4.8 Review

Thermometry at the nanoscale

期刊

NANOSCALE
卷 4, 期 16, 页码 4799-4829

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2nr30663h

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT, Portugal)
  2. COMPETE program [PEst-C/CTM/LA0011/2011, PTDC/CTM/101324/2008]
  3. FEDER program [PEst-C/CTM/LA0011/2011, PTDC/CTM/101324/2008]
  4. Integrated Spanish-Portuguese Action [PT2009-0131]
  5. Ministry of Education [MAT2007-61621, CONSOLIDER CSD2007-00010]
  6. Nanobiotec-CAPES network
  7. FCT [SFRH/BD/38472/2007, SFRH/BPD/34365/2006]
  8. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BPD/34365/2006, SFRH/BD/38472/2007] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-invasive precise thermometers working at the nanoscale with high spatial resolution, where the conventional methods are ineffective, have emerged over the last couple of years as a very active field of research. This has been strongly stimulated by the numerous challenging requests arising from nanotechnology and biomedicine. This critical review offers a general overview of recent examples of luminescent and non-luminescent thermometers working at nanometric scale. Luminescent thermometers encompass organic dyes, QDs and Ln(3+) ions as thermal probes, as well as more complex thermometric systems formed by polymer and organic-inorganic hybrid matrices encapsulating these emitting centres. Non-luminescent thermometers comprise of scanning thermal microscopy, nanolithography thermometry, carbon nanotube thermometry and biomaterials thermometry. Emphasis has been put on ratiometric examples reporting spatial resolution lower than 1 micron, as, for instance, intracellular thermometers based on organic dyes, thermoresponsive polymers, mesoporous silica NPs, QDs, and Ln(3+)-based up-converting NPs and beta-diketonate complexes. Finally, we discuss the challenges and opportunities in the development for highly sensitive ratiometric thermometers operating at the physiological temperature range with submicron spatial resolution.

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

4.8
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