journal article·2023-05-01

Linker Aromaticity Reduces Band Dispersion in 2D Conductive Metal–Organic Frameworks

Monique C. Demuth, Christopher H. Hendon

ACS Materials Letters· Volume 5· Issue 5
Publisher page

Abstract

All 2D electrically conductive metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) are constructed from hexasubstituted aromatics that oxidize during self-assembly. Since electrical conduction is thought to occur through the ligand π-system, but aromaticity itself results in stabilized π-electrons, the delocalization of ligand wavefunctions should be inversely related to the ligand π-stability. That is, aromatic π-electrons should prefer to localize on a single linker rather than delocalize to form a curved band in the MOF. Here, we use a combination of NICS-xy scans and bulk electronic band structure calculations to show that the extent of residual aromaticity in the oxidized linker is a good predictor for electronic localization in the resultant MOF. Thus, ligands that feature antiaromatic π-systems in the oxidation state found within the MOF should yield increased band curvature, a target parameter that affects charge mobility in high performing electrical conductors.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Graphene research and applications · Metal-Organic Frameworks: Synthesis and Applications · Thermal properties of materials

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403, United States

Funding

Research Corporation for Science Advancement · Division of Materials Research

References (40)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1021/cr020730k10.1021/cr020730k ↗
2. 10.1038/nmat229710.1038/nmat2297 ↗
3. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b0076610.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00766 ↗
4. 10.1002/ijch.20180007810.1002/ijch.201800078 ↗
5. 10.1021/acscentsci.9b0100610.1021/acscentsci.9b01006 ↗
6. 10.1038/nmat476610.1038/nmat4766 ↗
7. 10.1038/s41467-019-12857-410.1038/s41467-019-12857-4 ↗
8. 10.1002/ange.20200610210.1002/ange.202006102 ↗
9. 10.1063/1.156432910.1063/1.1564329 ↗
10. 10.1021/jacs.7b0574210.1021/jacs.7b05742 ↗
11. 10.1021/acsami.1c0913010.1021/acsami.1c09130 ↗
12. 10.1039/C4NR05247A10.1039/C4NR05247A ↗
13. 10.1021/ja502765n10.1021/ja502765n ↗
14. 10.1021/cm301194a10.1021/cm301194a ↗
15. 10.1021/ic201174810.1021/ic2011748 ↗
16. 10.1021/ja030123u10.1021/ja030123u ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ccr.2010.12.00610.1016/j.ccr.2010.12.006 ↗
18. 10.1002/anie.20141185410.1002/anie.201411854 ↗
19. 10.1021/jo051746o10.1021/jo051746o ↗
20. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c0014810.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00148 ↗
21. 10.1021/jacs.6b0851110.1021/jacs.6b08511 ↗
22. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b0314010.1021/acs.jpclett.7b03140 ↗
23. 10.1021/jacs.7b0723410.1021/jacs.7b07234 ↗
24. 10.1039/C4CP05328A10.1039/C4CP05328A ↗
25. 10.1039/C5RA09824F10.1039/C5RA09824F ↗
26. 10.1039/C9CP04797B10.1039/C9CP04797B ↗
27. 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.20140310.1103/PhysRevB.90.201403 ↗
28. 10.1021/jacs.8b0602010.1021/jacs.8b06020 ↗
29. 10.1021/acsnano.1c1083810.1021/acsnano.1c10838 ↗
30. 10.1039/D0PY01615B10.1039/D0PY01615B ↗
31. 10.1038/s41563-020-00847-710.1038/s41563-020-00847-7 ↗
32. 10.1039/C5RA25530A10.1039/C5RA25530A ↗
33. 10.1021/acsaem.0c0053910.1021/acsaem.0c00539 ↗
34. 10.1021/jacs.5b1107610.1021/jacs.5b11076 ↗
35. 10.1002/chem.20130430710.1002/chem.201304307 ↗
36. 10.1021/acs.orglett.1c0151410.1021/acs.orglett.1c01514 ↗
37. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Scalmani, G.; Barone, V.; Petersson, G. A.; Nakatsuji, H. Gaussian 09, Revision E.01; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford CT, 2016.
38. 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.1116910.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 ↗
39. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.13640610.1103/PhysRevLett.100.136406 ↗
40. 10.1063/1.352433610.1063/1.3524336 ↗