Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Fullerenes (C60) versus heteroazafullerenes (C59N); a photophysical comparison of their monoadducts and hexaadducts

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

This Article is currently unavailable for purchase.
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

Cover image Placeholder

The singlet and triplet excited state properties of a series of fullerene derivatives (C60) are compared to those of the corresponding heteroazafullerenes derivatives (C59N) by employing a variety of steady-state and time-resolved photophysical assays. The most far-reaching results infer that the C59N (2, 5) analogous of C60 (1, 4) are characterized by shorter singlet lifetimes (1.01/0.57 ns versus 1.80/1.75 ns) and weaker fluorescence quantum yields (1.6 × 10-4/2.1 × 10-4 versus 6.0 × 10-4/1.09 × 10-3). This general conclusion applies for the monoadduct series (1, 2) and also for the highly functionalized hexaadducts (4, 5). Similarly, higher singlet energies (1.89 eV (4) versus 1.79 eV (1)) come together with higher fluorescence quantum yields for the hexaadducts than for the monoadducts.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation