Communication
ChemComm
was performed on the particles grown using all three precursors Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN). We thank Scott
using both the peaks at 321 and 451 2y37 and yielded an average Braswell for his help with TEM and HRTEM data collection. This
particle diameter of 1.1 and 2.8 nm, the second of which is consistent research was supported by start-up funds from the University of
with the TEM data (Fig. S21, ESI†) for a 0.4 mmol P(SiMe3)3 Washington and the University of Washington Innovation Award.
reaction.38,39 The peak at 321 2y was analyzed assuming one reflec-
Notes and references
1 R. R. Lunt, T. P. Osedach, P. R. Brown, J. A. Rowehl and V. Bulovic,
tion was the sole cause of the intensity, which may not be the case.
Also, given the small particle size, the surface will have a larger
´
impact on lattice strain which would broaden the peak width.
Due to the similarity in the solubility of the zinc phosphide QDs and
zinc myristate, particles synthesized with this zinc reagent could not be
separated from excess zinc myristate. Zinc phosphide QDs were there-
fore prepared using more soluble zinc oleate for complete excess ligand
removal. 1H NMR data confirmed clean isolation of zinc-rich particles
capped only by oleate ligands (Fig. S22, ESI†). Particles grown to 255 1C
had a zinc to phosphorus ratio of 7.6 : 2 and particles grown to 315 1C
had a zinc to phosphorus ratio of 5 : 2 as determined by inductively
Adv. Mater., 2011, 23, 5712–5727.
2 A. E. Curtright, M. G. Morgan and D. W. Keith, Environ. Sci. Technol.,
2008, 42, 9031–9038.
3 C. Wadia, A. P. Alivisatos and D. M. Kammen, Environ. Sci. Technol.,
2009, 43, 2072–2077.
4 E. A. Fagen, J. Appl. Phys., 1979, 50, 6505–6515.
5 J. P. Bosco, S. B. Demers, G. M. Kimball, N. S. Lewis and H. A. Atwater,
J. Appl. Phys., 2012, 112, 093703.
6 N. C. Wyeth and A. Catalano, J. Appl. Phys., 1979, 50, 1403–1407.
7 T. Suda and K. Kakishita, J. Appl. Phys., 1992, 71, 3039–3041.
8 M. Bhushan and A. Catalano, Appl. Phys. Lett., 1981, 38, 39–41.
9 P. S. Nayar and A. Catalano, Appl. Phys. Lett., 1981, 39, 105–107.
coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES). Thermo- 10 G. M. Kimball, N. S. Lewis and H. A. Atwater, Photovoltaic Specia-
lists Conference (PVSC), 2010 35th IEEE, 2010.
11 R. Yang, Y.-L. Chueh, J. R. Morber, R. Snyder, L.-J. Chou and
gravimetric analysis (TGA) was performed under nitrogen on particles
grown to 315 1C, showing a single weight loss transition centered near
Z. L. Wang, Nano Lett., 2006, 7, 269–275.
400 1C. Following TGA, 46% inorganic mass remained, consistent with 12 C. B. Murray, D. J. Norris and M. G. Bawendi, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1993,
115, 8706–8715.
a Zn(O2CR)2-capped zinc phosphide formulation with less than a
`
13 L. Li, M. Protiere and P. Reiss, Chem. Mater., 2008, 20, 2621–2623.
mono-layer of zinc oxide included at the surface (Fig. S23, ESI†).33
14 H. Weller, A. Fojtik and A. Henglein, Chem. Phys. Lett., 1985, 117, 485–488.
To assess the potential of these particles for photovoltaic applica- 15 W. E. Buhro, Polyhedron, 1994, 13, 1131–1148.
16 M. Green and P. O’Brien, Chem. Mater., 2001, 13, 4500–4505.
17 S. Carenco, M. Demange, J. Shi, C. Boissiere, C. Sanchez, P. Le Floch
tions, a film of particles was electrodeposited onto a conductive
mesoporous nanoITO substrate using electrophoretic deposition
and N. Mezailles, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46, 5578–5580.
(Fig. S24, ESI†).40 Controlled potential electrolysis was performed 18 S. Miao, T. Yang, S. G. Hickey, V. Lesnyak, B. Rellinghaus, J. Xu and
A. Eychmu¨ller, Small, 2013, 9, 3415–3422.
19 E. J. Luber, M. H. Mobarok and J. M. Buriak, ACS Nano, 2013, 7,
under chopped white light (Fig. S25, ESI†) and showed a 100 nA
current increase with light irradiation indicating the possibility of
8136–8146.
using these particles as visible light absorbers.33
20 M. H. Mobarok, E. J. Luber, G. M. Bernard, L. Peng, R. E. Wasylishen
and J. M. Buriak, Chem. Mater., 2014, 26, 1925–1935.
21 J. R. Heath and J. J. Shiang, Chem. Soc. Rev., 1998, 27, 65–71.
22 M. Westerhausen, G. Sapelza, M. Zabel and A. Pfitzner, Z. Naturforsch.,
B: J. Chem. Sci., 2004, 59, 1548–1550.
23 See Fig. S1 (ESI†) for absorbance of particles made without ZnEt2.
24 LEET is determined by fitting the spectra and taking the second-
derivative to locate the local minima.
In conclusion, this work describes a novel three precursor synth-
esis of colloidal crystalline Zn3P2 quantum dots that have clear
excitonic absorbance features ranging from 424 to 535 nm, depending
on the final growth temperature. NMR experiments revealed a critical
molecular transformation that only occurs when ZnEt2, Zn(O2CR)2,
and P(SiMe3)3 areallpresent.Theobserved(Et2Zn)P(ZnO2CR)2(SiMe3) 25 D. Battaglia and X. Peng, Nano Lett., 2002, 2, 1027–1030.
26 R. Wang, C. I. Ratcliffe, X. Wu, O. Voznyy, Y. Tao and K. Yu, J. Phys.
Chem. C, 2009, 113, 17979–17982.
27 V. K. LaMer and R. H. Dinegar, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1950, 72,
intermediate was conclusively shown to be a direct precursor to the
crystalline zinc phosphide quantum dots obtained in this study. TEM,
ICP-OES, TGA, NMR, and XRD experiments showed that the resulting
particles were crystalline and confirmed their identity as zinc-rich
zinc phosphide QDs that ranged from 2.6 to 2.9 nm in diameter. In
4847–4854.
28 S. G. Kwon and T. Hyeon, Small, 2011, 7, 2685–2702.
29 K. L. Orchard, A. J. P. White, M. S. P. Shaffer and C. K. Williams,
Organometallics, 2009, 28, 5828–5832.
contrast to the synthesis of Zn3P2 QDs recently reported by Buriak and 30 O. Fuhr and D. Fenske, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem., 2004, 630, 244–246.
31 G. Sapelza, P. Mayer and M. Westerhausen, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem.,
2005, 631, 3087–3091.
32 C. A. Schneider, W. S. Rasband and K. W. Eliceiri, Nat. Methods,
co-workers which yields 15 Æ 2 nm particles from a combination of
ZnMe2 and P(SiMe3)3 with no strongly passivating ligands present, our
synthesis yields relatively monodisperse colloidal solutions of small
size nanocrystals as a result of carboxylate ligand passivation.20 The
stark contrast between the nanocrystal sizes reported here and by
2012, 9, 671–675.
33 See the ESI† for experimental details.
34 P. J. Reid, B. Fujimoto and D. R. Gamelin, J. Chem. Educ., 2013, 91,
280–282.
Buriak highlights the critical role of precursor reactivity and ligand 35 M. Kuno, Introductory Nanoscience: Physical and Chemical Concepts,
Garland Science, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, 2012, ch. 3,
pp. 29–60.
36 This larger particle gave the most detail during imaging.
binding strength on final particle size, and suggests a strategy for
achieving nanocrystals of intermediate size.41 Initial photoresponse
measurements demonstrated the possibility of using these particles 37 The discrepancy in expected versus observed peak intensity for the
45 2y reflection may be the result of a defective lattice and may be an
indication of the zinc-rich nature of this sample.
as visible light absorbers. Future experiments will focus on synthe-
sizing and characterizing larger particles that retain an excitonic
¨
38 P. Scherrer, Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen., 1918, 1990, 98–100.
feature as well as fabricating solid state devices to probe the effect 39 M. G. Bawendi, A. R. Kortan, M. L. Steigerwald and L. E. Brus,
J. Chem. Phys., 1989, 91, 7282–7290.
40 P. G. Hoertz, Z. Chen, C. A. Kent and T. J. Meyer, Inorg. Chem., 2010,
of QD composition and surface chemistry on device characteristics.
Part of this work was conducted at the University of
49, 8179–8181.
Washington NanoTech User Facility, a member of the NSF National 41 M. H. Mobarok and J. M. Buriak, Chem. Mater., 2014, 26, 4653–4661.
Chem. Commun.
This journal is ©The Royal Society of Chemistry 2014