4.6 Article

Sodium-Citrate-Assisted Synthesis of Aqueous CdTe Nanocrystals: Giving New Insight into the Effect of Ligand Shell

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 113, 期 3, 页码 827-833

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp8088897

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Development Program of China [2007CB936402, 2009CB939701]
  2. Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of P. R. China [200734]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20704014, 20534040, 20731160002]
  4. Program of Technological Progress of Jilin Province [20080101]
  5. Independent Research Program of State Key Laboratory of Supramolecular Structure and Materials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report a protocol for investigating the effect of the ligand shell in the growth process of aqueous CdTe nanocrystals (NCs) from the viewpoint of both experiment and theoretical calculation. Experimentally we develop a new method of sodium-citrate-assisted preparation of aqueous CdTe NCs, which breaks through the restriction of thiol/Cd ratio (1.2:1) in conventional aqueous synthesis and realizes the extensive tunability of the thiol/Cd ratios from 0.1:1 to 2.4:1. On the basis of the investigation of CdTe NCs in the presence of sodium citrate (SC), the ligand shell is confirmed to control both the growth rates and the photoluminescence quantum yields (PL QYs) of aqueous NCs. Theoretically, according to the absolute rate theory (ART), the growth rates of NCs are determined by the reaction temperature, activation energy, and concentration of Te. Theoretical simulation of the NC growth process by MP2/Lan12DZ in the Gaussian 03 program indicates that the nature of the ligand shell greatly affects the activation energy of NCs through formation of the transition-state complex, thus affecting the growth rates of NCs. Obviously, both experiment results and theoretical calculation prove that the nature of the ligand shell plays a key role in the growth process and PL QYs of aqueous CdTe NCs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据