| Literature DB >> 32876432 |
Francesca Tajoli1,2, Nicola Dengo1,2, Maddalena Mognato3, Paolo Dolcet4, Giacomo Lucchini5, Andrea Faresin1, Jan-Dierk Grunwaldt4, Xiaohui Huang6, Denis Badocco1, Michele Maggini1,2, Christian Kübel6,7, Adolfo Speghini5, Tommaso Carofiglio1,2, Silvia Gross1,2.
Abstract
The room-temperature controlled crystallization of monodispersed al">ZnS nanoparticles (average size of 5 nm) <al">span class="Chemical">doped with luminescent ions (such as Mn2+, Eu3+, Sm3+, Nd3+, and Yb3+) was achieved via a microfluidic approach. The preparation did not require any stabilizing ligands or surfactants, minimizing potential sources of impurities. The synthesized nanomaterials were characterized from a structural (XRD and XAS at lanthanide L3 edges), morphological (TEM), and compositional (XPS, ICP-MS) perspective, giving complementary information on the materials' features. In view of potential applications in the field of optical bioimaging, the optical emission properties of the doped nanoparticles were assessed, and samples showed strong luminescent properties while being less affected by self-quenching mechanisms. Furthermore, in vitro cytotoxicity experiments were conducted, showing no negative effects and evidencing the appeal of the synthesized materials for potential applications in the field of optical bioimaging.Entities:
Keywords: NIR emission; ZnS; doping; luminescence; microfluidics; optical bioimaging; zinc sulfide
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32876432 PMCID: PMC8011799 DOI: 10.1021/acsami.0c13150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ISSN: 1944-8244 Impact factor: 9.229
Figure 1TEM and HRTEM micrographs of undoped (a, b) and 5 at. % Eu-doped (d, e) zinc sulfide NPs and relative size distributions (c and f, respectively). Lattice spacings of (111) and (220) planes of cubic ZnS are highlighted in red.
Figure 2Comparison of diffractograms of undoped and (a) Mn-doped and (b) Eu-doped ZnS samples at different atomic percentages. Eu(OH)3 reflections are highlighted by a solid circle.
Comparison between Average Crystallite Size Obtained from XRPD Fitting and Average NP Sizes Obtained from TEM Micrographs for Undoped and 5 at. % Doped ZnS Samples
| sample | average crystallite size (nm) from XRPD | average NP size (nm) from TEM |
|---|---|---|
| undoped ZnS | 4.6 ± 0.1 | 4.8 ± 0.5 |
| ZnS:Mn 5 at. % | 4.8 ± 0.1 | 5.5 ± 0.9 |
| ZnS:Eu 5 at. % | 5.1 ± 0.1 | 5.8 ± 1.0 |
| ZnS:Nd 5 at. % | 5.5 ± 0.1 | 5.6 ± 1.0 |
| ZnS:Sm 5 at. % | 6.2 ± 0.1 | 5.5 ± 0.9 |
| ZnS:Yb 5 at. % | 4.9 ± 0.1 | 5.4 ± 0.7 |
Figure 3XPS survey spectrum of undoped ZnS. Binding energy is corrected for charge effects.
Binding Energy (BE) and Auger Parameter (AP) Values
| sample | BE Zn2p3/2 (eV) | AP (eV) | BE S2p (eV) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ZnS | 1021.7 | 2011.1 | 161.4 |
| ZnS:Mn 5 at. % | 1021.9 | 2011.1 | 161.6 |
| ZnS:Eu 5 at. % | 1021.6 | 2011.4 | 161.2 |
| ZnS:Nd 5 at. % | 1021.8 | n.a. | 161.4 |
Figure 4Fitting (red lines) of (a) Zn2p photoemission peaks (blue line: photoemission peaks and pink line: shake up satellite peaks) and (b) the S2p peak (blue line: S2p3/2 component and green line: S2p1/2 component, separated for clarity) of ZnS:Nd 5 at. %. Sulfate species would be expected at 169 eV. BE values are corrected for charge effects.
ICP-MS Measurements (Relative Error: ± 5%)
| atomic percentage | ||
|---|---|---|
| nominal | experimental | |
| ZnS:Mn | 0.1 | 0.10 |
| 1 | 1.06 | |
| 5 | 5.96 | |
| ZnS:Eu | 0.1 | 0.07 |
| 1 | 0.90 | |
| 5 | 6.08 | |
| ZnS:Nd | 0.1 | 0.08 |
| 1 | 0.48 | |
| 5 | 2.78 | |
Figure 5Eu L3 edge XANES spectra for Eu-doped samples, compared to (a) reference oxide and (b) the spectrum of the 1 at. % doped sample compared with calculated theoretical references (spectra shifted vertically for clarity).
Figure 6(a) Nd L3 edge XANES spectra for Nd-doped samples acquired in fluorescence mode and (b) the spectrum of the 1 at. % doped sample compared with calculated theoretical references (spectra shifted vertically for clarity).
Results of the EXAFS Fitting Procedure of the EXAFS Curves for Eu- and Nd-Doped Samples
| sample | shell | N | distance (Å) | σ2 (10–3 Å2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eu L3 edge | |||||||
| ZnS:Eu 1 at. % | Eu-O | 8.9 ± 1.6 | 2.42 ± 0.02 | 2.47 | 8.7 ± 3.6 | 5.7 ± 1.7 | 1.4% |
| ZnS:Eu 5 at. % | Eu-O | 9.4 ± 1.5 | 2.44 ± 0.02 | 2.47 | 10.7 ± 3.3 | 6.5 ± 1.4 | 1.0% |
| Nd L3 edge | |||||||
| ZnS:Nd 0.1 at % | Nd-O | 8.6 ± 1.9 | 2.50 ± 0.02 | 2.54 | 9.7 ± 4.3 | 2.7 ± 1.9 | 1.9% |
| ZnS:Nd 1 at % | Nd-O | 8.4 ± 1.9 | 2.51 ± 0.03 | 2.54 | 8.7 ± 4.5 | 2.8 ± 2.1 | 2.5% |
| ZnS:Nd 5 at % | Nd-O | 8.0 ± 1.4 | 2.50 ± 0.02 | 2.54 | 7.8 ± 3.6 | 2.9 ± 1.6 | 2.0% |
Figure 7Tauc plot ((F(R)hv)2 vs hv) of the undoped ZnS sample.
Figure 8Emission spectrum (black line, λexc = 320 nm) and excitation spectrum (red line, λem = 597 nm) of the 5 at. % Mn-doped ZnS nanoparticles.
Figure 9Emission decay curves for 0.1 at. % (blue line), 1 at. % (red line), and 5 at. % (green line) Mn-doped ZnS nanoparticles. Black line: multi-exponential fitting.
Decay Lifetimes τ, Normalized Amplitudes A, and Average Lifetimes τav Obtained from the Fitting of the Emission Decay Curves for Mn-Doped Samples
| Mn2+ concentration | τ1 (ms) | τ2 (ms) | τ3 (ms) | τav (ms) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 at. % | 4.30 ± 0.02 | 22 | 2.00 ± 0.02 | 35 | 0.330 ± 0.005 | 42 | 3.09 ± 0.03 |
| 1 at. % | 2.41 ± 0.01 | 5 | 0.536 ± 0.006 | 30 | 0.134 ± 0.002 | 65 | 1.04 ± 0.02 |
| 5 at. % | 1.02 ± 0.02 | 1 | 0.206 ± 0.002 | 20 | 0.059 ± 0.001 | 79 | 0.201 ± 0.004 |
Figure 10Emission spectrum (black line, λexc = 393 nm) and excitation spectrum (red line, λem = 614 nm) of the 1 at. % Eu3+-doped ZnS nanoparticles.
Figure 11Emission spectrum (black line, λexc = 582 nm) and excitation spectrum (red line, λem = 1062 nm) of the 1 at. % Nd3+-doped ZnS nanoparticles.
Figure 12Cytotoxicity of ZnS NPs toward human A549 alveolar carcinoma cells. Cell viability was determined by an MTS assay (NP concentrations of (a) 10–50 μg/mL and (b) 100–400 μg/mL) and (c) clonogenic assay at the end of a 24 h incubation in media containing different concentration of ZnS NPs. Data are means ± S.D. from independent experiments performed in triplicate and expressed as the percentage of NP-treated cells over that of untreated control cells (100%).
Figure 13Schematic representation of the microfluidic setup used (HS– is the predominant species at the native pH value of 0.2 M Na2S water solution).