Hubbry Logo
Isotopes of copperIsotopes of copperMain
Open search
Isotopes of copper
Community hub
Isotopes of copper
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Isotopes of copper
Isotopes of copper
Isotopes of copper
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Isotopes of copper (29Cu)
Main isotopes[1] Decay
Isotope abun­dance half-life (t1/2) mode pro­duct
63Cu 69.2% stable
64Cu synth 12.70 h β+ 64Ni
β− 64Zn
65Cu 30.9% stable
67Cu synth 61.83 h β− 67Zn
Standard atomic weight Ar°(Cu)

Copper (29Cu) has two stable isotopes, 63Cu and 65Cu, along with 28 known radioisotopes from 55Cu to 84Cu. The most stable radioisotope, 67Cu, has a half-life of only 61.83 hours, then follow 64Cu at 12.70 hours and 61Cu at 3.34 hours. The others have half-lives all under an hour and most under a minute. The isotopes with mass below 63 generally undergo positron emission and electron capture to nickel isotopes, while isotopes with mass above 65 generally undergo β− decay to zinc isotopes. The single example in between, 64Cu, decays both ways.

There are at least 10 metastable isomers of copper, of which the most stable is 68mCu with a half-life of 3.75 minutes.

List of isotopes

[edit]


Nuclide
[n 1] 		Z N Isotopic mass (Da)[4]
[n 2][n 3] 		Half-life[1]
 Decay
mode[1]
[n 4] 		Daughter
isotope
[n 5] 		Spin and
parity[1]
[n 6][n 7] 		Natural abundance (mole fraction)
Excitation energy[n 7] Normal proportion[1] Range of variation
55Cu 29 26 54.96604(17) 55.9(15) ms β+ 55Ni 3/2−#
β+, p (?%) 54Co
56Cu 29 27 55.9585293(69) 80.8(6) ms β+ (99.60%) 56Ni (4+)
β+, p (0.40%) 55Co
57Cu 29 28 56.94921169(54) 196.4(7) ms β+ 57Ni 3/2−
58Cu 29 29 57.94453228(60) 3.204(7) s β+ 58Ni 1+
59Cu 29 30 58.93949671(57) 81.5(5) s β+ 59Ni 3/2−
60Cu 29 31 59.9373638(17) 23.7(4) min β+ 60Ni 2+
61Cu 29 32 60.9334574(10) 3.343(16) h β+ 61Ni 3/2−
62Cu 29 33 61.9325948(07) 9.672(8) min β+ 62Ni 1+
63Cu 29 34 62.92959712(46) Stable 3/2− 0.6915(15)
64Cu 29 35 63.92976400(46) 12.7004(13) h β+ (61.52%) 64Ni 1+
β− (38.48%) 64Zn
65Cu 29 36 64.92778948(69) Stable 3/2− 0.3085(15)
66Cu 29 37 65.92886880(70) 5.120(14) min β− 66Zn 1+
66mCu 1154.2(14) keV 600(17) ns IT 66Cu (6)−
67Cu 29 38 66.92772949(96) 61.83(12) h β− 67Zn 3/2−
68Cu 29 39 67.9296109(17) 30.9(6) s β− 68Zn 1+
68mCu 721.26(8) keV 3.75(5) min IT (86%) 68Cu 6−
β− (14%) 68Zn
69Cu 29 40 68.929429267(15) 2.85(15) min β− 69Zn 3/2−
69mCu 2742.0(7) keV 357(2) ns IT 69Cu (13/2+)
70Cu 29 41 69.9323921(12) 44.5(2) s β− 70Zn 6−
70m1Cu 101.1(3) keV 33(2) s β− (52%) 70Zn 3−
IT (48%) 70Cu
70m2Cu 242.6(5) keV 6.6(2) s β− (93.2%) 70Zn 1+
IT (6.8%) 70Cu
71Cu 29 42 70.9326768(16) 19.4(14) s β− 71Zn 3/2−
71mCu 2755.7(6) keV 271(13) ns IT 71Cu (19/2−)
72Cu 29 43 71.9358203(15) 6.63(3) s β− 72Zn 2−
72mCu 270(3) keV 1.76(3) μs IT 72Cu (6−)
73Cu 29 44 72.9366744(21) 4.20(12) s β− (99.71%) 73Zn 3/2−
β−, n (0.29%) 72Zn
74Cu 29 45 73.9398749(66) 1.606(9) s β− (99.93%) 74Zn 2−
β−, n (0.075%) 73Zn
75Cu 29 46 74.94152382(77) 1.224(3) s β− (97.3%) 75Zn 5/2−
β−, n (2.7%) 74Zn
75m1Cu 61.7(4) keV 0.310(8) μs IT 75Cu 1/2−
75m2Cu 66.2(4) keV 0.149(5) μs IT 75Cu 3/2−
76Cu[5] 29 47 75.9452370(21) 1.27(30) s β− (?%) 76Zn (1,2)
β−, n (?%) 75Zn
76mCu[5] 64.8(25) keV 637.7(55) ms β− (?%) 76Zn 3−
β−, n (?%) 75Zn
IT (10–17%) 76Cu
77Cu 29 48 76.9475436(13) 470.3(17) ms β− (69.9%) 77Zn 5/2−
β−, n (30.1%) 76Zn
78Cu 29 49 77.9519206(81)[6] 330.7(20) ms β−, n (50.6%) 77Zn (6−)
β− (49.4%) 78Zn
79Cu 29 50 78.95447(11) 241.3(21) ms β−, n (66%) 78Zn (5/2−)
β− (34%) 79Zn
80Cu 29 51 79.96062(32)# 113.3(64) ms β−, n (59%) 79Zn
β− (41%) 80Zn
81Cu 29 52 80.96574(32)# 73.2(68) ms β−, n (81%) 80Zn 5/2−#
β− (19%) 81Zn
82Cu 29 53 81.97238(43)# 34(7) ms β− 82Zn
83Cu 29 54 82.97811(54)# 21# ms [>410 ns] 5/2−#
84Cu[7] 29 55 83.98527(54)#
This table header & footer:
  1. ^ mCu – Excited nuclear isomer.
  2. ^ ( ) – Uncertainty (1σ) is given in concise form in parentheses after the corresponding last digits.
  3. ^ # – Atomic mass marked #: value and uncertainty derived not from purely experimental data, but at least partly from trends from the Mass Surface (TMS).
  4. ^ Modes of decay:
    IT: Isomeric transition
    n: Neutron emission
    p: Proton emission
  5. ^ Bold symbol as daughter – Daughter product is stable.
  6. ^ ( ) spin value – Indicates spin with weak assignment arguments.
  7. ^ a b # – Values marked # are not purely derived from experimental data, but at least partly from trends of neighboring nuclides (TNN).

Copper nuclear magnetic resonance

[edit]

Both stable isotopes of copper (63Cu and 65Cu) have nuclear spin of 3/2−, and thus produce nuclear magnetic resonance spectra, although the spectral lines are broad due to quadrupolar broadening. 63Cu is the more sensitive nucleus while 65Cu yields very slightly narrower signals. Usually though 63Cu NMR is preferred.[8]

Copper-64 and other potential medical isotopes

[edit]

Copper offers a relatively large number of radioisotopes that are potentially useful for nuclear medicine.

There is growing interest in the use of 64Cu, 62Cu, 61Cu, and 60Cu for diagnostic purposes and 67Cu and 64Cu for targeted radiotherapy. For example, 64Cu has a longer half-life than most positron-emitters (12.7 hours) and is thus ideal for diagnostic PET imaging of biological molecules.[9]

See also

[edit]

Daughter products other than copper

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Isotopes of copper

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Copper (₂₉Cu) has two stable isotopes, ⁶³Cu and ⁶⁵Cu, along with approximately 27 known radioactive isotopes spanning mass numbers from ⁵⁴Cu to ⁸⁵Cu. The stable isotopes occur naturally with abundances of 69.15% for ⁶³Cu and 30.85% for ⁶⁵Cu, both possessing a nuclear spin of ³/₂, which enables applications in (NMR) spectroscopy despite quadrupolar broadening effects. These isotopes contribute to the of copper, 63.546(3). The radioactive isotopes of copper decay primarily via β⁺ emission for neutron-deficient nuclides (mass numbers below 64) and β⁻ emission for neutron-rich ones (above 64), with also prominent in some cases. The longest-lived radioisotope is ⁶⁷Cu, with a of 61.83 hours and pure β⁻ decay, followed by ⁶⁴Cu at 12.7 hours, which undergoes mixed β⁺ (17–19%), β⁻ (38–39%), and (41–43%) decay modes. Shorter-lived isotopes include ⁶²Cu (9.74 minutes, 98% β⁺), ⁶¹Cu (3.33 hours, 61% β⁺), and ⁶⁰Cu (23.7 minutes, 93% β⁺), all positron emitters suitable for imaging. Copper radioisotopes are notable for their production via cyclotrons or reactors and their applications in , particularly (PET) imaging and targeted . For instance, ⁶⁴Cu is widely used in theranostic due to its compatible with antibody-based targeting and its dual emission for both diagnostics and . Additionally, copper isotopes play roles in geophysical studies of processes and in fundamental research on shell structures in neutron-rich regions.

Overview and Natural Occurrence

Introduction to Copper Isotopes

(Cu), with 29, has 30 known isotopes consisting of two stable nuclides, ^{63}Cu and ^{65}Cu, and 28 radioactive ones spanning mass numbers from ^{55}Cu to ^{84}Cu. The stable isotopes dominate natural , while the radioactive variants range from neutron-deficient lighter isotopes with fewer s relative to protons to neutron-rich heavier ones exhibiting greater neutron excess, reflecting the broad nuclear landscape around copper's . Notably, ^{84}Cu was discovered in 2024 through in-flight fission experiments at . The stable isotopes of copper were identified in the early through techniques developed by Francis Aston, who confirmed their existence as part of his pioneering work on non-radioactive isotopes. Systematic studies of the radioactive copper isotopes began in the post-1940s era, facilitated by the advent of nuclear reactors and particle accelerators that enabled their production and characterization. These isotopes collectively cover an atomic mass range of approximately 55 to 84 u, providing insights into nuclear structure and reactions across the nuclide chart for element 29.

Stable Isotopes and Abundances

Copper has two stable isotopes: copper-63 (^{63}\ce{Cu}) and copper-65 (^{65}\ce{Cu}). The isotope ^{63}\ce{Cu} has an atomic mass of 62.92959772(56) u and a natural abundance of 69.15(15)%, while ^{65}\ce{Cu} has an atomic mass of 64.92778970(71) u and a natural abundance of 30.85(15)%. Both isotopes possess a nuclear spin of 3/2, which contributes to their utility in nuclear magnetic resonance studies. The of copper, 63.546(3) u, is determined as the abundance-weighted average of these isotopes. This value is calculated using the formula: M=(f63×m63)+(f65×m65)M = (f_{63} \times m_{63}) + (f_{65} \times m_{65}) where MM is the , f63f_{63} and f65f_{65} are the fractional abundances of ^{63}\ce{Cu} and ^{65}\ce{Cu} (summing to 1), and m63m_{63} and m65m_{65} are their respective atomic masses.
IsotopeAtomic Mass (u)Natural Abundance (%)Nuclear Spin
^{63}\ce{Cu}62.92959772(56)69.15(15)3/2
^{65}\ce{Cu}64.92778970(71)30.85(15)3/2
In natural samples, isotopic abundances can vary slightly due to geochemical fractionation processes, such as redox reactions and biological uptake, which preferentially enrich one isotope over the other. These variations are quantified using the δ^{65}\ce{Cu} notation, defined relative to a standard (e.g., NIST SRM 976), where δ^{65}\ce{Cu} = [(^{65}\ce{Cu}/^{63}\ce{Cu}){sample} / (^{65}\ce{Cu}/^{63}\ce{Cu}){standard} - 1] × 1000‰; reported ranges in terrestrial materials span from approximately -16‰ to +20‰. Natural copper primarily occurs in ores such as chalcopyrite (\ce{CuFeS2}) and bornite (\ce{Cu5FeS4}), where these isotopic ratios reflect environmental conditions during mineral formation. Precise measurement of copper isotopic abundances and ratios is achieved through mass spectrometry techniques, including multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) and thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS), which provide high accuracy after sample purification via column chromatography.

Radioactive Isotopes

Key Radioisotopes and Half-Lives

Copper has 28 known radioactive isotopes, ranging from mass numbers 55 to 84, with half-lives spanning from microseconds to days. Among these, the most studied radioisotopes are those with relatively longer half-lives that enable practical applications in research and medicine. The longest-lived is ^{67}Cu, with a half-life of 61.83 hours, decaying primarily via β^- emission to stable ^{67}Zn. This isotope's extended half-life makes it suitable for targeted therapies where prolonged circulation is beneficial, though detailed applications are discussed elsewhere. Another key radioisotope is ^{64}Cu, with a of 12.701 hours, notable for its dual β^+ ( for PET imaging) and β^- decay modes. This versatility allows ^{64}Cu to serve both diagnostic and therapeutic roles, such as in imaging tumor uptake. On the proton-rich side, ^{60}Cu has a of 23.7 minutes and undergoes primarily β^+ decay (93%) alongside (EC, 7%), making it useful for short-duration studies despite its brevity. Neutron-rich isotopes include ^{68}Cu, with a short half-life of 31.1 seconds, decaying via β^- to ^{68}Zn. High-precision measurements in 2024 identified an isomeric state in ^{76}Cu with a half-life of 672(110) ms, initially challenging assumptions about its ground-state nature, but a 2025 study suggests both isomeric and ground states have similar half-lives of 600–700 ms, leaving the nuclear structure debate unresolved. The following table summarizes the half-lives of the five longest-lived radioactive copper isotopes (excluding those with half-lives under 10 seconds):
IsotopeHalf-lifePrimary Decay Mode
^{67}Cu61.83 hoursβ^-
^{64}Cu12.701 hoursβ^+, β^-, EC
^{61}Cu3.333 hoursβ^+, EC
^{62}Cu9.74 minutesβ^+, EC
^{60}Cu23.7 minutesβ^+, EC
Half-lives sourced from accepted nuclear data compilations.

Decay Modes and Nuclear Stability

The decay modes of copper radioisotopes are determined by their position relative to the line of beta stability, with neutron-rich isotopes predominantly undergoing β⁻ decay, while proton-rich ones favor β⁺ emission or electron capture (EC). For instance, the neutron-rich ^{68}Cu decays almost exclusively via β⁻ emission to stable zinc isotopes, with a half-life of 31.1 s and no significant alternative pathways observed. In contrast, proton-rich isotopes such as ^{60}Cu exhibit β⁺ decay (approximately 100%) accompanied by EC, reflecting the excess protons that convert to neutrons to achieve stability. The mixed-decay isotope ^{64}Cu, an odd-odd nucleus, branches into β⁻ (39%), β⁺ (18%), and EC (43%) modes, highlighting how proximity to stability allows multiple pathways. Alpha decay is exceedingly rare in copper isotopes due to high Coulomb barriers. Nuclear stability in copper isotopes (Z=29) is influenced by pairing effects, where even-even and odd-even configurations benefit from nucleon pairing energy, leading to longer half-lives compared to odd-odd nuclei like ^{64}Cu, which lacks full pairing and thus exhibits reduced stability and faster decay rates. Near the neutron drip line, stability is further probed by neutron separation energies (S_n), which approach zero for isotopes beyond ^{78}Cu, rendering them unbound and prone to neutron emission alongside β⁻ decay; for example, S_n for ^{84}Cu is approximately 1.4 MeV, marginalizing its persistence. Shell effects play a key role around N=40 (e.g., in ^{69}Cu), where a subshell closure enhances stability through filled neutron orbitals, increasing binding energies and suppressing decay probabilities compared to nearby isotopes. Quantitative insights into decay energetics are provided by Q-values; for the β⁻ decay of ^{67}Cu, Q_{β⁻} = 0.562(2) MeV, sufficient to populate low-lying states in ^{67}Zn but indicative of moderate neutron excess. Theoretical models elucidate these trends by combining macroscopic and microscopic descriptions. The liquid drop model captures bulk stability through fission-like barriers and predicts half-lives via semi-empirical mass formulas, often overestimating them for light nuclei like by neglecting shell corrections, but it effectively scales Q-values with asymmetry (N-Z). Complementarily, the shell model incorporates interactions within the fp shell (for neutrons around N=28-50), accurately reproducing gaps (∼1-2 MeV) and shell-induced enhancements near N=40, with predictions for half-lives of neutron-rich isotopes aligning within factors of 2-5 of experimental values for ^{68}Cu and beyond. These models underscore how deviations from liquid drop predictions arise from quantum shell effects, particularly in the Z=29 region where proton configurations in the 1f_{7/2} orbital interact with shells.

Nuclear Properties

Magnetic Moments and Spin

The stable isotopes of copper, ^{63}Cu and ^{65}Cu, both exhibit a nuclear spin quantum number I=32I = \frac{3}{2}, characteristic of their odd-proton (Z = 29) configuration with even neutron numbers, where the unpaired proton contributes to the total angular momentum. This spin value reflects the dominance of the proton's orbital and spin contributions in the nuclear shell model, leading to a ground-state parity of negative (π=−\pi = -). The moments for these isotopes are μ(63Cu)=+2.22369(13) μN\mu(^{63}\mathrm{Cu}) = +2.22369(13) \, \mu_N and μ(65Cu)=+2.38199(15) μN\mu(^{65}\mathrm{Cu}) = +2.38199(15) \, \mu_N, where μN\mu_N is the ; these positive values indicate alignment of the nuclear magnetic field with the spin direction. The slightly larger moment in ^{65}Cu arises from differences in the filling of the sd shell, influencing core polarization effects on the proton moment. For radioactive isotopes with deformed nuclei, electric moments become significant, reflecting deviations from spherical symmetry; for example, Q(67Cu)=−0.182(8)Q(^{67}\mathrm{Cu}) = -0.182(8) barn for the . This value, derived from laser spectroscopy, highlights the prolate deformation in neutron-rich isotopes beyond N=40. The spin-parity Jπ=32−J^\pi = \frac{3}{2}^- in isotopes influences nuclear stability by favoring beta-decay transitions to nearby odd-A nuclei with compatible , as predicted by the for protons in the p3/2p_{3/2} or f7/2f_{7/2} orbitals. This configuration enhances stability for even-neutron isotopes like the stable pair, while radioisotopes with mismatched parities exhibit shorter half-lives due to allowed Gamow-Teller transitions. These properties are measured using techniques such as atomic beam spectroscopy for dipole moments and collinear laser ionization spectroscopy for spins and quadrupole moments in short-lived isotopes, with muonic providing complementary data on quadrupole interactions via hyperfine splitting. Such measurements underpin applications in , where the spin and moments determine resonance frequencies.

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

Both stable isotopes of copper, ^{63}Cu and ^{65}Cu, are NMR-active nuclei with nuclear spin quantum number I = 3/2, enabling their use in nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to probe local environments in copper-containing compounds. The gyromagnetic ratios are γ(^{63}Cu)/2π = 11.285 MHz/T and γ(^{65}Cu)/2π = 12.089 MHz/T, with natural abundances of 69.17% and 30.83%, respectively; however, isotopic enrichment to near 100% abundance is often employed to enhance signal intensity. Copper NMR faces significant challenges due to the low natural abundances of these isotopes, resulting in inherently low detection sensitivity—approximately 5.9 × 10^{-2} relative to ^{1}H for ^{63}Cu under identical conditions. Additionally, the quadrupolar nature (I > 1/2) leads to substantial electric field gradient interactions, causing line broadening and complicating spectral resolution, particularly in asymmetric coordination environments. Chemical shifts for copper nuclei span a wide range, typically from -1000 to +1000 ppm relative to aqueous Cu^{2+} (Cu(aq)), reflecting sensitivity to the metal's , , and ligands. For instance, Cu(I) complexes (d^{10}, diamagnetic) exhibit shifts often in the positive region (e.g., +200 to +800 ppm for tetrahedral ligands), while Cu(II) complexes (d^{9}, paramagnetic) show broader, more variable shifts influenced by rapid relaxation, typically appearing upfield (e.g., -500 to 0 ppm in square-planar environments). These differences have been exploited to study copper sites in metalloproteins, such as blue copper proteins like , where Cu(I)/Cu(II) redox-dependent shifts help elucidate mechanisms and dynamics. Recent advances in solid-state NMR techniques, particularly post-2020 developments in high-field spectrometers and , have improved resolution for quadrupolar copper nuclei in heterogeneous systems like catalysts. For example, ^{63/65}Cu solid-state NMR combined with calculations has characterized Cu(I) coordination in metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) used as selective catalysts, revealing quadrupolar coupling constants (C_Q ≈ 70-80 MHz) and isotropic shifts around +300 ppm, aiding design of efficient copper-based heterogeneous catalysts.

Production Methods

Accelerator Production

Particle accelerators, particularly cyclotrons, are widely used for producing copper radioisotopes such as ^{64}Cu and ^{67}Cu through proton-induced nuclear reactions on enriched metallic targets. These methods leverage high-energy proton beams to induce transmutations, enabling the synthesis of medically relevant isotopes with high . Typical beam energies range from 10 to 20 MeV, suitable for medical cyclotrons, to optimize yield while minimizing unwanted side reactions. The production of ^{64}Cu predominantly occurs via the ^{64}Ni(p,n)^{64}Cu reaction using electroplated or pressed enriched ^{64}Ni targets (typically >95% isotopic purity). At incident proton energies around 12 MeV, experimental yields reach approximately 2-6 mCi/μA·h, with one study reporting 6.5 mCi/μA·h from a 48 mg target irradiation. The reaction threshold is about 2.92 MeV, and optimal production avoids higher energies to reduce co-production of ^{61}Cu and ^{67}Cu impurities. Recent simulations and validations, including modeling, have refined target geometry and beam parameters to enhance purity above 99% post-decay. For ^{67}Cu, key cyclotron routes include the ^{68}Zn(p,2p)^{67}Cu reaction on enriched ^{68}Zn targets, with cross-sections peaking at approximately 40-100 MeV proton energies, reaching up to 12 mb as measured in 2023 experiments. An alternative is the ^{70}Zn(p,α)^{67}Cu reaction, feasible at lower energies (15-30 MeV) on medical cyclotrons, though cross-section data remain sparse and yields are typically 1-40 MBq/μA·h at 18 MeV. Production from natural zinc via natZn(p,x)^{67}Cu is less efficient due to lower isotopic abundance but useful for preliminary studies, with integrated cross-sections evaluated up to 80 MeV in 2021 revisions. Challenges in accelerator production include isobaric and isotopic contamination from target matrix elements, such as residual or isotopes, and co-produced radioisotopes like ^{61}Cu or ^{64}Cu, which can compromise purity for therapeutic applications. Separation typically employs ion-exchange with cation resins, often preceded by buffer pretreatment to achieve >99% recovery and reduce stable carrier. Facilities like TRIUMF's Isotope and Medical Accelerator Facility (IAMI) and the (PSI) have optimized these processes, with 2024 advancements in extraction efficiency enabling higher-purity batches for clinical use.

Reactor and Other Production Techniques

Reactor production of copper isotopes relies on neutron capture reactions, offering an alternative to charged-particle acceleration for generating neutron-rich or specific short-lived nuclides. The radioisotope 64Cu^{64}\mathrm{Cu} is commonly produced via thermal neutron irradiation of enriched 63Cu^{63}\mathrm{Cu} targets through the 63Cu(n,γ)64Cu^{63}\mathrm{Cu}(n,\gamma)^{64}\mathrm{Cu} reaction, typically in research reactors with thermal flux densities around 101310^{13} to 101410^{14} n/cm²·s. However, this route results in low specific activity (often <1 Ci/g) due to the high abundance of stable carrier copper in natural or enriched targets, limiting its utility for high-purity applications. Yields can reach several mCi per irradiation hour under optimal conditions, but post-processing is essential to mitigate isotopic dilution. In contrast, production of 66Cu^{66}\mathrm{Cu} via the 65Cu(n,γ)66Cu^{65}\mathrm{Cu}(n,\gamma)^{66}\mathrm{Cu} reaction on enriched 65Cu^{65}\mathrm{Cu} targets proves more favorable in medium-flux reactors, with a thermal neutron cross-section of approximately 2.2 b (compared to 4.5 b for 63Cu^{63}\mathrm{Cu}); this may relate to target handling or rapid processing needs given the short half-life. This method yields activities suitable for activation analysis or short-term studies, though the 5.1-minute half-life necessitates rapid processing. Reactor-based approaches for these isotopes have historically dominated pre-2000 production, providing cost-effective access in facilities like the Tehran Research Reactor. Minor quantities of lighter copper isotopes, such as 62Cu^{62}\mathrm{Cu} and 68Cu^{68}\mathrm{Cu}, arise as fission products during the irradiation of uranium targets in high-flux reactors, with cumulative yields on the order of 0.01–0.1% per fission event for thermal neutron-induced splitting of 235U^{235}\mathrm{U}. These low yields make fission a supplementary rather than primary route, often co-producing them alongside other medium-mass fragments in power or research reactors. Spallation sources represent another non-reactor technique for copper isotope generation, where high-energy protons (1–2 GeV) bombard heavy targets like tantalum or uranium, ejecting copper fragments across a broad mass range. At CERN's ISOLDE facility, this process yields neutron-deficient to neutron-rich copper isotopes (from 59Cu^{59}\mathrm{Cu} to 74Cu^{74}\mathrm{Cu}) with beam intensities up to 10710^7 ions/s for select nuclides, enabling on-line separation via mass spectrometry. The method excels for exotic isotopes unavailable via capture, though it requires sophisticated ion-source chemistry for efficient extraction. Post-irradiation chemical separation is critical for all these techniques to achieve radiochemical purity exceeding 99%, typically employing solvent extraction with chelating agents like dithizone in chloroform or tri-n-octylamine in toluene to isolate copper from target matrices and contaminants. These processes recover 90–95% of the activity while minimizing stable copper interference, with automated microfluidic variants enhancing throughput for clinical-scale batches. Historically, reactor neutron capture dominated copper radioisotope production through the mid-2000s, valued for its simplicity in generating 64Cu^{64}\mathrm{Cu} and 67Cu^{67}\mathrm{Cu} for early radiopharmaceutical research. Post-2010, a shift toward accelerator methods has occurred for theranostic applications, driven by demands for carrier-free isotopes with higher specific activity. By 2025, hybrid techniques—combining accelerator-generated neutrons with capture targets—have emerged, offering reactor-like yields (e.g., up to 100 mCi of 64Cu^{64}\mathrm{Cu} per run) in compact facilities without full nuclear reactor infrastructure.

Applications

Medical and Therapeutic Uses

Radioactive isotopes of copper, particularly ^{64}Cu and ^{67}Cu, have emerged as promising agents in nuclear medicine for both diagnostic imaging and targeted therapy due to their favorable nuclear properties and coordination chemistry. ^{64}Cu, a positron-emitting isotope with a half-life of 12.7 hours, is well-suited for positron emission tomography (PET) imaging protocols extending up to 24 hours post-injection, allowing for comprehensive assessment of tracer biodistribution and tumor uptake. One notable application involves ^{64}Cu-ATSM, a complex designed to detect hypoxic regions within tumors, where it accumulates preferentially under low-oxygen conditions; clinical trials in the 2020s, including phase I studies for malignant brain tumors, have demonstrated its feasibility and tolerability for hypoxia imaging in oncology. Additionally, ^{64}Cu-DOTATATE has shown high diagnostic accuracy for somatostatin receptor-positive neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), with studies reporting up to 98% sensitivity in lesion detection compared to standard agents like ^{68}Ga-DOTATOC. ^{67}Cu, a beta-emitting radionuclide with a half-life of 2.58 days, serves as a therapeutic agent in targeted radionuclide therapy, delivering localized radiation to cancer cells while minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissue. Its beta particles have a maximum energy of 0.562 MeV and an average energy of 0.141 MeV, resulting in a tissue penetration range of approximately 2-3 mm, which is ideal for treating small metastatic lesions. For instance, ^{67}Cu-SAR-bisPSMA, utilizing the SarAr chelator for stable binding to prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), has been evaluated in clinical trials for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, showing promising efficacy in phase I/II studies with complete responses observed in early patients. In early 2025, the FDA granted Fast Track designation to ^{67}Cu-SAR-bisPSMA for this indication, with dose expansion ongoing in the SECuRE trial as of April 2025. Dosimetry for such agents indicates targeted energy deposition, with beta emissions contributing to tumor cell destruction while gamma emissions (at 93 keV and 185 keV) enable SPECT imaging for dose verification. The similar chemical behavior of ^{64}Cu and ^{67}Cu enables theranostic applications, where the same ligand can be labeled with ^{64}Cu for pre-therapy PET imaging to predict biodistribution and dosimetry, followed by ^{67}Cu for therapeutic intervention. This pairing has been explored in prostate cancer models using PSMA-targeted constructs, allowing for personalized treatment planning and improved outcomes. In early 2025, the FDA also granted Fast Track designation to ^{64}Cu-SAR-bisPSMA. As of 2025, ongoing clinical trials, such as the Phase 3 AMPLIFY study (commenced May 2025) for ^{64}Cu-SAR-bisPSMA in prostate cancer recurrence detection and the Phase I/IIa COMBAT trial for ^{64}Cu/^{67}Cu-SAR-BBN in gastrin-releasing peptide receptor-positive tumors, underscore the potential of this approach. Safety profiles for these copper-based radiopharmaceuticals are favorable, with effective radiation doses typically low; for example, a standard ^{64}Cu-DOTATATE PET scan at 148 MBq yields an effective dose of approximately 4.7 mSv, comparable to other diagnostic PET procedures and well below annual occupational limits. No significant adverse events have been reported in phase I/II trials for either isotope, supporting their advancement toward broader clinical use.

Research and Industrial Applications

Stable copper isotopes, particularly the ratios of ⁶⁵Cu to ⁶³Cu expressed as δ⁶⁵Cu, serve as effective tracers in environmental studies to identify and track anthropogenic pollution sources in aquatic systems. These isotopes undergo fractionation during processes such as mineral dissolution, adsorption, and biological uptake, enabling differentiation between natural and human-derived copper inputs. For instance, in water bodies affected by industrial effluents or mining runoff, δ⁶⁵Cu variations can reach up to 10‰, reflecting distinct signatures from ore processing (typically heavier isotopes) versus atmospheric deposition (lighter isotopes). In wetland environments receiving contaminated stormwater, δ⁶⁵Cu depletion in dissolved copper (by 0.03‰ to 0.77‰ from inlet to outlet) highlights retention mechanisms like adsorption onto organic matter and aluminum minerals, with over 84% of incoming copper sequestered in sediments. Radioisotopes of copper find applications in fundamental research beyond clinical settings. The positron-emitting ⁶⁴Cu is used to label metalloproteins and other biomolecules in biochemical investigations, allowing non-invasive tracking of copper transport and binding in cellular processes. Bifunctional chelators such as C-NE3TA enable efficient ⁶⁴Cu attachment to peptides or proteins at room temperature, achieving >95% labeling efficiency and high serum stability (>90% intact after 48 hours), which facilitates studies of copper's role in enzymatic function and . Similarly, ⁶⁰Cu contributes to models of astrophysical , particularly in explosive stellar events where it forms as a rare proton-rich nucleus from seed elements like iron and under high-temperature proton capture conditions. Calculations in simulations show ⁶⁰Cu yields when temperatures exceed 2.1 GK, aiding predictions of isotopic abundances in cosmic rays and providing insights into galactic chemical . In industrial contexts, radioisotopes support material performance evaluations and analytical techniques. ⁶⁴Cu acts as a in wear studies of alloys, where introduces the isotope into components like bearings or parts, allowing real-time quantification of material loss through gamma detection during tribological testing. This method reveals rates in alloys such as Al-Si-Cu used in automotive applications, correlating microstructural changes with friction-induced degradation. Additionally, instrumental (INAA) employing isotopes detects trace elements in ores and alloys at parts-per-billion levels, leveraging the k₀-standardized method for simultaneous multi-element profiling without sample destruction. For example, in minerals like , INAA identifies impurities such as and , informing in . Geochemical applications of isotopes elucidate formation processes in deposits and mantle dynamics. Fractionation of δ⁶⁵Cu during segregation and magmatic differentiation links isotopic signatures to deep processes, with lighter values in basaltic rocks indicating mantle-derived sources influenced by recycled crustal material. Recent analyses of volcanic rocks from 2024 studies reveal δ⁶⁵Cu ranges of -0.26‰ to 0.36‰ in andesitic magmas, tracing subduction-related and providing constraints on genesis in porphyry systems. Emerging research employs ⁷⁶Cu in nuclear structure studies via gamma-ray spectroscopy to probe shell evolution near the doubly ⁷⁸Ni nucleus. experiments of ⁷⁶Cu, detected using high-purity detectors, reveal excited states in daughter ⁷⁶Zn up to 6 MeV, with 105 gamma transitions informing models of shape coexistence and isomeric states. Precise measurements resolve long-standing debates on ⁷⁶Cu's ground and isomeric states, enhancing understanding of neutron-rich nuclear landscapes.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4033511/
  2. https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat3/
  3. https://imserc.northwestern.edu/guide/eNMR/chem/Cu.html
  4. https://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/Compositions/stand_alone.pl?ele=Cu
  5. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.4c02885
  6. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/PUB1961_web.pdf
  7. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/chemistry/articles/10.3389/fchem.2020.00609/full
  8. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.81.061303
  9. https://frib.msu.edu/public-engagement/learning-resources-and-programs/brief-history-of-rare-isotopes/latest-discovered-isotopes
  10. https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html
  11. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/1922/aston/facts/
  12. https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nsr/nsrlink.jsp?2012GA06
  13. https://www.webelements.com/copper/isotopes.html
  14. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282996636_A_review_of_progress_in_copper_stable_isotope_geochemistry
  15. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003267022004767
  16. https://isotopes.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/Cu-67.pdf
  17. https://www.uab.edu/ehs/images/docs/rad/Accepted_HalfLives_Commonly_Used_Radioisotopes.pdf
  18. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11831595/
  19. https://ealga.mit.edu/KAERI/cgi-bin/nuclide?nuc=Cu68
  20. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269324002211
  21. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.06400
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12030277/
  23. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-drug/def/copper-cu-62-ethylglyoxal-bisthiosemicarbazone
  24. https://ealga.mit.edu/KAERI/cgi-bin/nuclide?nuc=Cu61
  25. https://www-nds.iaea.org/amdc/ame2020/NUBASE2020.pdf
  26. https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ensnds/68/Cu/68cu_it_decay_3.75_m.pdf
  27. http://www.lnhb.fr/nuclides/Cu-64_tables.pdf
  28. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.69.044306
  29. https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/meetings/nuclear-data-week-2013/wed/am/usndp/USNDP2013_JunChen.pdf
  30. https://www.ucolick.org/~woosley/ay220-15/lectures/lecture4.4x.pdf
  31. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.92.044331
  32. https://www-nds.iaea.org/nuclearmoments/isotope_measurement_results.php?A=63&Z=29
  33. https://www-nds.iaea.org/nuclearmoments/isotope_measurement_results.php?A=65&Z=29
  34. https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.5420
  35. https://www-nds.iaea.org/publications/indc/indc-nds-0833.pdf
  36. https://www-nds.iaea.org/nuclearmoments/isotope_measurement_results.php?A=67&Z=29
  37. https://www-nds.iaea.org/publications/indc/indc-nds-0794.pdf
  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0066410308600393
  39. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ic00193a059
  40. https://febs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1432-1033.1996.0132r.x
  41. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2024/sc/d4sc00782d
  42. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.1c03036
  43. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-23048-5
  44. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physics/articles/10.3389/fphy.2022.1038014/full
  45. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38483-1
  46. https://hal.science/hal-02912614/document
  47. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0969804321001421
  48. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-76660-y
  49. https://triumf.ca/facilities-experiments/iami/
  50. https://www.psi.ch/en/lrc/isotope-production-and-separation
  51. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/dt/d5dt02046h
  52. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1738573318305102
  53. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223131.2017.1419887
  54. https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/06/177/6177102.pdf
  55. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/32211/0000270.pdf?sequence=1
  56. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168583X08007179
  57. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevC.8.775
  58. https://isolde.cern/sites/default/files/April%25202017_1.pdf
  59. https://ep-news.web.cern.ch/content/isolde-dives-deeper-mystery-odd-even-staggering-effect
  60. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666821122001934
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8912090/
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12546246/
  63. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-98757-8
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7145880/
  65. https://jnccn.org/view/journals/jnccn/18/3.5/article-pCLO20-034.xml
  66. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82812-1
  67. https://www.claritypharmaceuticals.com/news/complete_response/
  68. https://www.targetedonc.com/view/fda-grants-fast-track-designation-to-67cu-sar-bispsma-in-mcrpc
  69. https://www.urologytimes.com/view/dose-expansion-begins-in-phase-1-2-trial-of-67cu-sar-bispsma-in-mcrpc
  70. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1774100
  71. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10288943/
  72. https://www.claritypharmaceuticals.com/news/ftd-2/
  73. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06970847
  74. https://www.claritypharmaceuticals.com/news/amplifycommences/
  75. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05633160
  76. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2020/213227s000lbl.pdf
  77. https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/61/6/890
  78. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43017-024-00520-6
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3470735/
  80. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1972ApJ...175..201H/abstract
  81. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248325261_TLA_and_wear_quantification_of_an_aluminium-silicon-copper_alloy_for_the_car_industry
  82. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0969804311003691
  83. https://journal.hep.com.cn/gsf/EN/10.1016/j.gsf.2024.101818
  84. https://www.ornl.gov/publication/b-decay-neutron-rich-76cu-and-structure-76zn
  85. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269325003120
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.