4.8 Article

Reliability of rare-earth-doped infrared luminescent nanothermometers

期刊

NANOSCALE
卷 10, 期 47, 页码 22319-22328

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c8nr07566b

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad de Espana [MAT2016-75362-C3-1-R]
  2. COST Action [CM1403]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI16/00812]
  4. Comunidad Autonoma de Madrid [B2017/BMD-3867RENIM-CM]
  5. University of Verona
  6. European Structural and Investment Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of infrared-emitting rare-earth-doped luminescent nanoparticles as nanothermometers has attracted great attention during the last few years. The scientific community has identified rare-earth-doped luminescent nanoparticles as one of the most sensitive and versatile systems for contactless local temperature sensing in a great variety of fields, but especially in nanomedicine. Researchers are nowadays focused on the design and development of multifunctional nanothermometers with new spectral operation ranges, outstanding brightness, and enhanced sensitivities. However, no attention has been paid to the assessment of the actual reliability of the measurements provided by rare-earth-doped luminescent nanothermometers. In fact, it is assumed that they are ideal temperature sensors. Nevertheless, this is far from being true. In this work we demonstrate that the emission spectra of rare-earth-doped nanothermometers can be affected by numerous environmental and experimental factors. These include the numerical aperture of the optical elements used for their optical excitation and luminescence collection, the local concentration of nanothermometers, optical length variations, self-absorption of the luminescence by the nanothermometers themselves, and solvent optical absorption. This work concludes that rare-earth-doped luminescent nanothermometers are not as reliable as thought and, consequently, special care has to be taken when extracting temperature estimations from the variation of their emission spectra.

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