| Literature DB >> 34316098 |
Jitender Kumar1, Rajesh Kumar2, Mukhtiyar Singh2, Shalendra Kumar3,4, Ravi Kumar5, Sung Ok Won6, Ranjeet Brajpuriya4, Sourabh Dwivedi7, Ram K Sharma8, Ankush Vij4.
Abstract
We report here the structural, reflectance, photoluminescence and thermoluminescence study of t-Mg2B2O5 nanostructures synthesized using optimized combustion method relatively at much lower temperature. The rietveld refinement of X-ray diffraction data confirms single-phase triclinic crystal structure of Mg2B2O5 nanoparticles. The direct band gap determined using diffuse reflectance spectra (DRS) was 5.23 eV, which is contrary to earlier reports quoting Mg2B2O5 as indirect band gap material. To elucidate the nature of band gap in Mg2B2O5, we performed first principle calculations based on full potential linearized augmented plane-wave (FPLAPW) method, predicting the direct band gap of 5.10 eV in t-Mg2B2O5 which is in good agreement with our experimental results. The t-Mg2B2O5 nanoparticles were found to exhibit yellow-reddish photoluminescence peaking at 588 nm, attributed to various defects states. The combustion synthesized Mg2B2O5 nanocrystals exhibited ultraviolet (254 nm) responsive thermoluminescence (TL). TL glow curve of Mg2B2O5 comprises of one dominant peak around 417-428 K and less intense shoulder around 573-589 K which arouse possibility of various trapping sites or defects present in the sample. The TL analysis using general order Kitti's equations was performed to estimate the activation energies of trapping states. Owing to already well-known mechanical and thermal properties, the direct wide band gap nature and UV responsive thermoluminescence of combustion synthesized t-Mg2B2O5 nanostructures can pave way for its use in luminescence-based applications and UV dosimetry. As an additional application of Mg2B2O5, anti-biofilms activity of Mg2B2O5 nanoparticles using pseudomonas aeruginosa bacterial cells was also performed which revealed 91 ± 2.7% inhibition of biofilms formed by P. aeruginosa, respectively, at 100 μg/ml after 24 h of treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Diffuse reflectance; Photoluminescence; Thermoluminescence; UV dosimetry; t-Mg2B2O5 Nanostructures
Year: 2021 PMID: 34316098 PMCID: PMC8299454 DOI: 10.1007/s00339-021-04761-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process ISSN: 0947-8396 Impact factor: 2.584
Fig. 1Rietveld refined XRD pattern of Mg2B2O5 nanostructures and inset shows crystal structure obtained after rietveld refinement
Atomic position and occupancy inferred from rietveld analysis
| Atoms | Occupancy | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| O1 | 0.73235 | 0.06127 | 0.26233 | 0.66677 |
| Mg2 | 0.37146 | 0.10007 | 0.29468 | 0.77147 |
| B2 | 1.00987 | 0.07195 | 0.18060 | 1.00 |
| B1 | 0.52318 | 0.41301 | 1.19064 | 0.82307 |
| O5 | 0.60357 | 0.44719 | 0.71681 | 0.79247 |
| Mg1 | 0.16671 | 0.33051 | 0.71593 | 0.70485 |
| O3 | 0.50637 | 0.27555 | 0.75209 | 0.92353 |
| O4 | 0.88694 | 0.28083 | 0.50265 | 0.79360 |
| O2 | 0.09961 | 0.19603 | 0.21127 | 0.80015 |
Fig. 2a TEM b Magnified TEM c HR-TEM and d SAED image of Mg2B2O5 nanostructures
Fig. 3TG-DSC curves for Mg2B2O5 nanostructures
Fig. 4a Diffuse reflectance spectrum of Mg2B2O5 nanostructures and b Tauc’s plot for band gap determination
Fig. 5a Total DOS and band structure of Mg2B2O5. Fermi level (EF) is shifted to 0 Ev. b calculated partial DOS of Mg2B2O5
Fig. 6a Photoluminescence emission spectrum of Mg2B2O5 b CIE diagram of PL emission
Fig. 7a TL glow curve of Mg2B2O5 nanostructures exposed to ultraviolet rays of wavelength 254 nm and b TL intensity Vs UV exposure time for both TL peaks
Fig. 8Deconvoluted TL curves for (a) 2 min (b) 5 min (c) 30 min and (d) 60 min exposure time of UV rays
Kinetic parameters of Mg2B2O5 nanophosphors obtained after deconvolution using TLanal software
| Exposure Time | Traps | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 min | 1st Trap | 2nd Trap | 3rd Trap | 4th Trap |
| Energy(eV) | 0.71 | 1.17 | 0.97 | 1.03 |
| S” | 3.1 × 108 | 2.5 × 1013 | 1.2 × 1010 | 1.6 × 108 |
| b | 1.0 | 2 | 2 | 1.4 |
| 5 min | 1st Trap | 2nd Trap | 3rd Trap | 4th Trap |
| Energy(eV) | 0.65 | 0.96 | 0.91 | 1.10 |
| S” | 2.2 × 107 | 2.8 × 1010 | 1.1 × 109 | 1.8 × 109 |
| b | 1.0 | 1.5 | 2 | 1.7 |
| 30 min | 1st Trap | 2nd Trap | 3rd Trap | 4th Trap |
| Energy(eV) | 0.95 | 1.26 | 1.11 | 1.12 |
| S” | 3.0 × 1011 | 3.7 × 1014 | 6.8 × 1011 | 8.9 × 1018 |
| b | 1.4 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.8 |
| 60 min | 1st Trap | 2nd Trap | 3rd Trap | 4th Trap |
| Energy(eV) | 0.97 | 0.84 | 1.99 | 1.46 |
| S” | 3.2 × 1011 | 1.3 × 109 | 2.8 × 1017 | 6.6 × 1011 |
| b | 1.6 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
Fig. 9Concentration dependent inhibition of bacterial biofilm. These data represent the mean ± SD of two independent experiments done in triplicate