OSA's Digital Library

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

| EXPLORING THE INTERFACE OF LIGHT AND BIOMEDICINE

  • Editor: Gregory W. Faris
  • Vol. 5, Iss. 9 — Jul. 6, 2010
« Show journal navigation

Highly efficient nonradiative energy transfer mediated light harvesting in water using aqueous CdTe quantum dot antennas

Evren Mutlugun, Olga Samarskaya, Tuncay Ozel, Neslihan Cicek, Nikolai Gaponik, Alexander Eychmüller, and Hilmi Volkan Demir  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 18, Issue 10, pp. 10720-10730 (2010)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.18.010720


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1335 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We present light harvesting of aqueous colloidal quantum dots to nonradiatively transfer their excitonic excitation energy efficiently to dye molecules in water, without requiring ligand exchange. These as-synthesized CdTe quantum dots that are used as donors to serve as light-harvesting antennas are carefully optimized to match the electronic structure of Rhodamine B molecules used as acceptors for light harvesting in aqueous medium. By varying the acceptor to donor concentration ratio, we measure the light harvesting factor, along with substantial lifetime modifications of these water-soluble quantum dots, from 25.3 ns to 7.2 ns as a result of their energy transfer with efficiency levels up to 86%. Such nonradiative energy transfer mediated light harvesting in aqueous medium holds great promise for future quantum dot multiplexed dye biodetection systems.

© 2010 OSA

1. Introduction

Today dye molecules are widely used in molecular biology. They offer several benefits including good biocompatibilty, high quantum yield, and reasonable photostability. Some of their common applications include biolabeling, biodetection, and spectroscopy [1

1. A. Georgi, C. Mottola-Hartshorn, A. N. Warner, B. Fields, and L. B. Chen, “Detection of individual fluorescently labeled reovirions in living cells,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87(17), 6579–6583 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3

3. K. Bacia, S. A. Kim, and P. Schwille, “Fluorescence cross-correlation spectroscopy in living cells,” Nat. Methods 3(2), 83–89 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Also, their small size of only a few nanometers allows for their use in molecular-level detection systems (e.g., in double stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which is not possible with larger size biotags [4

4. C. Fang, A. Agarwal, K. D. Buddharaju, N. M. Khalid, S. M. Salim, E. Widjaja, M. V. Garland, N. Balasubramanian, and D. L. Kwong, “DNA detection using nanostructured SERS substrates with Rhodamine B as Raman label,” Biosens. Bioelectron. 24(2), 216–221 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

5. H. Tokudome, Y. Yamada, S. Sonezaki, H. Ishikawa, M. Bekki, K. Kanehira, and M. Miyauchi, “Photoelectrochemical deoxyribonucleic acid sensing on a nanostructured TiO2 electrode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 87(21), 213901 (2005). [CrossRef]

]). Despite these unique advantages, organic dyes, suffer one main drawback that they cannot be efficiently pumped over a wide spectral range beyond their characteristically narrow absorption spectra (for example, see Fig. 1a
Fig. 1 (a) Absorbance spectra of the two differently sized aqueous CdTe nanocrystal quantum dots (emitting at 552 and 525 nm) together with that of the Rhodamine B dye molecules. (b) Normalized photoluminescence spectra of our aqueous CdTe quantum dots (donors) selectively chosen to emit at the peak wavelengths of 525 nm and 552 nm, along with the emission and absorption spectra of the Rhodamine B molecules (acceptors). The donors emitting at 552 nm provide a better spectral match to the electronic structure of these acceptors.
for Rhodamine B). This limits their use in some important applications that require broader spectral operation including spectral multiplexing (in which various dyes can simultaneously be pumped using a single source). Also for dyes, spectral extension of their optical absorption is important in photovoltaic applications where dyes are used as sensitizers [6

6. B. O’Reagen and M. Grätzel, “A low-cost, high-efficiency solar cell based on dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films,” Nature 353(6346), 737–740 (1991). [CrossRef]

]. The dye sensitized solar cells require a wide spectral response for an enhanced efficiency, but broadening of the absorption spectra of dyes generally necessitates complicated chemical modifications [7

7. S. L. Li, K. J. Jiang, K. F. Shao, and L. M. Yang, “Novel organic dyes for efficient dye-sensitized solar cells,” Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 26(26), 2792–2794 (2006). [CrossRef]

].

In this paper, different than the prior works of our group and the others, we propose and demonstrate light harvesting of aqueous colloidal CdTe quantum dots to nonradiatively transfer their excitonic excitation energy efficiently to dye molecules in water, and present systematic tuning and control of their light harvesting activity in aqueous medium, without the need for ligand exchange. We investigated the effects of Förster radius of these aqueous nanocrystals on modifying their lifetimes and controlling their light harvesting factor in water. We studied the operation of these CdTe nanocrystal donors, serving as optical antennas for acceptor Rhodamine B molecules, with their steady state photoluminescence (SSPL) spectroscopy and further investigated and analyzed their significantly modified photoluminescence decay kinetics for light harvesting with their time resolved photoluminescence (TRPL) spectroscopy.

With acceptor to donor (A/D) concentration ratio varied in water, we controlled the light harvesting factor of the donor CdTe quantum dots, with their substantial lifetime modifications as a result of the nonradiative energy transfer with high efficiency levels (up to 86%). We further analyzed the controlled change in the lifetime of the acceptor molecules and investigated the resulting trend of increasing energy transfer efficiency versus decreasing light harvesting enhancement of the acceptor emission with the increased A/D concentration ratio, discussing the fundamental tradeoffs and practical feasibility of nonradiative energy transfer assisted light harvesting operation with reasonable efficiency and enhancement.

2. Experimental characterization, analyses, and results

In this work we colloidally synthesized aqueous CdTe quantum dots in two different sizes to study the effect of Förster radius on the energy transfer efficiency and light harvesting activity. Our synthesis procedure follows the method previously described in detail in references 11

11. M. Grabolle, M. Spieles, V. Lesnyak, N. Gaponik, A. Eychmüller, and U. Resch-Genger, “Determination of the Fluorescence Quantum Yield of Quantum Dots: Suitable Procedures and Achievable Uncertainties,” Anal. Chem. 81(15), 6285–6294 (2009). [CrossRef]

and 12

12. N. Gaponik, D. V. Talapin, A. L. Rogach, K. Hoppe, E. V. Shevchenko, A. Kornowski, A. Eychmüller, and H. Weller, “Thiol-Capping of CdTe nanocrystals: An alternative to organometallic synthetic routes,” J. Phys. Chem. B 106(29), 7177–7185 (2002). [CrossRef]

. In our synthesis, 4.59 g of Cd(ClO4)2x6H2O is dissolved in 0.5 l of Milli-Q water in 1 l three-neck reaction flask. 1.33 g of TGA is added to the mixture, which turns into milky appearance. The pH of this mixture is then increased to 11.8 – 12.0 by dropwise addition of NaOH upon vigorous stirring. After this step, the reaction mixture becomes clear or slightly turbid. To prepare tellurium precursor, 0.8 g of Al2Te3 is transferred into a small three-neck flask in the glove box and then deaerated by passing Ar for 50-60 min in the setup. 10 ml of deaerated 0.5 M H2SO4 is slowly poured into Al2Te3 lumps to produce H2Te gas, which is carried by a slow Ar flow and bubbled through the mixture containing cadmium precursor for 40-50 min. The resulting red-black mixture is refluxed at 100°C to obtain the desired nanocrystal size. The reaction mixture is then cooled to room temperature and filtered. The CdTe quantum dots are finally separated by size selective precipitation.

Figure 1a shows the optical absorption spectra of these differently sized CdTe quantum dot donors carefully chosen by size selection, along with that of Rhodamine B acceptor molecules in water. Figure 1b depicts the photoluminescence spectra of these CdTe quantum dots selectively chosen to emit at the peak emission wavelengths of 525 nm and 552 nm (corresponding to 2.04 nm and 2.98 nm in size, respectively), presented here along with the emission and absorption spectra of the acceptor dye molecules alone to show the spectral overlap. Here the absorbance measurements were taken using Cary UV-VIS spectrophotometer and the photoluminescence measurements were carried out using Cary Eclipse fluorescence spectrophotometer.

Förster radius, which is defined as the distance between the donor and acceptor molecules yielding a 50% efficient energy transfer, is given by Eq. (1)
R0=0.211(κ2n4QDJ(λ))1/6
(1)
where κ2 is the dipole orientation factor; n is the refractive index of the medium; QDis the quantum efficiency of the donor; J(λ) is the overlap integral of the donor emission spectrum and the acceptor absorption spectrum; and Ro is expressed in terms of Angstroms (Å) [26

26. J. R. Lakowicz, Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy (New York: Springer,2006).

]. Figure 1b is used to calculate the spectral overlap integralsJ(λ), which leads to 5.5 × 1015 and 9.2 × 1015 for the donor quantum dots emitting at 525 nm and 552 nm, respectively. Subsequently, the quantum efficiencies of the donor molecules are experimentally measured to be 10% and 54% for 525 nm emitting and for 552 nm emitting dots, respectively using Rhodamine 6G as the reference dye. This difference in the quantum efficiency is commonly observed for this type of nanocrystals; their quantum efficiencies increase with increasing size, which is inevitable for such only core structures. Using Eq. (1), the Förster radii calculated are Ro=4.7 and Ro=6.7 nm, for 525 nm and 552 nm quantum dots, respectively. This difference in the Förster radius comes both from the spectral overlap and quantum efficiency difference. Based on this observation, the quantum dot donors emitting at 552 nm are found to have a wider Förster interaction range and thus to be a better optimized match to the acceptor dyes, compared to 525 nm emitting dots,

2.1 Steady State Photoluminescence (SPPL) measurements

To observe FRET, we first performed SSPL measurements (with optical excitation at 375 nm) while adding controlled amounts of acceptor molecules into the aqueous donor solution, thus changing A/D ratio in increments. Figure 2a
Fig. 2 SSPL spectra taken by adding controlled amounts of dye acceptors into the aqueous donor solution using CdTe quantum dots emitting at the peak wavelength of (a) 552 nm and (b) 525 nm. The legends show the corresponding A/D concentration ratios (A/D = 1.8–152.8). (Note that these PL intensity levels are measured using the same arbitrary units and that they are presented using the scales as indicated on their plots, for clear visibility.)
presents SSPL spectra for our CdTe quantum dots emitting at 552 nm used as the donors and Fig. 2b shows the results of the same measurements repeated using 525 nm emitting dots as the donors, both starting with the same concentration levels and changing A/D concentration ratio in an identical manner in water. In this steady state characterization, optical excitation is chosen at 375 nm to be consistent with that of the time resolved measurements that use a 375 nm laser diode pump. It is worth noting that our donor molecules are optically well excited at 375 nm, while this excitation wavelength is out of the absorption range of the acceptor molecules (Fig. 1a). Here the concentrations of the donors (without acceptors) and acceptors (without donors) used in Fig. 1a correspond to the same starting points of Fig. 2 before adding the acceptor molecules into the aqueous donor solution. As A/D concentration ratio is increased, we clearly observe simultaneously the quenching of donor emission and the enhancement of acceptor emission in increments.

2.2 Time Resolved Photoluminescence (TRPL) measurements

To better understand the emission kinetics, we also performed and analyzed TRPL measurements, again by adding controlled amounts of acceptors into the aqueous donor solution (and changing A/D concentration ratios) in identical increments, both for 552 nm and 525 nm quantum dot donors. TRPL measurements were conducted using PicoQuant FluoTime 200 time resolved spectroscopy system with a fixed laser diode head at 375 nm wavelength having pulse widths of <70 ps . Figure 3
Fig. 3 TRPL measurements of donor molecules taken by adding controlled amounts of dye acceptors into the aqueous donor solution, using CdTe quantum dots emitting at the peak wavelength of (a) 552 nm and (b) 525 nm, all shown together with their corresponding numerical fits, and along with a comparative analysis of the donor photoluminescence decay lifetimes both for 552 and 525 nm emitting dots as a function of A/D concentration ratio (c). In the last plot, the red (black) dotted baseline represents the lifetime of only donors of 552 nm (525 nm) emitting dots, without any acceptors in the mixture.
shows the evolution of photon count decay over time, parameterized with respect to the varied A/D concentration ratios, using 552 nm emitting quantum dots (given in Fig. 3a) and 525 nm emitting ones (given in Fig. 3b) at the corresponding donor emission wavelengths. Each decay curve is also shown together with its corresponding numerical exponential fits, which exhibit good fitting to the experimental data. These measurements and numerical analyses are performed at the corresponding peak emission wavelengths of the donor nanocrystals since there is an insignificant overlap between the donor and acceptor emission spectra at these peak wavelengths (Fig. 1b), which makes the analysis safe (with no detectable crosstalk between the emission of donor and acceptor molecules). The comparison of their donor photoluminescence decay lifetimes is also presented as a function of A/D concentration ratio in Fig. 3c. Here we clearly observe increasingly faster photoluminescence decay of donors. We also see that the donor lifetimes diverge away more from the starting baseline of only donors and are shortened further more for 552 nm emitting quantum dots (with its lifetimes modified from 25.3 ns to 7.2 ns) than those of 525 nm dots (with its lifetimes modified from 20.4 ns to 7.1 ns). This is because 552 nm emitting CdTe quantum dots are better optimized to match Rhodomine dye molecules and thus serve as better light-harvesting antennas to these dyes.

τamp=iAiτi/iAi
(3)

Table 2. TRPL measurement analysis (at 581 nm) of the 525 nm emitting donors varying the A/D concentration ratio.

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

Table 3. TRPL measurement analysis (at 605 nm) of the 525 nm emitting donors varying the A/D concentration ratio.

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

Table 4. TRPL measurement analysis (at 552 nm) of the 552 nm emitting donors varying the A/D concentration ratio.

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

Table 5. TRPL measurement analysis (at 581 nm) of the 552 nm emitting donors varying the A/D concentration ratio.

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

Table 6. TRPL measurement analysis (at 605 nm) of the 552 nm emitting donors varying the A/D concentration ratio

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

Table 7. TRPL measurement analysis (at 581 and 605 nm) of the 581 nm emitting acceptors varying the A/D concentration ratio.

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables

2.3 Light harvesting analyses and remarks

Fig.s 3 and 4 demonstrate clearly the effect of Förster radius on the lifetime modifications of the donor and acceptor molecules. For further analyses, we also calculate energy transfer efficiency and light harvesting enhancement of the acceptor emission. The energy transfer efficiency is extracted from the amplitude weighted donor lifetime, τamp in the presence and absence of the acceptor molecules using Eq. (4)
ηFRET=1τDAτD.
(4)
Here is the ampitude weighted lifetime of donors in the presence of acceptors and is that of donors in the absence of acceptors [26

26. J. R. Lakowicz, Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy (New York: Springer,2006).

].

Figure 5a reveals the comparison of efficiency levels extracted from TRPL measurements. Here we observe that the energy transfer efficiency increases with the increased A/D concentration ratio, as the donors find more acceptors around them to transfer more of their excitation energy. Tuning the A/D concentration ratios and using better optimized 552 nm emitting quantum dot donors, we observe a maximum energy transfer efficiency of 86%, which is obtained at an A/D concentration ratio of 152.8 in our experiments. This comparison shows that the efficiency levels are higher using 552 nm emitting quantum dots than those of 525 nm emitting ones.

To show the effect of nonradiative energy transfer mediated light harvesting on the emission enhancement of the acceptor molecules, we further compute the light-harvesting factor for the acceptor emission (Fig. 5b). These calculations are carried out through fitting SSPL measurements (in Fig. 2) of the donor quantum dots to a Gaussian distribution and comparing the overall emission (donor + acceptor mixture) with the emission of only acceptors (corresponding to the same concentration of acceptor molecules used in each A/D concentration point). In these calculations, the tail overlap of the donor emission on the acceptor emission is also considered, and any possible contribution from the tail (although weak) is also subtracted. Here we observe that the relative enhancement factor of the acceptor emission is decreased with the increased A/D concentration ratio, because the acceptors increasing in number find fewer donors around them to be fed via nonradiative energy transfer, which indicates a tradeoff between the efficiency and light harvesting factor.

Also, we again observe that 552 nm emitting aqueous CdTe quantum dots are better light-harvesting antennas in water for Rhodamine B dye molecules in comparison to those quantum dots emitting at 525 nm. In the light of these experiments and analyses, such light harvesting is possible; however, one needs to consider the tradeoff between efficiency and enhancement factor to choose an operating point. These results also indicate that nonradiative energy transfer assisted light harvesting may enable quantum dot multiplexed dye biodetection systems, on which we are currently working.

3. Conclusion

In conclusion, as a proof-of-concept demonstration, we have presented nonradiative energy transfer based light harvesting of aqueous colloidal CdTe quantum dot antennas for dye molecules in water. Our experiments show that these quantum dots used as donors need to be carefully optimized to match Rhodamine B used as acceptors. In our experiments, we have observed strong lifetime modifications of these CdTe quantum dots from 25.3 to 7.2 ns. We have demonstrated the energy transfer efficiency tuning up to 86% as the acceptor-donor concentration ratio is varied. These experiments indicate that nonradiative energy transfer mediated light harvesting using aqueous quantum dots leads to enhanced emission of dye molecules in water at wavelengths beyond the absorption range of the dyes. One should also note that a good operating point in the A/D concentration ratio for a specific donor-acceptor pair has to be set to provide both reasonably high efficiency and high light harvesting of the acceptor emission. This nonradiative energy transfer assisted light harvesting holds great potential for future quantum dot multiplexed biological and optoelectronic applications.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by EU-FP7 Nanophotonics4Energy NoE, BMBF TUR 09/001, and TUBITAK EEEAG 106E020, 107E297, 107E088, 109E002, and 109E004. HVD acknowledges support from ESF-EURYI and TUBA-GEBIP, and EM, from TUBITAK-BIDEB.

References and links

1.

A. Georgi, C. Mottola-Hartshorn, A. N. Warner, B. Fields, and L. B. Chen, “Detection of individual fluorescently labeled reovirions in living cells,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87(17), 6579–6583 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

Y. Li, Y. T. H. Cu, and D. Luo, “Multiplexed detection of pathogen DNA with DNA- based fluorescence nanobarcodes,” Nat. Biotechnol. 23(7), 885–889 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

K. Bacia, S. A. Kim, and P. Schwille, “Fluorescence cross-correlation spectroscopy in living cells,” Nat. Methods 3(2), 83–89 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

C. Fang, A. Agarwal, K. D. Buddharaju, N. M. Khalid, S. M. Salim, E. Widjaja, M. V. Garland, N. Balasubramanian, and D. L. Kwong, “DNA detection using nanostructured SERS substrates with Rhodamine B as Raman label,” Biosens. Bioelectron. 24(2), 216–221 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

H. Tokudome, Y. Yamada, S. Sonezaki, H. Ishikawa, M. Bekki, K. Kanehira, and M. Miyauchi, “Photoelectrochemical deoxyribonucleic acid sensing on a nanostructured TiO2 electrode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 87(21), 213901 (2005). [CrossRef]

6.

B. O’Reagen and M. Grätzel, “A low-cost, high-efficiency solar cell based on dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films,” Nature 353(6346), 737–740 (1991). [CrossRef]

7.

S. L. Li, K. J. Jiang, K. F. Shao, and L. M. Yang, “Novel organic dyes for efficient dye-sensitized solar cells,” Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 26(26), 2792–2794 (2006). [CrossRef]

8.

E. Mutlugün, S. Nizamoglu, and H. V. Demir, “Highly efficient nonradiative energy transfer using charged CdSe/ZnS nanocrystals for light-harvesting in solution,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 95(3), 033106 (2009). [CrossRef]

9.

W. W. Yu, E. Chang, R. Drezek, and V. L. Colvin, “Water-soluble quantum dots for biomedical applications,” Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 348(3), 781–786 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

S. Kim and M. G. Bawendi, “Oligomeric Ligands for Luminescent and Stable Nanocrystal Quantum Dots,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125(48), 14652–14653 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

M. Grabolle, M. Spieles, V. Lesnyak, N. Gaponik, A. Eychmüller, and U. Resch-Genger, “Determination of the Fluorescence Quantum Yield of Quantum Dots: Suitable Procedures and Achievable Uncertainties,” Anal. Chem. 81(15), 6285–6294 (2009). [CrossRef]

12.

N. Gaponik, D. V. Talapin, A. L. Rogach, K. Hoppe, E. V. Shevchenko, A. Kornowski, A. Eychmüller, and H. Weller, “Thiol-Capping of CdTe nanocrystals: An alternative to organometallic synthetic routes,” J. Phys. Chem. B 106(29), 7177–7185 (2002). [CrossRef]

13.

A. L. Rogach, T. Franzl, T. A. Klar, J. Feldmann, N. Gaponik, V. Lesnyak, A. Shavel, A. Eychmüller, Y. P. Rakovich, and J. F. Donegan, “Aqueous synthesis of thiol-capped CdTe nanocrystals: State-of-the-art,” J. Phys. Chem. C 111(40), 14628–14637 (2007). [CrossRef]

14.

T. Förster, “Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz,” Ann. Phys. 437(1-2), 55–75 (1948). [CrossRef]

15.

A. R. Clapp, I. L. Medintz, J. M. Mauro, B. R. Fisher, M. G. Bawendi, and H. Mattoussi, “Fluorescence resonance energy transfer between quantum dot donors and dye-labeled protein acceptors,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126(1), 301–310 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

D. M. Willard and A. Van Orden, “Quantum dots: Resonant energy-transfer sensor,” Nat. Mater. 2(9), 575–576 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

I. L. Medintz, A. R. Clapp, F. M. Brunel, T. Tiefenbrunn, H. T. Uyeda, E. L. Chang, J. R. Deschamps, P. E. Dawson, and H. Mattoussi, “Proteolytic activity monitored by fluorescence resonance energy transfer through quantum-dot-peptide conjugates,” Nat. Mater. 5(7), 581–589 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

S. Sadhu and A. Patra, “Composition effects on quantum dot-based resonance energy transfer,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(18), 183104 (2008). [CrossRef]

19.

P. S. Chowdhury, P. Sen, and A. Patra, “Optical properties of CdS nanoparticles and the energy transfer from CdS nanoparticles to Rhodamine 6G,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 413(4-6), 311–314 (2005). [CrossRef]

20.

T. Pons, I. L. Medintz, M. Sykora, and H. Mattoussi, “Spectrally resolved energy transfer using quantum dot donors: Ensemble and single-molecule photoluminescence studies,” Phys. Rev. B 73(24), 245302 (2006). [CrossRef]

21.

E. Alphandery, L. M. Walsh, Y. Rakovich, A. L. Bradley, J. F. Donegan, and N. Gaponik, “Highly efficient Förster resonance energy transfer between CdTe nanocrystals and Rhodamine B in mixed solid films,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 388(1-3), 100–104 (2004). [CrossRef]

22.

X. Y. Wang, Q. Maa, Y. B. Lia, B. Li, X. G. Su, and Q. H. Jin, “Studies on fluorescence resonance energy transfer between dyes and water-soluble quantum dots,” Can. J. Anal. Sci. Spectrosc. 50, 141–146 (2005).

23.

J. Li, F. Mei, W. Y. Li, X. W. He, and Y. K. Zhang, “Study on the fluorescence resonance energy transfer between CdTe QDs and butyl-rhodamine B in the presence of CTMAB and its application on the detection of Hg(II),” Spectrochimica Acta Part A 70(4), 811–817 (2008). [CrossRef]

24.

Q. Chen, Q. Ma, Y. Wan, X. Su, Z. Lin, and Q. Jin, “Studies on fluorescence resonance energy transfer between dyes and water-soluble quantum dots,” J. Biolumin. Chemilumin. 20(4-5), 251–255 (2005).

25.

A. R. Clapp, I. L. Medintz, and H. Mattoussi, “Förster resonance energy transfer investigations using quantum-dot fluorophores,” Chem. Phys. Chem 7(1), 47–57 (2006). [CrossRef]

26.

J. R. Lakowicz, Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy (New York: Springer,2006).

27.

V. K. Komarala, A. L. Bradley, Y. P. Rakovich, S. J. Byrne, Y. K. Gun’ko, and A. L. Rogach, “Surface plasmon enhanced Förster resonance energy transfer between the CdTe quantum dots,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(12), 123102 (2008). [CrossRef]

28.

S. Chanyawadee, R. T. Harley, M. Henini, D. V. Talapin, and P. G. Lagoudakis, “Photocurrent Enhancement in Hybrid Nanocrystal Quantum-Dot p-i-n Photovoltaic Devices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(7), 077402 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(160.2540) Materials : Fluorescent and luminescent materials
(160.4670) Materials : Optical materials
(160.4760) Materials : Optical properties
(230.5590) Optical devices : Quantum-well, -wire and -dot devices
(260.2160) Physical optics : Energy transfer
(160.1435) Materials : Biomaterials

ToC Category:
Materials

History
Original Manuscript: February 9, 2010
Revised Manuscript: April 23, 2010
Manuscript Accepted: April 28, 2010
Published: May 7, 2010

Virtual Issues
Vol. 5, Iss. 9 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Evren Mutlugun, Olga Samarskaya, Tuncay Ozel, Neslihan Cicek, Nikolai Gaponik, Alexander Eychmüller, and Hilmi Volkan Demir, "Highly efficient nonradiative energy transfer mediated light harvesting in water using aqueous CdTe quantum dot antennas," Opt. Express 18, 10720-10730 (2010)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/vjbo/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-18-10-10720


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. A. Georgi, C. Mottola-Hartshorn, A. N. Warner, B. Fields, and L. B. Chen, “Detection of individual fluorescently labeled reovirions in living cells,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87(17), 6579–6583 (1990). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Y. Li, Y. T. H. Cu, and D. Luo, “Multiplexed detection of pathogen DNA with DNA- based fluorescence nanobarcodes,” Nat. Biotechnol. 23(7), 885–889 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. K. Bacia, S. A. Kim, and P. Schwille, “Fluorescence cross-correlation spectroscopy in living cells,” Nat. Methods 3(2), 83–89 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. C. Fang, A. Agarwal, K. D. Buddharaju, N. M. Khalid, S. M. Salim, E. Widjaja, M. V. Garland, N. Balasubramanian, and D. L. Kwong, “DNA detection using nanostructured SERS substrates with Rhodamine B as Raman label,” Biosens. Bioelectron. 24(2), 216–221 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. H. Tokudome, Y. Yamada, S. Sonezaki, H. Ishikawa, M. Bekki, K. Kanehira, and M. Miyauchi, “Photoelectrochemical deoxyribonucleic acid sensing on a nanostructured TiO2 electrode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 87(21), 213901 (2005). [CrossRef]
  6. B. O’Reagen and M. Grätzel, “A low-cost, high-efficiency solar cell based on dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films,” Nature 353(6346), 737–740 (1991). [CrossRef]
  7. S. L. Li, K. J. Jiang, K. F. Shao, and L. M. Yang, “Novel organic dyes for efficient dye-sensitized solar cells,” Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 26(26), 2792–2794 (2006). [CrossRef]
  8. E. Mutlugün, S. Nizamoglu, and H. V. Demir, “Highly efficient nonradiative energy transfer using charged CdSe/ZnS nanocrystals for light-harvesting in solution,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 95(3), 033106 (2009). [CrossRef]
  9. W. W. Yu, E. Chang, R. Drezek, and V. L. Colvin, “Water-soluble quantum dots for biomedical applications,” Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 348(3), 781–786 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. S. Kim and M. G. Bawendi, “Oligomeric Ligands for Luminescent and Stable Nanocrystal Quantum Dots,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125(48), 14652–14653 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. M. Grabolle, M. Spieles, V. Lesnyak, N. Gaponik, A. Eychmüller, and U. Resch-Genger, “Determination of the Fluorescence Quantum Yield of Quantum Dots: Suitable Procedures and Achievable Uncertainties,” Anal. Chem. 81(15), 6285–6294 (2009). [CrossRef]
  12. N. Gaponik, D. V. Talapin, A. L. Rogach, K. Hoppe, E. V. Shevchenko, A. Kornowski, A. Eychmüller, and H. Weller, “Thiol-Capping of CdTe nanocrystals: An alternative to organometallic synthetic routes,” J. Phys. Chem. B 106(29), 7177–7185 (2002). [CrossRef]
  13. A. L. Rogach, T. Franzl, T. A. Klar, J. Feldmann, N. Gaponik, V. Lesnyak, A. Shavel, A. Eychmüller, Y. P. Rakovich, and J. F. Donegan, “Aqueous synthesis of thiol-capped CdTe nanocrystals: State-of-the-art,” J. Phys. Chem. C 111(40), 14628–14637 (2007). [CrossRef]
  14. T. Förster, “Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz,” Ann. Phys. 437(1-2), 55–75 (1948). [CrossRef]
  15. A. R. Clapp, I. L. Medintz, J. M. Mauro, B. R. Fisher, M. G. Bawendi, and H. Mattoussi, “Fluorescence resonance energy transfer between quantum dot donors and dye-labeled protein acceptors,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126(1), 301–310 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. D. M. Willard and A. Van Orden, “Quantum dots: Resonant energy-transfer sensor,” Nat. Mater. 2(9), 575–576 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. I. L. Medintz, A. R. Clapp, F. M. Brunel, T. Tiefenbrunn, H. T. Uyeda, E. L. Chang, J. R. Deschamps, P. E. Dawson, and H. Mattoussi, “Proteolytic activity monitored by fluorescence resonance energy transfer through quantum-dot-peptide conjugates,” Nat. Mater. 5(7), 581–589 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. S. Sadhu and A. Patra, “Composition effects on quantum dot-based resonance energy transfer,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(18), 183104 (2008). [CrossRef]
  19. P. S. Chowdhury, P. Sen, and A. Patra, “Optical properties of CdS nanoparticles and the energy transfer from CdS nanoparticles to Rhodamine 6G,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 413(4-6), 311–314 (2005). [CrossRef]
  20. T. Pons, I. L. Medintz, M. Sykora, and H. Mattoussi, “Spectrally resolved energy transfer using quantum dot donors: Ensemble and single-molecule photoluminescence studies,” Phys. Rev. B 73(24), 245302 (2006). [CrossRef]
  21. E. Alphandery, L. M. Walsh, Y. Rakovich, A. L. Bradley, J. F. Donegan, and N. Gaponik, “Highly efficient Förster resonance energy transfer between CdTe nanocrystals and Rhodamine B in mixed solid films,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 388(1-3), 100–104 (2004). [CrossRef]
  22. X. Y. Wang, Q. Maa, Y. B. Lia, B. Li, X. G. Su, and Q. H. Jin, “Studies on fluorescence resonance energy transfer between dyes and water-soluble quantum dots,” Can. J. Anal. Sci. Spectrosc. 50, 141–146 (2005).
  23. J. Li, F. Mei, W. Y. Li, X. W. He, and Y. K. Zhang, “Study on the fluorescence resonance energy transfer between CdTe QDs and butyl-rhodamine B in the presence of CTMAB and its application on the detection of Hg(II),” Spectrochimica Acta Part A 70(4), 811–817 (2008). [CrossRef]
  24. Q. Chen, Q. Ma, Y. Wan, X. Su, Z. Lin, and Q. Jin, “Studies on fluorescence resonance energy transfer between dyes and water-soluble quantum dots,” J. Biolumin. Chemilumin. 20(4-5), 251–255 (2005).
  25. A. R. Clapp, I. L. Medintz, and H. Mattoussi, “Förster resonance energy transfer investigations using quantum-dot fluorophores,” Chem. Phys. Chem 7(1), 47–57 (2006). [CrossRef]
  26. J. R. Lakowicz, Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy (New York: Springer,2006).
  27. V. K. Komarala, A. L. Bradley, Y. P. Rakovich, S. J. Byrne, Y. K. Gun’ko, and A. L. Rogach, “Surface plasmon enhanced Förster resonance energy transfer between the CdTe quantum dots,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 93(12), 123102 (2008). [CrossRef]
  28. S. Chanyawadee, R. T. Harley, M. Henini, D. V. Talapin, and P. G. Lagoudakis, “Photocurrent Enhancement in Hybrid Nanocrystal Quantum-Dot p-i-n Photovoltaic Devices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(7), 077402 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 
Fig. 4 Fig. 5
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited