Abstract
Majority of Mn4+ activated oxide phosphors have the wavelength of excitation and emission suitable for acceleration of plant growth as light converter from sunlight to deep red. Here, it is observed that 60% increase of red emission of Sr4Al14O25:0.01Mn4+ is found by substituting 0.1Ga3+. It is clarified that the increase is originated from a unique mechanism of breaking parity forbidden transition under the substitution of cation in d–d transition by using the tool of special aberration corrected transmission electron microscope(AC‐STEM), pre‐edge peak (1s→3d) Mn K‐edge X‐ray absorption near edge structure (XANES), extended X‐ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS), Rietveld analysis of X‐ray diffraction (XRD) patterns, and reflection spectra. Further, a combination of substituted Ga, Mg, and special double flux H3BO3/AlF3 is found to tremendously increase the emission intensity (355% up). Actual growth of chlorella and rose is examined by a combination of the cheap Sr4Al14O25:0.01Mn4+,0.007Mg2+,0.1Ga3+ and a unique reflection typed phosphor‐film system as sunlight converting system. Optical density of chlorella and height of rose grass is increased by 36±14% and 174±80% compared with nonphosphor‐film, respectively.
Keywords: breaking parity forbidden, oxide phosphor, plant cultivation, red emission phosphor, sunlight converter
An oxide phosphor for plant growth with excellent luminescence is prepared by changing the local structure of the luminescence center by Ga ion substitution method and breaking the mechanism of parity prohibition of conversion. And a new type of highly efficient reflective light conversion film is prepared by mixing it with PDMS to promote plant growth.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, with the improvement of people's living standard, people's demand for healthy living and green environment is increasing day by day, while traditional methods of increasing yield of crops through chemical fertilizers and pesticides cannot meet these demands because they produce a lot of pollution. So, the way of enhancing plant growth efficiency through fluorescent conversion materials has been proposed and widely studied and discussed.
In general, sunlight plays a vital role in plant growth, and three specific wavelengths of light are particularly important for plant growth: blue light (400–500 nm), red light (620–690 nm), and near‐infrared color (730–760 nm), which are responsible for phototropism,[ 1 ] photosynthesis,[ 2 ] and photomorphogenesis,[ 3 ] respectively. Among them, photosynthesis is a necessary condition for plant growth, so enhancing the light intensity in the red band can effectively enhance the photosynthesis of plants. However, the ratio of the red part in total sunlight is very small, resulting in the low absorption efficiency of plants in this band, therefore, red fluorescent conversion materials with excellent performance are needed to compensate for it. LED‐induced plant growth has been proposed[ 4 ] and successfully contributed to the scientific clarification of the relation between the actual growth of each specific crop and each specific wavelength of light for more than two decades, while its business and industry is not thriving due to its highly costing facilities, LED devices, and electricity, etc.
Compared with LED plant growth factory, a relatively low costing method is a method that the red or far red light yielded from sunlight through emitting film is exposure to the plants.[ 5 ] Because the latter does not need highly costing facilities, LED devices, and electricity, etc. Majority of the latter method has been greenhouse type as shown in Figure 1a, where emitting powders dispersed resin film surrounds the plants or crops, which can receive the red or far red light emitted from the film with low cost. The fundamental problem in this greenhouse type is that red light spread towards not only inside the greenhouse but also outside the greenhouse in principle, which causes just 50% loss of the red light for plant growth. Technologies of modifying distribution or size of emitting powders in the film improves it to only (50 – several) %.[ 6 ]
Figure 1.

Plant growth method of a) emitting materials dispersed greenhouse, and b) our new method “reflection‐type red emitting phosphor‐plate under sunlight”.
We construct a method of reflection typed phosphor‐plate nearby plant where sunlight is coming to the phosphor‐plate having thin white reflector on back‐side, yielding red light whose majority can be directed to plant as shown in Figure 1b. At first 50% of red light from phosphor‐powders is directed towards the side opposite plants, then being returned to the side of plants by the existence of white reflector. Theoretical flux of red emission which plants can receive in the reflection type is 1.4–2 times of greenhouse type. The new system has much higher ability of giving the sunlight‐converted red light to the plant. Typical phosphor converting sunlight to red light could be CaAlSiN3:Eu, which is the best NUV and blue excited, red emission phosphor for LED lighting. However, CaAlSiN3:Eu is highly costing (cost of CaAlSiN3:Eu: oxide phosphors = 5–8: 1), compared with cheap crops or plants due to its severe batch styled synthesis at about 1800 °C under high pressure and highly costing nitride starting materials such as Ca3N2.
For the subject of creating low costing phosphors, we have considered not nitride phosphor but oxide phosphor in recent years. In oxide phosphors activated by Eu2+ or Ce3+, relatively strong excitation and emission are often obtained due to their parity and spin allowed 4f→5d transition, while these are likely to provide limited wavelength of emission, not reaching red emission of 650–685 nm important for plant growth due to relatively low crystal field splitting and nephelauxetic effect in [EuO x ] and [CeO x ] polyhedron, compared with [EuN x ] in CaAlSiN3:Eu. In oxide phosphors activated by Mn4+ are, in many cases, stable, nontoxic, and provides fine red emission of 650–685 nm due to the relatively small energy difference between excited 2E state and ground 4A2 state caused by relatively large Racar B value and small nephelauxetic effect, compared with toxic, not much stable fluoride phosphors activated by Mn4+ such as K2SiF4:Mn4+ (KSF), famous Mn4+‐phosphor having 630 nm emission for LED display, in Tanabe–Sugano d3 energy diagram. However, in oxide phosphors activated by Mn4+, the excitation and emission are significantly small in most cases due to parity forbidden 3d→3d transition of 4A2→4T1, 4A2→4T2 (Ex.), and 2E→4A2 (Em.). For solving this problem, we have struggled with local structure having this parity forbidden property. Here, we would like to present a successful break of parity forbidden transition in stable phosphor Sr4Al14O25:Mn4+ having good NUV and blue excitation, and good emission, 653 nm (red) for plant growth. We exhibit the surprising result of actual chlorella and rose growth too by using the above reflection typed plate having the Mn4+ activated oxide phosphor where parity forbidden is broken.
2. Experimental Section
2.1. Synthesis of Materials
2.1.1. Preparation of Phosphor
Mn4+,Ga3+‐substituted Sr4Al14O25 (SAO) phosphor was prepared by high‐temperature solid‐state method. The raw materials were SrCO3 [analytical reagent (A.R.)], Al2O3 (99.99%), Ga2O3 (99.99%), and MnO2 (99.99%); the raw materials were weighed according to certain stoichiometric ratios, then uniformly mixed and finely ground in an agate mortar. The mixture was then packed in an alumina crucible and sintered in a high temperature tube furnace under air atmosphere at 1260 °C for 6 h. After cooling to room temperature, the samples were ground again for further measurements. SAO: Mn4+, Mg2+, Z3+ (Z3+: Ga3+, Sc3+, or Lu3+) was also prepared by using the above raw materials, MgCO3 (99.99%), Sc2O3 (99.99%), or Lu2O3 (99.99%) in the above condition. H3BO3 (99.99%) and AlF3 (99.99%) were also used as flux.
2.1.2. Preparation of Phototransfer Film
The red phosphor SAO: Mn4+, Mg2+, Ga3+, and adhesive of PDMS were mixed in proportion, stirred in a vacuum defoamer for 3 min, and then evenly coated in the grooves of a 30 cm × 30 cm × 2 mm glass plate. After that it was placed in an oven at 60 °C for 6 h, dried and removed to obtain the light conversion film. Teflon thin film was set on back side of SAO: Mn4+, Mg2+, Ga3+ film as a white reflector of light.
3. Characterization
The phase purity of the prepared aluminates was analyzed by powder X‐ray diffraction (XRD) on a RigakuD/max‐2400 X‐ray diffractometer with Kα radiation. XRD patterns were acquired in the range of 10°–80° with a counting time of 0.1 s per step and a step size of 0.03°. Rietveld was modified using the General Structural Analysis System (GSAS)). The morphology was obtained by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, S‐3400, Hitachi, Japan) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM)). An EDX detector attached to the same SEM was used to explore the elemental composition. High resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) was performed with a FEI TecnaiF30TEM at 300KV. Photoluminescence excitation (PLE) and photoluminescence (PL) spectra were collected using an Edinburgh Instruments FLS920. Quantum efficiency was measured with the quantum yield attachment attached to the FLS‐920T fluorescence spectrophotometer. PL decay curves were collected with the FLS‐920T fluorescence spectrophotometer. Thermal burst performance was measured with an aluminum patch with a cartridge heater; temperature was measured with a thermocouple inside the patch and controlled by a standard TAP‐02 high‐temperature fluorescence controller (Oriental KOJI Co., Ltd., Tianjin, China). Spherical aberration‐corrected transmission electron microscope (AC‐STEM), JEM‐ARM200F, was used for confirming the structure and detecting the position of impurities such as Ga. Mn K edge XAFS was measured at the beam‐line of Shanghai XAFS Institute.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Fundamental Analysis of Structure and Optics
Figure 2a shows the crystal structure of SAO. The SAO sample space group belongs to the centrosymmetric space group Pmma (51), and the crystal system is orthogonal. The lattice consists of three [AlO4] tetrahedra, three [AlO6] octahedra, and [SrO7] and [SrO10] polyhedra, in which [AlO4], [Al2O4], and [Al3O4] are codotted and arranged alternately in the a‐direction; while [Al4O4], [Al5O4], and [Al6O4] are connected to each other by coprismatic connection to form the ring structure, as shown in Figure 1b; the [AlO4] tetrahedra and [AlO6] octahedra form an ordered lamellar structure by codot connections between them.
Figure 2.

a) SAO crystal structure diagram and b) [AlO] polyhedral ring structure diagram.
Based on the previous analysis, we prepared SAO:xMn4+ and tested its emission spectrum (Figure S1, Supporting Information), yielding optimal emission intensity at 0.01Mn4+ and characterized the luminescence properties of a series of samples codoped with Mn4+ and Ga3+ and characterized them, and measured its series of XRD patterns and decay, as shown in Figures S2 and S9 in the Supporting Information. Sr4Al14− x Ga x O25 Rietveld diagram is shown in Figure S3 in the Supporting Information.
Figure 3 shows normalized excitation and emission spectra of SAO:0.01Mn4+/xGa3+ (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.7) samples. The excitation spectra mainly consist of two peaks located at NUV region and blue region, which are attributed to spin allowed 4A2→4T1 and 4A2→4T2 transitions, respectively.[ 7 ] Trivial contribution to excitation is O2−→Mn4+ charge transfer (minimum wavelength) and spin forbidden 4A2→2T2 (a little longer wavelength than that of 4A2→4T1).[ 8 ] The emission spectra is assigned to a sharp peak centered at 653 nm and a broad band located at 665 nm, which correspond to the 2E→4A2 transition of Mn4+ and a phonon assisted sideband, respectively.[ 9 ]
Figure 3.

a) Normalized excitation and b) emission spectra of SAO:0.01Mn4+/xGa3+ (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.7).
It was observed that the emission intensity significantly increases with increasing Ga3+ up to x = 0.1, then it decreases due to concentration quenching. We found the 60% increase of the emission intensity by substituting 0.1Ga(EQE = 31.61%,as shown in Table S3 in the Supporting Information). Transmission electron microscopy tests and EDS tests were performed on this sample, as shown in Figure S6 in the Supporting Information.
Substitution of new cation often improves thermal stability, namely, temperature dependency of emission, simultaneously improving the emission intensity. Bad temperature dependency of emission relates to the next two mechanism.[ 10 ] No.1. Auto‐ionization, where photoexcited electron at 5d band jumps to conduction band with help of heat of room temperature,[ 11 ] and No.2. nonemissive process in configuration coordinate, where photoexcited electron jumps to the intersection between the ground‐state curve and the excited‐state curve.[ 12 ] Bad emission induced by No.1 mechanism has nothing to do with defects. Bad emission induced by No.2 mechanism is considered to be only partly influenced by defects. So, the substitution of new cation often depresses No.1 or No.2 phenomenon, improving emission intensity even without depressing defects.[ 13 ] We investigated the temperature dependency of emission of SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+, substitution of Ga3+ does not improve the temperature dependency of emission, which is shown in Figure 4a (Figure S5 in the Supporting Information for details). Therefore, the reason for much increase of emission intensity by the substitution of Ga3+ is not the depression of auto‐ionization or nonemissive process in configurational coordinate.[ 14 ]
Figure 4.

a) Temperature dependency of emission of SAO:0.01Mn4+ and SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.1Ga3+, b) emission spectra of SAO:Mn4+ at room temperature and 77 K.
Figure 4b shows the emission spectra of Sr4Al14O25:Mn4+ at 77 K. A strong sharp emission at 652 nm is assigned to zero phonon line 2E→4A2 transition of Mn4+ on Al4 site (site symmetry in Oh: C2) havig no inversion symmetry, while very small sharp emission at 647 nm is considered zero phonon line 2E→4A2 transition of Mn4+ on Al5 or Al6 site (site symmetry in Oh: C2h) having inversion symmetry.[ 15 ] Inversion symmetry in octahedron causes parity forbidden property at 3d→3d transition, exhibiting much small emission, while noninversion symmetry in octahedron more or less mitigates parity forbidden property at 3d→3d transition, exhibiting relatively stronger emission. Peng et al. calculated the average covalency of Al–O bonds on Al4, Al5, and Al6 sites by using the dielectric chemical bond theory of complex ionic crystals. The result was the covalency: Al4 > Al5, Al6, which indicates that Mn4+ on Al4 site has larger covalency and smaller Racah B value (BR) than Mn4+ on Al5 or Al6 site. As the energy difference of 2E and 4A2 is nearly proportional to BR or √(BR/BR0)2 + (CR/CR0)2 (CR: Racah C value)[ 16 ] in 3d3 configurational Tanabe–Sugano energy diagram, the energy difference is slightly smaller in Mn4+/Al4 site than in Mn4+/A5 or Mn4+/Al6 site, which coincides with the wavelength of the assigned zero phonon line: Mn4+/Al4 site > Mn4+/Al5 or Al6 site in Figure 4b. From the above information and consideration, it is reasonable that the important two emission of 652 nm (zero phonon line) and 665 nm (phonon assisted side band much enhanced at room temperature) are originated from Mn4+ on Al4 site. In Figure 3a, there is no significant change in peak‐wavelength in the main excitation of NUV (4A2→4T1) and blue (4A2→4T2) in case of substitution of Ga3+, which indicates that crystal field splitting (Cfs) of Mn4+ emitting red is not significantly changed by substituting Ga3+. 4T2 and 4T1 are in eg level and 4A2 is in t2g level in 3d3 configurational Tanabe–Sugano energy diagram. If Cfs of Mn4+ (Oh) were changed, energy differences between 4A2 and 4T2 and between 4A2 and 4T1 should be changed. No significant change of Cfs is supported by the result of our Rietveld analysis that average bond length R of 6(Mn/Al)‐O at Al4 site relating to Cfs of Mn4+ (Oh) is not much different, 1.911 Å (Ga molar ratio: 0) and 1.904 Å (Ga molar ratio: 0.1) because Cfs is proportional to R −5 (from simple point charge approximation)[ 16 ] or R − n (n: 3.5–6).[ 17 ]
4.2. AC‐STEM
For the purpose of searching out the reason for emission increase, a spherical aberration‐corrected transmission electron microscope (AC‐STEM) of SAO:0.01Mn4+/0.7Ga3+ was Measured, and the results are shown in Figure 5 .
Figure 5.

AC‐STEM image of SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.7Ga3+.
The STEM photograph shown in the figure is the atomic arrangement of the a–b plain, where it can be clearly seen that the larger bright white dots are Sr atoms, and the smaller dark gray dots are Al atoms in six different sites. Some of the dots corresponding to the Al2 site are brighter than the other Al sites (marked by the yellow circles), while this phenomenon is not found at Al sites other than Al2 site. Since atoms with larger atomic number show higher brightness in AC‐TEM images,[ 18 ] it is strongly considered that the brighter atoms in the Al2 site mentioned above are Ga. This is supported by the results of Rietveld analysis of Sr4Al13.9Ga0.3O25 that χ 2 in case of Ga at Al1, Al2, Al3, Al4, Al5, and Al6 sites is 2.418, 2.223 (minimum), 2.449, 2.386, 2.461, and 2.257, respectively, and R wp and R b values in case of Ga at Al2 site are also in minimum level in 6 values.
4.3. XAFS
We measured Mn K‐edge XAFS (X‐ray absorption fine structure) for obtaining information of local structure and property around Mn4+. Figure 6a shows EXAFS (extended X‐ray absorption fine structure) oscillation and XANES (X‐ray absorption near edge structure).[ 19 ] Figure 6a exhibits the difference in EXAFS oscillation between SAO:Mn4+ and SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+. In Figure 6b, Fourier transform analyzed from Mn K‐edge EXAFS oscillation exhibits the 1st nearest peak (Mn–O) and the 2nd nearest peak (Mn–(O)–Al or Mn–(O)–Ga). The average distance in Mn–O peak is quite similar in between SAO:Mn4+ and SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+, which is consistent with the result of Rietveld analysis, while the average distance in Mn–(O)–Al/Ga peak of SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+ is significantly larger than that in Mn–(O)–Al average distance of SAO:Mn4+, which is an evidence that Ga makes bond with [MnO6] octahedron. Figure S4 in the Supporting Information shows tall and sharp edge of Mn K‐edge XANES, where the edge of SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+ a little shifts towards higher energy level compared with that of SAO:Mn4+, which is also an evidence of Mn–(O)–Ga because Ga3+ having relatively higher electronegativity χ (Pauling's χ(Ga): 1.81) reasonably lowers electron density of Mn4+ compared with Al3+ (χ(Al): 1.61) through Mn–(O)–Ga bond.
Figure 6.

a) Mn K edge XAFS curves of SAO:Mn4+ and SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+. XANES (left side) and EXAFS (right side), and b) Mn K‐edge EXAFS‐Fourier transform showing R‐space of SAO:0.01Mn4+ (red) and SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.1Ga3+ (blue).
Figure 6a shows small pre‐edge peak in XANES region, which corresponds to 1s→3d parity forbidden transition of Mn. From the same discussion as that of excitation spectra concerning 3d→3d parity forbidden transition, Mn4+ on Al4 site having no inversion symmetry (site symmetry in Oh: C2) mainly contributes to both 2E→4A2 transition (red emission) and 1s→3d transition (pre‐edge X‐ray absorption peak) rather than Mn4+ on Al5 or Al6 site having inversion symmetry (site symmetry in Oh: C2h).[ 20 ]
As shown in Figure 6a, we observed that pre‐edge peak of SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+ is significantly larger than that of SAO:Mn4+ (about 80% increase). The degree of increase in the intensity under the substitution of Ga3+ coincides in between the pre‐edge peak (1s→3d) and the emission peak of deep red (4A2→4T2 and 2E→4A2 in 3d). The XAFS local information of SAO:0.01Mn4+ and SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.1Ga3+ is shown in Figure S4 in the Supporting Information.
Parity forbidden transition is analyzed in the next. Electric dipole transition probability P is proportional to |∫Φ f HΦ idτ|2, where H is electric dipole moment H = e r , Φ i and Φ f are wave functions of initial and final states, respectively, and dτ is dxdydz.[ 21 ] For example, ∫Φ f HΦ idτ can be divided into two regions, +x region and −x region. In case of inversion‐symmetric [Mn4+O2− 6] octahedron, an example is shown that φ i is d x 2− y 2 and φ f is d z 2, where the sum of the value ∫−∞ 0 Φ f e r φ i dx in −x region and ∫0 ∞ Φ f e r φ i dx in x region is zero due to that parities of φ i and φ f are even functions (φ i(x) = φ i(−x) and φ f(x) = φ f(−x)). The other combination of two orbitals within (d xy , d yz , d zx , d x 2− y 2, and d z 2) as φ i and φ f also provides zero value of transition probability after the equation of transition probability is divided into +x region, −x region, +y region, −y region, +z region, and −z region, and the summation is done in the same way. However, when the bond length is different in between +x region and −x region, the value ∫−∞ 0 Φ f e r φ i dx in −x region is not equal to − ∫0 ∞ Φ f e r φ i dx in x region, resulting in that the transition probability is not zero but positive. We found that our Sr4Al14O25: Mn4+,Ga3+ is in this case, which is shown in Figure 7b. In Sr4Al14O25:Mn4+,[ 20 ] the site symmetry of Al4 site occupied by Mn4+is C2, namely, noninversion symmetry, while the site symmetry of Al5 and Al6 sites is C2h, namely, inversion symmetry (Figure 7b). According to our Rietveld refinement of our Sr4Al14O25:Mn4+,Ga3+ of which structural parameters of unit cell is shown in Table S1 in the Supporting Information, in −x region of MnO6 octahedron, the two bonds are elongated (1.931 Å→1.945 Å) due to the shrink (1.727 Å→1.700 Å) of nearby bond by substituting Ga3+ for [AlO4] (Al: Al2 site) tetrahedron site. Then, the two bonds in opposite side (+x region) in MnO6 is reversely reduced (1.881 Å→1.844 Å). Then, the symmetry of d‐orbitals of Mn4+ hybridized by p‐orbitals of O2− in between +x region and −x region is broken, changing from almost parity forbidden transition into parity allowed transition,[ 22 ] causing much increase of excitation and emission. This breakthrough was fortunately found because Ga3+ is sit in Al2 site nearby MnO6 at Al4 site, which was able to be observed by using AC‐STEM (Figure 5), where stronger white circle Ga compared with darker white Al can be seen (Cf. electron number of Ga3+ is much larger, 28, than that of Al3+, 10, leading to much larger electron scattering cross section.) Breaking almost parity forbidden transition was verified by measuring pre‐edge peak in Mn K‐edge XANES (Figure 6a). Pre‐edge peak (non‐single peak corresponding to almost symmetric O h (almost parity forbidden transition of 1s→3d)[ 23 ] of Mn4+ in Sr4Al14O25 was observed to be much increased by substituting Ga3+ (about 40% increase). Figure 7a shows the diffused reflection spectra of SAO:Mn4+ and SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+. It is clear that the substitution of tiny amount of Ga3+ much increased absorption (4A2→4T1 (NUV) and 4A2→4T2 (blue)) in the region of UV and blue. It strongly suggests that Ga3+ much increases the excitation transition of Mn4+, which is consistent with a break of parity forbidden transition under an existence of Ga3+.
Figure 7.

a) SAO Series Reflectance Spectrogram, and b) local structure including Mn4+ site and Ga3+ site in SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+.
For a purpose of evaluating the effect of Ga3+, we tried to introduce cation different from Ga3+ to SAO:Mn4+,Mg2+. Single phase of SAO:0.014Mn4+,0.007Mg2+,0.1Z3+ (Z: Sc3+ or Lu3+) was successfully synthesized, whose relative emission intensity is shown in Table 1 . The emission increase or decrease in case of Sc3+ and Lu3+ was only +4% and −8%, respectively, much different from the case of Ga3+. Table 1 shows the negligible effect of Mg2+ in 1s→3d transition in pre‐edge peak of XANES and the electronegativity difference between M and O for M–O bond (M: Mg, Lu, Sc, and Ga) too. As understood from Table 1, only Ga3+ yields large effect of breaking parity forbidden transition, while other cations such as Mg2+, Lu3+, and Sc3+ have negligible effect. When electronegativity difference between M and O is small, M–O bond has a covalent character where d orbital of M cation is significantly hybridized by p orbital of O anion. It was reported[ 24 ] that in perovskite cuprates La2CuMO6− x (M′: Mn, Ru), Cu–O bond in CuO6 octahedron is much distorted by nearby Ru–O bond having much large electronegativity difference between Ru and O, while CuO6 octahedron is not distorted by nearby Mn–O bond having less electronegativity difference between Mn and O, which indicates 3d(Cu)‐2p(O)‐4d(Ru) orbital hybridization is promoted, leading to the distortion of CuO6 octahedron by the orbital‐overlapping power of strong covalency of Ru–O bond. The existence or non‐existence of the break of parity forbidden transition in MnO6‐M (M: Mg, Sc, Lu, or Ga) in our case is consistent with that of distortion of CuO6 octahedron in CuO6‐M′ (M: Mn or Ru). It is strongly estimated that only Ga–O bond having significant covalency in a group of Mg, Lu, Sc, and Ga can strongly change the overlapping of 2p orbital in M–O–Mn bonds, distorting MnO6 octahedron and breaking parity forbidden d–d transition in Mn4+.
Table 1.
Intensities of deep red emission and pre‐edge peak in Mn‐K XANES, and electronegativity difference of M–O bond (M: Mg, Sc, Lu, and Ga) in Sr4Al14O25:0.014Mn4+,0.007X2+,0.1Z3+
| Sr4Al14O25:0.014Mn4+,0.007X2+,0.1Z3+ | Relative intensity of deep red emission (3d→3d transition) | Relative intensity of pre‐edge peak in Mn‐K XANES (1s→3d transition) | Electronegativity difference Δχ (χ(O)−χ(M)) in M–O bond | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| X2+ | Z3+ | |||
| none | none | – | 100 | – |
| Mg2+ | none | 100 | 100 | 2.13(Mn–O) |
| Mg2+ | Sc3+ | 104 | – | 2.08(Sc–O) |
| Mg2+ | Lu3+ | 92 | – | 2.17(Lu–O) |
| Mg2+ | Ga3+ | 160 | 180 | 1.63(Ga–O) |
Much increase in emission intensity by the substitution of ion breaking parity forbidden transition has never been reported in traditional phosphors having d–d transition or f–f transition such as many Mn4+, Mn2+, Cr3+, or Eu3+‐phosphors important for red‐light plant growth, LED lighting and display, CRT television, fluorescent lamp, plasma display, etc. so far, while this has been reported in self trapped exciton (different emission mechanism) of perovskite.[ 21 , 25 ] Comparison between pre‐edge peak in XANES and clarified local structure of activator having parity forbidden transition in phosphors are suggested to be effective in our work.
4.4. Further Modification of New SAO:Mn4+,Ga3+ for Charge Compensation
Possibly, Mn4+ activated aluminate has some defects due to a mismatch of electric charge of Mn4+ and Al3+. Further, we introduced Mg2+ because it is strongly expected that a charge balance between Δ+1 (Mn4+ on Al3+ site) and Δ−1 (Mg2+ on Al3+ site) can be achieved in the crystal. Figure S8 (Supporting Information) shows the photoluminescence (PL) spectra of the SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.1Ga3+,xMg2+ (0.003 ≤ x ≤ 0.009) sample. The emission peak much increased at x (Mg molar ratio) = 0.007 without any change of the peak position and ratio of zero phonon line and side bands. Moreover, we found much efficient flux, H3BO3/AlF3 for SAO:Mn4+,Mg2+,Ga3+. Figure 8 shows the tremendous feature concerning the emission intensity. Emission intensity of conventional SAO:Mn4+ [ 26 ] increased +105% by the substitution of 0.007Mg2+ due to charge compensation, further increased +60% by the substitution of 0.1Ga3+ due to a break of parity forbidden transition for the first time, and further increased +39% by using the new double flux (total increase +355%). The advanced mechanism induced by Ga3+ is never induced by Mg2+, as shown in Figure 6a, where Mg2+ never increases the pre‐edge peak (1s→3d).
Figure 8.

Emission spectra of SAO: Mn4+ series after modification.
5. Plant Cultivation
Photoconversion films using sunlight for excitation are advanced films that can now be used on a large scale for agricultural growth and have great potential in promoting agricultural development. Figure 9a shows that the blue part of the spectrum (NUV to trans‐infrared) of sunlight irradiated to the earth's surface is the strongest, and the phosphor in this paper has a wide absorption range of NUV–blue light, which makes the SAO: 0.01Mn4+, 0.1Ga3+,0.007Mg2+ powders dispersed PDMS‐film be well excited by sunlight and produce emission spectrum matching well with chlorophyll a chlorophyll b absorption band, as shown in Figure 9b. Accordingly, we conducted experiments on the growth of chlorella vulgaris (nutritious algae) and rose (popular flower).
Figure 9.

a) Solar spectrum and b) absorption spectra of chlorophyll and emission spectrum of SAO:0.01Mn4+,0.1Ga3+,0.007Mg2+.
5.1. Experiment of Chlorella Growth
Outdoor experiments of chlorella growth were conducted. Sunlight irradiates the light‐conversion film placed at 45°, and the film absorbs blue and NUV light, converting it to red light, which is directed to the nearby glass tube including chlorella, as shown in Figure 10b. Chlorella grows fast and has a short growth cycle of about 7 d. Therefore, chlorella is suitable for verifying the growth promotion effect of the photoconversion film. CO2 gas is constantly flown in chlorella tube to meet the photosynthesis of chlorella during growth. Experimental groups of 20 wt% SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga dispersed PDMS‐film (2 mm × 300 mm × 30 mm) having thin white reflector film on its back side were set up as well as a sample having nonphosphor film (simple white reflector) as blank group. The optical density (OD) of chlorella was measured for one week to characterize the growth effect of chlorella. The greater the OD, the higher the concentration of chlorella. Standard deviation of the values was determined by measuring 2 samples kept under the same condition.
Figure 10.

a) Change of optical density of chlorella in tube in a week and b) photograph of chlorella tube and nearby film (SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga film and blank).
After a week‐long experiment, the growth with SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga was 36±14% higher than that with the control group, as shown in Figure 10a. Therefore, our prepared photoconversion film has good practical application prospects for promoting the growth of chlorella vulgaris.
5.2. Experiment of Rose Growth
In the experiment of rose growth, SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga light conversion films having thin white reflector on its back side were located on both sides of the rose plants and the experiment was conducted for total 85 d during which the variables were strictly checked. Standard deviation of the values was determined by measuring 3 samples kept under the same condition. At the end of the experiment, the growth of height of rose grass was measured concerning 20 wt% SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga/ PDMS film (B1), 10 wt% SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga/ PDMS film (B2), and blank (Avg.). After 85 d‐long experiment, the growth of rose grass was 174±80% (20 wt% SAO) and 125±65% (10 wt% SAO) higher than that of the control group (blank), respectively (Figure 11 ). Earlier flowering of rose compared with blank was achieved in 20 wt% SAO. A combination of the SAO:Mn,Mg,Ga and the system of reflection‐type film had a significant effect in promoting the growth of rose plants.
Figure 11.

Increase of the height of rose‐grass after 85 d.
6. Conclusions
Mn4+’s weak excitation and emission due to the property of parity forbidden transition was much increased by an introduction of tiny amount of new cation Ga3+ to Mn4+‐phosphor. We found 60% increase of red emission of Sr4Al14O25:0.01Mn4+ by substituting 0.1Ga3+. It was clarified that the increase is originated from a unique mechanism of breaking parity forbidden transition under the substitution of cation in d–d transition by using the tool of AC‐STEM, pre‐edge peak (1s→3d) Mn K‐edge XANES and EXAFS, Rietveld analysis of XRD patterns, and reflection spectra. Substitution of Mg2+, Sc3+, or Lu3+ forming ionic bond with oxygen did not show any tendency of a break of parity forbidden transition. Further, a combination of substituted Ga, Mg, and special double flux H3BO3/AlF3 was found to tremendously increase the emission intensity (355% up). We examined actual growth of chlorella and rose by a combination of the quite cheap Sr4Al14O25:0.01Mn2+,0.007Mg2+,0.1Ga3+ and a unique reflection typed phosphor‐film system as sunlight converting system. Optical density of chlorella and height of rose grass was increased 36±14% and 174±80% compared with nonphosphor‐film, respectively. Earlier flowering of rose was achieved. It is suggested that a combination of advanced cheap phosphor and advanced sunlight converting system (system of well utilizing nature) could solve the subject of highly costing facilities in LED plant factory.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Supporting information
Supporting Information
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express gratitude to Gansu Defu Company, Lanzhou New Area Modern Agriculture Investment Group, and Shanghai XAFS Institute for helping the test of chlorella growth, helping the test of rose growth, and measuring XAFS, respectively. The authors are grateful to Prof. Yue Lin, University of Science and Technology of China, for helping to measure the AC‐STEM. The authors are also grateful to Yaxin Cao and Ziyong Kang for helping EXAFS analysis and helping the experiments of plant growth, respectively.
Wang S., Seto T., Liu B., Wang Y., Li C., Liu Z., Dong H., Tremendous Acceleration of Plant Growth by Applying a New Sunlight Converter Sr4Al14− x Ga x O25:Mn4+ Breaking Parity Forbidden Transition. Adv. Sci. 2023, 10, 2204418. 10.1002/advs.202204418
Contributor Information
Takatoshi Seto, Email: seto@lzu.edu.cn.
Bin Liu, Email: liubin@lzu.edu.cn.
Yuhua Wang, Email: wyh@lzu.edu.cn.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
- 1.a) Yun Y. J., Kim J. K., Ju J. Y., Choi S. K., Park W. I., Suh J. Y., Jung H.‐k., Kim Y., Choi S. J. P. C. C. P., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2017, 19, 11111; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Luo L., Liu R., Liu Y., Zhuang W., Li Y., Qin S. J. J. o. R. E., J. Rare Earths 2021, 39, 380. [Google Scholar]
- 2.a) Zhang J., Zhang X., Zhang J., Ma W., Ji X., Liao S., Qiu Z., Zhou W., Yu L., Lian S. J. J. o. M. C. C., J. Mater. Chem. C 2017, 5, 12069; [Google Scholar]; b) Li Y., Qiu Z., Zhang J., Ji X., Zhang X., Liao S., Zhou W., Yu L., Lian S. J. J. o. M. C. C., J. Mater. Chem. C 2019, 7, 8982; [Google Scholar]; c) Li K., Van Deun R. J. C. C., Chem. Commun. 2019, 55, 10697; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Gu S., Xia M., Zhou C., Kong Z., Molokeev M. S., Liu L., Wong W.‐Y., Zhou Z. J. C. E. J., Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 396, 125208. [Google Scholar]
- 3.a) Shi L., Wang S., Han Y.‐j., Ji Z.‐x., Liu L., Ma D., Mu Z.‐f., Mao Z.‐y., Wang D.‐J., Zhang Z.‐w. J. J. o. A., Compounds, J. Alloys Compd. 2020, 829, 154475; [Google Scholar]; b) Chen J., Zhang N., Guo C., Pan F., Zhou X., Suo H., Zhao X., Goldys E. M. J. A. a. m., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 20856; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Dong L., Zhang L., Jia Y., Shao B., Lü W., Zhao S., You H. J. A. a. m., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 7334; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Massa G. D., Kim H.‐H., Wheeler R. M., Mitchell C. A. J. H., HortScience 2008, 43, 1951. [Google Scholar]
- 4. Okamoto K., Yanagi T., Takita S., Tanaka M., Higuchi T., Ushida Y., Watanabe H., presented at Int. Symp. Plant Production in Closed Ecosystems 440, Japan in August 1996.
- 5. Wang J., Zhang H., Lei B., Xia Z., Dong H., Liu Y., Zheng M., Xiao Y. J. J. o. M. C. C., J. Mater. Chem. C 2015, 3, 4445. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Wu X., Yang Y., Gai S., Liu L., Zhou Z., Li M., Zhong Y., Xia M., Zhou N., Zhou Z. J. J. o. t. A. C. S., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2019, 102, 7386. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Wang B., Lin H., Xu J., Chen H., Wang Y. S., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 22905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.a) Wang X., Li P., Brik M. G., Li X., Li L., Peng M. J. J. o. L., J. Lumin. 2019, 206, 84; [Google Scholar]; b) He M., Sun Y., Han B. J. A. C. I. E., Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2021. [Google Scholar]
- 9.a) Xu Y., Wang D., Wang L., Ding N., Shi M., Zhong J., Qi S. J. J. o. a., J. Alloys Compd. 2013, 550, 226; [Google Scholar]; b) Zhang N., Tsai Y.‐T., Fang M.‐H., Ma C.‐G., Lazarowska A., Mahlik S., Grinberg M., Chiang C.‐Y., Zhou W., Lin J. G. J. A. a. m., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 23995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Rajendran V., Fang M. H., Huang W. T., Majewska N., Lesniewski T., Mahlik S., Leniec G., Kaczmarek S. M., Pang W. K., Peterson V. K., Lu K. M., Chang H., Liu R. S., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2021, 143, 19058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.a) Ten Kate O., Zhang Z., Dorenbos P., Hintzen H., Van der Kolk E. J. J. o. S. S. C., J. Solid State Chem. 2013, 197, 209; [Google Scholar]; b) Van der Kolk E., Dorenbos P., De Haas J., Van Eijk C. J. P. R. B., Phys. Rev. B 2005, 71, 045121; [Google Scholar]; c) Bachmann V., Jüstel T., Meijerink A., Ronda C., Schmidt P. J. J. J. o. L., J. Lumin. 2006, 121, 441. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Li Y., De With G., Hintzen H. J. J. o. S. S. C., J. Solid State Chem. 2008, 181, 515. [Google Scholar]
- 13. Piao X., Horikawa T., Hanzawa H., Machida K.‐i. J. J. o. T. E. S., J. Electrochem. Soc. 2006, 153, H232. [Google Scholar]
- 14. Liang S. S., Li G. G., Dang P. P., Wei Y., Lian H. Z., Lin J., Adv. Opt. Mater. 2019, 7, 12. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Peng M., Yin X., Tanner P. A., Liang C., Li P., Zhang Q., Qiu J. J. J. o. t. A. C. S., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2013, 96, 2870. [Google Scholar]
- 16. Brik M., Camardello S., Srivastava A., Avram N., Suchocki A. J. E. J. o. S. S. S., ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol. 2015, 5, R3067. [Google Scholar]
- 17. Peng M., Yin X., Tanner P. A., Brik M., Li P. J. C. o. m., Chem. Mater. 2015, 27, 2938. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Cech E. A., Waidzunas T. J., Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, 3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Kim K. B., Kim Y. I., Chun H. G., Cho T. Y., Jung J. S., Kang J. G., Chem. Mater. 2002, 14, 5045. [Google Scholar]
- 20. Ye T. N., Li S., Wu X. Y., Xu M., Wei X., Wang K. X., Bao H. L., Wang J. Q., Chen J. S., J. Mater. Chem. C 2013, 1, 4327. [Google Scholar]
- 21. Luo J. J., Wang X. M., Li S. R., Liu J., Guo Y. M., Niu G. D., Yao L., Fu Y. H., Gao L., Dong Q. S., Zhao C. Y., Leng M. Y., Ma F. S., Liang W. X., Wang L. D., Jin S. Y., Han J. B., Zhang L. J., Etheridge J., Wang J. B., Yan Y. F., Sargent E. H., Tang J., Nature 2018, 563, 541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Hansen P.‐A., Kumar S., Meijerink A. J. J. o. L., J. Lumin. 2021, 235, 118012. [Google Scholar]
- 23. Farges F. J. P. r. B., Phys. Rev. B 2005, 71, 155109. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Meng L. Y., Feng C. C., He L. H., Deng S. H., Wu Y. D., Han L. M., Bai Y. J., J. Solid State Chem. 2022, 310, 123050. [Google Scholar]
- 25. Luo B. B., Liang D. H., Sun S. S., Xiao Y. H., Lian X., Li X. L., Li M. D., Huang X. C., Zhang J. Z., J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2020, 11, 199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Peng M. Y., Yin X. W., Tanner P. A., Brik M. G., Li P. F., Chem. Mater. 2015, 27, 2938. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supporting Information
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
