4.6 Article

A systematic examination of surface coatings on the optical and chemical properties of semiconductor quantum dots

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 8, 期 33, 页码 3895-3903

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b606572b

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA108468, U54 CA119338] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [P20 GM072069] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [U54CA119338, R01CA108468] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [P20GM072069] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A number of procedures are currently available to encapsulate and solubilize hydrophobic semiconductor Quantum Dots (QDs) for biological applications. Most of these procedures are based on the use of small-molecule coordinating ligands, amphiphilic polymers, or amphiphilic lipids. However, it is still not clear how these different surface coating molecules affect the optical, colloidal, and chemical properties of the solubilized QDs. Here we report a systematic study to examine the effects of surface coating chemistry on the hydrodynamic size, fluorescence quantum yield, photostability, chemical stability, and biocompatibility of water-soluble QDs. The results indicate that quantum dots with the smallest hydrodynamic sizes are best prepared by direct ligand exchange with hydrophilic molecules, but the resulting particles are less stable than those encapsulated in amphiphilic polymers. For stability against chemical oxidation, QDs should be protected with a hydrophobic bilayer. For high stability under acidic conditions, the best QDs are prepared by using hyperbranched polyethylenimine. For stability in high salt buffers, it is preferable to have uncharged, sterically-stabilized QDs, like those coated with polyethylene glycol ( PEG). These insights are expected to benefit the development of quantum dots and related nanoparticle probes for molecular and cellular imaging 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

4.6
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