4.8 Article

Peasecod-Like Hollow Upconversion Nanocrystals with Excellent Optical Thermometric Performance

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 7, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202000731

关键词

hollow nanocrystals; lanthanide ions; Li4ZrF8; nanothermometers; upconversion

资金

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of CAS [XDB20000000]
  2. NSFC [21871256, 21731006]
  3. Key Research Program of Frontier Science CAS [QYZDY-SSW-SLH025]
  4. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of CAS [Y201747]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trivalent lanthanide (Ln(3+))-doped hollow upconversion nanocrystals (UCNCs) usually exhibit unique optical performance that cannot be realized in their solid counterparts, and thus have been receiving tremendous interest from their fundamentals to diverse applications. However, all currently available Ln(3+)-doped UCNCs are solid in appearance, the preparation of hollow UCNCs remains nearly untouched hitherto. Herein, a class of UCNCs based on Yb3+/Er3+-doped tetralithium zirconium octafluoride (Li4ZrF8:Yb/Er) featuring 2D layered crystal lattice is reported, which makes the fabrication of hollow UCNCs with a peasecod-like shape possible after Ln(3+)doping. By employing the first-principle calculations, the unique peasecod-like hollow nanoarchitecture primarily associated with the hetero-valence Yb3+/Er(3+)doping into the 2D layered crystal lattice of Li(4)ZrF(8)matrix is revealed. Benefiting from this hollow nanoarchitecture, the resulting Li4ZrF8:Yb/Er UCNCs exhibit an abnormal green upconversion luminescence in terms of the population ratio between two thermally coupled states ((2)H(11/2)and(4)S(3/2)) of Er(3+)relative to their solid Li2ZrF6:Yb/Er counterparts, thereby allowing to prepare the first family of hollow Ln(3+)-doped UCNCs as supersensitive luminescent nanothermometer with almost the widest temperature sensing range (123-800 K). These findings described here unambiguously pave a new way to fabricate hollow Ln(3+)-doped UCNCs for numerous applications.

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