| Literature DB >> 28694956 |
Ji-Yun Hu1, Yingying Ning1, Yin-Shan Meng1, Jing Zhang2, Zhuo-Yan Wu1, Song Gao1, Jun-Long Zhang1.
Abstract
The design of highly near-infrared (NIR) emissive lanthanide (Ln) complexes is challenging, owing to the lack of molecular systems with a high sensitization efficiency and the difficulty of achieving a large intrinsic quantum yield. Previous studies have reported success in optimizing individual factors and achieving high overall quantum yields, with the best yield being 12% for Yb(iii). Herein we report a series of highly NIR emissive Yb complexes, in which the Yb is sandwiched between anEntities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28694956 PMCID: PMC5480304 DOI: 10.1039/c6sc05021b
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1(A) Synthesis of the Ln(iii) complexes; (B)–(D) perspective drawings of 1-Yb, 2-Yb and [D, respectively, with hydrogen atoms omitted for clarity.
Fig. 2UV-vis absorption spectra of the Yb complexes with different porphyrin ligands in CH2Cl2.
Fig. 3(A) Emission spectra of the ytterbium complexes with various degrees of C–H bond replacement under the same conditions (λ ex = 425 nm, absorbance = 0.10); (B) decay of the NIR luminescence of the ytterbium complexes.
Luminescence lifetimes (τ obs), NIR quantum yields (ΦLYb) and triplet energies E(T1) of the Yb(iii) complexes described in this study
| Complex |
|
|
| ||
| CH2Cl2 | CD2Cl2 | CH2Cl2 | CD2Cl2 | ||
|
| 49(1) | 54(1) | 5.1(0.2) | 5.7(0.2) |
|
|
| 285(9) | 714(20) | 25(1), 26 | 63(3), 69 | |
|
| 273(4) | — | 24(2) | — | |
|
| 281(5) | — | 25(1) | — | |
|
| 29(1) | 33(2) | 2.4(0.1) | 2.5(0.1) |
|
|
| 54(1) | 65(2) | 3.9(0.2) | 5.1(0.2) | |
|
| 180(2) | 401(5) | 15(1) | 29(1) | |
|
| 197(6) | 449(21) | 20(2) | 42(2) |
|
|
| 249(3) | 592(5) | 23(1) | 58(3) |
|
|
| 233(3) | 500(5) | 20(1) | 51(2) |
|
Standard error values are given in parentheses; they refer to the reproducibility of the measurements. The estimated uncertainties in the quantum yield are 15%. Experimental relative errors: τ obs, ±5%; ΦLYb, ±10%.
Determined using a comparative method and referenced to Yb(TPP)(L (Φ = 2.4% in CH2Cl2) unless noted.
Determined in an integrating sphere on a FLS920 instrument using a PMT R5509-73 detector (300–1700 nm).
Determined in an integrating sphere on a Fluorolog-3 instrument with a CCD detector (1024 × 256 pixel, 200–1100 nm), referenced to Yb(TPP)(L.
Estimated from the phosphorescence of a corresponding Gd(iii) complex (ESI Fig. S68).[31]
Not determined.
Fig. 4C–H oscillator quenching sphere of the [Yb(Por)(LOR)] complexes (top view from the porphyrin plane side) showing the quenching rate differences Δk (in ms–1) of C-(H/D) or C-(H/F) at different sites. Hydrogen atoms are colored from black to grey indicating a decreased quenching rate difference.
Intrinsic quantum yield and sensitization efficiency of the Yb complexes
| Compound |
|
|
|
| 5.7(0.7) | 100(13) |
|
| 75(9.6) | 84(11) |
|
| 3.5(0.5) | 71(10) |
|
| 6.9(0.9) | 74(10) |
|
| 42(5.3) | 69(9) |
|
| 47(6.3) | 90(13) |
|
| 62(7.7) | 93(13) |
|
| 52(6.5) | 97(13) |
Solvent: CD2Cl2. τ rad = 0.95 ms (see text). The standard errors are given in parentheses. Experimental relative errors: ΦYbYb, ±15%; η, ± 15%.
Fig. 5Approximate linear relationship of ΦLYbvs. ΦYbYb in CD2Cl2.