This is an open access article published under an ACS AuthorChoice License, which permits copying and redistribution of the article or any adaptations for non-commercial purposes.
Article Cite This: ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
http://pubs.acs.org/journal/acsodf
Kinetic Model under Light-Limited Condition for Photoinitiated Thiol−Ene Coupling Reactions Kurt W. E. Sy Piecco,† Ahmed M. Aboelenen,† Joseph R. Pyle,† Juvinch R. Vicente,† Dinesh Gautam,† and Jixin Chen*,†,‡,§ Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, ‡Nanoscale and Quantum Phenomena Institute, and §Center for Intelligent Chemical Instrumentation, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, United States
Downloaded via 146.185.203.125 on October 31, 2018 at 09:28:52 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
†
ABSTRACT: Thiol−ene click chemistry has become a powerful paradigm in synthesis, materials science, and surface modification in the past decade. In the photoinitiated thiol− ene reaction, an induction period is often observed before the major change in its kinetic curve, for which a possible mechanism is proposed in this report. Briefly, light soaking generates radicals following the zeroth-order reaction kinetics. The radical is the reactant that initializes the chain reaction of thiol−ene coupling, which is a first-order reaction. Combining both and under the light-limited conditions, a surprising kinetics represented by a Gaussian-like model evolves that is different from the exponential model used to describe the first-order reaction of the final product. The experimental data are fitted well with the new model, and the reaction kinetic constants can be pulled out from the fitting.
■
INTRODUCTION Click reactions have been one of the widely used methods for chemical synthesis because of their properties, as defined by Sharpless in 2001, which are as follows: (a) they produce high yields under mild conditions, (b) they are not affected by the presence of oxygen and water, and (c) they are compatible with a wide variety of starting materials, which selectively react only with each other (i.e., the reaction is orthogonal to other organic reactions).1 The reaction between an alkene, or an alkyne, and a thiol is widely accepted as having the properties of a click reaction.2 It has become a powerful tool in various synthetic methodologies, biofunctionalization, surface and polymer modification, and polymerization.3−15 This thiol− ene click reaction can follow two different mechanisms depending on the type of initiator that is used.8 The basecatalyzed thiol−ene (also called thiol-Michael addition) reaction is initiated by adding a nucleophile, usually phosphines.16,17 Or the reaction is initiated by exposing the thiols to heat or UV light, which generate thiyl radicals that will react with the alkene, or alkyne (Figure 1A).18−22 In a series of recent studies, the most important factor governing the overall kinetics of thiol−ene polymerization was found by Bowman and co-workers to be the ratio of the propagation rate (k P ) to the chain-transfer rate (kCT).8,16,17,20,23−29 The reaction kinetics is simplified into first-order reactions with respect to either thiol or alkene, or both, depending on the kP/kCT ratio.24 This explains the overall exponential growth curve of the product but ignores the short induction period that is often observed before the steep © 2018 American Chemical Society
portion of the growth curve, making it difficult to extract the rate constants from the curve fitting. Here, we propose an expanded mechanism to explain the induction period using the same kinetic model from the literature but taking the photoinitiator into account. In this report, we measured the reaction kinetics of vinyltrimethoxysilane (VTMS) with thioglycolic acid (TGA) photoinitiated by 2,2-dimethoxy-2-phenylacetophenone (DMPA), and VTMS with cysteamine hydrochloride (CAH) also photoinitiated by DMPA (Figure 1B) using 1H NMR spectroscopy. The mixture was exposed to a 368−400 nm light source that is 3 cm away from the sample. Silanes were used in this study because many applications require the immobilization of a molecule tailored for a specific property via the silane group. The ability to couple a molecule to a silane through thiol−ene click reactions widens the range of molecules that can be grafted onto oxide surfaces.
■
EXPERIMENTAL SECTION All reagents were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, and all spectra were collected using a Bruker Ascend 500 MHz NMR spectrometer under the same instrument options. Reactants TGA (or CAH), VTMS, and photoinitiator DMPA were added into an NMR tube, with solvent CDCl3 for the VTMS (0.427 M), TGA (0.857 M), and DMPA (0.03 M) mixture, Received: July 20, 2018 Accepted: October 19, 2018 Published: October 29, 2018 14327
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
ACS Omega
Article
Figure 2. (A) 1H NMR spectra of the reactant mixture of VTMS, TGA, and DMPA in CDCl3, before (red trace) and after (blue trace) exposure to the solar simulator for 300 s. (B) 1H NMR spectra of the reactant mixture of VTMS, CAH, and DMPA in (CD3)2CO−D2O (1:4 v/v) co-solvent, before (red trace) and after (blue trace) exposure to the solar simulator for 150 s. (C, D) 1H NMR spectra of control experiments of the unexposed reaction mixtures of (C) VTMS with TGA showing no change in the vinyl and thiol peaks, and (D) VTMS with CAH also showing no change in the vinyl peak without UV light exposure.
Figure 1. (A) Scheme for the simplified mechanism of the photoinitiated thiol−ene coupling reaction catalyzed by the addition of a chemical photoinitiator (PI).22 (B) Schemes of the two reactions in this report.
and (CD3)2CO−D2O (1:4 v/v) co-solvent for the VTMS (0.058 M), CAH (0.112 M), and DMPA (0.012 M) mixture to dissolve both the CAH salt and the nonpolar aromatic DMPA. Both solutions were split into two equal portions. One portion was exposed to a 368−400 nm light source with a visible lightblocking filter (Sunlite SL20 lamp, 20 W). The lamp was placed ∼3 cm away from the sample, where the power density was ∼4 mW/cm2 measured using a Thor Labs PM100-S121C photodiode sensor. UV exposure was done at specific time intervals under room temperature prior to 1H NMR measurements. The remaining portions of both solutions were left unexposed and kept as the experimental controls. Baseline correction of all 1H NMR spectra, peak area calculations, and curve fitting (using least-squares regression analysis) were performed using MATLAB.
hydrolysis of the Si−OCH3 groups. Control experiments showed that indoor room lighting has no effect and that UV light is necessary for initiating the thiol−ene reaction. Without UV exposure, the NMR spectra in the control experiment (Figure 2C) indicate that no reaction occurs after 1 h of incubation at room temperature and under room light. The absence of VTMS-homopolymerization products is consistent with the click property of the thiol−ene coupling reported in the literature,8 whose products would have shown NMR peaks between 0.5 and 0.9 ppm for the methyl protons in the −Si−CH2− group,31−33 which were negligible in the 1H NMR spectra that were collected. The 1H NMR spectra of the mixture of VTMS, CAH, and DMPA before and after exposure to UV light are shown in Figure 2B. The hydrogen peak of HOD at ∼4.4 ppm is broadened due to its hydrogen bonding to the other molecules; peaks from the −SH and NH3+ exchanges with D2O and are not observed; hydrogen in Si−OCH3 is observed at 3.2 ppm; hydrogens in N−CH2−CH2 are observed around 3.8 and 3.4 ppm, respectively.34 The progress of the reaction can be most clearly tracked through the disappearance of the signal from the vinyl group at 5.9 ppm and the appearance of the thioether-specific peaks at 2.7 and 0.9 ppm.30 The reason for seeing only one peak near the center of the chemical shifts for the vinyl group is due to the peak broadening caused by self-aggregation.35 The methoxy groups of VTMS are partially hydrolyzed in D2O and the silanes are cross-linked, which may cause the peaks between 3.2 and 3 ppm. The reaction between VTMS and CAH was complete after 150 s of UV exposure (Figure 2B), with the thioether as the only product. The
■
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The 1H NMR spectra in Figure 2 confirm the formation of the click reaction products from the thiol−ene coupling of the VTMS with TGA (Figure 2A), or with CAH (Figure 2B). The coupling reaction in the mixture of VTMS, TGA, and DMPA was complete in less than 5 min of exposure to UV light (Figure 2A). The NMR spectra before and after UV exposure in Figure 2A clearly show the disappearance of the vinyl peaks in VTMS (at 5.8, 5.9, and 6.1 ppm) and the appearance of new peaks at 1.0 and 2.7 ppm that indicate the presence of the thioether product.30 The intensity of the TGA thiol peak at around 2.0 ppm was also reduced to half, which is consistent with the initial thiol−vinyl concentration ratio of 2:1 and a 1:1 thiol−vinyl reaction stoichiometry. These initial ratios have been reported to produce the highest yield in the shortest time.9 The peaks around 3.6 ppm in Figure 2A come from the 14328
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
ACS Omega
Article
Figure 3. (A) Reaction kinetics in bulk solution containing VTMS, TGA, and DMPA in CDCl3 measured by 1H NMR. The sample was exposed to 368−400 nm light for specific time intervals (0, 9, 14, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 70, 80, 90, 120, 180, and 300 s) prior to each 1H NMR measurement. (B) Similar experiments performed on a reaction mixture containing VTMS, CAH, and DMPA in (CD3)2CO−D2O co-solvent (1:4 v/v) and at time intervals of 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 75, 90, and 150 s.
Figure 4. (A) Selected NMR spectra of the reaction mixture of TGA, VTMS, and DMPA in CDCl3 focusing on the vinyl (red), thiol (black), and product (green and blue) regions from Figure 3. (B) Plots of integrated peak areas of the color-coded regions shown in (A). The scatter plots are integrated peak areas after each exposure time for each of the corresponding peaks in (A), which are fitted with the models described in the text. (C) Selected NMR spectra of the reaction mixture of CAH, VTMS, and DMPA in (CD3)2CO−D2O (1:4 v/v) co-solvent focusing on the vinyl (red) and product (green and blue) regions. (D) Plots of integrated peak areas of the color-coded regions shown in (C), where the scatter plots and solid traces represent integrated peak areas and fitted curves, respectively. These curves were fitted using eqs 11−13.
The yield for TGA and VTMS is >90%. The yield for CAH and VTMS is ∼50%. The relatively lower yield of the VTMS and CAH reaction is due to the recently observed inhibition of thiol−ene reactions by amine groups.36 Induction times were also observed in other photocatalytic reactions.19,28,29,37 The length of the induction time is dependent on the reaction conditions, such as light intensity.25,38 The kinetics of the photoinitiated thiol−ene reactions is best described by a half-Gaussian function, as shown by the solid curves in Figure 4B,D. The photocatalytic reaction cycle shown in Figure 1 has been assumed to have two competing steps in the literature, chain transfer and chain propagation.8,27 The relative rate constants of these processes and the chain initialization and termination processes will determine the kinetic trajectory of the reaction. These processes can be specified to have the following elementary reactions expanded from the model in the literature27
spectra from the control experiment without UV light is shown in Figure 2D, again confirming that UV light is required as indicated by the absence of the thioether product peaks (2.7 and 0.9 ppm) and the retention of the vinyl peak (5.9 ppm). The kinetics of both reactions were monitored with a series of 1H NMR spectra collected after every exposure interval (Figure 3), with the decay curves shown in Figure 4. In the VTMS−TGA coupling (Figure 4A), the vinyl (red traces) peak gradually disappears, while the thiol (black traces) peak was gradually reduced to roughly half after exposure to UV light over time. At the same time, there was a gradual increase in the peak intensities centered at 2.73 ppm (green traces) and 0.98 ppm (blue traces), both specific to the thioether product. Figure 4B shows a plot of the integrated peak areas corresponding to each moiety in Figure 4A as a function of exposure time. The data indicate that the photoinitiated reaction between VTMS and TGA has a short induction time followed by an exponential decay of the reactants, with a corresponding exponential growth of the thioether product. 14329
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
ACS Omega
Article k1
PI + R + light → PI• + R• k2
S + PI• → S• + PI
2
[SV]t = [S]0 (1 − e−(1/2)k 9t )
(1)
(11)
2
(2)
[S]t = [S]0 e−(1/2)k 9t
(3)
[V]t = [V]0 − [S]0 (1 − e−(1/2)k 9t )
(12) 2
k3
S• + V → SV • k4
SV • + S → SV + S• k5
PI• + R• → PI + R k6
S• + R• → S + R k7
SV • + R• → SV + R
These three Gaussian equations are different from the exponential decay functions used in the literature,24 but explain our light-limited induction period better (Figure 4B,D, fitted curves). A short induction period has been commonly observed in the literature for thiol−ene and thiol−yne couplings.22,27,39 This bulk kinetic analysis allowed us to estimate the value of k9 under our experimental conditions (Table 1) and thus select a relatively longer exposure time than
(4) (5) (6) (7)
Table 1. Rate Constants and Half-Lives of Thiols (from Equation 12) in the Photoinitiated Thiol−Ene Reactions Calculated from the 1H NMR Data (Figure 4)
where PI is the photoinitiator that has not been considered in the literature model;24,27 R is an unknown molecule (e.g., another PI, oxygen, or other molecules); S, V, and SV are the thiol, vinyl, and thioether products, respectively; and “•” indicates if the species is a radical. These reactions can be grouped into three major processes. Reactions 1 and 2 are the initiation steps of the photochemical reaction. Reactions 3 and 4 are the chain-transfer and chain-propagation steps, respectively. Reactions 5−7 are the termination steps of the photoinitiated thiol−ene reaction. Varying the rates of reactions 3−7 has resulted in various exponential curves with no obvious induction period. 24 Thus, we assume the photoactivation steps to be the rate-limiting steps to check if they contribute to the induction period. This assumption is reasonable because of the low light intensity used in this study (4 mW/cm2, ∼4% sunlight intensity at air mass 1.5). Solving these reactions is difficult for us, but useful equations can be drawn with approximations. The reaction rate can be expressed as a function of exposure time, t, and reactant concentrations, from step 4, which produces the thioether product d[SV]t = k4[SV •][S] dt
k9 (s−2)
t1/2 (s)
VTMS + TGA VTMS + CAH
0.0011 0.0014
36 31
t1/2 =
2 ln(2)/k 9
(14)
We note that at a higher light intensity, the photoactivated photoinitiator reaches a steady state quickly (when eq 9 becomes [SV•] = k8), and the kinetic equations (eqs 11 and 12) converge into the single-exponential decay functions found in the literature.22,27,39 The treatment of the rate-limiting step is different in this report compared to that in the literature, which allows us to predict the induction period observed under our reaction conditions. In summary, we have extended the existing kinetic model and demonstrated proof-of-concept experimental evaluations to provide a more complete reaction mechanism for thiol−ene click reactions. The observed consumption rates of the reactants and formation rates of products were best fit by half-Gaussian functions (eqs 11−13) that contain induction periods. These functions look empirical but are supported by the proposed light-limited reaction mechanism. When the photoinitiating step of the chain-reaction model is the ratelimiting step, a short induction period emerges prior to the exponential-like growth of the product (or decay of the reactant) concentration. This mechanism may help the researchers to elucidate and understand the factors that underlie the confusing kinetic curves observed before.
(8)
■
(9)
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
where k8 is a new constant, which under light-limited conditions is directly proportional to k1, e.g., k8 = k1, when the radical propagation rate is much higher than the termination rate. By combining eqs 8 and 9, we get d[SV]t = k 9[S]t = k 9([S]0 − [SV]t )t dt
reaction
the half-life, t1/2, for the surface-grafting experiments, where from eq 12
We can assume that the concentration of the activated [SV•] is small and rate-limited by the light exposure because the concentration of the photoinitiator [PI] is much smaller than the concentration of vinyl [V] and thiol [S] and because the light source is relatively weak, thus making [PI•] and [R•] small. Assuming typical light-limited photoreactions as zerothorder reactions and assuming a relatively small termination rate compared to the chain-transfer rate,27 the concentration of the photoactivated [SV • ] radical at any time, t, can be approximated as [SV •] = k 8t
(13)
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Ahmed M. Aboelenen: 0000-0002-7880-0660 Jixin Chen: 0000-0001-7381-0918 Notes
(10)
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
where k9 = k4 × k8 is another new constant, [S]0 is the initial concentration of the thiol, which is consumed to form the equal amount of [SV]t. After integration with the boundary condition that at time = 0, [SV]0 = 0, we get
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the Ohio University startup fund, the National Science Foundation MRI program CHE14330
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
ACS Omega
Article
side reactions and diffusional limitations. Macromolecules 2013, 46, 1732−1742. (20) Okay, O.; Bowman, C. N. Kinetic modeling of thiol-ene reactions with both step and chain growth aspects. Macromol. Theory Simul. 2005, 14, 267−277. (21) Bordoni, A. V.; Lombardo, M. V.; Wolosiuk, A. Photochemical radical thiol−ene click-based methodologies for silica and transition metal oxides materials chemical modification: a mini-review. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 77410−77426. (22) Fairbanks, B. D.; Love, D. M.; Bowman, C. N. Efficient polymer-polymer conjugation via thiol-ene click reaction. Macromol. Chem. Phys. 2017, 218, No. 1700073. (23) Reddy, S. K.; Cramer, N. B.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-vinyl mechanisms. 1. termination and propagation kinetics in thiol-ene photopolymerizations. Macromolecules 2006, 39, 3673−3680. (24) Northrop, B. H.; Coffey, R. N. Thiol-ene click chemistry: computational and kinetic analysis of the influence of alkene functionality. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 13804−13817. (25) Cramer, N. B.; Davies, T.; O’Brien, A. K.; Bowman, C. N. Mechanism and modeling of a thiol-ene photopolymerization. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 4631−4636. (26) Shin, J.; Matsushima, H.; Comer, C. M.; Bowman, C. N.; Hoyle, C. E. Thiol-isocyanate-ene ternary networks by sequential and simultaneous thiol click reactions. Chem. Mater. 2010, 22, 2616− 2625. (27) Cramer, N. B.; Bowman, C. N. Kinetics of thiol − ene and thiol − acrylate photopolymerizations with real-time Fourier transform infrared. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2001, 39, 3311−3319. (28) Cramer, N. B.; Reddy, S. K.; O’Brien, A. K.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-ene photopolymerization mechanism and rate limiting step changes for various vinyl functional group chemistries. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 7964−7969. (29) Reddy, S. K.; Cramer, N. B.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-vinyl mechanisms. 2. kinetic modeling of ternary thiol-vinyl photopolymerizations. Macromolecules 2006, 39, 3681−3687. (30) Bordoni, A. V.; Lombardo, M. V.; Regazzoni, A. E.; Soler-Illia, G. J. A. A.; Wolosiuk, A. Simple thiol-ene click chemistry modification of sba-15 silica pores with carboxylic acids. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2015, 450, 316−324. (31) Liu, L.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Q. Efficient flame retardant polyvinyl alcohol membrane through surface graft method. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 35051−35057. (32) Vadala, M. L.; Thompson, M. S.; Ashworth, M. A.; Lin, Y.; Vadala, T. P.; Ragheb, R.; Riffle, J. S. Heterobifunctional poly(ethylene oxide) oligomers containing carboxylic acids. Biomacromolecules 2008, 9, 1035−1043. (33) Mondal, A. N.; Zheng, C.; Cheng, C.; Hossain, M. M.; Khan, M. I.; Yao, Z.; Wu, L.; Xu, T. Effect of novel polysiloxane functionalized poly(amps-co-cea) membranes for base recovery from alkaline waste solutions via diffusion dialysis. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 95256−95267. (34) Kim, C.-H.; Parkin, S.; Bharara, M.; Atwood, D. Linear coordination of hg(ii) by cysteamine. Polyhedron 2002, 21, 225−228. (35) Whitesides, G. M.; Simanek, E. E.; Mathias, J. P.; Seto, C. T.; Chin, D. N.; Mammen, M.; Gordon, D. M. Noncovalent synthesis: using physical-organic chemistry to make aggregates. Acc. Chem. Res. 1995, 28, 37−44. (36) Love, D. M.; Kim, K.; Goodrich, J. T.; Fairbanks, B. D.; Worrell, B. T.; Stoykovich, M. P.; Musgrave, C. B.; Bowman, C. N. Amine induced retardation of the radical-mediated thiol-ene reaction via the formation of metastable disulfide radical anions. J. Org. Chem. 2018, 83, 2912−2919. (37) Reddy, S. K.; Sebra, R. P.; Anseth, K. S.; Bowman, C. N. Living radical photopolymerization induced grafting on thiol-ene based substrates. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2005, 43, 2134−2144. (38) Cramer, N. B.; Reddy, S. K.; Lu, H.; Cross, T.; Raj, R.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-ene photopolymerization of polymer-derived ceramic precursors. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2004, 42, 1752−1757.
1338000, and the National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health Award Number R15HG009972, Prof. Michael Jensen, Prof. Katherine Cimatu Group, Prof. Hugh Richardson group, and Prof. Andrew Tangonan, for instrumental supports and beneficial discussions.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Kolb, H. C.; Finn, M. G.; Sharpless, K. B. Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 2004−2021. (2) Hoyle, C. E.; Lowe, A. B.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-click chemistry: a multifaceted toolbox for small molecule and polymer synthesis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2010, 39, 1355−1387. (3) Melnik, E.; Muellner, P.; Bethge, O.; Bertagnolli, E.; Hainberger, R.; Laemmerhofer, M. Streptavidin binding as a model to characterize thiol−ene chemistry-based polyamine surfaces for reversible photonic protein biosensing. Chem. Commun. 2014, 50, 2424−2427. (4) Melnik, E. V. A.; Bruck, R.; Hainberger, R.; Lämmerhofer, M. Multi-step surface functionalization of polyimide based evanescent wave photonic biosensors and application for dna hybridization by Mach-Zehnder interferometer. Anal. Chim. Acta 2011, 699, 206−215. (5) Skinner, E. K.; Whiffin, F. M.; Price, G. J. Room temperature sonochemical initiation of thiol-ene reactions. Chem. Commun. 2012, 48, 6800−6802. (6) Taghavikish, M.; Subianto, S.; Dutta, N.; Roy Choudhury, N. Novel thiol-ene hybrid coating for metal protection. Coatings 2016, 6, 17. (7) Kade, M. J.; Burke, D. J.; Hawker, C. J. The power of thiol-ene chemistry. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2010, 48, 743−750. (8) Hoyle, C. E.; Bowman, C. N. Thiol-ene click chemistry. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 1540−1573. (9) Lowe, A. B. Thiol-ene “ click ” reactions and recent applications in polymer and materials synthesis: a first update. Polym. Chem. 2014, 5, 4820−4870. (10) Grim, J. C.; Marozas, I. A.; Anseth, K. S. Thiol-ene and photocleavage chemistry for controlled presentation of biomolecules in hydrogels. J. Controlled Release 2015, 219, 95−106. (11) McKenas, C. G.; Fehr, J. M.; Donley, C. L.; Lockett, M. R. Thiol-ene modified amorphous carbon substrates: surface patterning and chemically modified electrode preparation. Langmuir 2016, 32, 10529−10536. (12) Wendeln, C.; Rinnen, S.; Schulz, C.; Arlinghaus, H. F.; Ravoo, B. J. Photochemical microcontact printing by thiol-ene and thiol-yne click chemistry. Langmuir 2010, 26, 15966−15971. (13) Wu, J.-T.; Huang, C.; Liang, W.; Wu, Y.; Yu, J.; Chen, H. Reactive polymer coatings: a general route to thiol-ene and thiol-yne click reactions. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2012, 33, 922−927. (14) Cole, M. A.; Bowman, C. N. Evaluation of thiol-ene click chemistry in functionalized polysiloxanes. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2013, 51, 1749−1757. (15) Li, Z.; Zhu, Z.; Chueh, C.-C.; Luo, J.; Jen, A. K.-Y. Facile thiolene thermal crosslinking reaction facilitated hole-transporting layer for highly efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Adv. Energy Mater. 2016, 6, No. 1601165. (16) Chan, J. W.; Hoyle, C. E.; Lowe, A. B.; Bowman, M. Nucleophile-initiated thiol-Michael reactions: effect of organocatalyst, thiol, and ene. Macromolecules 2010, 43, 6381−6388. (17) Nair, D. P.; Podgórski, M.; Chatani, S.; Gong, T.; Xi, W.; Fenoli, C. R.; Bowman, C. N. The thiol-michael addition click reaction: a powerful and widely used tool in materials chemistry. Chem. Mater. 2014, 26, 724−744. (18) Hoyle, C. E.; Lee, T. Y.; Roper, T. Thiol-enes: chemistry of the past with promise for the future. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2004, 42, 5301−5338. (19) Derboven, P.; D’hooge, D. R.; Stamenovic, M. M.; Espeel, P.; Marin, G. B.; Du Prez, F. E.; Reyniers, M.-F. Kinetic modeling of radical thiol−ene chemistry for macromolecular design: importance of 14331
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
ACS Omega
Article
(39) Feng, W.; Li, L.; Ueda, E.; Li, J.; Heißler, S.; Welle, A.; Trapp, O.; Levkin, P. A. Surface patterning via thiol-yne click chemistry: an extremely fast and versatile approach to superhydrophilic-superhydrophobic micropatterns. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 1, No. 1400269.
14332
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b01725 ACS Omega 2018, 3, 14327−14332
