“…This difference in the dependence of the luminescence of Eu II on the counterions between Eu II 1 and Eu II 2 is likely a consequence of the greater geometric flexibility of ligand 2 relative to ligand 1 , enabled by the acyclic nature of ligand 2 . The increased flexibility in 2 relative to 1 enables close interactions between counterions and Eu II , resulting in more pronounced differences in the extent of the splitting of 5d orbitals because the energies associated with the 5d–4f transitions depend on the extent of 5d splitting. , This greater tunability achieved by varying counterions in the presence of a suitable ligand (here, ligand 2 ) demonstrates the importance of studying the impact of counterions on the photophysical properties of divalent lanthanides, especially counterions other than the typical halides. In addition, this wide range of emission tunability of Eu II 2 makes Eu II 2 a potentially interesting family of lumiphores to study for applications such as light-emitting diodes.…”