité de Surface UMR CNRS 7197, Sorbonne Université, Faculté de Sciences et Ingénierie, Tour 43-53, 3ème étage, 4 Pl Jussieu, 75005 Paris, France. E-mail: alberto.mezzetti@upmc.fr
dPhotoGreen Lab, Department of Chemistry, University of Pavia, Via Taramelli 12, 27100 Pavia, Italy. E-mail: stefano.protti@unipv.it
First published on 29th May 2020
Abstract
Correction for ‘Role of solute-solvent hydrogen bonds on the ground state and the excited state proton transfer in 3-hydroxyflavone. A systematic spectrophotometric study’ by Simone Lazzaroni et al., Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2018, 17, 923–933, DOI: 10.1039/C8PP00053K.
The authors would like to correct Table 1 as, upon further examination of the fluorescence spectra and fluorescence excitation spectra, they noticed that the position of the peak is not well-defined. This may be due to a series of factors: (1) simultaneous presence, in the same solution, of three different emission peaks (N*, T*, A*). The authors decided not to use any deconvolution or band decomposition procedure for reasons that will be explained in point (3) below. This may lead to some uncertainty (±∼3 nm) especially when the A* band is present. (2) Presence of Raman peak(s) from the solvent which overlap with the emission peaks, leading to some uncertainty around the exact position of the latter. (3) Presence of subpopulations of species (especially of the A* form, as previously noticed),1,2 each one characterized by slightly different emission and absorption peaks.
| Solvent | λ em(N) (ΦN) | λ em(T) (ΦT) | λ em(A) (ΦA) | λ ex(A) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aqueous solution | ||||
| NaOH (0.1 M) | — | — | 519 (0.002) | 400 |
| Alkanes | ||||
| n-Pentane | — | 530 (0.37) | — | — |
| i-Pentane | — | 528 (0.32) | — | — |
| 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane | — | 523 (0.31) | — | — |
| n-Hexane | — | 529 (0.33) | — | — |
| Cyclohexane | — | 527 (0.28) | — | — |
| Aromatics | ||||
| Benzene | — | 536 (0.23) | — | — |
| Toluene | — | 530 (0.29) | — | — |
| Haloaliphatics | ||||
| Dichloromethane | — | 528 (0.18) | — | — |
| Chloroform | 400 (<10−3) | 532 (0.19) | — | — |
| Carbon tetrachloride | — | 523 (0.24) | — | — |
| Esters | ||||
| Ethyl acetate | 387 (0.0027) | 529 (0.067) | — | — |
| Nitriles | ||||
| Acetonitrile | 395 (0.0008) | 525 (0.06) | 468 (0.096) | 420 |
| Ethers | ||||
| 1,4-Dioxane | 394 (0.0028) | 530 (0.067) | 474 (0.055) | 413 |
| Diethyl ether | 400 (0.0025) | 537 (0.042) | 474 (0.052) | 412 |
| Tetrahydrofuran | 403 (0.001) | 538 (0.040) | 485 (0.119) | 404 |
| Ketones | ||||
| Acetone | 400 (0.0048) | 530 (0.030) | 481 (0.046) | 420 |
| Alcohols | ||||
| Methanol | 406 (0.009) | 528 (0.017) | 481 (0.029) | 410 |
| Ethanol | 406 (0.0056) | 531 (0.018) | 478 (0.010) | 414 |
| i-Propanol | 404 (0.0049) | 532 (0.041) | 495 (0.021) | 411 |
| 2-Methoxyethanol | 403 (0.009) | 539 (0.053) | 488 (0.018) | 406 |
| Triethylene glycol monomethyl ether | 406 (0.0079) | 540 (0.067) | 484 (0.053) | 411 |
| 2,2,2-Trifluoroethanol | 407 (0.024) | 503 (0.046) | — | — |
| Amides | ||||
| Formamide | 406 (0.006) | 526 (0.023) | 490 (0.016) | 412 |
| N-Methylformamide | 402 (0.009) | 529 (0.035) | 483 (0.130) | 407 |
| N,N-Dimethylformamide | 400 (0.003) | 539 (0.024) | 492 (0.096) | 431 (a twin peak at 417 nm) |
| Sulfoxides | ||||
| Dimethylsulfoxide | 400 (0.0015) | 534 (0.008) | 502 (0.034) | 428 |
Slight discrepancies compared to literature values are most likely due to differences in the excitation wavelength (for the emission spectra) or the chosen emission wavelength (for the fluorescence excitation spectra). Given the strict protocols which were followed for solvent purification and 3HF purification, the authors exclude any contributions from impurities, moisture, or other contaminants.
The correct Table 1 is shown below with the corrected values for the following: λem(N) in ethyl acetate, acetonitrile, 1,4-dioxane, tetrahydrofuran, methanol, formamide and N-methyl formamide; λem(T) in chloroform; λem(A) in acetone, ethanol and formamide; and λex(A) in tetrahydrofuran, acetone, methanol, iso-propanol, 2-methoxyethanol, formamide, N-methylformamide and N,N-dimethylformamide.
The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.
References
- D. Loco, S. Protti, B. Mennucci and A. Mezzetti, J. Mol. Struct., 2019, 1182, 283–291 Search PubMed.
- B. Dereka, R. Letrun, D. Svechkarev, A. Rosspeintner and E. Vauthey, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2015, 119, 2434–2443 Search PubMed.
| This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry and Owner Societies 2020 |