Nanothermometry is a challenging field that can open the door to intriguing questions ranging from biology and medicine to material sciences. Gold nanorods are excellent candidates to act as nanoprobes because they are reasonably bright emitters upon excitation with a monochromatic source. Gold nanoparticles are commonly used in photothermal therapy as efficient transducers of electromagnetic radiation into heat. In this work we use the spectrum of the anti-Stokes emission from gold nanorods irradiated in resonance to measure the absolute temperature of the nanoparticles and their surrounding medium without the need for a previous calibration. We show a 4 K accuracy in the determination of the temperature of the medium with spectral measurements of 180 s integration time. This procedure can be easily implemented in any microscope capable of acquiring emission spectra, and it is not limited to any specific shape of nanoparticles.
Nanothermometry is a challenging field that can open the door to intriguing questions ranging from biology and medicine to material sciences. Gold nanorods are excellent candidates to act as nanoprobes because they are reasonably bright emitters upon excitation with a monochromatic source. Gold nanoparticles are commonly used in photothermal therapy as efficient transducers of electromagnetic radiation into heat. In this work we use the spectrum of the anti-Stokes emission from gold nanorods irradiated in resonance to measure the absolute temperature of the nanoparticles and their surrounding medium without the need for a previous calibration. We show a 4 K accuracy in the determination of the temperature of the medium with spectral measurements of 180 s integration time. This procedure can be easily implemented in any microscope capable of acquiring emission spectra, and it is not limited to any specific shape of nanoparticles.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gold nanorods; anti-Stokes; plasmon; sensing; temperature
Most physical,
chemical, and
biological processes depend on temperature. Together with the miniaturization
of devices and the advent of nanotechnology, the need for measuring
temperature with high spatial accuracy started to emerge. Notably
in biology[1,2] and medicine[3] measuring and controlling temperature at a subcellular scale are
the challenges that must be overcome to achieve better understanding
and control of new therapies such as photothermal tumor ablation[4] or controlled drug delivery.[5,6]Nanometer-size probes with distinctive spectral features are ideal
candidates for temperature measurements since they provide high spatial
accuracy while far-field optics allow a noncontact readout. Some of
the proposed strategies include structures that undergo a conformational
change upon an increase in temperature,[7] thus inducing variations in fluorescence intensity of a dye molecule
embedded in them.Also cleverly designed lanthanide-based fluorescent
probes in which
the ratio of particular emission peaks depends on temperature provide
a high accuracy and can be used as nanothermometers[8] even in biological samples.[9] Photobleaching is often an important limitation of these approaches.
Recently, surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) allowed to measure
spectral changes induced by temperature down to single molecules,[10] but a careful calibration of the measurements
is crucial.Gold nanoparticles continue to receive a fair amount
of attention
because of their unique optical properties.[11] The collective oscillation of conduction electrons, also known as
surface plasmon, shows a resonance in the visible to near-infrared
wavelengths. This resonance can be tuned by changing the shape of
the particles[12] and is responsible for
a large absorption and scattering cross section at the resonance wavelength.
These cross sections can be calculated by solving the Maxwell equations
numerically employing different computer packages,[13−15] providing a
good agreement between calculations and what is experimentally achievable.Thanks to their high absorption and scattering cross section (several
times higher than their geometrical cross section), it is relatively
simple to detect nanoparticles in a dark-field scattering configuration[16] or via photothermal imaging.[17,18] Alternatively, detecting gold nanoparticles through their luminescence[19] is also possible; their low quantum yield,[20−23] around 10–6, is compensated by the enhanced cross
section at the surface plasmon resonance (SPR). The luminescence signal
is stable over time; gold nanoparticles do not blink nor bleach and
therefore are useful labeling agents for processes that require extended
periods of observation.[24]Different
metallic nano-objects are being introduced as agents
for photothermal therapy[5,25] or drug delivery.[26] One of the advantages of gold nanoparticles
is the possibility of tuning their resonance to the near-infrared
range, where the penetration of light into tissues can be of several
centimeters.[3−5,25,27,28] Moreover, the particles can be
used not only for treatment, but also for imaging.[5,29] In
the case of photothermal therapy, nanoparticles are used as heat sources[4,27] to locally increase the temperature in order to induce the death
of specific cells in a tissue.[5,25] However, the temperatures
reached[30] can only be estimated from models[29] or from an ad-hoc calibration. Therefore, a
method to simultaneously increase and monitor the local temperature
will be of great interest in a broad range of fields.Luminescence
of metallic nanoparticles has been the subject of
extensive study in recent years. Since the first observation of luminescence
from bulk gold,[31] different groups have
tried to quantitatively describe the observed properties,[32−36] such as the quantum yield[20−23,37] and the emission spectrum.[38] In particular, gold nanorods present two distinct
resonance energies, namely, the transverse and the longitudinal plasmon
resonances. These particles can therefore be excited efficiently at
one of those energies; the transverse resonance corresponds to a wavelength
of about 530 nm and will give rise to a broad luminescence emission
with a peak at the longitudinal plasmon energy. Conversely, it is
possible to excite the particles with a wavelength matching the longitudinal
plasmon resonance. In this case, the excitation benefits from an enhanced
absorption cross section, but the emission that overlaps the plasmon
resonance will be mostly blocked by the filters needed to prevent
direct excitation light from reaching the detectors.In this
work, we call “photoluminescence” any secondary
light emission[39] at energies different
from the excitation laser energy, ℏωL. After
absorption (we do not specify whether the absorption is real or virtual)
of an excitation photon, the excited electronic state[31,37] may interact and exchange energy with the phonon bath or, in the
case of metals, with the bath of thermally excited charge carriers
around the Fermi level. After a number of interactions, the excited
electronic state will re-emit a photon, which can possess a lower
or higher energy than that of the excitation photon.[40−42] For a nonresonant excitation, the probability of more than one interaction
is negligible, and the main contribution to secondary emission is
Raman scattering.[34] This is the case, for
example, of insulators excited well below their electronic absorption
edge. For resonant excitation, a relatively long-lived excited state
is prepared. It will have enough time to interact repeatedly with
thermal baths, particularly with phonons. This is the case of organic
dye molecules or semiconductors in which relaxed fluorescence is observed.
We also note that fluorescence always presents hot bands on the anti-Stokes
side of the excitation laser. In most fluorescence detection schemes,
however, these hot bands are ignored, but they are far from negligible
in heavily doped samples.[43]Metal
nanoparticles fall between those two extremes because the
excited electronic state, an electron–hole pair, relaxes very
rapidly by interacting with other charge carriers and with phonons.
The photoluminescence lifetimes are on the order of tens of femtoseconds,[44] and therefore, there is not enough time to obtain
a fully relaxed luminescence. In other words, the photoluminescence
is always “hot”. It is worth noting that Raman scattering,
corresponding to the lowest order of interaction with baths, will
be an important contribution to photoluminescence.[34,36] However, second and higher orders may also contribute significantly.
Because all these processes obey a Boltzmann-type relationship between
anti-Stokes and Stokes emission, they cannot be easily distinguished
from each other on the basis of their temperature dependence.The anti-Stokes emission is highly sensitive to temperature, and
thus, it can be used for thermometry.[45] In this Letter, we present a simple procedure to extract the absolute
temperature from the anti-Stokes photoluminescence spectrum of individual
gold nanorods without the need of any previous temperature calibration.
We show that we can determine the particle temperature in
situ with an accuracy of 6% by recording a single anti-Stokes
spectrum (with an acquisition time of 3 min). Moreover, by performing
this measurement at different excitation powers we can obtain the
temperature of the surrounding medium with an accuracy better than
2%.
Phenomenological
Model for the Luminescence Emission
In a nutshell, we consider
the luminescence emission as radiative
recombination of electron–hole pairs created by the decay of
the plasmon, after their interaction with thermal baths. Before the
recombination, carriers may interact with the baths one or more times,
leading to secondary light emission with an energy different from
the initial internal energy of the pair. The anti-Stokes spectral
contribution arises from interactions that increase the energy of
the pair, whereas the Stokes emission corresponds to a decrease in
energy. The emission process will be enhanced by the surface plasmon;
therefore, the luminescence spectrum will be modulated with the plasmon
shape. A schematic representation of these ideas is shown in the Supporting Information.Exciting a gold
nanorod with a monochromatic beam at its resonance frequency, ωSPR, generates a collective oscillation of the gas of conduction
electrons, also called a plasmon. The plasmon decays by forming a
pair of hot electron and hole with an internal energy equal to the
exciting photon energy,[46−48] i.e., Ee–h = ℏωL, where ωL is the laser frequency.This hot electron–hole
pair has a small probability of recombining
radiatively, i.e., of re-emitting its high electronic energy as a
photoluminescence photon. If the electron and hole have interacted
only with static surfaces or defects, their energies will be the same.
Therefore, the emitted photon will have the same energy as the incoming
photon and will not contribute to the measured photoluminescence.
It will be blocked by the notch filter used to remove the exciting
laser from detection. If, however, the electron and hole have interacted
with a phonon or a thermally excited electron or hole, they may have
lost or acquired energy. In both cases the energy available upon recombination
cannot much exceed ℏωL + kBT, where kB represents Boltzmann’s constant
and T the absolute temperature.Radiative recombination
gives rise to emission spectrally and spatially
distributed throughout the particle over a broad frequency band with
an exponential cutoff at ℏωL + kBT. The weak recombination emission can
be greatly enhanced by the surface plasmon resonance, acting as an
antenna. With this model, the following predictions can be made. First,
the emission spectrum must follow the plasmon spectrum if the excitation
laser is well above the plasmon resonance as shown in Figure , green line. If the excitation
falls within the plasmon resonance, the spectrum is expected to follow
the plasmon spectrum multiplied by a Bose–Einstein statistics
factor arising from phonon population (here, we assume that the coupling
to the phonons dominates the process, while refs (34) and (36) assume that carrier–carrier
interactions dominate). Thus, under our assumption, the emission should
be proportional to the phonon occupation number n̅ for anti-Stokes and n̅ + 1 for Stokes processes,
withwhere ℏΩ is the phonon energy.
If carrier–carrier interactions dominate, the occupation number
would obey Fermi statistics, i.e., .
Figure 1
Luminescence
emission spectra of a single gold nanorod. The green
curve is the measured luminescence emission under 532 nm excitation,
and the red curve shows the extracted ISPR(ω) from this spectra. The other curves are the emission of
the same particle under 633 nm irradiation at three different powers
indicated in the legend. The inset shows the anti-Stokes-to-Stokes
ratio as a function of the excitation power, overlapped with a linear
fit in red. The dip centered on the laser wavelength is caused by
the notch filter used to prevent the excitation laser from reaching
the detectors. For these spectra, the acquisition time was 10 s.
Luminescence
emission spectra of a single gold nanorod. The green
curve is the measured luminescence emission under 532 nm excitation,
and the red curve shows the extracted ISPR(ω) from this spectra. The other curves are the emission of
the same particle under 633 nm irradiation at three different powers
indicated in the legend. The inset shows the anti-Stokes-to-Stokes
ratio as a function of the excitation power, overlapped with a linear
fit in red. The dip centered on the laser wavelength is caused by
the notch filter used to prevent the excitation laser from reaching
the detectors. For these spectra, the acquisition time was 10 s.With this model, we can also predict
that the emission should be
polarized. For the strong longitudinal plasmon of gold nanorods, this
polarization coincides with the longitudinal axis of the particle.[49] Moreover, the lifetime should be determined
by the lifetime of hot electrons and holes and should be significantly
shorter than the thermalization time of the carriers. Indeed, a few
interactions would suffice to reduce the carriers’ energy significantly,
and therefore, the electron and hole would not have the energy required
to produce an optical photon. One important assumption for this model
is that the emission spectrum of radiative recombination is much broader
than the plasmon. Therefore, excitation just above the plasmon resonance
should excite the electron–hole pairs with nearly the same
efficiency as well above the plasmon resonance.[23,36]
Application to Nanothermometry
According to the model
just described, the anti-Stokes emission spectrum follows the formwhere I(ω) is the emitted
intensity, ω is the angular frequency of the photons, ωL is the frequency of the exciting laser, and ISPR(ω) is the surface plasmon resonance spectrum. The only remaining
free parameter is the temperature T (and a normalization
constant not included in eq ).The procedure we propose to obtain the absolute temperature T of gold nanorods from the anti-Stokes luminescence emission
without the need of any previous temperature calibration involves
the following steps:Obtain the surface plasmon resonance
spectrum of the particle. This is usually expressed as a Lorentzian
function,[11] i.e.,where ω is the
photon energy frequency,
ωSPR is the resonance frequency, and Γ is the
width of the surface plasmon resonance. In our case, we detect the
spectrum of photoluminescence excited at 532 nm to extract ωSPR and Γ, with the procedure explained in the Supporting Information.Excite near the longitudinal plasmonic
resonance and detect the blue-shifted anti-Stokes emission spectra.
For this we employed a 633 nm laser as a source.Fit the high-energy part of the spectrum
using eq with T as the only free parameter.We emphasize that we cannot simply use the anti-Stokes
to Stokes
intensity ratio to obtain the temperature of the particle, as is commonly
done with Raman lines of molecules,[50,51] due to the
presence of the strong plasmonic enhancement of the emission that
must be considered in addition to the Boltzmann factor.
Experimental
Methods
All the measurements in this work
were performed with a home-built confocal microscope equipped with
a spectrometer (Acton 500i) in the emission path. We focused our lasers
to a diffraction-limited spot using a 60×, NA 1.4 oil immersion
objective (Olympus) or a 60×, NA 0.9 air objective (Olympus)
and collected the emitted photons through the same objective. This
provided high excitation and collection efficiency. We employed a
532 nm (CNI) laser for characterizing the nanorods’ plasmon
and a 633 nm HeNe (Thorlabs) to excite the nanorods in resonance.
The intensity of the laser was controlled via an acousto-optic modulator.
We provide a scheme of the setup and more details in the Supporting Information.Wet-chemically
synthesized nanorods[52] with average dimensions
of 25 nm × 50 nm and a plasmon resonance around 630 nm were spin-coated
onto clean coverslips, controlling the superficial concentration to
separate individual nanorods within the diffraction-limited spot.[11] The characterization of the gold nanorods sample
with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and the ensemble extinction
spectrum are presented in the Supporting Information.The samples were mounted in a flow cell that allowed us to
increase
the temperature of the medium up to 60 °C and to monitor it through
a Pt100 resistance thermometer placed 1 mm away from the observation
area. To compensate for the drift of the setup while increasing the
temperature, we developed a computer program to continuously track
a reference particle. The same program was responsible for recording
the temperature and triggering the spectrometer. In this way, complete
data sets were acquired at different temperatures, with excitation
at 532 and 633 nm, at different laser intensities. A spectrum with
532 nm laser excitation was taken after every cycle to ensure that
the particle under study had not reshaped due to high excitation power.When recording anti-Stokes spectra to extract the temperature of
the particles using the high NA objective, six accumulations of each
spectrum were recorded with an exposure time of 10 s (total time of
60s). When we used the low NA objective the exposure time was increase
to 30s in each exposition (total time 180s). This not only allowed
us to lower the noise of the measurement because of a longer exposure
time, but also allowed us to remove bright pixels generated by cosmic
rays. Having several accumulations is also useful to monitor changes
in the intensity of the spectra during the acquisition itself. These
changes can be due to a drift of the setup while measuring or to reshaping
of the particle. If the reshaping was confirmed by comparing the spectra
acquired with the 532 nm laser,[53] the measurements
where rejected. If the changes in the observed emission spectra were
due to drift of the setup, the particular data set was not taken into
account. For the purposes of this work, the excitation intensity is
crucial for characterizing the method; if the particle is not in focus,
it would result in an overestimation of the excitation power.
Results
The proposed model for the anti-Stokes emission
requires the plasmon spectrum (ISPR(ω)
in eq ) in order to
fit the emission at shorter wavelengths and extract the particle temperature.
It has been shown that both scattering and luminescence spectra roughly
overlap over a broad range of wavelengths.[22] Therefore, exciting gold nanorods with 532 nm allows us to record
the longitudinal plasmon spectra, as shown in the green solid curve
of Figure . It has
to be recalled that the luminescence spectrum is not a perfect Lorentzian
since there is a broadband contribution also observed in bulk gold.[31] The procedure to extract the SPR profile from
such a measurement is explained in the Supporting Information. We show in Figure the extracted surface plasmon profile in the red solid
curve.The other curves in Figure show the luminescence emission of the same
nanorod with irradiation at 633 nm at different powers, ranging from
25 to 75 μW at the back aperture of the objective. The vertical
black line shows the wavelength of the laser. The Stokes part of the
spectrum at longer wavelengths than the excitation shows the same
shape as the plasmon emission observed under 532 nm excitation, apart
from a normalization factor. From the figure, it can readily be seen
that the shape of the anti-Stokes emission, at shorter wavelengths
than excitation, is exponential-like and does not follow the Lorentzian
shape of the Stokes emission. The dip between Stokes and anti-Stokes
is caused by the notch filter that prevents direct excitation light
from reaching the detectors.The inset of Figure shows the anti-Stokes-to-Stokes ratio of
the integrated luminescence
for different laser excitation intensities. It is possible to see
that even though the photoluminescence process is linear, the anti-Stokes
intensity increases slightly more rapidly than the Stokes emission.
We already exploited this phenomenon to image gold nanorods in high-background
conditions.[43] For more information on the
power dependence of both the anti-Stokes and Stokes luminescence,
please refer to the Supporting Information.To further characterize the anti-Stokes emission in gold
nanorods,
we measured the emission for 105 nanorods with different plasmon resonances
under the same 633 nm excitation and calculated the ratio of integrated
anti-Stokes to Stokes emissions. Figure shows the experimental ratios as blue circles
versus the surface plasmon resonance (SPR) of the particle. The vertical
black line marks the laser wavelength. The particles measured had
resonances between 600 and 690 nm; the ones showing the maximum ratio
of anti-Stokes to Stokes are those with a resonance to the blue of
the laser. For these particles, the longitudinal plasmon is enhancing
preferably the anti-Stokes emission. For particles with a resonance
at the laser wavelength, the anti-Stokes and the Stokes emission have
similar enhancement and show a ratio close to 10%.
Figure 2
Characterization of anti-Stokes
emission for different surface
plasmon resonance. Ratio of the anti-Stokes to Stokes emission under
633 nm excitation as a function of the resonance wavelength of the
particle. The blue circles are experimental results (105 different
nanorods), while the red triangles are the results of numerical simulations
with eq (82 nanorods
with different aspect ratio). There is a very good agreement between
experiment and calculations. Particles with a resonance to the blue
of the laser (indicated by the vertical black line) have an increased
anti-Stokes emission.
Characterization of anti-Stokes
emission for different surface
plasmon resonance. Ratio of the anti-Stokes to Stokes emission under
633 nm excitation as a function of the resonance wavelength of the
particle. The blue circles are experimental results (105 different
nanorods), while the red triangles are the results of numerical simulations
with eq (82 nanorods
with different aspect ratio). There is a very good agreement between
experiment and calculations. Particles with a resonance to the blue
of the laser (indicated by the vertical black line) have an increased
anti-Stokes emission.Figure also
shows
as red triangles the results of numerical calculations showing an
excellent overlap between the measured and the calculated data. To
obtain these results, we numerically calculated the absorption cross
section of 82 particles with the ADDA package[14] using a fixed width and different lengths to achieve different SPR
wavelengths. Each calculated absorption spectrum was fitted by a Lorentzian
and used as ISPR(ω) in eq . Assuming a diffraction-limited
laser spot and using the calculated absorption cross section, we calculated
the temperature of the particle. This value was used in eq to compute the anti-Stokes emission
spectrum. The Stokes emission was set proportional to the excitation
power with a shape given by the calculated absorption spectrum. Since
both anti-Stokes and Stokes emissions are proportional to the excitation
power, this term cancels out when computing the ratio. The laser power
therefore only enters into the equation when calculating the temperature
of the particles. It is remarkable that the agreement between data
and calculations was achieved without free parameters, solely taking
into account the transmission spectra of the filters.We then
use our protocol to extract the temperature of an individual
nanorod. The anti-Stokes spectra shown in Figure were recorded at four different excitation
intensities, while the full lines are the fits using our model from eq ; again, there is an excellent
agreement between data and model. For every anti-Stokes measurement
we have also acquired the full plasmon spectrum exciting with a 532
nm laser before and after the temperature extraction, to verify that
the particle did not reshape while being excited at resonance.
Figure 3
Anti-Stokes emission of a single nanorod at different
irradiation
powers. We used the model from eq to fit the experimental data. There is an excellent
agreement between data and model. The inset shows the extracted temperature
at each power (blue dots) and a linear extrapolation of the data to
0 μW excitation power. The value obtained for room temperature
was 293 K, while the measured value was 296 K.
The inset in Figure shows the temperatures resulting from the fits at different irradiation
intensities (blue dots). Note that the absolute temperatures of the
particle at each excitation power were calculated without any calibration.
As expected, the temperature of the nanorod varied linearly with excitation
intensity or equivalently with the absorbed energy. Thus, this method
provides an in situ way to measure the temperature
reached by nanoparticles when they are excited with resonant monochromatic
light. Additionally, from these data sets it is also possible to calculate
the temperature at 0 μW excitation power, i.e., room temperature,
by extrapolating the results with a linear fit. The value we obtained
in this case is 293 ± 6 K, while room temperature was 296 K,
a 2% accuracy.Anti-Stokes emission of a single nanorod at different
irradiation
powers. We used the model from eq to fit the experimental data. There is an excellent
agreement between data and model. The inset shows the extracted temperature
at each power (blue dots) and a linear extrapolation of the data to
0 μW excitation power. The value obtained for room temperature
was 293 K, while the measured value was 296 K.The accuracy of the obtained temperature depends on the signal-to-noise
ratio of the anti-Stokes spectra and on the accurate modeling of the
photoluminescence. The first step in the protocol is the determination
of the surface plasmon spectral profile, ISPR(ω) in eq . In
this Letter, we obtained this term by fitting an exponential background
plus a Lorentzian to the spectra obtained at 532 nm excitation. We
note that this choice was made for experimental convenience in our
setup, but other options to obtain the SPR profile are suited for
the procedure as well. The error bars in the inset of Figure and in the following figures
are the result of the estimated variance in the fit parameters for
the anti-Stokes spectra using eq , step 3 in our protocol. More details about the error determination
for the final temperature extracted are given in the Supporting Information.As expected from the model,
the anti-Stokes emission depends not
only on the particle’s intrinsic properties but also on the
temperature of the surrounding medium.[54] In order to further test this point, we changed the temperature
of the sample in a controlled manner and recorded the luminescence
emitted by a single nanorod.For this set of experiments, we
employed an air objective (60×,
NA 0.9, Olympus) to avoid the presence of a heat sink directly in
contact with the observed area. We employed longer exposure times
to compensate for the lower excitation efficiency. At each temperature,
six spectra (with 30 s integration time each) were acquired at different
633 nm excitation powers and also a spectrum of the plasmon before and after each measurement
in order to monitor any possible reshaping of the particles during
the experiment.Figure shows the
extracted temperature of a particle at varying excitation powers and
at different water temperatures. The blue squares are the results
of the measurement at 60 °C, while the green crosses are measured
at 40 °C and the yellow circles at 20 °C. The full lines
are fits with the same slope for the three sets of data. Using these
fits we can extrapolate the temperature value at zero excitation power
to obtain the water temperature in each case. The values obtained
with the extrapolation to 0 μW excitation power were 296 ±
4, 315 ± 4, and 339 ± 4 K for water temperatures of 293,
313, and 333 K, respectively. The inset plot in Figure presents these points and a red solid line
with the expected curve if both temperatures are identical. The dashed
line shows a fit of the data that evidence a small systematic offset
of 3.8 K. This represents an inaccuracy of 1.2%, which is a good result
for a calibration-free method.
Figure 4
Calibration-free temperature measurement.
Extracted temperatures
from the anti-Stokes-luminescence emission of an individual nanorod
at different excitation powers and at different sample temperatures.
The dashed lines are fits with the same slope for the three temperatures.
The squares in the inset plot show the local temperature of the sample
obtained by extrapolating the temperature at zero excitation power
as a function of the water temperature. The red line represents the
expected curve if both temperatures are identical (equal). The dashed
blue line is a fit to the data points with unit slope that shows a
systematic offset of 3.8 K, a 1.2% difference.
Calibration-free temperature measurement.
Extracted temperatures
from the anti-Stokes-luminescence emission of an individual nanorod
at different excitation powers and at different sample temperatures.
The dashed lines are fits with the same slope for the three temperatures.
The squares in the inset plot show the local temperature of the sample
obtained by extrapolating the temperature at zero excitation power
as a function of the water temperature. The red line represents the
expected curve if both temperatures are identical (equal). The dashed
blue line is a fit to the data points with unit slope that shows a
systematic offset of 3.8 K, a 1.2% difference.Figure clearly
shows that the extracted temperature varies with the temperature of
the surrounding medium. More strikingly, the method does not require
any previous calibration nor adjustment. Notably, the presented calibration-free
procedure would allow us to perform the same measurements in any other
setup and could act as a reference for calibration of other nanothermometers.Being able to control and monitor temperature at the nanoscale
is of utmost importance in different fields ranging from photothermal
therapy[5] to nanofabrication.[55] In this work, we have shown a simple procedure
that allows us to measure the temperature of single gold nanorods
irradiated by a monochromatic continuous laser and without any previous
calibration. The level of accuracy of the temperature measurement
depends on several factors, but for a single nanorod, it can be estimated
to be better than 6% with an integration time of 1 min without any
previous calibration.The model employed for describing the
anti-Stokes emission takes
into account the surface plasmon resonance of the particles under
study, which is responsible for enhancing the emission, as well the
electron–hole pair interaction with the thermal baths. Particles
with a resonance to the red of the excitation wavelength would be
more reliable in the temperature extraction procedure but would also
exhibit a lower emission toward shorter wavelengths. The trade-off
between both effects and the possibility to fully characterize the
plasmon resonance will determine the specific particles that are better
suited for each application.A possible improvement of this
technique would be the use of nanostructures
with a narrow shape distribution such as gold bipyramids.[56] Such structures would be ideal candidates for
temperature extraction since they present negligible size dispersion,
and thus, their plasmon can be measured in bulk or determined from
theory, avoiding the need of a second excitation source.The
proposed method does not require any temperature calibration
since the only free parameter of the model is the absolute temperature
of the nanoparticle under study. Moreover, the recording of the anti-Stokes
spectrum is readily achievable in any confocal microscope with a coupled
spectrometer. A 6 K accuracy may suffice for several applications;
it is important to point out that this value can be improved in different
ways: by carefully selecting the particles that show the most favorable
plasmon resonance; by determining the plasmon resonance through white-light
scattering, reducing the uncertainty in the fit; and by increasing
the exposure times to increase the signal-to-noise ratio. A cheaper
alternative would have two detectors and band-pass filters to detect
the anti-Stokes and the Stokes emission independently. However, this
approach would require a temperature calibration.
Authors: A Arbouet; C Voisin; D Christofilos; P Langot; N Del Fatti; F Vallée; J Lermé; G Celep; E Cottancin; M Gaudry; M Pellarin; M Broyer; M Maillard; M P Pileni; M Treguer Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2003-04-29 Impact factor: 9.161
Authors: Haifeng Wang; Terry B Huff; Daniel A Zweifel; Wei He; Philip S Low; Alexander Wei; Ji-Xin Cheng Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-10-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ravishankar Sundararaman; Prineha Narang; Adam S Jermyn; William A Goddard; Harry A Atwater Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-12-16 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Yan Li; Andre M Gobin; Gerald W Dryden; Xinqin Kang; Deyi Xiao; Su Ping Li; Guandong Zhang; Robert C G Martin Journal: Int J Nanomedicine Date: 2013-06-18