CrossRef enabled

PAC Archives

Archive →

Pure Appl. Chem., 2013, Vol. 85, No. 8, pp. 1715-1724

Published online 2013-07-29


Terminology of metal–organic frameworks and coordination polymers (IUPAC Recommendations 2013)

Stuart R. Batten1, Neil R. Champness2, Xiao-Ming Chen3, Javier Garcia-Martinez4, Susumu Kitagawa5, Lars Öhrström6*, Michael O’Keeffe7, Myunghyun Paik Suh8 and Jan Reedijk9

1 School of Chemistry, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia
2 School of Chemistry, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
3 School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, PR China, 510275
4 Universidad de Alicante, Departamento de Química Inorgánica, Carretera San Vicente del Raspeig s/n, E-03690 Alicante, Spain
5 Department of Synthetic Chemistry and Biological Chemistry, Kyoto University, Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto, 615-8510, Japan
6 Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Physical Chemistry, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
7 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA
8 Department of Chemistry, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-747, South Korea
9 Leiden Institute of Chemistry, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9502, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands

Abstract: A set of terms, definitions, and recommendations is provided for use in the classification of coordination polymers, networks, and metal–organic frameworks (MOFs). A hierarchical terminology is recommended in which the most general term is coordination polymer. Coordination networks are a subset of coordination polymers and MOFs a further subset of coordination networks. One of the criteria an MOF needs to fulfill is that it contains potential voids, but no physical measurements of porosity or other properties are demanded per se. The use of topology and topology descriptors to enhance the description of crystal structures of MOFs and 3D-coordination polymers is furthermore strongly recommended.