4.6 Article

Covalent modification of surfaces with porous metal-organic materials

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 11, 期 44, 页码 23888-23894

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d3ta04662a

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent advances in metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and porous coordination cages (PCCs) have resulted in their widespread use due to their tunable properties and large surface areas. In this paper, the surface attachment of MOFs and cages using click chemistry, alkylation reactions, and electrostatic methods is explored. The results demonstrate the feasibility of surface attachment for porous cages and offer versatile approaches for functionalizing surfaces in various applications.
Recent advances in metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and porous coordination cages (PCCs) have led to their extensive use in various applications due to their tunable properties and exceptional surface areas. To address challenges in harnessing their tunability, surface deposition of MOFs and cages has been investigated. This paper presents efforts in surface attachment of MOFs and porous cages, leveraging click chemistry, alkylation reactions, and electrostatic approaches. HKUST-1 MOF nanoparticles were covalently tethered to an azide-modified gold surface using copper-catalyzed click chemistry, allowing precise control over the deposited layer. Calixarene and zirconium cages were also attached via click chemistry, providing controlled crystallinity and thickness. Complementary strategies using minimally-functionalized ligands enabled cage attachment to surfaces. These surface-attached porous materials offer versatile approaches for functionalizing surfaces in catalysis, sensing, drug delivery, and other applications, expanding the utility of porous materials in diverse fields. The results demonstrate the feasibility of surface attachment for porous cages. Enhancing MOF and PCC tunability: surface attachment explored via click chemistry, alkylation, and electrostatic methods.

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

4.6
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