Magnetic Control of the Manganese Photoluminescence in Fe₃O₄/l-Cys ZnS:Mn Nanocomposites

Abstract

We investigated the magnetic control of the Mn photoluminescence (PL) in iron oxide/l-cysteine-capped zinc sulfide (Fe3O4/l-cys ZnS:Mn) nanocomposites via temperature- and field-dependent PL intensity studies. Fe3O4/l-cys ZnS:Mn was synthesized following a wet chemical deposition route and then its physicochemical, morphological, and magnetic properties were characterized. X-ray diffraction analysis indicates the formation of a semiconducting composite material with coexisting phases with high crystalline quality and purity. Electron microscopy reveals that the surfaces of the nanoparticles are clean and smooth, sized between 15 and 30 nm, without any sheathed amorphous phase. Vibrating sample magnetometry and UV light excitation show a clear superparamagnetic behavior and an optical response of Fe3O4/l-cys ZnS:Mn, which revealed its bifunctional nature. Magnetoluminescent coupling at 1.0 T is seen in the form of PL suppression in Fe3O4/l-cys ZnS:Mn from low temperature (10 K) to room temperature, with a PL intensity drop of ∼5% at 10 K and a maximum drop of 10% at room temperature. This observation can be explained by restriction of the energy transfer to Mn orbitals through magnetic ordering and Jahn–Teller distortions. Fe3O4/l-cys ZnS:Mn shows promise as a bifunctional biocompatible compound that can be applied as a theranostic agent and a quantum computational element. A deeper understanding behind the magnetic control of the optical response in bifunctional materials brings forth new arenas in diagnostics and drug delivery.

Strong Magnetically‐Responsive Circularly Polarized Phosphorescence and X‐Ray Scintillation in Ultrarobust Mn(II)–Organic Helical Chains

“…It is also known that the magnetic field leads to the splitting of dorbitals of Mn 2+ , thereby making the spin-selective transfer of energy more difficult. [51,52] To deeper rationalize the splitting of the ground state of Mn 2+ ions of SS-/RR-1 under the action of a magnetic field, we have performed an EPR study and magnetic circular dichroism (MCD) calculations exemplified by SS-1 (for details, see Section S15, Supporting Information). It has been found that the ground state of Mn 2+ ions of SS-1 is orbital singlet 6 S 5/2 with relatively high zero-field splitting parameters.…”

Bifunctional folic-conjugated aspartic-modified Fe3O4 nanocarriers for efficient targeted anticancer drug delivery

“…88-0315) and those reported elsewhere. 2,7,8,[26][27][28][29] Besides, the result also demonstrated that the formation of such crystal phase and their degree of crystallinity was not affected by surface modication with aspartic acid. As shown, both unmodied and aspartic-modied Fe 3 O 4 exhibited a very similar XRD pattern.…”

Magnetic Control of Protein Expression via Magneto-mechanical Actuation of ND-PEGylated Iron Oxide Nanocubes for Cell Therapy

“…ICP-mass spectrometry (ICP–MS) was used to determine the concentration of iron internalization in cells after being loaded with cubic ND-PEG-SPIONs. ICP–MS analysis was done using a NexION 300D ICP mass spectrometer (PerkinElmer, USA) equipped with SC4-DX autosamplers (ESI, USA) . Cells were seeded at 10 5 cells per well in 6-well plates and treated with cubic ND-PEG-SPIONs (0.000, 0.025, 0.100, 0.500 mg/mL Fe) for 24 h. Then, wells were washed abundantly with DPBS to remove free particles and centrifuged to obtain cells in pellet form.…”

“…Decomposition of the samples’ matrix was performed by heating at 70 °C for 16 h after the addition of trace metal grade nitric acid (20% aqueous solution). Digested samples were diluted (1:10) with pico-pure water and with 2% nitric acid to fit into the calibration curve . ICP–MS was operated in standard mode; all operating parameters were optimized to meet the requirements as defined by the manufacturer prior to method calibration and analysis.…”

“…Five replicates were analyzed per sample. Quantification was performed by germanium as an internal standard . Iron content (ng) was normalized to the total protein (μg) count in each sample.…”