COORDINATION CHEMISTRY OF BIS(BENZYL)PHOSPHINATE

The work presented in this dissertation deals with the coordination chemistry of the bis(benzyl)phosphinate ligand with vanadium, tungsten and cobalt. The long term goal of this project was to produce and physically characterize high oxidation state transition metal oxide phosphinate compounds with potential catalytic applications. The reaction of bis(benzyl)phosphinic acid with VO(acac)2 in the presence of water or pyridine leads to the synthesis of trimeric vanadium(IV) clusters (V3(µ3-O)O2)(µ2-O2P(CH2C6H5)2)6(H2O) and (V3(µ3-O)O2)(µ2-O2P(CH2C6H5)2)6(py). In contrast, when diphenylphosphinic acid or 2-hydroxyisophosphindoline-2-oxide were reacted with VO(acac)2, insoluble polymeric compounds were produced. The trimeric clusters were characterized using FTIR, elemental analysis, single crystal diffraction, room temperature magnetic susceptibility, thermogravimetric analysis and differential scanning calorimetry. The variable-temperature, solid-state magnetic susceptibility was measured on (V3(µ3-O)O2)(µ2-O2P(CH2C6H5)2)6(py). The polymeric compounds were characterized using FTIR, powder diffraction and elemental analysis. Two different cubane clusters made of tungsten(V) and vanadium(V) were stabilized using bis(benzyl)phosphinate. The oxidation of (V3(µ3-O)O2)(µ2-O2P(CH2C6H5)2)6(H2O) with tBuOOH led to the formation of V4(µ3-O)4(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)4(O4). W4(µ3-O)4(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)4(O4) was produced by heating W(CO)6 in a 1:1 mixture of EtOH/THF at 120 ˚C. Both compounds were characterized using single crystal diffraction, FTIR, 31P-NMR, 1H-NMR and elemental analysis. W4(µ3-O)4(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)4(O4) was also characterized using UV-vis. Cobalt(II) reacted with bis(benzyl)phosphinate to produce three different dinuclear complexes. [(py)3Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(py)][ClO4], (py)3Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(Cl) and (py)(µ2-NO3)Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(py) were all characterized using single crystal diffraction, elemental analysis and FTIR. Room temperature magnetic susceptibility measurements were performed on [(py)3Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(py)][ClO4] and (py)3Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(Cl). The variable-temperature, solid-state magnetic susceptibility was also measured on [(py)3Co(µ2-O2P(Bn)2)3Co(py)][ClO4].

THERMORESPONSIVE PROPERTIES OF GOLD HYBRID NANOPARTICLES OF POLY(DI(ETHYLENE GLYCOL) METHYL ETHER METHACRYLATE) (PDEGMA) AND ITS BLOCK COPOLYMERS WITH DIFFERENT ANCHORING REGIMES

Thermo-responsive materials have been of interest for many years, and have been studied mostly as thermally stimulated drug delivery vehicles. Recently acrylate and methacrylates with pendant ethylene glycol methyl ethers been studied as thermo responsive materials. This work explores thermo response properties of hybrid nanoparticles of one of these methacrylates (DEGMA) and a block copolymer with one of the acrylates (OEGA), with gold nanoparticle cores of different sizes. We were interested in the effects of gold core size, number and type of end groups that anchored the chains to the gold cores, and location of bonding sites on the thermo-response of the polymer. To control the number and location of anchoring groups we using a type of controlled radical polymerization called Reversible Addition Fragmentation Transfer (RAFT) Polymerization. Smaller gold cores did not show the thermo responsive behavior of the polymer but the gold cores did seem to self-assemble. Polymer anchored to larger gold cores did show thermo responsivity. The anchoring end group did not alter the thermoresponsivity but thiol-modified polymers stabilized gold cores less well than chains anchored by dithioester groups, allowing gold cores to grow larger. Use of multiple bonding groups stabilized the gold core. Using block copolymers we tested the effects of number of thiol groups and the distance between them. We observed that the use of multiple anchoring groups on the block copolymer with a sufficiently large gold core did not prevent thermo responsive behavior of the polymer to be detected which allows a new type of thermo-responsive hybrid nanoparticle to be used and studied for new applications.

Planting and production of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) as a bioenergy crop in Michigan's Upper Peninsula

Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) is a perennial grass holding great promise as a biofuel resource. While Michigan’s Upper Peninsula has an appropriate land base and climatic conditions, there is little research exploring the possibilities of switchgrass production. The overall objectives of this research were to investigate switchgrass establishment in the northern edge of its distribution through: investigating the effects of competition on the germination and establishment of switchgrass through the developmental and competitive characteristics of Cave-in-Rock switchgrass and large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis L.) in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula; and, determining the optimum planting depths and timing for switchgrass in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. For the competition study, a randomized complete block design was installed June 2009 at two locations in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Four treatments (0, 1, 4, and 8 plants/m2) of crabgrass were planted with one switchgrass plant. There was a significant difference between switchgrass biomass produced in year one, as a function of crabgrass weed pressure. There was no significant difference between the switchgrass biomass produced in year two versus previous crabgrass weed pressure. There is a significant difference between switchgrass biomass produced in year one and two. For the depth and timing study, a completely randomized design was installed at two locations in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula on seven planting dates (three fall 2009, and four spring 2010); 25 seeds were planted 2 cm apart along 0.5 m rows at depths of: 0.6 cm, 1.3 cm, and 1.9 cm. Emergence and biomass yields were compared by planting date, and depths. A greenhouse seeding experiment was established using the same planting depths and parameters as the field study. The number of seedlings was tallied daily for 30 days. There was a significant difference in survivorship between the fall and spring planting dates, with the spring being more successful. Of the four spring planting dates, there was a significant difference between May and June in emergence and biomass yield. June planting dates had the most percent emergence and total survivorship. There is no significant difference between planting switchgrass at depths of 0.6 cm, 1.3 cm, and 1.9 cm. In conclusion, switchgrass showed no signs of a legacy effect of competition from year one, on biomass production. Overall, an antagonistic effect on switchgrass biomass yield during the establishment period has been observed as a result of increasing competing weed pressure. When planting switchgrass in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, it should be done in the spring, within the first two weeks of June, at any depth ranging from 0.6 cm to 1.9 cm.