167,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Owing to the extensive interest in construction of functional metal organic frameworks (FMOFs), this book discusses the roles of functional groups on the structure and application of metal organic frameworks (MOFs). The contents of the book are classified based on the structural and chemical properties of organic functions, in order to make readers able to compare the different effects of each function on the structure and application of the MOFs. In each chapter, the chemical properties of applied functional groups are gathered to give deeper insight into the roles of organic functions in the structure and application of MOFs. In the function-application properties, the authors discuss how a functional group can dominate the host-guest chemistry of the MOFs and how this host-guest chemistry can expand the effectiveness and efficiency of the material in different fields of applications. Finally, function-structure properties are discussed. In function-application properties, it is discussed how a functional group can affect the topology, porosity, flexibility and stability of the framework. The features of this subject are novel and are presented for the first time.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 404
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title page
Copyright
Preface
1 Introduction to Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks
1.1 Coordination Polymers
1.2 Metal–Organic Frameworks
1.3 Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks
References
2 Amine Decorated Metal–Organic Frameworks
2.1 General Chemical Properties of Amine Function
2.2 Function–Application Properties
2.3 Function–Structure Properties
References
3 Azo and Azine Decorated Metal–Organic Frameworks
3.1 General Chemical Properties of Azine and Azo Functions
3.2 Function–Application Properties
3.3 Function-Structure Properties
References
4 Imidazolium and Pyridinium Decorated Metal-Organic Frameworks
4.1 Imidazolium Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks
4.2 Pyridinium Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks
References
5 Heterocyclic Azine Decorated Metal-Organic Frameworks
5.1 General Chemical Properties of Heterocyclic Azine Functions
5.2 Function–Application Properties
5.3 Function–Structure Properties
References
6 Heterocyclic Azole Decorated Metal-Organic Frameworks
6.1 General Chemical Properties of Heterocyclic Azole Functions
6.2 Function–Application Properties
6.3 Function–Structure Properties
References
7 Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks by Oxygen and Sulfur Based Functions
7.1 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Oxygen Based Functions
7.2 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Sulfur Based Functions
References
8 Urea and Amide Decorated Metal-Organic Frameworks
8.1 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Amide Function
8.2 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Urea Function
8.3 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Squaramide Function
References
9 Carbonyl, Carboxy and Imide Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks
9.1 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Carbonyl Function
9.2 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Carboxy Function
9.3 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Imide Function
References
10 Fluorine and Phosphonate Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks
10.1 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Phosphonic Acid/Phosphonate Functions
10.2 Functionalized Metal–Organic Frameworks by Fluorine Function
References
Index
End User License Agreement
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Title page
Copyright
Preface
Begin Reading
Index
End User License Agreement
Pages
v
ii
iii
iv
ix
x
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
Scrivener Publishing
100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J
Beverly, MA 01915-6106
Publishers at Scrivener
Martin Scrivener ([email protected])
Phillip Carmical ([email protected])
Functional Metal-Organic Frameworks
Structure, Properties and Applications
Ali Morsali and Sayed Ali Akbar Razavi
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
This edition first published 2021 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA and Scrivener Publishing LLC, 100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J, Beverly, MA 01915, USA
© 2021 Scrivener Publishing LLC
For more information about Scrivener publications please visit www.scrivenerpublishing.com.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or other- wise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
Wiley Global Headquarters
111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley prod- ucts visit us at www.wiley.com.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
ISBN 9781119640431
Cover image: Pixabay.Com
Cover design by Russell Richardson
Set in size of 11pt and Minion Pro by Manila Typesetting Company, Makati, Philippines
Preface
As a subclass of coordination polymers and porous materials, metal– organic frameworks (MOFs) are composed of a dual organic–inorganic structure based on organic (organic linkers) and inorganic (metal ions/clusters) building blocks. In structural view, a unique kind of connection between organic linkers and inorganic nodes leads to construction of a three-dimensional framework with vacant spaces between building blocks. Owing to unlimited possibility in selection of organic ligands and metal ions/clusters, theoretically it is feasible to synthesis an unlimited number of frameworks.
In recent decades, MOFs received lots of attention in the world of material science and chemistry. Such tremendous attention is owing to their unique chemical characters such as hybrid organic–inorganic nature, high porosity and surface area, tunability in chemical functionality, highly ordered and crystalline structure and moderate-to-high chemical and thermal stabilities. Each one of these chemical properties enable MOFs to apply for specific purpose, but the ability to functionalize MOFs is a specific character to improve the capability of MOFs in different field of applications.
There are three ways for functionalization of MOFs including: (I) using functional organic linker, (II) pore functionalization through immobilization of other functional materials and (III) functionalization of inorganic nodes of the framework. Owing to versatile kind of organic functional groups, linker functionalization is recognized as a favorite strategy to tailor the chemical properties and enrich the host-guest chemistry of functional metal–organic frameworks (FMOFs).
In this book, we tried to review the literature to gain deep insight about the effects of linker functionalization on structure and host-guest chemistry of FMOFs. The content of this book is useful for gaining better understanding of the structural and chemical properties of FMOFs. Considering our strategy in this book, we believe that this book is interesting for diverse group of scientists like chemists, material engineers and anyone who is working on supramolecular chemistry of MOFs and designing functional materials.
The authors
October 2020
1Introduction to Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks
Abstract
In this chapter, we discuss about the advantages of porous materials and crystalline materials and explain that what kinds of benefits are attainable if these advantages combine together in the structure of functional materials like metal-organic frameworks. Then, functional metal-organic frameworks are discussed and classified based on the roles of organic functions in the structure and application of MOFs.
Keywords: Porous materials, crystalline materials, functional metal-organic frameworks, coordination polymers, host-guest chemistry, function-application properties, function-structure properties
1.1 Coordination Polymers
Solid materials are generally classified in amorphous and crystalline (single-crystalline or poly-crystalline) solids in chemistry and material science. Crystalline solids are constructed based on periodic symmetrical arrays of constituents giving rise to definite, regular and repeating pattern of the solid in three dimensions over a large distance. Such long-range structural order rises in the beneficial fact that crystalline solids represent specific and repeatable chemical properties. This is a very pivotal advantage which is not observed in amorphous solids. For example, crystalline solids are of sharp melting point and definite heat of fusion while amorphous solids have not a characteristic heat of adsorption and sharp melting point. As a result, crystalline solids benefit from repeatable structure and chemical properties which are fitting characters in application of novel materials.
Another classification of materials is based on their porosity. Porosity, which also is called void fraction, is defined as the ratio of vacant space (void) in material to the total volume that the materials occupy. This fraction is always between 0 and 1. Porous materials encompass vacant spaces in their structure based on accessible pore volume (vacant cavities or channels) for guest molecules. This is a unique advantage of porous material in which not only can they interact with guest molecules on their surface, but also they can adsorb and interact with guests within their pores inside the bulk material. The characteristics of a porous material define by their surface area (m2·g−1), accessible pore volume (m3·g−1), shape, size and distribution of pores. Based on pore size, porous materials are classified in three major groups including microporous (in the range of 2 nm and below), mesoporous (in the range of 2 to 50 nm) and macroporous (above 50 nm) [1]. Another way to classify porous materials is pursuant to uniformity in the pore size, volume and distribution [2]. In this approach, porous materials are classified as ordered (uniform) and non-ordered groups. Uniform porous materials are developed based on same pore size, shape and distribution. To observe such uniformity in porosity, a porous material must be founded on uniform and repeatable structural patterns. This uniformity in the structure and porosity is essential for some of superior applications like size selective separation of a small molecule from a mixture containing large molecules. In size selective applications, guest molecules with smaller size (or kinetic diameter) than pore aperture of the host are able to diffuse into the pores of ordered porous material while molecules with larger size cannot. Definitely, porous materials without uniformity in their pore size and distribution could not be applied in size-selective applications because they cannot differentiate guest molecules with different sizes. These contents indicate that crystalline porous solids with regular and repeatable structure and porosity are very efficacious in molecular-sieving and also other kinds of applications.
Crystalline porous solids can be extended by different types of interactions (ionic and hydrogen bonds, covalent interactions and coordination interactions) between their individual molecular building blocks [3]. Especially, crystalline porous materials which are developed by coordination interactions are coordination polymers (CPs). In structural view, CPs could be extended in different dimensions, so they could be 1-dimensional (1D), 2D or 3D. Also, they are synthesized based on linkers and metal ion/clusters when a polydentate linker is able to associate multiple metal centers through coordination bonds in self-assembly process (Figure 1.1) [4]. As a subclass of CPs, metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) are porous, three-dimensional and developed based on polydentate organic ligands and metal ion/clusters (Figure 1.2). Although these terms, MOFs and CPs, are widely applied interchangeably in the literature, there are some similarities and differences between both terms.
Figure 1.1 Representation of CPs building blocks, synthesis and dimensionality.
Figure 1.2 Depiction of MOF-5 (Zn4O(BDC)3) as one of the most well-known MOFs. MOF-5 is synthesized using zinc nitrate and 1,4-benzenedicarboxyxlic acid (H2-BDC). In self-assembly process Zn(II) ions and deprotonated 1,4-benzenedicarboxyxlic acid bond together through coordination interactions between Zn(II) ions and BDC2−linkers to develop MOF-5 in solid phase [5].
In 2013, IUAC recommended that CP could be defined as a “coordination compound with repeating coordination entities extending in 1, 2, or 3 dimensions” while MOF is defined as “coordination network with organic ligands containing potential voids” [6]. It is necessary to mention that IUPAC defines coordination networks as a “coordination compound extending through repeating coordination entities in 2 or 3 dimensions” [6]. Based on these recommendations it could be concluded that CPs could be 1D, 2D or 3D with repetitive building blocks connected with coordination interactions while MOF are porous with hybrid organic–inorganic nature and they are at least extended in 2 dimensions. Also, there is another hidden point in these IUPAC definitions which must be clarified. In these definitions there is no persistence on crystallinity of the materials. In other word, it is not mentioned that CPs must be crystalline. It means that crystalline porous materials based on coordination interactions are coordination polymers while CPs could be both crystalline and amorphous. In another common approach about MOFs and CPs, it is realized that porous 3D structures may be called as MOFs [7]. In conclusion, the most important differences between MOFs and CPs revolve around their dimensionality and porosity [8].
1.2 Metal–Organic Frameworks
After pioneering works of Yaghi in 1995 [9], a remarkable number of chemists and material engineers are engrossed in design and application of MOFs. Such great interest among scientists is because of their unique characters which make MOFs suitable for diverse industrial and real-life applications [10, 11].
As mentioned, MOFs are constructed based on organic and inorganic building blocks. In most cases, organic ligands are ditopic or polytopic O-donor ligands based on carboxylates linkers or N-donor ligands based on pyridine pillar spacers. Metal-containing units founded on different kind of metal ions, mostly based on lanthanide cations (like Ln(III), Tb(III), Eu(III), Dy(III) and Sm(III)), transition metals (like 3d cations like Zn(II), Cu(II), Ni(II), Co(II), Fe(III) or Fe(II), Mn(II) and Cr(III) or Cr(II) and heavy transition metals like Cd(II), Zr(IV), Hf(IV)) and main metal ions (Al(III), or some of alkaline or alkaline-earth cations). As a result of such diversity in selection of building blocks, unlimited number of MOFs with different structural and practical properties can be developed by changing metal ion/clusters, using various combinations of these inorganic building blocks and infinite types of organic linkers with different lengths, functionalities and geometries. Additionally, since MOFs are developed based on organic and inorganic building blocks, their hybrid organic–inorganic nature is suitable for tuning the structure and application of MOFs.
MOFs are synthesized by coordination of organic linker to inorganic units by strong bonds [12]. These connections between organic and inorganic building blocks through coordination interactions are such that they create vacant spaces (pores) between the each individual building block. As a result of such porosity, MOFs provide accessible pore volume in the bulk of the materials moreover than accessible area at the surface of material. Right selection of the building blocks makes it possible to vary some parameters, such as the pore size (to increase pore diameter to 98 Å), density (to decrease to 0.126 g·cm−3) and surface area (typically in range from 1,000 to 10,000 m2·g−1) which are exceeding those of traditional porous materials such as zeolites and carbons [13]. In summary, porosity and surface area of MOFs could be tuned through right selection of organic ligands with correct size, flexibility and appropriate inorganic nodes.
The nature, strength and the number of coordination interactions between organic and inorganic building blocks of MOFs are the main reasons for evaluation of their stability. On one hand, selection of building blocks based on Hard-Soft acid-based theory is very beneficial for synthesis of highly stable MOFs [14]. For example hard metal ions such as Al(III) and Zr(IV) [15] could develop stable MOFs through connection with carboxylate-donor organic linker because these building blocks are hard Lewis acid and base, respectively. Another group of stable MOFs are based on selection of soft metal ions like late 3D metal ions and soft N-donor organic ligands like pyrazolate based linkers. On the other hand, the number of coordination bonds between inorganic nodes and organic linkers is another critical factor on the stability of MOFs. The higher number of coordination bonds, the higher stability of the MOF.
Another desirable character of MOFs is their crystalline structure. Selection of well-defined individual molecular building blocks could develop regular structure and periodic frameworks. As a result of their regular crystalline structure, we can tune their chemical and physical properties through logical designing of the framework and right selection of building blocks.
One of the most important advantages of MOFs from other conventional polymers or porous materials is the fact that we can tailor their chemical properties through rational choice of functional groups. Tunability in chemical functionality of MOFs could be provided via three functionalization strategies including selection of functional organic ligand, functionalization of inorganic nodes and functionalization of vacant spaces (pores) inside the framework of MOFs (Figure 1.3) [14, 16]. These functions could be introduced prior to the self-assembly process by selection of desirable functional building blocks (pre-synthesis functionalization strategy) or after synthesis of the frameworks (post-synthesis functionalization strategy) [17, 18]. Unlimited ways for functionalization of MOFs is key factor to control their chemical properties and host–guest interactions. Definitely, we can state that tunability in chemical functionality and consequent ability in control over host–guest chemistry of MOFs has very essential roles in absorbing the attraction of scientist toward MOFs.
Figure 1.3 Three strategies for functionalization of MOFs.
Considering the diverse and useful characteristics of MOFs including regular crystalline structure, high porosity and surface area, hybrid inorganic–organic nature, satisfactory structural stability and tunability in chemical functionality, they are employed for different types of applications such as gas storage and separation [19–23], heterogeneous catalysis [24, 25] and photocatalysis [26–28], sensing [29–33], removal and separation of hazardous chemicals [34–36], drug delivery [37], bio sensing [38–41] and other medical applications [42] electrical conductivity [43] and electrochemical applications [44], ion storage and conductivity [45, 46], and designing MOF-based energetic materials [47]. Such diversity in chemical properties and application of MOFs show that intensive studies are necessary to identify the maximum capability of MOFs for each type of applications.
1.3 Functional Metal–Organic Frameworks
We mentioned that there are three different strategies for functionalization of MOFs. Among these methods, functionalization of organic ligand absorbed massive attention thanks to unlimited diversity in synthesis of organic ligands with different length and shape as well as rich host–guest chemistry of organic functional groups. So, functionalized organic linkers are extensively applied for construction of functional metal-organic frameworks (FMOFs) [14, 48].
The most important reason for introduction of organic functional groups into the framework of MOFs is to control the host–guest chemistry of FMOFs and gain selectivity to special guest molecules in presence of other analytes or tailoring the photoelectrochemical properties of FMOFs. However, moreover than domination in the host–guest chemistry and chemical properties of FMOFs, introduction of organic functional groups influence on the structural properties of FMOFs through induced structural changes and different types of secondary interactions (Figure 1.4).
Although linker functionalization strategy gained lots of attention to control the chemical properties of FMOFs, FMOFs could be developed through other methods. For example a special kind of linker can be stabilized on inorganic nodes or special kind of functional materials like carbonitride, nanoparticles, dyes, graphene or graphene oxide or polyoxometalates can be incorporated into the pores of MOFs to fabricate a multi-functional MOF-based hybrid material (Figure 1.5) [49]. In addition, synergic cooperation of functions in the structure of FMOFs is useful for improvement of practical application of FMOFs.
Figure 1.4 Function–structure and function–application properties of functional MOFs. Function–structure properties include relationship between structural features of MOFs and functional groups while function–application properties encompass the effects of functional groups on different type of applications.
Figure 1.5 Different application of functional or multi-functional MOF-based materials [16].
For a coherent and purposeful study, organic functional groups are sorted in two different methods. Based on first approach, organic functional groups are classified owing to their chemical properties and structural similarities. In this view, applied functional groups into the structure of FMOFs are categorized in four major groups including (I) nitrogenbased functions, (II) oxygen-based functions, (III) sulfur-based functions and carbonyl-based functions. All these four major groups entail a number of organic functional groups (Figure 1.6). In addition to these four major groups of organic functional groups into the pores of FMOFs, there are some of other functions especially phosphonate and fluorine-based functions which are applied in the structure of FMOFs.
In the second approach, organic functional groups are classified based on their role in the structure of FMOFs. In this view functional groups are classified as coordinating sites (Figure 1.7) and gust-interactive sites (Figure 1.8). Functional groups as coordinating site are those which can coordinatively bond to metal ions during the synthesis of MOFs. Coordinating functional groups must be strong coordination bond donor with high chelation ability to develop stable FMOFs. There are two common types of coordinating functional groups. First common coordinating functions are O-donor functions such as sulfonate, phosphonate, enoxide and especially carboxylate. Other common coordinating functions are N-donor functions like pyridine, pyrazine and heterocyclic azole functions including pyrazole, triazole and tetrazole. Although, we mentioned that some functions like carboxylate, sulfonate, phosphonate, enoxide, pyridine, pyrazine and heterocyclic azole functions applied as coordinating sites, this does not mean that these functions did not apply as guest interactive sites. In other word, mentioned functions can apply as both coordinating and guest-interactive sites.
Figure 1.6 Classification of organic functional groups which are applied in synthesis of FMOFs based on their chemical characteristics and structural properties.
Figure 1.7 Common coordinating functional groups in the structure of FMOFs.
Guest-interactive functions are those enabling to interact with guest-molecules for special purpose. In this regard, the guest-interactive functions must remain free during the synthesis of FMOFs or introduced in the framework through post-synthesis modification. Almost all functions applied as guest interactive site to sensitize the FMOFs to special guest.
The next chapters of this book are structured based on these two approaches and effects of any function on the structure and application of FMOFs are discussed in details.
Figure 1.8 Functional groups as guest-interactive sites inside the structure of FMOFs and position of some of common functional groups.
References
1. Zdravkov, B., Čermák, J., Šefara, M., Janků, J., Pore classification in the characterization of porous materials: A perspective. Open Chem., 5, 385–395, 2007.
2. Davis, M.E., Ordered porous materials for emerging applications. Nature, 417, 813–821, 2002.
3. Parnham, E.R. and Morris, R.E., Ionothermal synthesis of zeolites, metal–organic frameworks, and inorganic–organic hybrids. Acc. Chem. Res., 40, 1005–1013, 2007.
4. Tranchemontagne, D.J., Mendoza-Cortés, J.L., O’Keeffe, M., Yaghi, O.M., Secondary building units, nets and bonding in the chemistry of metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev., 38, 1257–1283, 2009.
5. Perez, E.V., Karunaweera, C., Musselman, I.H., Balkus, K.J., Ferraris, J.P., Origins and evolution of inorganic-based and MOF-based mixed-matrix membranes for gas separations. Processes, 4, 32, 2016.
6. Bennett, T.D. and Horike, S., Liquid, glass and amorphous solid states of coordination polymers and metal–organic frameworks. Nat. Rev. Mater., 3, 431–440, 2018.
7. Biradha, K., Ramanan, A., Vittal, J.J., Coordination polymers versus metal–organic frameworks. Cryst. Growth Des., 9, 2969–2970, 2009.
8. Batten, S.R., Champness, N.R., Chen, X.-M., Garcia-Martinez, J., Kitagawa, S., Öhrström, L., O’Keeffe, M., Suh, M.P., Reedijk, J., Coordination polymers, metal–organic frameworks and the need for terminology guidelines. CrystEngComm, 14, 3001–3004, 2012.
9. Yaghi, O.M., Li, G., Li, H., Selective binding and removal of guests in a microporous metal–organic framework. Nature, 378, 703, 1995.
10. Czaja, A.U., Trukhan, N., Müller, U., Industrial applications of metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev., 38, 1284–1293, 2009.
11. Kirchon, A., Feng, L., Drake, H.F., Joseph, E.A., Zhou, H.-C., From fundamentals to applications: A toolbox for robust and multifunctional MOF materials. Chem. Soc. Rev., 47, 23, 8611–8638, 2018.
12. Long, J.R. and Yaghi, O.M., The pervasive chemistry of metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev., 38, 1213–1214, 2009.
13. Butova, V.V.E., Soldatov, M.A., Guda, A.A., Lomachenko, K.A., Lamberti, C., Metal–organic frameworks: Structure, properties, methods of synthesis and characterization. Russ. Chem. Rev., 85, 280, 2016.
14. Ali Akbar Razavi, S. and Morsali, A., Linker functionalized metal–organic frameworks. Coord. Chem. Rev., 399, 213023, 2019.
15. Bai, Y., Dou, Y., Xie, L.-H., Rutledge, W., Li, J.-R., Zhou, H.-C., Zr-based metal–organic frameworks: Design, synthesis, structure, and applications. Chem. Soc. Rev., 45, 2327–2367, 2016.
16. Li, B., Wen, H.M., Cui, Y., Zhou, W., Qian, G., Chen, B., Emerging multifunctional metal–organic framework materials. Adv. Mater., 28, 40, 8819–8860 2016.
17. Cohen, S.M., Postsynthetic Methods for the Functionalization of Metal–Organic Frameworks. Chem. Rev., 112, 970–1000, 2012.
18. Deria, P., Mondloch, J.E., Karagiaridi, O., Bury, W., Hupp, J.T., Farha, O.K., Beyond post-synthesis modification: Evolution of metal–organic frameworks via building block replacement. Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 5896–5912, 2014.
19. Sumida, K., Rogow, D.L., Mason, J.A., McDonald, T.M., Bloch, E.D., Herm, Z.R., Bae, T.-H., Long, J.R., Carbon dioxide capture in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev., 112, 724–781, 2011.
20. Getman, R.B., Bae, Y.-S., Wilmer, C.E., Snurr, R.Q., Review and analysis of molecular simulations of methane, hydrogen, and acetylene storage in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev., 112, 703–723, 2011.
21. Mason, J.A., Veenstra, M., Long, J.R., Evaluating metal–organic frameworks for natural gas storage. Chem. Sci., 5, 32–51, 2014.
22. He, Y., Zhou, W., Qian, G., Chen, B., Methane storage in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 5657–5678, 2014.
23. Murray, L.J., Dincă, M., Long, J.R., Hydrogen storage in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev., 38, 1294–1314, 2009.
24. Corma, A., García, H., Llabrés i Xamena, F., Engineering metal organic frameworks for heterogeneous catalysis. Chem. Rev., 110, 4606–4655, 2010.
25. Huang, Y.-B., Liang, J., Wang, X.-S., Cao, R., Multifunctional metal–organic framework catalysts: Synergistic catalysis and tandem reactions. Chem. Soc. Rev., 46, 126–157, 2017.
26. Dolgopolova, E.A., Rice, A.M., Martin, C.R., Shustova, N.B., Photochemistry and photophysics of MOFs: Steps towards MOF-based sensing enhancements. Chem. Soc. Rev., 47, 4710–4728, 2018.
27. Zhang, T. and Lin, W., Metal–organic frameworks for artificial photosynthesis and photocatalysis. Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 5982–5993, 2014.
28. Wang, C.-C., Li, J.-R., Lv, X.-L., Zhang, Y.-Q., Guo, G., Photocatalytic organic pollutants degradation in metal–organic frameworks. Energy Environ. Sci., 7, 2831–2867, 2014.
29. Cui, Y., Yue, Y., Qian, G., Chen, B., Luminescent functional metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev., 112, 1126–1162, 2011.
30. Kreno, L.E., Leong, K., Farha, O.K., Allendorf, M., Van Duyne, R.P., Hupp, J.T., Metal–organic framework materials as chemical sensors. Chem. Rev., 112, 1105–1125, 2011.
31. Razavi, S.A.A. and Morsali, A., Metal ion detection using luminescent-MOFs: Principles, strategies and roadmap. Coord. Chem. Rev., 415, 213299, 2020.
32. Hu, M.-L., Razavi, S.A.A., Piroozzadeh, M., Morsali, A., Sensing organic analytes by metal–organic frameworks: A new way of considering the topic. Inorg. Chem. Front., 7, 1598–1632, 2020.
33. Lustig, W.P., Mukherjee, S., Rudd, N.D., Desai, A.V., Li, J., Ghosh, S.K., Metal–organic frameworks: functional luminescent and photonic materials for sensing applications. Chem. Soc. Rev., 46, 3242–3285, 2017.
34. DeCoste, J.B. and Peterson, G.W., Metal–organic frameworks for air purification of toxic chemicals. Chem. Rev., 114, 5695–5727, 2014.
35. Li, J., Wang, X., Zhao, G., Chen, C., Chai, Z., Alsaedi, A., Hayat, T., Wang, X., Metal–organic framework-based materials: superior adsorbents for the capture of toxic and radioactive metal ions. Chem. Soc. Rev., 47, 2322–2356, 2018.
36. Kobielska, P.A., Howarth, A.J., Farha, O.K., Nayak, S., Metal–organic frameworks for heavy metal removal from water. Coord. Chem. Rev., 358, 92–107, 2018.
37. Horcajada, P., Serre, C., Vallet-Regí, M., Sebban, M., Taulelle, F., Férey, G., Metal–organic frameworks as efficient materials for drug delivery. Angew. Chem., 118, 6120–6124, 2006.
38. Zhang, J.-W., Zhang, H.-T., Du, Z.-Y., Wang, X., Yu, S.-H., Jiang, H.-L., Water-stable metal–organic frameworks with intrinsic peroxidase-like catalytic activity as a colorimetric biosensing platform. Chem. Commun., 50, 1092–1094, 2014.
39. Ai, L., Li, L., Zhang, C., Fu, J., Jiang, J., MIL-53 (Fe): A Metal–Organic Framework with Intrinsic Peroxidase-Like Catalytic Activity for Colorimetric Biosensing. Chem.–Eur. J., 19, 15105–15108, 2013.
40. Hu, P.-P., Liu, N., Wu, K.-Y., Zhai, L.-Y., Xie, B.-P., Sun, B., Duan, W.-J., Zhang, W.-H., Chen, J.-X., Successive and Specific Detection of Hg2+ and I–by a DNA@ MOF Biosensor: Experimental and Simulation Studies. Inorg. Chem., 57, 8382–8389, 2018.
41. Qiu, G.-H., Lu, W.-Z., Hu, P.-P., Jiang, Z.-H., Bai, L.-P., Wang, T.-R., Li, M.-M., Chen, J.-X., A metal-organic framework based PCR-free biosensor for the detection of gastric cancer associated microRNAs. J. Inorg. Biochem., 177, 138–142, 2017.
42. Horcajada, P., Gref, R., Baati, T., Allan, P.K., Maurin, G., Couvreur, P., Férey, G., Morris, R.E., Serre, C., Metal–Organic Frameworks in Biomedicine. Chem. Rev., 112, 1232–1268, 2012.
43. Campbell, M.G., Sheberla, D., Liu, S.F., Swager, T.M., Dincă, M., Cu3(hexaiminotriphenylene)2: An Electrically Conductive 2D Metal–Organic Framework for Chemiresistive Sensing. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 54, 4349–4352, 2015.
44. Morozan, A. and Jaouen, F., Metal organic frameworks for electrochemical applications. Energy Environ. Sci., 5, 9269–9290, 2012.
45. Ramaswamy, P., Wong, N.E., Shimizu, G.K., MOFs as proton conductors–challenges and opportunities. Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 5913–5932, 2014.
46. Meng, X., Wang, H.-N., Song, S.-Y., Zhang, H.-J., Proton-conducting crystalline porous materials. Chem. Soc. Rev., 46, 464–480, 2017.
47. Wang, S., Wang, Q., Feng, X., Wang, B., Yang, L., Explosives in the cage: Metal–organic frameworks for high-energy materials sensing and desensitization. Adv. Mater., 29, 1701898, 2017.
48. Lu, W., Wei, Z., Gu, Z.-Y., Liu, T.-F., Park, J., Park, J., Tian, J., Zhang, M., Zhang, Q., Gentle, T.J.C.S.R., III, Tuning the structure and function of metal–organic frameworks via linker design. Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 5561–5593, 2014.
49. Li, B., Chrzanowski, M., Zhang, Y., Ma, S., Applications of metal-organic frameworks featuring multi-functional sites. Coord. Chem. Rev., 307, 106–129, 2016.
