4.8 Article

Self-assembled poly-catenanes from supramolecular toroidal building blocks

期刊

NATURE
卷 583, 期 7816, 页码 400-+

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2445-z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mechanical interlocking of molecules (catenation) is a nontrivial challenge in modern synthetic chemistry and materials science(1,2). One strategy to achieve catenation is the design of pre-annular molecules that are capable of both efficient cyclization and of pre-organizing another precursor to engage in subsequent interlocking(3-9). This task is particularly difficult when the annular target is composed of a large ensemble of molecules, that is, when it is a supramolecular assembly. However, the construction of such unprecedented assemblies would enable the visualization of nontrivial nanotopologies through microscopy techniques, which would not only satisfy academic curiosity but also pave the way to the development of materials with nanotopology-derived properties. Here we report the synthesis of such a nanotopology using fibrous supramolecular assemblies with intrinsic curvature. Using a solvent-mixing strategy, we kinetically organized a molecule that can elongate into toroids with a radius of about 13 nanometres. Atomic force microscopy on the resulting nanoscale toroids revealed a high percentage of catenation, which is sufficient to yield 'nanolympiadane'(10), a nanoscale catenane composed of five interlocked toroids. Spectroscopic and theoretical studies suggested that this unusually high degree of catenation stems from the secondary nucleation of the precursor molecules around the toroids. By modifying the self-assembly protocol to promote ring closure and secondary nucleation, a maximum catenation number of 22 was confirmed by atomic force microscopy. Nanoscale toroids with a high percentage of poly-catenation and radii of up to about 13 nm are kinetically organized using fibrous supramolecular assemblies with intrinsic curvature and a solvent-mixing strategy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据