shows the TGA thermograms of IL, MCX, MCX-MS and MCXMSA. As shown in Fig. 2(a) and (b), the decomposition of IL and MCX occurred at about 350 °C and 400 °C, and at about 250 °C, respectively. Fig. 2(c) shows the weight loss of MCX in MCX-MS at about 300 °C, suggesting that the encapsulated MCX in MS was thermally more stable than the free MCX. This is attributed to the protection by the silica network structure. The thermogram also reveals that a large amount of MCX (about 65 wt.%) was encapsulated in MCX-MS. This is ascribed to that the MCX molecules might be anchored on the network of MS during the in-situ sol–gel polymerization due to its long carbon chain. On the other hand, Fig. 2(d) reveals that about 40 wt.% of MCX was adsorbed in MCX-MSA, which was about 1/3 lesser than that in MCX-MS. The result indicates that the encapsulation method is a better way to include MCX in the mesoporous silica than the direct absorption method. The TEM images of MS and MCX-MS (not shown) exhibit the disordered and interconnected mesopores in both the SiO2 networks, confirming that both MS and MCX-MS had the mesoporous structure. Besides, it also shows that the pore volume of MCX-MS was significantly less than that of MS due to the presence of MCX.