Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The electrodesorption of self-assembled monolayers of methyl-terminated alkanethiols, 11-mercaptoundecanonic acid, and 3-mercaptopropionic acid adsorbed on Au(111) has been investigated by scanning tunneling microscopy and electrochemical methods. Results show that 11-mercaptoundecanonic acid and 3-mercaptopropionic acid form √3×√3 R30° and c(4×2) lattices similar to those found for methyl-terminated thiols. For both methyl- and COO - -terminated alkanethiols, the electrodesorption process follows a combined adsorption−desorption nucleation and growth-of-holes model under charge-transfer control. The nucleation rate of holes at COO - -terminated alkanethiol adlayers is smaller than at methyl-terminated alkanethiol adlayers, which explains the slower electrodesorption kinetics. The activation energy to remove a COO - -terminated alkanethiol molecule from the edge of a growing hole is smaller than that of a methyl-terminated molecule because of the repulsive forces introduced by the negatively charged groups. The magnitude of these repulsive forces, which is partially compensated for by ion binding between the COO - groups and the counterions in the electrolyte, depends on both the nature of the cation and the pH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Azzaroni et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: