Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: ChemPhotoChem. 2021 Jan 19;5(5):421–425. doi: 10.1002/cptc.202000283

Table 1.

Excited state lifetimes and quantum yields for emission and singlet oxygen production for Ru-ip-nTunder different conditions.

Complex τem.[c] τTA.[c] Ф em.[c] Ф Δ[d]
Aerated (μs) Deaerated (μs) Aerated (μs) Deaerated (μs) Aerated Deaerated

Ru-ip-0T 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.038 0.05 0.68
Ru-ip-1T 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.7 0.044 0.06 0.61
Ru-ip-2T 0.3; 1[a] 0.6; 11[a] 1.4 14 0.006 0.04 0.71
Ru-ip-3T 0.3 0.6 1.4 48 -[b] 4.8×10−4 0.77
Ru-ip-4T 0.3 0.6 1.4 29 -[b] 8.1×10−4 0.81

τem. : emission lifetime; τTA.: recovery lifetime; Φem.: quantum yield of emission; ΦΔ: singlet oxygen quantum yield. Singlet oxygen was determined spectroscopically by monitoring its emission centered at 1275 nm in aerated MeCN. [Ru(bpy)3][PF6]2 is used as the reference obtaining Φem.[27] and ΦΔ.[28]

[a]

A biexponential decay of the respective signal is observed.

[b]

Emission is too low to obtain a reasonable estimate of the emission quantum yield.

[c]

Solvent used is H2O.

[d]

Solvent used is MeCN.