4.6 Article

DFT/TDDFT Study on the Sensing Mechanism of a Fluorescent Probe for Hydrogen Sulfide: Excited State Intramolecular Proton Transfer Coupled Twisted Intramolecular Charge Transfer

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY A
卷 121, 期 28, 页码 5245-5256

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.7b02606

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21273234]
  2. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [ZR2014AM025]
  3. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB834604]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By using density functional theory (DFT) and time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) methods, the sensing mechanism of a fluorescent probe 2-(2-hydroxyphenyl) benzothiazole (HBT) derivative HBTPP-S for hydrogen sulfide has been thoroughly studied. The thiolysis reaction has a moderate reaction barrier of 18.40 kcal mol(-1), which indicates that the hydrogen sulfide sensing process has a favorable response speed. Because of the nonradiative donor-excited photoinduced electron transfer (d-PET, fluorophore as the electron donor) from the excited HBTPP group to the electron-withdrawing 2,4-dinitrophenyl group, as well as the inhibition of the proton transfer (PT) and the excited state intramolecular proton transfer (ESIPT) process by 2,4-dinitrophenyl group, the probe HBTPP-S is essentially nonfluorescent. On the other hand, the added hydrogen sulfide induces the thiolysis of the 2,4-dinitrophenyl ether bond, and then the thiolysis product HBTPP comes into existence. The theoretically simulated potential energy surface demonstrates that without the electron-withdrawing 2,4-dinitrophenyl group, the thiolysis product HBTPP undergoes the excited state intramolecular proton transfer (ESIPT) coupled twisted intramolecular charge transfer (TICT) processes in the first excited state. The absence of the d-PET and the process mentioned above may explain the significant fluorescent turn-on response and large Stokes shift of the thiolysis product HBTPP.

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