4.6 Article

Nanocomposite structure of two-line ferrihydrite powder from total scattering

期刊

COMMUNICATIONS CHEMISTRY
卷 3, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s42004-020-0269-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. E.R.C. [279705, 788144]
  2. E.P.S.R.C. [EP/G004528/2]
  3. National Science Foundation [EAR-1451996, CAREER-1652237]
  4. Virginia Tech National Center for Earth and Environmental Nanotechnology Infrastructure (NanoEarth, NSF) [1542100]
  5. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the DOE BES Geosciences [DE-FG02-06ER15786]
  6. DOE Office of Science [DE-AC02-06CH11357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ferrihydrite is one of the most important iron-containing minerals on Earth. Yet determination of its atomic-scale structure has been frustrated by its intrinsically poor crystallinity. The key difficulty is that physically-different models can appear consistent with the same experimental data. Using X-ray total scattering and a nancomposite reverse Monte Carlo approach, we evaluate the two principal contending models-one a multi-phase system without tetrahedral iron(III), and the other a single phase with tetrahedral iron(III). Our methodology is unique in considering explicitly the complex nanocomposite structure the material adopts: namely, crystalline domains embedded in a poorly-ordered matrix. The multi-phase model requires unphysical structural rearrangements to fit the data, whereas the single-phase model accounts for the data straightforwardly. Hence the latter provides the more accurate description of the short- and intermediate-range order of ferrihydrite. We discuss how this approach might allow experiment-driven (in)validation of complex models for important nanostructured phases beyond ferrihydrite. Although a geologically important mineral, the atomic-scale structure of ferrihydrite remains unresolved. Here the authors combine X-ray total scattering and reverse Monto Carlo to evaluate the two principal contending models, explicitly considering the material's complex nanocomposite structure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据