Research Article  Open Access
M. S. Pudovkin, D. A. Koryakovtseva, E. V. Lukinova, S. L. Korableva, R. Sh. Khusnutdinova, A. G. Kiiamov, A. S. Nizamutdinov, V. V. Semashko, "Characterization of PrDoped LaF_{3} Nanoparticles Synthesized by Different Variations of Coprecipitation Method", Journal of Nanomaterials, vol. 2019, Article ID 7549325, 17 pages, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7549325
Characterization of PrDoped LaF_{3} Nanoparticles Synthesized by Different Variations of Coprecipitation Method
Abstract
A set of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} nanoparticles (NPs) were synthesized via coprecipitation method at three stoichiometric proportions of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF (1 : 0.8, 1 : 1, and 1 : 6, respectively). Two ways of mixing of the La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF solutions (dropwise and swift addition) were used. One sample was subjected to microwave (MW) treatment for 30, 90, and 180 min. All the samples were characterized by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and Xray diffraction (XRD). For all the samples, optical spectroscopy experiments were carried out. The XRD data were analyzed via the DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods. It was revealed that the way of mixing of the La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF solutions strongly affects the shape of the NPs. The slow dropwise addition of the NaF solution leads to the platelike NP (PLNP) formation; otherwise, the swift addition of the NaF solution leads to the formation of more spherelike NPs (SLNPs). The size and regularity in shape of the NP increase with the increasing stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF from 1 : 0.8 to 1 : 6. The size and regularity in shape of the SLNPs increase with the increasing time of MW treatment. The DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods confirmed the anisotropic shape of the PLNPs. The WilliamsonHall method showed that the values of strain are almost similar for all the samples (around 1410^{4}). Optical spectroscopy experiments revealed that although all the samples have an equal chemical composition, the luminescence lifetimes for different samples differ between each other. The luminescence lifetime of the PLNPs is less than that of the SLNPs having an equal stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF. The luminescence lifetime of the 1 : 1 SLNPs increases with the increasing time of MW treatment.
1. Introduction
Rareearthdoped fluoride nanomaterials hold a special role among other luminescent nanomaterials because of their excellent magnetic properties [1, 2], photostability [3, 4], long luminescent lifetimes [5], sharp emission bands [6], low toxicity [7], high melting point, and good resistance to thermal and chemical attacks [8]. These nanomaterials have a huge variety of applications including luminescent nanothermometry [9, 10] and bioimaging [11].
During the last two decades, immense progress has been done toward facile and economy methods of synthesis of LnF_{3} (, Ce, Pr, and others) nanoparticles (NPs) doped by rareearth ions [12]. Among these methods of synthesis, a coprecipitation method is considered one of the cheapest and easiest methods of synthesis of NPs [13]. On the one hand, it provides a synthesis of LnF_{3} NPs with desired size, shape, and structure [14]. Usually, this method does not require toxic organic precursors as well as sophisticated and expensive laboratory equipment. On the other hand, this method has some disadvantages such as the presence of captured [15] and absorbed [8] water in NPs. These water molecules may significantly contribute into the luminescencequenching processes [16]. Also, for some cases, NPs synthesized via such method can be characterized by relatively low crystallinity [17], presence of undesirable crystal phase, and broad size distribution and irregularity of NPs shape [18]. For this method, additional modifications of some parameters of synthesis such as the stoichiometric ratio of fluorinating agents and rareearth salts or/and using microwaveassisted treatment can significantly improve the quality of nanomaterials.
Microwaveassisted treatment of fluoride NPs was developed in [15, 17, 19–21]. This method has been widely applied in chemical reactions and material synthesis due to its unique reaction effects such as rapid volumetric heating and consequent dramatic increase in reaction rates [22]. In this case, the growth mechanism is likely a dissolution–recrystallization process according to the conventional hydrothermal method for preparing rareearth fluoride NPs and hydroxide nanorods/nanotubes [23]. However, in [17], it was shown that the recrystallization process for PrF_{3} and DyF_{3} NPs during the microwaveassisted treatment is different and depends on such factors as difference in symmetry and difference of lattice energies for lanthanide ions Pr^{3+} and Dy^{3+}. Also, in [17], it was reported that crystallinity of DyF_{3} NPs obtained via coprecipitation method was significantly improved after microwaveassisted treatment for 7 hours without considerable changing of an average size of the DyF_{3} NPs. In [8], it is reported that fullerenelike PrF_{3} NPs were obtained after microwaveassisted treatment of a colloidal solution of irregularshaped PrF_{3} NPs synthesized via coprecipitation method crystallinity [17], and remove captured water from the NPs core [15]. Hence, the luminescence lifetime and luminescence quantum yield will be improved without the significant complication of the synthesis procedure.
The excess of fluorinating agents is commonly used in the synthesis of fluoride NPs in order to provide a singlephased composition of NPs and regularity of size and shape. For example, the nonstoichiometric proportions of rareearth nitrates and fluorinating agent are often used for the synthesis of hexagonal structured Yb^{3+}/Er^{3+}:NaYF_{4} NPs. Also, it is reported in [18] that the regularity if the size and shape of Eu^{3+}:NaYF_{4} was achieved by using the 5fold stoichiometric proportion of NaF.
Usually, NPs synthesized via the methods mentioned above are crystalline particles. In order to determine the phase of the NPs and assess their crystallinity, the Xray diffraction method is used. Moreover, the additional information can be extracted from Xray data. For example, unlike the bulk crystals, the nanosized crystalline particles demonstrate broadened diffraction peaks. This peak broadening stems from crystallite size and different crystal imperfections such as lattice strains. Hence, the two main properties which can be extracted from the analysis of peak width are the crystallite size and lattice strain [24]. There are methods such as DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall which enable to estimate for example lattice strains for additional characterization of different nanomaterials.
The Pr^{3+}doped LaF_{3} () NPs were chosen as an object of research because of their unique properties such as thermally coupled ^{3}P_{1} to ^{3}P_{0} electron states of Pr^{3+} ions [25–27]. This property can be used in luminescent nanothermometry [12, 28]. The emission spectrum of Pr^{3+} in lanthanum fluoride host matrix overlaps with photosensitizers such as acridine (C_{13}H_{9}N) and cyanine which are highly relevant in hybrid radiotherapy–photodynamic therapy mentioned above [3]. Hence, this system Pr^{3+}doped LaF_{3} nanoparticles can be used for different application including biology and medicine [29].
In this study, we focus on studying the physical properties of the Pr^{3+}doped LaF_{3} of different size and shape synthesized via coprecipitation method by using different ways of mixing of rareearth salts and fluorinating agents, varying stoichiometric proportion of rareearth salts and fluorinating agents, and performing microwaveassisted treatment for chosen samples.
In order to assess the contribution of size and shape of the NPs and also their crystallinity into the optical properties of the NPs, we characterize the obtained NPs via transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Xray analysis, and optical spectroscopy. We also analyze Xray data via the DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods in order to calculate crystallite size and strains of the NPs. For a chosen sample, we studied the influence of microwave irradiation on the physical properties of the NPs. Additionally, the information concerning microstrains into the NPs extracted from the Xray data can be very useful for understanding some physical properties of NPs.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Classification of the Samples
All the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} ( (atomic)) NPs were synthesized via coprecipitation method using a chemical reaction described in [8, 15]. The obtained Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () samples can be divided into two groups: spherelike NPs (SLNPs) and platelike NPs (PLNPs). Synthesis of both SLNPs and PLNPs was carried out at 3 different stoichiometric proportions of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF (1 : 0.8, 1 : 1, and 1 : 6, respectively). For the sake of simplicity, we will use abbreviations 1 : 0.8, 1 : 1, and 1 : 6 and SLNPs or PLNPs in order to name the samples. For example, 1 : 6 SLNPs means spherelike Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () NPs synthesized at 1 : 6 stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF. Regardless of the stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF, the same volumes of NaF and La(NO_{3})_{3}/Pr(NO_{3})_{3} solutions, time of reactions, temperature, and pH values were used intentionally for all the samples. Hence, the main strategy of synthesis of both SLNPs and PLNPs is exactly the same except for one parameter: for SLNPs, the NaF solution was poured very swiftly to the La(NO_{3})_{3} and Pr(NO_{3})_{3} solution, and for PLNPs, the NaF solution was added dropwise. The 1 : 1 SLNPs were treated by microwave for 30, 90, and 180 min and are named 1 : 1 SLNPs 30 min MW, 1 : 1 SLNPs 90 min MW, and 1 : 1 SLNPs 180 min MW, respectively.
2.2. Coprecipitation Synthesis of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles Using Different Stoichiometric Proportion of RareEarth Nitrates and Fluorinating Agent and MicrowaveAssisted Treatment of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles
In order to synthesize the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} (), NPs 0.188 g of Pr_{2}O_{3} and 2.500 g and La_{2}O_{3} were added to 70 mL of 10% nitric acid in a glass beaker. The mixture was heated to 50°С and stirred for 45 min until a transparent lightgreen solution appeared. Then the mixture was filtered, poured in a polypropylene glass, and put on a magnetic mixer (400 revolutions per minute). The solutions of NaF were prepared by adding 0.836 g, 1.045 g, and 6.270 g of NaF into 160 mL of distillated water for 1 : 0.8, 1 : 1, and 1 : 6 stoichiometric proportions of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF, respectively. After filtration of the NaF solution, it was swiftly poured for SLNPs and added dropwise for PLNPs. Then the pH was adjusted to 4 by adding a 25% solution of ammonium hydrate. Then the mixture was stirring for 30 minutes (400 revolutions per minute) and then was washed by centrifugation (Janetski K24; 12000 RPM) using the deionized water for several times.
2.3. MicrowaveAssisted Treatment of 1 : 1 SLNPs
The colloidal solutions of 1 : 1 SLNPs were divided into two volumes, and the first part was placed into a microwave oven (650 W, 2.45 GHz) for 30, 90, and 180 minutes. The resulting product was collected by centrifugation (Janetski K24; 12000 RPM) and washed using the deionized water for several times. Then NPs were dried in air.
2.4. Transmission Electron Microscopy and XRay Diffraction Experiments
The structure of the material was characterized by Xray diffraction method (XRD) with Shimadzu XRD7000S Xray diffractometer. Analysis of samples was carried out in a transmission electron microscope Hitachi HT7700 Exalens. Sample preparation: 10 microliters of the suspension were placed on a formvar/carbon lacey 3 mm copper grid; drying was performed at room temperature. After drying, the grid was placed in a transmission electron microscope using a special holder for microanalysis. The analysis was held at an accelerating voltage of 100 kV in TEM mode.
2.5. Optical Spectroscopy
The luminescence spectra were recorded using CCD spectrometer (StellarNet), which detects the emission in 200 – 1100 nm spectral range with a spectral resolution of 0.5 nm. The optical parametric oscillator laser system (420–1200 nm) from JV LOTIS TII was used for excitation of the luminescence of the samples. The pulse width and the pulse repetition rate were 10 ns and 10 Hz, respectively. The spectral width of laser radiation was less than 0.15 nm. The luminescent lifetimes of Pr^{3+} ions were detected using BORDO 211А (10 bit, 200 MHz bandwidth) digital oscillography and MDR3 monochromator. The experiments were carried out at room temperature.
2.6. Elemental Analysis
Elemental analysis was carried out by using fieldemission highresolution scanning electron microscope Merlin Carl Zeiss with AZtec XMax EDS system at accelerating voltage of incident electron of 20 kV and working distance of 10 mm. Excitation area is 1 μm.
Technique preparation: sample on chuck move in the chamber of vacuum apparatus Quorum Q 150T ES. Conductive layer apply by technique cathode sputtering using alloy Au/Pd by quantity proportion 80/20. The thickness of the alloy is 15 nm.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Transmission Electron Microscopy of the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles
According to the TEM data (Figures 1–6), all the samples differ between each other by size and shape. The size distribution histograms (insets of Figures 1–6) are fitted by Gaussian function from which diameter and a width of the size distribution are extracted. In order to build size distribution for the PLNPs, the length of each plate was measured. The values of diameter and width of size distribution are listed in Table 1.
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 0.8 SLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 0.8 SLNPs
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 1 SLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 1 SLNPs
(c) TEM image of the 1 : 1 SLNPs treated by MW (180 min)
(d) Size distribution of the 1 : 1 SLNPs treated by MW (180 min)
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 6 SLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 6 SLNPs
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 1 PLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 1 PLNPs
(a) TEM image of the 1 : 6 PLNPs
(b) Size distribution of the 1 : 6 PLNPs

As can be seen from Figure 1, the 1 : 0.8 SLNPs have a relatively irregular shape. For the 1 : 1 SLNPs (Figure 2(a)), the shape is more regular. The 1 : 6 SLNPs (Figure 3) demonstrate the most regular shape among all the SLNPs. The average diameter of the SLNPs increases from to for 1 : 0.8 SLNPs and 1 : 6 SLNPs, respectively, with the increasing stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF. For the SLNPs, the values of the width of the size distribution do not differ between each other significantly.
In the case of the SLNPs treated by MW, the regularity of the shape of the 1 : 1 SLNPs increases with the increasing time of MW treatment. The 1 : 1 SLNPs 180 min MW also demonstrated a relatively regular shape (Figure 2(b)) (the 1 : 1 SLNPs 30 min MW and 1 : 1 SLNPs 90 min MW are not shown for the sake of brevity). The value of size distribution decreases with the increasing time of MW treatment which is in good accordance with the literature data [15, 17, 19, 20].
The shape of the PLNPs demonstrates a remarkable difference from the SLNPs. According to Figures 4 and 5, the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs form agglomerates consisting of thin plates. The average thickness of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs is around 4 nm. The edges of both the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs are rough. The values of the size distribution of the PLNPs are almost two times broader than that for the SLNPs. However, the 1 : 6 PLNPs are thicker (Figures 6(a) and 6(b)). Most of the 1 : 6 PLNPs are more similar to the SLNPs. It can be concluded that for the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs, the surfacetovolume ratio is higher than that of the rest of the NPs which can affect their optical properties [4] discussed in Optical Spectroscopy and Luminescence Lifetimes of the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles.
For all the samples mentioned above, the calculations of the crystallite sizes and lattice strains via DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods were carried out. These calculations will be discussed in the next part of the article. However, one of the main conclusions made from microscopy data is that SLNPs are more isotropic in shape and, as a consequence, more appropriate for DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods. For this reason, 1 : 1 SLNPs were chosen for further microwave (MW) assisted treatment in order to study the contribution of MW irradiation into physical properties of the NPs. Although the regularity of the shape of the 1 : 6 SLNPs is slightly higher, we did not use the 1 : 6 SLNPs intentionally because in the majority of the articles, the 1 : 1 stoichiometric proportions of rareearth nitrates and fluorinating agent are used; hence, this information is more valuable.
It can be seen from Table 1 that the diameter of the 1 : 1 SLNPs increases with the increasing time of MW treatment. The value of size distribution becomes narrower from to for 0 and 180 min of MW treatment, respectively. The regularity of shape also improves with the increasing time of MW treatment.
The difference in size and shape of the PLNPs and the SLNPs can be explained by different synthesis conditions. In case of swift addition of NaF solution, the formation of the SLNPs is caused by homogeneous nucleation occurring when the concentration of rare earth and F^{} ions becomes significantly higher than the equilibrium concentration immediately and the spontaneous growth of NPs takes place [30, 31]. In the case of dropwise addition, the fast increase of F^{} ions concentration does occur. In such conditions, the final shape of a nanocrystal can be determined by the growth competition of different crystal planes [32]. For hexagonalphase materials, a specific morphology happens because of growth competition between the [001] planes and the [100] planes. Obviously, the PLNPs are preferentially generated if the growth rate of the [100] and [010] planes is higher than that of the [001] plane. For instance, in the case of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs, the distance between two fringes which are parallel to the upper and lower pedestals of the plate is measured to be 0.35 nm which corresponds to the [002] plane of the LaF_{3} crystal. This fact confirms the preferred growth along both the [100] and [010] planes under the existing conditions of synthesis. Moreover, the 1 : 6 PLNPs demonstrate more spherical shape comparing with the 1 : 0.8 and 1 : 1 SLNPs. It can be attributed to the 1 : 6 stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF which leads to a more swift increase of F ions concentration, and the nature of the reaction looks similar to the reaction for the SLNPs.
3.2. XRay Diffraction and Elemental Analysis of the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles
3.2.1. Lattice Constant Calculation
The Xray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the PLNPs, SLNPs, and SLNPs treated by MW irradiation and simulation are shown in Figures 7(a)–7(d), respectively. According to the XRD data, all the NPs are hexagonalstructured nanocrystals that correspond to the structure of matrixes of LaF_{3} and PrF_{3}. Sharp peaks and lack of peaks from impurities are observed, suggesting the high purity and good crystallinity of these samples. Also, the lack of amorphous phase was detected. For all the samples, the lattice parameters and are calculated using the formulas from [33, 34]. For all the samples, and are 0.7164 and 0.7330 nm, respectively. The lattice parameters for LaF_{3} (JCPDS–32–0483) are and nm. The reduction of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} lattice parameters apparently related to crystal lattice distortion. The radius of Pr^{3+} (0.105 nm) is smaller than that of La^{3+} (0.113 nm) due to the lanthanide contraction, so the cell volume of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} reduces with more Pr^{3+} replacing La^{3+} [14].
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
3.2.2. Elemental Analysis
NaF is considered a very specific fluorinating agent. On the one hand, according to the literature data in some cases, the use of NaF leads to Sr_{1x}Na_{x}F_{2x}, Ca_{1x}Na_{x}F_{2x} [35, 36], NaFRF_{3}, and/or NaRF_{4} (where earth) [37] formation in waterbased coprecipitation method. On the other hand, in spite of the possibility of NaFRF_{3} and/or NaRF_{4} formation, the synthesis of NaFLaF_{3} and/or NaLaF_{4} is considered as a very specific task. This is because La^{3+} has the largest cationic radius among the lanthanide ions, and the ionic bond of La^{3+}– F^{–} is stronger than that of Na^{+}– F^{–} and other RE^{3+}– F^{–}, as reflected by the melting points of several representatives: LaF_{3} (993°C) [38]. As a result, in coprecipitation route, cations are difficult to settle into the lattice in compounds with large RE cations such as NaLaF_{4}, which makes the synthesis of these compounds more difficult than that of NaYF_{4} or NaLuF_{4} [39]. For these reasons, NaLaF_{4} compound is considered thermodynamically nonpreferred [39]. This fact results in the shortage of efficient synthetic methods for the preparation of pure βNaLaF_{4} nanocrystals [40]. Indeed, we failed to find a work devoted to lowtemperature coprecipitation method of synthesis of pure NaLaF_{4} NPs. On the other hand, in papers devoted to the synthesis and investigation of undoped and doped NaLaF_{4} NPs, the hightemperature hydrothermal routes or melting in a corundum crucible are utilized [41, 42].
Moreover, it is noteworthy that the βNaLaF_{4} has a very distinguishable XRD pattern (diffraction peaks at 16.6, 28.9, 33.6, 37.7, 41.4, 44.9, 48.1, 51.3, 57.2, and 60.0° can be indexed to the planes (100), (110), (200), (111), (201), (120), (002), (300), (112), and (220), respectively) [43]. This pattern differs from the LaF_{3} one. In the case of complex NaFLaF_{3} system, the notable amount of NaLaF_{4} would be detected via doublephase XRD pattern as it is observed in [43].
In our work, as it is mentioned above, we do not observe any impurity peaks. It can be suggested that there is no second βNaLaF_{4} phase or this phase is negligible and cannot be detected via out Xray diffractometer.
On the other hand, a small amount of Na can form NaFLaF_{3} system without forming the second phase. Just in order to check the presence of Na in the samples, we have performed an elemental analysis. The elemental analysis revealed that all the samples do not contain sodium as well as other elements. The presence of Pr, La, and F was proved. The elemental analysis spectra of 1 : 0.8 PLNPs, 1 : 1 PLNPs, 1 : 6 PLNPs, 1 : 0.8 SLNPs, 1 : 1 SLNPs, 1 : 6 SLNPs, and 1 : 1 SLNPs 180 MW are shown in Figures 8(a)–8(g), respectively. The unidentified peaks are the peaks of the conductive layer which was used for the sample preparation. The elemental analysis data are listed in Table 2.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)

3.2.3. DebyeScherrer Calculations
The instrumental corrected broadening corresponding to the diffraction peak of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} was estimated using equation (1) [33, 34] as follows:
In order to estimate the average size of the NPs, the DebyeScherrer method is used [44]: where is a diameter of a NP, is a shape factor (we used ), is the Xray wavelength (0.15418 nm), is the line broadening at half the maximum intensity (FWHM) in radians, and is the Bragg angle (in degrees). The diffraction peaks having the lowest values of the signalnoise ratio are chosen. The values of in different crystallography orientations (hkl) are listed in Tables 3 and 4. Also, Figures 9(a) and 9(b) summarize these data.


(a)
(b)
We do not compare TEM data and the DebyeScherrer calculations of the intentionally for some reasons. More specifically, equation (2) assumes that the peak broadening is related to the nanoscale dimensionality of the crystalline particles only. It does not take into control the presence of strains and distortions in NPs; hence, the presence of these strains and distortions can seriously confound the value. More than that the size calculated via DebyeScherrer formula is the size of coherently diffracting domains which is not generally the same as the particle size [24, 34]. Additionally, according to the microscopy data, all the samples have relatively broad size distribution (several nm) of NPs which require calculation of the additional constant for the DebyeScherrer equation [45]. Also, according to the microscopy data, the shape of the NPs is far from perfect spherical or cubic; hence, the shape factor is very sophisticated and actually should be calculated for each crystallographic orientation (hkl) [45]. The shape of both the PLNPs and the SLNPs is not perfect, and for all the samples, the shape factor cannot be calculated precisely. The value of 0.9 is taken just in order to estimate the size of the particles. Summarizing all the abovementioned information, it is very difficult to compare TEM data and DebyeScherrer calculations. Hence, it is difficult to estimate the contribution of size into the peak broadening for all the samples in this study. For more precise results, the WilliamsonHall method described in the next part of the article is used.
On the one hand, the shape factor depends on the crystallographic orientation (hkl) and the symmetry [45]. The symmetry is the same for all the samples; hence, it can be assumed that the is a function of the crystallographic orientation (hkl) only. For irregularshaped NPs, the is very sophisticated. For perfectly spherical NPs, the and it is the same for all the crystallographic orientations, and the value of does not depend on the crystallographic orientation. If the NPs are not perfectly spherical, the values of differ between each other. The irregularshaped NPs should have the values of which differ between each other significantly.
The difference in values can be estimated via standard deviation (SD) from the mean value of . The values of and the SD are listed in Tables 3 and 4 (see also Figures 9(a) and 9(b)). For the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs, the SD are 5.1 and 4.4, respectively, and these NPs are really irregular in shape. The rest of the samples demonstrate the SD around 1.5, and their shape is more regular and more spherical. The MWtreated NPs also demonstrate the SD around 1.5. Moreover, for the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs, the values of is almost 2 times bigger than either or which corresponds to growth along [100] and [010] axis. These facts additionally confirm the microscopy data concerning irregularity in the shape of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs.
This irregularity in shape can also be confirmed by assessing the linearity of the DebyeScherrer formula. For this purpose, the DebyeScherrer formula is rearranged.
The plots were drawn with on the axis and Cosθ along the axis. The is assumed 0.9. The anisotropy in shape of the NPs leads to the phenomenon that the XRD peaks are broadened differently. As a consequence, the linearity of this plot can additionally confirm or disprove the isotropy of the shape of the NPs within the DebyeScherrer model. If the shape of the NPs is far from spherical, the linearity of equation (3) should be low. The almost spherical NPs should demonstrate good linearity of equation (3). In turn, the linearity can be estimated using the Pearson coefficient. The values of the Pearson coefficient are listed in Tables 5 and 6. Taking into control that good linearity of data requires the values of Pearson coefficient more than 0.9, the comparison of the samples is performed. It is seen that the DebyeScherrer data do not demonstrate perfect linearity especially for the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs which have low linearity (the Pearson coefficients are 0.72 and 0.71, respectively). Also, the values of of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs for different crystallography orientations differ between each other significantly comparing with the rest of the samples (Table 3). These facts indicate the anisotropy in shape of the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs which is also in agreement with microscopy data. However, the 1 : 1 SLNPs and the 1 : 6 SLNPs demonstrate relatively good linearity having the Pearson coefficient around 0.87.


In contrast to the abovementioned samples, the 1 : 1 SLNPs treated by MW demonstrate the Pearson coefficient around 0.9 and more which confirms the conclusions based on microscopy data.
Summarizing all the abovementioned information, the DebyeScherrer model confirmed the anisotropy in shape of some samples. However, comparison of DebyeScherrer diameters and the TEM sizes seems to be difficult especially for the PNLPs. Hence, the contribution of the nanoscale dimensionality into the peak broadening is not clear.
In order to take into account both the nanoscale dimensionality of the NPs and lattice strain contribution into the peak broadening, the WilliamsonHall method is used.
3.2.4. The WilliamsonHall Calculations of Size and Strain
If the peak broadening is related to the presence of strains induced in powders due to crystal imperfection and distortion only, these strains are calculated using the equation as follows [34, 46]: where is a distance between crystallographic planes, and the values of are into an interval from  to .
Assuming that the particle size and strain contributions to line broadening are independent to each other, the observed line breadth is simply the sum of from equations (2) and (4).
By rearranging the above equation, we get
Equations (5) and (6) are the WilliamsonHall equations. A plot (equation (6)) is drawn with 4sinθ along the axis and along the axis. From the linear fit to the data, the crystalline size was estimated from the yintercept, and the strain , from the slope of the fit. The WilliamsonHall plots for the SLNPs and the PLNPs are shown in Figure 10(a). The WilliamsonHall method assumes that the particles are isotropic in shape and the size of strains in different crystallographic directions are similar [47]. The TEM data, DebyeScherrer, and WilliamsonHall calculations are listed in Table 5.
(a)
(b)
According to the microscopy data and the DebyeScherrer calculations, the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs are highly anisotropic in shape. The SLNPs also are not perfectly isotropic. Hence, the accuracy of the WilliamsonHall calculations is not supposed to be high for at least 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and 1 : 1 PLNPs. However, the SLNPs treated by MW irradiation demonstrate relatively good shape isotropy; hence, the WilliamsonHall method is more applicable for them. Here, we analyze size and strain as well as estimate applicability of the WilliamsonHall method by assessing the linearity of the WilliamsonHall plots.
As it is mentioned above, we do not quantitatively compare the TEM data and the DebyeScherrer calculations. However, both DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall calculations do not reflect such an important tendency as increasing of the sizes of the SLNPs with increasing stoichiometric proportion of rareearth salts and NaF qualitatively. Actually, all the SLNPs are around 14.2 nm in diameter. This fact brings into a question the applicability of the WilliamsonHall method toward the samples. Indeed, it was already mentioned that in the WilliamsonHall method, it is assumed that the particles are isotropic in shape and the strain is uniform in different directions leading to independent crystal properties [33]. Analyzing the microscopy data and the Pearson coefficients for the WilliamsonHall plots, it can be concluded that irregularity in the shape of the NPs correlates with the Pearson coefficients for the WilliamsonHall plots (Table 7). Moreover, the accuracy and quality of the WilliamsonHall calculation seem to be dependent on the linearity of the plots.

It is seen that the most irregularshaped 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and 1 : 1 PLNPs have very poor linearity (the Pearson coefficients are 0.57 and 0.66, respectively). The Pearson coefficient increases with improving the regularity of the shape of the NPs. Summarizing the abovementioned information, the WilliamsonHall calculations of the diameter do not reflect tendencies of increasing the sizes of the SLNPs, and the Pearson coefficients are less than 0.9. It can be concluded that all the samples synthesized via coprecipitation method are not isotropic enough. On the other hand, in the specified accuracy, the values of strain seem to be equal for all the samples. Hence, the different conditions of the coprecipitation method do not lead to significant changing of the values of strain.
However, for the 1 : 1 SLNPs treated by MW for 30, 90, and 180 min (named 1 : 1 SLNPs 30 min, 1 : 1 SLNPs 90 min, and 1 : 1 SLNPs 180 min, respectively), both the DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall methods reflect the tendency of increasing the sizes of the SLNPs with the increasing of MW treatment time (Table 6). The WilliamsonHall plots of the samples are shown in Figure 10(b).
Moreover, the Pearson coefficients for both DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall plots of NPs treated with MW are equal or more than 0.9 (Table 8). Here, we try to assess how anisotropy in shape assessed via TEM influences the applicability of the DebyeScherrer and WilliamsonHall theories by comparing the Person coefficients of linear fitting (Table 8).

It means that the WilliamsonHall model is more appropriate for the analysis of the samples treated by MW unlike the rest of the samples. For MWtreated NPs, the values of seem to be similar for all the samples within the accuracy. These values do not depend on the time of MW treatment. The values of are around 1410^{4}. These values are of the same magnitude to the results for ZnO NPs obtained in [24].
In the WilliamsonHall method, the value of seems to be similar for all the samples within the accuracy and does not depend on the time of MW treatment. It is reported in [15, 17, 48] that MW treatment improves the crystallinity of PrF_{3}, DyF_{3}, and LaF_{3} NPs, respectively. As it is mentioned above, the growth mechanism of NPs during MW treatment is dissolution–recrystallization. Probably during 30, 90, and 180 min of MW treatment, the complete recrystallization does not occur. The average size of the NPs increases but significant reduction of strains does not take place during the chosen time of MW treatment. On the other hand, even 30 min of MW treatment makes the NPs more isotropic in shape, and the Pearson coefficient for 1 : 1 SLNPs and 1 : 1 SLNPs (30 min MW) increases from 0.76 to 0.90, respectively, which means that the isotropy of the shape of the NPs is improved and they become more appropriate for theoretical calculations via chosen methods. The values of the Pearson coefficient for all the samples subjected to MW treatment are equal to 0.90 or more which indicate the good linear approximation of the data. Also, based on the TEM data, it can be concluded that the shape of the NPs subjected to MW treatment is more regular and spherical. The literature data for trifluoride NPs also confirm these results [15, 17]. It means that the NPs subjected to MW treatment are more appropriate for theoretical analysis via WilliamsonHall method comparing to the 1 : 0.8 PLNP and the 1 : 1 PLNPs demonstrating the most irregular shape and the broadest size distribution and, as a consequence, smaller values of the Pearson coefficient.
Finally, it is noteworthy to say that the DebyeScherrer diameters are less than the WilliamsonHall ones which is in accordance with [47]. In this case, the DebyeScherrer formula provides only a lower bound for the crystallite size. The WilliamsonHall diameter for all the particles is bigger than TEM diameter which can be explained by the wide variety of mechanisms leading to the peak broadening. These mechanisms are not taken into consideration within these models.
3.3. Optical Spectroscopy and Luminescence Lifetimes of the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () Nanoparticles
Although the initial chemical composition of all the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} () samples is equal, some optical properties of the NPs differ from each other. On the one hand, the luminescence spectra of all the Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} NPs do not differ between each other. Figure 11(a) shows the spectra of the most distinguishable NPs. The transitions were determined according to [49]. The luminescent spectra have the emission bands at about 487, 523, 537, 580, 601, and 672 nm which are interpreted as a result of the transition from the ^{3}P_{j} (, 1, 2) excited states to ^{3}H_{4}, ^{3}H_{5}, ^{3}H_{6}, and ^{3}F_{3} states of Pr^{3+} ions, respectively. The emission from the ^{1}D_{2} state was not found under the excitation condition and at the studied temperature range. Probably the emission from ^{1}D_{2} is not observed because of the lack of nonradiative relaxation of ^{3}P_{𝑗} to ^{1}D_{2} due to low cutoff phonon frequency in LaF_{3} (350–400 cm^{−1}).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
On the other hand, the lifetime curves of ^{3}P_{0} state of Pr^{3+} ions for different samples differ from each other notably (Figures 11(b)–11(d)). In addition, luminescence lifetime curves are not one or double exponential. The fitting curves are more sophisticated. Since the theoretical description of lifetime curves seems to be difficult and lays behind the scope of this article, we qualitatively compare the lifetime curves between each other. It is seen from Figures 11(b) and 11(c) that the SLNPs demonstrate longer lifetime comparing with the suitable PLNPs. Moreover, for both the SLNPs and the PLNPs, the lifetime increases with increasing of the NPs size. The SLNPs treated by MW demonstrate the same tendency. The increasing of MW treatment time leads to increasing in lifetime (Figure 11(d)).
It can be suggested that the optical properties of the samples are mainly affected by the size and shape of the NPs and, as consequent, the volumetosurface ratio [50, 51]. In this case, probably the main mechanism of luminescence quenching is related to energy multiphonon transfer from the exited ion to the highvibrionic energy molecule such as OH group adsorbed on the NPs surface [16, 52]. The thinnest 1 : 0.8 PLNPs having the biggest surfacetovolume ratio demonstrate the lowest luminescence lifetime which can be attributed to the proximity of the highest amount of Pr^{3+} ions to the surface OH groups which can be regarded as the main quenching centers in this system [53]. In [54], it is shown that the shape of rareearthdoped dielectric NPs can affect the luminescence lifetime. Moreover, it is shown in [55] that the use of waterbased coprecipitation method leads to the presence of OH groups into the NP’s core as well. Hence, in the case of the MWtreated samples, the lifetime increasing can be attributed by two processes. The first is the increasing in size of the NPs which leads to a reduction of the role of the surface. The second is the migration of the OH groups from the NP’s core to specific water clusters [30, 56, 57] which leads to reducing the total amount of Pr^{3+} ions contacting with OH groups.
The theoretical description of the decay curves is behind the scope of the article. In order to estimate and compare the specific lifetimes, we calculated the effective decay time, , via equation (7) which is commonly used for such complicated nonexponential decay curves [58]: where , intensity; , time. Values of the effective lifetime are listed in Table 9.

4. Conclusions
The 1 : 0.8 PLNPs, 1 : 1 PLNPs, 1 : 6 PLNPs, 1 : 0.8 SLNPs, 1 : 1 SLNPs, and 1 : 6 SLNPs were synthesized via coprecipitation method. The 1 : 1 SLNPs 30 min MW, 1 : 1 SLNPs 90 min MW, and 1 : 1 SLNPs 180 min MW were synthesized via coprecipitation method with subsequent MW treatment. All the samples were characterized by TEM and XRD. For all the samples, optical spectroscopy experiments were carried out. The XRD data were analyzed via the DebyeScherrer and the WilliamsonHall methods.
It was revealed that the way of mixing the La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF solutions strongly affects the shape of the NPs. The slow dropwise addition of the NaF solution to the La(NO_{3})_{3} and Pr(NO_{3})_{3} solution leads to the PLNPs formation; otherwise, the swift addition of the NaF solution leads to the formation of more spherical NPs (SLNPs).
The stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF also strongly affects the size and the shape of the NPs. In the case of SLNPs, the size and regularity in shape of the SLNP increase with the increasing stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF from 1 : 0.8 to 1 : 6. The increasing stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF also affect the PLNPs leading to an increase in thickness of the PLNPs. In the case of the PLNPs, the growth along the [100] and [010] planes occur more effectively than along the [001] plane which leads to PLNPs formation.
The size and regularity in shape of the SLNPs increase with the increasing time of MW treatment.
The DebyeScherrer calculations have shown that the size of the most irregularshaped 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and 1 : 1 PLNPs strongly depends on the crystallographic plane which additionally confirmed the shape irregularity of these NPs. The values of the diameter were calculated for several [hkl] planes. For the 1 : 0.8 PLNPs and the 1 : 1 PLNPs, the SD of the values of size are 5.1 and 4.4, respectively. The rest of the samples demonstrate the SD around 1.5, and their shape is more regular and more spherical. The NPs treated by MW also demonstrate the SD around 1.5.
The WilliamsonHall method has shown that the values of strains are almost similar for all the samples (around 1410^{4}).
Optical spectroscopy experiments revealed that although all the samples have an equal chemical composition, the luminescence lifetimes for different samples differ between each other. The luminescence lifetime of the PLNPs is less than that of the SLNPs having an equal stoichiometric proportion of La(NO_{3})_{3}, Pr(NO_{3})_{3}, and NaF. The luminescence lifetime of the 1 : 1 SLNPs increases with the increasing time of MW treatment. Commonly, the lifetime increase with the increasing size of the NPs. Hence, the role of surfacequenching agents reduces. However, the luminescence lifetime curves cannot be fitted exponentially, and the additional theoretical interpretation is required. This last task is behind the scope of this work.
Data Availability
The TEM microscopy, XDR, spectra, and lifetime data used to support the findings of this study have been deposited in the Google disk repository (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1D9RSIqwNOBqElv7tSfZ1EYJomr0cFbGk/view?usp=sharing). The size distribution, DebyeScherrer, WilliamsonHall, and elemental analysis data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article. These data are available upon request from the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Authors’ Contributions
M. S. Pudovkin, D. A. Koryakovtseva, S. L. Korableva, and E. V. Lukinova have performed the synthesis. M. S. Pudovkin has performed all the calculations of the XRD data and written the manuscript. A. G. Kiiamov has performed the XRD experiments and XRD simulations. M. S. Pudovkin, R. Sh. Khusnutdinova, A. S. Nizamutdinov, and V. V. Semashko have performed the optical spectroscopy experiments. S. L. Korableva, A. S. Nizamutdinov, and V. V. Semashko have made important remarks and gave feedback concerning the manuscript. All the authors have taken part in the discussion of the results.
Acknowledgments
The microscopy study was funded by the subsidy of the Russian Government (02.A03.21.0002) to support the Program of Competitive Growth of KFU among the World’s Leading Academic Centers. The rest of the works was supported by the subsidy allocated to KFU for the state assignment in the sphere of scientific activities (3.1156.2017/4.6, 3.5835.2017/6.7). Microscopy studies were carried out at the Interdisciplinary Center of Analytical Microscopy of Kazan Federal University. We thank V. G. Evtugyn and V. Vorobev for performing the TEM microscopy and elemental analysis, respectively.
Supplementary Materials
The graphical abstract expresses the main idea of the article. Dropwise addition of the NaF solution to the Pr(NO3)3 and La(NO3)3 solution provides platelike nanoparticles formation unlike the swift addition of the NaF solution to the Pr(NO3)3 and La(NO3)3 solution providing sphericallike nanoparticles formation. The luminescence lifetime of Pr ions in platelike nanoparticles is less than the luminescence lifetime of Pr ions in sphericallike nanoparticles. The microwave treatment of the sphericallike nanoparticles leads to increasing of their sizes and the luminescence lifetimes of Pr ions. (Supplementary Materials)
References
 A. M. Gazizulina, E. M. Alakshin, E. I. Baibekov et al., “Electron paramagnetic resonance of Gd^{3+} ions in powders of LaF_{3}:Gd^{3+} nanocrystals,” JETP Letters, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 149–152, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. Alakshin, A. Klochkov, S. Korableva et al., “Magnetic properties of powders LiTbF_{4} and TbF_{3},” Magnetic Resonance in Solids Electronic Journal, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1–6, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
 D. Bekah, D. Cooper, K. Kudinov et al., “Synthesis and characterization of biologically stable, doped LaF_{3} nanoparticles coconjugated to PEG and photosensitizers,” Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry, vol. 329, pp. 26–34, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Z. Xiaoting, T. Hayakawa, Y. Ishikawa, Y. Liushuan, and M. Nogami, “Structural investigation and Eu^{3+} luminescence properties of LaF_{3}:Eu^{3+} nanophosphors,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 644, pp. 77–81, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. C. Ximendes, U. Rocha, K. U. Kumar, C. Jacinto, and D. Jaque, “LaF_{3} core/shell nanoparticles for subcutaneous heating and thermal sensing in the second biologicalwindow,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 108, no. 25, article 253103, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. Dong, S. Du, X. Zheng et al., “Lanthanide nanoparticles: from design toward bioimaging and therapy,” Chemical Reviews, vol. 115, no. 19, pp. 10725–10815, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Y. Tang, H. Xin, F. Yang, and X. Long, “A historical review and bibliometric analysis of nanoparticles toxicity on algae,” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol. 20, no. 4, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. P. Fedorov, A. A. Luginina, S. V. Kuznetsov, and V. V. Osiko, “Nanofluorides,” Journal of Fluorine Chemistry, vol. 132, no. 12, pp. 1012–1039, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 D. Jaque and F. Vetrone, “Luminescence nanothermometry,” Nanoscale, vol. 4, no. 15, pp. 4301–4326, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 C. D. S. Brites, P. P. Lima, N. J. O. Silva et al., “Thermometry at the nanoscale,” Nanoscale, vol. 4, no. 16, pp. 4799–4829, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 U. Rocha, K. U. Kumar, C. Jacinto et al., “Neodymiumdoped LaF_{3} nanoparticles for fluorescence bioimaging in the second biological window,” Small, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 1141–1154, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. Rahman and M. Green, “The synthesis of rare earth fluoride based nanoparticles,” Nanoscale, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 214–224, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 F. Wang and X. Liu, “Recent advances in the chemistry of lanthanidedoped upconversion nanocrystals,” Chemical Society Reviews, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 976–989, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. S. Pudovkin, P. V. Zelenikhin, V. Shtyreva et al., “Coprecipitation method of synthesis, characterization, and cytotoxicity of Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} (CPr = 3, 7, 12, 20, 30%) nanoparticles,” Journal of nanotechnology, vol. 2018, Article ID 8516498, 9 pages, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. M. Alakshin, R. R. Gazizulin, A. V. Klochkov et al., “Annealing of PrF_{3} nanoparticles by microwave irradiation,” Optics and Spectroscopy, vol. 116, no. 5, pp. 721–723, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. K. Krebs, S. P. Feofilov, A. A. Kaplyanskii, R. I. Zakharchenya, and U. Happek, “Nonradiative relaxation of Yb^{3+} in highly porous γAl_{2}O_{3},” Journal of Luminescence, vol. 8384, pp. 209–213, 1999. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. M. Alakshin, A. V. Klochkov, E. I. Kondratyeva et al., “Microwaveassisted hydrothermal synthesis and annealing of DyF_{3} nanoparticles,” Journal of nanaomaterials, vol. 2016, article 7148307, 5 pages, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. Wang and Y. Li, “Controlled synthesis and luminescence of lanthanide doped NaYF_{4} nanocrystals,” Chemistry of Materials, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 727–734, 2007. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. Ma, W.X. Chen, Y.F. Zheng, J. Zhao, and Z. Xu, “Microwaveassisted hydrothermal synthesis and characterizations of PrF_{3} hollow nanoparticles,” Materials Letters, vol. 61, no. 13, pp. 2765–2768, 2007. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 I. Bilecka and M. Niederberger, “Microwave chemistry for inorganic nanomaterials synthesis,” Nanoscale, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 1358–1374, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 C. Mi, Z. Tian, B. Han, C. Mao, and S. Xu, “Microwaveassisted onepot synthesis of watersoluble rareearth doped fluoride luminescent nanoparticles with tunable colors,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 525, pp. 154–158, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. Wang, J.R. Zhang, and J.J. Zhu, “A microwave assisted heating method for the rapid synthesis of sphalritetype mercury sulfide nanocrystals with different sizes,” Journal of Crystal Growth, vol. 233, no. 4, pp. 829–836, 2001. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 X. Wang and Y. Li, “Fullerenelike rareearth nanoparticles,” Angewandte Chemie, International Edition, vol. 42, no. 30, pp. 3497–3500, 2003. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Khorsand Zak, W. H. Abd Majid, M. E. Abrishami, and R. Yousefi, “Xray analysis of ZnO nanoparticles by Williamson–Hall and size–strain plot methods,” Solid State Sciences, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 251–256, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 V. K. Rai, D. K. Rai, and S. B. Rai, “Pr^{3+} doped lithium tellurite glass as a temperature sensor,” Sensors and Actuators A, vol. 128, no. 1, pp. 14–17, 2006. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. Kaczkan, Z. Boruc, B. Fetlinski, S. Turczynski, and M. Malinowski, “Temperature dependence of ^{3}P_{0} Pr^{3+} fluorescence dynamics in Y_{4}Al_{2}O_{9} crystals,” Applied Physics B: Lasers and Optics, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 277–283, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 I. Kamma, P. Kommidi, and B. R. Reddy, “High temperature measurement using luminescence of Pr^{3+} doped YAG and Ho^{3+} doped CaF_{2},” Physica Status Solidi (c), vol. 6, no. S1, pp. S187–S190, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 G. Tessier, M. Bardoux, C. Boué, C. Filloy, and D. Fournier, “Back side thermal imaging of integrated circuits at high spatial resolution,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 90, no. 17, article 171112, 2007. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. S. Pudovkin, S. L. Korableva, A. O. Krasheninnicova et al., “Toxicity of laser irradiated photoactive fluoride PrF_{3} nanoparticles toward bacteria,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 560, article 012011, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. M. Alakshin, D. S. Blokhin, A. M. Sabitova et al., “Experimental proof of the existence of water clusters in fullerenelike PrF_{3} nanoparticles,” JETP Letters, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 181–183, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 G. Cao and Y. Wang, Nanostructures and Mamomaterials. Synthesis, Properties, and Application, World Scientific, 2nd edition, 2011. View at: Publisher Site
 L. Bao, Z. Li, Q. Tao, J. Xie, Y. Mei, and Y. Xiong, “Controlled synthesis of uniform LaF_{3} polyhedrons, nanorods and nanoplates using NaOH and ligands,” Nanotechnology, vol. 24, no. 14, pp. 145604–145609, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 K. A. Aly, N. M. Khalil, Y. Algamal, and Q. M. A. Saleem, “Estimation of lattice strain for zirconia nanoparticles based on Williamson Hall analysis,” Materials Chemistry and Physics, vol. 193, pp. 182–188, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Sivakami, S. Dhanuskodi, and R. Karvembu, “Estimation of lattice strain in nanocrystalline RuO_{2} by Williamson–Hall and size–strain plot methods,” Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, vol. 152, pp. 43–50, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. P. Fedorov, M. N. Mayakova, S. V. Kuznetsov et al., “Phase diagram of the NaF–CaF_{2} system and the electrical conductivity of a CaF_{2}based solid solution,” Russian Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 1472–1478, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. P. Fedorov, M. N. Mayakova, V. A. Maslov et al., “The solubility of sodium and potassium fluorides in strontium fluoride,” Nanosystems: Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 830–834, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Mech, M. Karbowiak, L. Kepinski, A. Bednarkiewicz, and W. Strek, “Structural and luminescent properties of nanosized NaGdF_{4}: Eu^{3+} synthesised by wetchemistry route,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 380, no. 12, pp. 315–320, 2004. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 T. Grzyb and S. Lis, “Photoluminescent properties of LaF_{3}:Eu^{3+} and GdF_{3}:Eu^{3+} nanoparticles prepared by coprecipitation method,” Journal of Rare Earths, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 588–592, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Z. Wang, C. Liu, Y. Wang, and Z. Li, “Solventassisted selective synthesis of NaLaF_{4} and LaF_{3} fluorescent nanocrystals via a facile solvothermal approach,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 509, no. 5, pp. 1964–1968, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. Nie, Y. Shen, X. Zhang et al., “Selective synthesis of LaF_{3} and NaLaF_{4} nanocrystals via lanthanide ion doping,” Journal of Materials Chemistry C, vol. 5, no. 35, pp. 9188–9193, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. Ladol, H. Khajuria, S. Khajuria, and H. N. Sheikh, “Hydrothermal synthesis, characterization and luminescent properties of lanthanidedoped NaLaF_{4} nanoparticles,” Bulletin of Materials Science, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 943–952, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Sarakovskis, J. Grube, A. Mishnev, and M. Springis, “Upconversion processes in NaLaF_{4}:Er^{3+},” Optical Materials, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1517–1524, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. Rao, W. Lu, G. Ren et al., “Monodispersed LaF_{3} nanocrystals: shapecontrollable synthesis, excitationpowerdependent multicolor tuning and intense nearinfrared upconversion emission,” Nanotechnology, vol. 25, article 065703, pp. 1–8, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
 P. Scherrer, “Bestimmung der Größe und der inneren Struktur von Kolloidteilchen mittels Röntgenstrahlen,” Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, MathematischPhysikalische Klasse, vol. 26, pp. 98–100, 1918. View at: Google Scholar
 J. I. Langford and A. J. C. Wilson, “Scherrer after sixty years: a survey and some new results in the determination of crystallite size,” Journal of Applied Crystallography, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 102–113, 1978. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. R. Stokes and A. J. C. Wilson, “The diffraction of X rays by distorted crystal aggregates  I,” Proceedings of the Physical Society, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 174–181, 1944. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. G. Pandya, J. P. Corbett, W. M. Jadwisienczak, and M. E. Kordesch, “Structural characterization and Xray analysis by Williamson–Hall method for erbium doped aluminum nitride nanoparticles, synthesized using inert gas condensation technique,” Physica E: Lowdimensional Systems and Nanostructures, vol. 79, pp. 98–102, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 E. M. Alakshin, A. M. Gazizulina, R. R. Gazizulin et al., “The spin kinetics of ^{3}He in contact with nanosized crystalline powders LaF_{3},” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 568, no. 1, article 012001, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. Okamoto, K. Kasuga, I. Hara, and Y. Kubota, “Visible–NIR tunable Pr^{3+}doped fiber laser pumped by a GaN laser diode,” Optics Express, vol. 17, no. 22, article 20227, 20232 pages, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. W. Stouwdam, G. A. Hebbink, J. Huskens, and F. C. J. M. van Veggel, “Lanthanidedoped nanoparticles with excellent luminescent properties in organic media,” Chemistry of Materials, vol. 15, no. 24, pp. 4604–4616, 2003. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. W. Stouwdam and F. C. J. M. van Veggel, “Nearinfrared emission of redispersible Er^{3+}, Nd^{3+}, and Ho^{3+} doped LaF_{3} nanoparticles,” Nano Letters, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 733–737, 2002. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 K. Ramasesha, L. D. Marco, A. Mandal, and A. Tokmakoff, “Water vibrations have strongly mixed intra and intermolecular character,” Nature Chemistry, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 935–940, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. M. Selzer, D. S. Hamilton, R. Flach, and W. M. Yen, “Phononassisted energy migration in Pr^{3+}: LaF_{3},” Journal of Luminescence, vol. 1213, pp. 737–741, 1976. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 K. K. Pukhov, Y. V. Orlovskii, and T. T. Basiev, “Spontaneous and stimulated transitions in impurity dielectric nanoparticles,” in Recent Optical and Photonic Technologies, K. Y. Kim, Ed., p. 450, INTECH, Croatia, 2010, downloaded from SCIYO.COM. View at: Google Scholar
 A. Vanetsev, K. Kaldvee, L. Puust et al., “Relation of crystallinity and fluorescent properties of LaF_{3}:Nd^{3+} nanoparticles synthesized with different waterbased techniques,” Chemistry Select, vol. 2, pp. 4874–4881, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
 M. S. Pudovkin, A. Morozov, V. V. Pavlov et al., “Physical background for luminescence thermometry sensors based on Pr^{3+}:LaF_{3} crystalline particles,” Journal of Nanomaterials, vol. 2017, Article ID 3108586, 9 pages, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 V. V. Semashko, M. S. Pudovkin, A.C. Cefalas et al., “Tiny rareearth fluoride nanoparticles activate tumour cell growth via electrical polar interactions,” Nanoscale Research Letters, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 370, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. Sivakumar, P. R. Diamente, and F. C. J. M. van Veggel, “Silicacoated Ln^{3+} doped LaF_{3} nanoparticlesas robust down and upconverting biolabels,” Chemistry  A European Journal, vol. 12, no. 22, pp. 5878–5884, 2006. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 M. S. Pudovkin et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.