Enhanced interfacial charge transport motivated by Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterointerface for superior Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ storage system

Abstract

Aqueous energy storage technologies hold great promise in the renewable energy field. Transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) have garnered significant attention as prospective cathode materials. However, their development has been hampered by sluggish ionic transport kinetics and structural instability during repeated ion insertion/extraction processes. Herein, a heterostructured Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ composite anchored on nitrogen-doped carbon frameworks (Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC) is designed to address these challenges. The formation of a built-in electric field at the heterojunction interface, in conjunction with the conductive NC framework, promotes uniform material distribution and effectively mitigates volume expansion during Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ intercalation/de-intercalation. Density functional theory (DFT) calculations reveal that the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterointerface exhibits enhanced adsorption energies for both Zn²⁺ (−1.687 eV) and NH₄⁺ (−2.296 eV) compared to pristine Bi₂Te₃. These synergistic effects collectively contribute to outstanding dual-ion storage capabilities, as evidenced by the high specific capacity of 295 mA h g⁻¹ at 1 A g⁻¹ for zinc-ion storage and 325 mA h g⁻¹ at 0.5 A g⁻¹ for ammonium-ion storage. Remarkably, the hybrid device achieves exceptional long-term cycling stability with 99.1% capacity retention after 9000 cycles for Zn²⁺ and 84.66% retention after 2000 cycles for NH₄⁺. This work provides fundamental insights into heterointerface engineering for developing high-performance dual-ion battery systems.

---

Introduction

The depletion of traditional fossil fuels, climate warming, and environmental pollution have driven the development of renewable energy technologies. Aqueous energy batteries have emerged as an attractive candidate due to their eco-friendliness, intrinsic safety and ultrafast charge/discharge capability.^1–7 Among various systems, dual-ion batteries represent a promising direction due to their ability to utilize multiple charge carriers (e.g., Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺). However, such systems face challenges including sluggish reaction kinetics and poor structural stability under the intercalation of different ionic species.

Transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs), such as bismuth telluride (Bi₂Te₃), have been widely investigated as cathode candidates for aqueous rechargeable batteries due to their layered structures and tunable electrochemical properties.^8–11 While their widespread application is constrained by sluggish ion diffusion kinetics and structural instability during repeated charge–discharge cycles, primarily attributable to intrinsic lattice limitations and interfacial instability.^12–15 Although heterojunction engineering has demonstrated potential in optimizing charge transfer dynamics,^16,17 the rational design of heterointerfaces with balanced lattice compatibility and robust built-in electric fields remains a significant challenge, particularly in dual-ion storage systems involving diverse charge carriers.

Recent advances highlight the pivotal role of interface modulation in enhancing battery performance.^18,19 Heterostructures with work function differences can create spontaneous interfacial electric fields, while lattice matching at phase boundaries alleviates mechanical strain during ion intercalation.^20,21 Nevertheless, current strategies often neglect the synergistic requirements of dual-ion coordination chemistry and long-term structural durability. To address these limitations, we introduce a heterojunction engineering strategy via the integration of bismuth telluride (Bi₂Te₃) and antimony phosphate (SbPO₄) anchored on nitrogen-doped carbon frameworks (Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC). This architecture leverages the complementary attributes of the constituent phases. Bi₂Te₃ provides a stable conductive matrix, while SbPO₄ serves as a structural stabilizer and interface modifier. Its lattice compatibility with Bi₂Te₃ not only creates a strong built-in electric field but also provides a coherent and durable mechanical support to buffer the volume change of Bi₂Te₃.^22–24 The nitrogen-doped carbon substrate further enhances electron transport and mitigates volume fluctuations.^25,26

Theoretical calculations and experimental assessments confirm that the designed heterointerface establishes an efficient charge redistribution network. The work function difference between Bi₂Te₃ and SbPO₄ induces a strong built-in electric field, significantly lowering the energy barriers for Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ migration. Simultaneously, their lattice coherence minimizes interfacial strain, preserving structural integrity during repetitive ion insertion/extraction. Moreover, the hybrid configuration demonstrates exceptional dual-ion storage performance, including high reversible capacities of 295 mA h g⁻¹ at 1 A g⁻¹ for Zn²⁺ and 325 mA h g⁻¹ at 0.5 A g⁻¹ for NH₄⁺, along with exceptional long-term cycling stability (99.1% retention after 9000 cycles for Zn²⁺ and 84.66% after 2000 cycles for NH₄⁺). Furthermore, a hybrid-ion battery assembled in a 15 M CH₃COONH₄ + 2 M ZnSO₄ aqueous electrolyte maintains 78.27% capacity retention over 8000 cycles under a high current density of 5 A g⁻¹. This work provides fundamental insights into heterointerface design for high-energy-density, long-lifespan dual-ion storage devices.

Results and discussion

The role of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ heterointerface in charge transfer and ion storage processes was studied by the first-principles calculations based on density functional theory (DFT). Fig. 1a–c present the optimized crystal structure models of Bi₂Te₃, SbPO₄ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄, respectively. Compared with pure Bi₂Te₃ material, Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ exhibits enhanced electrical conductivity, with the interface offering abundant active sites and efficient pathway for Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ transport (Fig. 1d). The charge density difference analysis reveals a significant charge redistribution at the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ heterojunction interface, indicating pronounced electron transfer from SbPO₄ to Bi₂Te₃ (Fig. 1e–h). Yellow and blue regions represent charge accumulation and depletion, respectively. Furthermore, the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ system demonstrates higher adsorption energies for Zn²⁺ (−1.687 eV) and NH₄⁺ (−2.296 eV) compared to the pure Bi₂Te₃ model, suggesting that the heterointerface is more conducive to the storage of Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺.

Fig. 1 Theoretical simulation models of (a) Bi₂Te₃, (b) SbPO₄ and (c) Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄. Schematic illustration of the optimization strategies of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ electrode and (d) the feasibility analyses of NH₄⁺/Zn²⁺ co-storage chemistry in Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄. Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ adsorption energy of the proposed configurations, yellow and blue regions represent the charge accumulation and the charge depletion (e–h).

Fig. 2a shows the synthesis process of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC nanorods. Detailed synthesis information is provided in the Experimental Section. The phase composition and crystalline structure of the samples were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD). As shown in Fig. 2b and S1, the diffraction peaks of the composite match well with Bi₂Te₃ (PDF#15-0863) and SbPO₄ (PDF#71-2275), confirming the successful construction of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) verified the presence of Bi, Te, Sb, P, O and C elements in the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC sample (Fig. S2). In the high-resolution Bi 4f spectrum (Fig. 2c), the peaks at 159.4 eV and164.7 eV are assigned to Bi 4f7/2 and Bi 4f5/2, respectively. In the Te 3d spectrum (Fig. 2d), two distinct peaks at 572.2 eV (Te 3d5/2) and 586.3 eV (Te 3d3/2) correspond to Te–Bi and Te–O bonding environments.²⁷ Notably, in both the Bi 4f and Te 3d spectra, the binding energies exhibit a positive shift in the heterojunction material, which can be attributed to the difference in work function between Bi₂Te₃ and SbPO₄ (Fig. S3). This drives electron transfer from Bi₂Te₃ to SbPO₄, resulting in the formation of a built-in electric field. Additionally, the presence of Sb, P, O signals in the heterojunction (Fig. S4) further confirms the successful incorporation of SbPO₄.²⁸ Morphological and internal structure of the prepared materials were characterized by field emission scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The Bi-BTC precursor exhibits uniform nanorod morphology (Fig. S5), and the resulting Bi₂Te₃@NC maintains the one-dimensional structure well after tellurization process (Figure S6-7). In contrast to pristine Bi₂Te₃@NC, the heterojunction material displays porous nanorods with larger particles encapsulated within a carbon shell (Fig. 2e and f). The porous architecture effectively mitigates mechanical fracture during ions insertion/(de)insertion processes, thereby facilitating ion transport (Fig. S8). The high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) images (Fig. 2g–k) reveal the interplanar spacings of 0.32 nm and 0.235 nm, corresponding to the (015) plane of Bi₂Te₃ and the (002) plane of SbPO₄, respectively. The selected area electron diffraction (SAED) pattern in Fig. S9 confirms the polycrystalline nature of the material. Furthermore, the high-angle annular dark-field (HAADF) image and corresponding energy dispersive spectrometer (EDS) elemental mappings demonstrate the uniform distribution of Bi, Te, Sb, P and O elements (Fig. 2l–q). These results confirm the successful synthesis of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction nanorods. Compared to Bi₂Te₃@NC, heterojunction materials enhances ion adsorption and effectively accommodates volume changes during repeated charge–discharge cycles. Since SbPO₄ is electrochemically inert (Fig. S10), we only compare the electrochemical performance of Bi₂Te₃@NC and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC in the following.

Fig. 2 (a) Schematic of the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction fabrication process. (b) XRD pattern. XPS spectra of (c) Bi 4f, (d) Te 3d. (e) SEM image of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC. (f) TEM image of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC. (g–i) HRTEM image. (j and k) Lattice distance. (l) The HAADF image of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC and (m–q) the corresponding element mappings.

The electrochemical properties of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC and pristine Bi₂Te₃@NC electrode were systematically studied in 2 M ZnSO₄ electrolyte. The cyclic voltammetry (CV) curve of the heterojunction exhibits minimal variation compared to those of Bi₂Te₃@NC (Fig. 3a and S11), retaining a pair of well-defined and reversible redox peaks, indicating similar redox behavior. Fig. 3b shows the galvanostatic charge–discharge (GCD) profiles of the heterojunction at various current densities. Reversible capacities of 330, 318, 295, 280, 259 mA h g⁻¹ are achieved at current densities of 0.5, 0.8, 1, 3, 5 A g⁻¹, respectively (Fig. 3c). When the current density is restored to 0.5 A g⁻¹, the electrode recovers its capacity, exhibiting excellent rate capability (Fig. S12). To further evaluate and compare the electrochemical performance, key parameters including coulombic efficiency (CE), capacity retention, and specific capacity are plotted in a visual radar chart (Fig. 3d). The Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction outperforms previously reported transition metal compounds in zinc ion storage performance.^29–34 The long-term electrochemical stability was assessed, the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC delivers an initial capacity of 300 mA h g⁻¹ at 0.5 A g⁻¹ and maintains the capacity over 100 cycles, exhibiting superior cycling stability relative to pristine Bi₂Te₃@NC (Fig. 3e). Even under high current densities of 5 A g⁻¹ for 1100 cycles (Fig. 3f) and 10 A g⁻¹ for 9000 cycles (Fig. 3g), the heterojunction demonstrates significantly enhanced capacity retention and exceptional cycle durability. These results underscore the outstanding rate capability and remarkable structural stability of the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction. The outstanding electrochemical performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction primarily is attributed to the strong built-in electric field at the interface of Bi₂Te₃ and SbPO₄, which effectively promotes charge transfer and mitigates volume expansion during cycling. The reaction kinetics of the samples were investigated in Fig. S13. To fully elucidate the energy storage mechanism of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC, the phase evolution during the charge–discharge process was analyzed by ex-situ XRD, XPS and SEM. GCD test was conducted at 0.8 A g⁻¹ (Fig. 3h). The XRD pattern in Fig. 3i clearly shows the characteristic peaks of Bi₂Te₃ (PDF#15-0863) and SbPO₄ (PDF#71-2275), with no additional diffraction peaks observed throughout the cycling process. It is worth noting that at 2θ = 27.8°, the (015) crystal plane of Bi₂Te₃ gradually moves to a lower angle upon discharge to 0.1 V (Fig. 3j), and reverts to its original position when charge to 1.6 V, indicating the reversible Zn²⁺/H⁺ insertion/extraction. XPS analysis provides further insights into electrochemical behavior. The Bi 4f spectrum shows negligible changes in the Bi–O and Bi–Te bonding environments during the redox process (Fig. 3k). In the Te XPS profile, the Te–Te bond disappears during cycling, while the Te–O and Te–Bi peaks remain largely unchanged (Fig. 3l), further highlighting the structural stability of the heterojunction. In the Zn 2p XPS spectrum (Fig. 3m), two obvious Zn signals are detected at 1022.58 eV and 1045.6 eV in the fully discharged state, and these signals are weaker significantly in the fully charged state, confirming the reversible insertion/de-insertion of Zn²⁺. To verify the H⁺ intercalation, CV curves were compared in ZnSO₄/DMSO and ZnSO₄/H₂O electrolytes, respectively (Fig. S14 and 15). The higher CV area observed in the ZnSO₄/H₂O electrolyte compared to that in ZnSO₄/DMSO electrolyte suggests a synergistic Zn²⁺/H⁺ co-insertion mechanism.^35,36 The morphological evolution of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC and Bi₂Te₃@NC was examined by SEM. In the discharge state, obvious Zn₄SO₄(OH)₆·xH₂O (ZSH) nanoflakes are observed on both electrodes (Fig. 3n and p). However, in the fully charged state, residual ZSH deposits persist on Bi₂Te₃@NC, whereas they are nearly absent on Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC (Fig. 3o and q), indicating enhanced reaction reversibility in the heterojunction. Based on the above studies, a schematic illustration summarizing the structural evolution during electrochemical intercalation is proposed to depict the Zn²⁺/H⁺ storage behavior within the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction host (Fig. 3r).³⁷

Fig. 3 The electrochemical properties of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC: (a) CV curves from 0.1 to 1.6 V at 0.1–0.5 mV s⁻¹. (b) The GCD curves under 0.5–5 A g⁻¹. (c) Rate performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC and Bi₂Te₃@NC. (d) Capacity comparison of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC with state-of-the-art Zn²⁺ storage cathode. (e–g) Cycling performance of Bi₂Te₃@NC and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC. (h–j) Ex situ XRD result obtained from the heterojunction cathodes at different states. (k) Bi 4f, (l) Te 3d, (m) Zn 2p XPS obtained from the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction cathodes. SEM images of (n-o) Bi₂Te₃@NC and (p and q) Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC at the fully discharged-charged states, respectively. (r) Schematic diagram presents the charge storage mechanism in the heterojunction cathode.

The Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC material exhibits excellent electrochemical performance in ZIBs, prompting further investigation into its behavior in ammonium-ion batteries (AIBs). We tested the electrochemical performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction materials in 1 M and 5 M CH₃COONH₄ as electrolytes (Fig. S16). It can be found that the electrochemical performance increases with the increase of concentration. In the 15 M CH₃COONH₄ as electrolyte, it shows better electrochemical performance. This is due to the fact that acetate ions are involved in the formation of solvated NH₄⁺ in high concentration electrolyte, which promotes the adsorption of solvated NH₄⁺ clusters on the electrode surface.³⁸ The electrochemical properties of Bi₂Te₃ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC were studied by using 15 M CH₃COONH₄ as electrolyte. From Fig. 4a–b, the heterojunction electrode displays stronger CV redox peak and more obvious charge–discharge platform, indicating enhanced NH₄⁺ storage capability. The CV and GCD curves of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC and Bi₂Te₃@NC are shown in Fig. 4c, d and S17, respectively. In impedance test (Fig. 4e), the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC delivers a lower charge transfer resistance, delivering the enhanced charge transport efficiency. Rate capability of the samples was also evaluated (Fig. 4f). The Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC electrode exhibits superior rate performance and reversibility with a recoverable capacity of 350 mA h g⁻¹. The Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC can maintain a high capacity retention of 84.66% when cycled for 2000 times at 3 A g⁻¹ (Fig. 4g). The energy storage kinetics of the sample in 15 M CH₃COONH₄ is evaluated (Fig. S18 and 19).

Fig. 4 Comparison of the electrochemical performance of Bi₂Te₃ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC electrodes in 15 M CH₃COONH₄: (a) CV curve at 1 mV s⁻¹; (b) GCD curve at 0.5 A g⁻¹; The electrochemical properties of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC: (c) CV curves, (d) GCD curve. (e) EIS spectra. (f) The rate performance of Bi₂Te₃ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC electrodes. (g) The cycling performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC electrode at 3 A g⁻¹. (h) GCD curve. (i and j) Ex-situ XRD patterns, (k) Bi 4f XPS spectra, and (l) N 1s XPS spectra of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC.

To explore the NH₄⁺ storage mechanism in Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC, ex-situ XRD and XPS tests were carried out. The charge–discharge test was conducted at 0.5 A g⁻¹ (Fig. 4h). XRD test revealed no formation of new phase after fully charge–discharge process (Fig. 4i). By enlarging the XRD spectrum near 27.8°, it can be observed that the peak moves to a low angle during the discharge process, which is attributed to the insertion process of NH₄⁺. During the subsequent charge process, the peak returns to a high angle, corresponding to the extraction of NH₄⁺ (Fig. 4j). The chemical states of Bi, Te, N, and O in charge–discharge state were studied by ex-situ XPS spectroscopy (Fig. 4k and S20). In the three-dimensional XPS spectra of Bi 4f and Te 3d, it can be found that the Bi–Te peak moves to the direction of high binding energy during charging, and then does not return to the initial state during discharging, indicating that there is a certain degree of irreversible reaction. In the N 1s spectrum (Fig. 4l), a strong –N–H– peak appears in the fully discharged state, which proves the insertion of NH₄⁺. However, upon fitting and integration of the N 1s spectra, the charged state shows no significant extra area compared to the pristine material, indicating that the N signal mainly comes from the NC framework itself rather than from residual NH₄⁺. Therefore, the insertion and extraction of NH₄⁺ are essentially reversible. In the O 1s signal (Fig. S21), the enhancement of the O–H bond in the fully discharged state illustrated that the coinsertion of H⁺ was accompanied by the embedding of NH₄⁺. The above results prove the reaction mechanism of NH₄⁺ insertion/extraction in Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC.

Fig. 5a shows the electron flow mechanism at the heterogeneous interface within the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC heterojunction during the charge and discharge process. During charging, electrons transfer from Bi₂Te₃ to SbPO₄, while during discharging, the direction reverses with electrons moving from SbPO₄ back to Bi₂Te₃. The electronic properties of both Bi₂Te₃ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ were investigated using density functional theory (DFT) calculations. The computed band structures and partial density of states (PDOS) are presented in Fig. 5b and c. Obviously, the pristine Bi₂Te₃ exhibits typical semiconductor behavior with a band gap of 0.95 eV. In contrast, the Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄ heterostructure displays additional occupied states near the Fermi level, indicating that interface coupling enhances the local electron concentration and improves electronic conductivity. Subsequently, the electrochemistry performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC was evaluated in a 15 M CH₃COONH₄ +2 M ZnSO₄ aqueous electrolyte by assembling coin cells. As shown in the CV curves (Fig. 5d), the heterojunction electrode exhibits well-defined redox peak. Even at a high current density of 5 A g⁻¹, Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC achieves a capacity retention of 78.27% after 8000 cycles (Fig. 5e), with negligible changes in the GCD profiles (Fig. S22), showing exceptional cycling stability. This work demonstrates the feasibility of designing a bi-functional electrode for Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ storage.

Fig. 5 (a) During the charge and discharge process, the electrons flow at the heterogeneous interface. (b and c) Energy band structure and density of state (DOS) of Bi₂Te₃ and Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄. (d) CV curves of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC at 15 M CH₃COONH₄ +2 M ZnSO₄ hybrid-ion electrolyte. (e) The cycling performance of Bi₂Te₃–SbPO₄@NC electrode at 5 A g⁻¹.

Conclusions

In summary, theoretical calculation and experimental validation demonstrate that the designed heterogeneous interface establishes an efficient charge redistribution network. The work function difference between Bi₂Te₃ and SbPO₄ induces a strong built-in electric field, which significantly lowers the energy barrier of Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ insertion. Concurrently, their lattice coherence minimizes the interfacial strain, thereby preserving structural integrity during repeated ion insertion/extraction processes. As a result, the electrode delivers a high specific capacity of 295 mA h g⁻¹ (1 A g⁻¹) in Zn²⁺ storage and 325 mA h g⁻¹ (0.5 A g⁻¹) in NH₄⁺ storage. Moreover, the hybrid structure maintains 99.1% of its capacity after 9000 cycles for Zn²⁺ storage and 84.66% capacity after 2000 cycles for NH₄⁺ storage. Furthermore, a hybrid-ion battery was assembled in a 15 M CH₃COONH₄ + 2 M ZnSO₄ aqueous electrolyte. Under a high current density of 5 A g⁻¹, the material maintains 78.27% capacity retention over 8000 cycles. This work demonstrates the feasibility of designing a bi-functional electrode for Zn²⁺ and NH₄⁺ storage.

Author contributions

Zhiyuan Zha: data curation, investigation, methodology, writing – original draft. Ruinan Chen: data curation, investigation. Tong Zhou: software. Daohong Zhang: supervision, funding. Qiufan Wang: writing – review & editing.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts to declare.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.

Supplementary information: experimental details, XRD, SEM and TEM images, XPS, and electrochemical performance. See DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d6sc02844f.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51702369, 22509055), Hubei Provincial Young Scientific and Technological Talent Cultivation Program (2025DJA042), and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of South-Central Minzu University (CZD24001) (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405829724004987?via=ihub)).

Notes and references

1. M. C. Tang, Q. Liu, X. H. Zou, B. Zhang and L. An, Adv. Mater., 2025, 37, 2501361.
2. C.-C. Kao, C. Ye, J. Hao, Y. Chen, S.-J. Zhang and S.-Z. Qiao, Adv. Energy Mater., 2025, 15, 2501201.
3. D. D. Ling, G. F. Tian, D. H. Zhang and Q. F. Wang, Nano Lett., 2025, 25, 2684.
4. M. Kim, J. Lee and J. W. Choi, Adv. Energy Mater., 2025, 15, e04692.
5. M. M. Shi and X. Y. Zhang, Adv. Mater., 2025, 37, 2415676.
6. Y. J. Zhao, Y. Y. Wang, J. Z. Li, J. W. Xiong, Q. Li, K. Abdalla, Y. Zhao, Z. Cai and X. M. Sun, eScience, 2025, 5, 100331.
7. L. Zhang, J. Xiao, X. L. Xiao, W. L. Xin, Y. H. Geng, Z. C. Yan and Z. Q. Zhu, eScience, 2024, 4, 100205.
8. Z. Y. Zha, R. N. Chen, D. H. Zhang and Q. F. Wang, Nano Lett., 2026, 26, 260–268,  DOI:10.1021/acs.nanolett.5c05017.
9. Q. F. Wang, Z. H. Zhao, S. F. Chen, T. Zhou and D. H. Zhang, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2025, e12019.
10. P. De, P. Lazar, M. Otyepka and M. Pumera, Adv. Sci., 2025, 12, e07255.
11. S. D. Liu, H. L. Zhang, X. Peng, J. M. Chen, L. Kang, X. Yin, Y. Yusuke and B. Ding, ACS Nano, 2025, 19, 13591–13636.
12. L. Wen, Q. X. Zhang, J. J. Shi, F. Wang, S. L. Wang, Z. W. Chen, Y. Yue and Y. H. Gao, ACS Nano, 2024, 18, 5981–5990.
13. O. C. Kenneth and N. J. Megan, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2025, 147, 4643–4653.
14. S. J. Zhang, M. Fang, F. Wang, L. Wen, Q. Wang, J. A. Dai, P. B. Gui, X. G. Ren, Z. L. Chen, W. Zeng, Z. X. Huang, Y. Yue and S. L. Wang, Chem. Eng. J., 2024, 496, 153980.
15. T. R. Gong, L. Gao, L. F. Kang, M. L. Shi, G. Hou, S. H. Zhang, D. H. Meng, J. T. Li and W. Su, Adv. Sci., 2024, 11, 2403845.
16. X. J. Wang, J. Q. Qiao, L. W. Guo, M. Feng, P. Wang and Z. M. Liu, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2025, 35, 2422017.
17. S. C. Liu, Q. Zhou, D. Wen, C. Y. Wu, Y. Q. Pan, X. Liu, Z. Huang and N. Li, ACS Catal., 2024, 14, 8105–8115.
18. B. T. Zhang, Y. X. Huang, S. Y. Gao, N. Zhang, Y. Mei, Y. T. Huang, T. F. Ding, X. Hu, L. Li, F. Wu and R. J. Chen, J. Energy Chem., 2025, 107, 908–918.
19. J. J. Feng, Z. H. Li, L. W. Zhao, Y. J. Zong, H. Sun, B. Liu, L. L. Li, C. L. Wang and H. C. Wang, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2025, 35, 2504803.
20. W. T. Qu, Y. Cai, B. H. Chen and M. Zhang, Energy Environ. Mater., 2024, 7, e12645.
21. M. L. Chen, M. Zhou, Q. Y. Wang, C. Xu, S. Wang, J. Ning, T. Q. Wang, K. L. Wang and K. Jiang, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2025, 35, 2414032.
22. X. Q. Song, D. Tian, Y. Qiu, X. Sun, B. Jiang, C. H. Zhao, Y. Zhang, L. S. Fan and N. Q. Zhang, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2022, 32, 2109413.
23. H. Q. Wang, L. Gou, W. F. Jing, D. An, Y. Li, M. Wang, N. Li, S. L. Hu and Y.-B. He, Mater. Adv., 2020, 1, 206–214.
24. J. Zhang, J. Y. Yu, Q. Lang, Y. X. Yang, J. L. Che, F. X. Wang, L. Q. Luo, J. H. Ye, Z. Y. Liu, L. Chen, G. Wang and Y. P. Wu, ACS Energy Lett., 2025, 10, 1013–1021.
25. L. L. Zhao, J. Y. Wang, Y. M. Wu, P. F. Wang, Z. L. Liu, J. Shu, T. F. Yi and Q. B. Zhang, J. Energy Chem., 2025, 111, 249–273.
26. Y. M. Qin, S. H. Zhao, H. D. Wu, C. X. Sun, J. Xu, M. Yang, R. D. Shi and H. F. Bao, J. Energy Storage, 2025, 134, 118300.
27. Y. X. Hou, P. F. Ma, F. Long, M. Y. Liu, Y. F. Zheng, L. Sun, J. J. Shi, K. Niu, J. Su, Y. N. Ma and Y. H. Gao, ACS Nano, 2024, 18, 27358–27371.
28. L. J. Li, F. Li and T. H. Li, Inorg. Chem. Commun., 2023, 156, 1111128.
29. W. H. Zhang, S. S. Zhang, F. F. Chen, R. Ma, L. L. Ai, M. J. Xu, D. Z. Jia, N. N. Guo and L. X. Wang, ACS Appl. Energy Mater., 2025, 8, 7530–7537.
30. Z. J. Tang, W. S. Chen, Z. L. Deng, Z. Y. Zhu, H. Y. Meng, N. Ju, F. Ye, Y. P. Du, Y. P. Wu and L. F. Hu, Sci. China Mater., 2026, 69, 1969–1977,  DOI:10.1007/s40843-025-3599-5.
31. Y. Y. Chen, S. T. Wang, Y. Y. Wang, Z. M. Fang, B. B. Liu, Y. Mi, J. T. Bai, B. B. Wang and G. Wang, J. Energy Chem., 2025, 105, 130–141.
32. Y. Zong, H. C. Chen, J. S. Wang, M. H. Wu, Y. Chen, L. Y. Wang, X. L. Huang, H. W. He, X. Ning, Z. C. Bai, W. Wen, D. M. Zhu, X. C. Ren, N. N. Wang and S. X. Dou, Adv. Mater., 2023, 35, 2306269.
33. H. N. Yue, M. W. Han, X. N. Li, T. Song, Y. Pei, X. Y. Wang, X. W. Wu, T. F. Duan and B. Long, J. Colloid Interface Sci., 2023, 651, 558–566.
34. B. B. Liu, S. T. Wang, K. M. Yan, Y. Y. Chen, Y. H. Ren, H. H. Xia, R. Y. Chen, J. F. Yan and G. Wang, Chem. Eng. J., 2025, 506, 160246.
35. Q. H. Zhao, A. Song, W. G. Zhao, R. Z. Qin, S. X. Ding, X. Chen, Y. L. Song, L. Y. Yang, H. Lin, S. N. Li and F. Pan, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2021, 133, 4215.
36. D. D. Ling, Q. Wang, G. F. Tian, H. Yu, D. H. Zhang and Q. F. Wang, ACS Nano, 2023, 17, 25222–25233.
37. G. F. Zeng, Q. Sun, S. Horta, S. Wang, X. Lu, C. Y. Zhang, J. Li, J. S. Li, L. J. Ci, Y. H. Tian, M. Ibáñez and A. Cabot, Adv. Mater., 2024, 36, 2305128.
38. J. M. Meng, Y. Song, J. Wang, P. Hei, C. Liu, M. X. Li, Y. L. Lina and X. X. Liu, Chem. Sci., 2024, 15, 220–229.

---