-Prof. Sven Hovmoller, Stockholm
University
-Prof. Jon Gjonnes, Oslo University
Proponents:
four ECA councillors:
-Prof. Karimat El-Sayed, Egypt
-Prof. Giovanni Ferraris, Italy
-Prof. Berit Fjaertoft, Norway
-Prof. Rolf Norrestam, Sweden
The aim of the SIG is to raise the awareness, acceptance and general standard of Electron crystallography, i.e. to standards comparable to those of X-ray diffraction. This will need some concerted effort of groups and workers in this field - and external support. Development of electron crystallography is usually carried out in electron microscopy labs, with relatively small research groups as one of several materials research activities. The contrast between this kind of 'in-house labs' and the organization associated with large facilities, e.g in the synchrotron field, has been pointed out by A. Howie (in 'Current Opinion in Solid State & Materials Science' vol 4, no 3). It is our view as SIG organizers that we should find ways to offset this drawback in order that the full potential of electron optical methods in structure research can be realized.
Recent crystallographic work in several
groups have demonstrated that electron optical methods
are viable options for structure solution over a wide
field, including various kinds of inorganic structures,
small organic molecules, biological macromolecules,
organic polymers. Successful refinement has been obtained
from intensity data collected by selected area electron
diffraction (SAED) or micro-diffraction. Refinement of
structure factor amplitude and phases to very high
accuracy has been attained by the convergent-beam (CBED)
technique for crystals with small unit cells. The main
advantage of electron crystallography remains the
facility to study minute crystals, and to relate these to
their surroundings, e.g. in multiphase materials. Other
benefits include sensitivity to ionic states, bond
charges and charge fluctuations; combination with other
electron microscopy techniques, such as spectroscopy with
high spatial resolution. The problems and tasks one is
facing in development of the field have two main aspects.
One needs to:
i) establish reliable, well-documented procedures,
that extend from data collection, through workable
procedures for determination and verification to
satisfactory refinement of crystal structure. The
difficulties, (especially related to dynamical scattering
effects) must be dealt with - and the specific advantages
exploited.
ii) focus on classes of structure problems that
depend upon electron crystallographic methods for
satisfactory solutions. Flexibility and variations in the
method is expected to remain a characteristic feature of
electron crystallography. Combination with other
crystallographic technique, such as X-ray powder
diffraction, will increase. Other aspects besides
precision in position parameters may be brought into
focus, e.g. ionicity of the atom species, disorder and
defects.
i) Structure solution: the phase problem Solving a
crystal structure is equivalent to assigning structure
factor phases to a sufficient number of reflections. A
selection of methods for extracting structure factor
phases from electron diffraction intensities and/or high
resolution images have been established - or proposed: .
Direct methods applied to electron diffraction
intensities, assuming kinematical scattering, have been
shown to work in a variety of cases, notably for organic
crystals. Recent experience indicates that direct methods
can be applied also to inorganic crystal, including three-dimensional
electron diffraction data, even from quite thick crystals.
Crystallographic structure factor phases can be extracted
directly from the Fourier transform of HREM images from
single images, or by more extensive procedures involving
through-focus series. The increased information limit and
high source coherence of FEG microscopes will increase
the power of these methods. Multiple-beam dynamical
diffraction effects containing phase information are
readily observed in CBED, but have so far not been much
used in actual structure determination. Such phase
information may be very useful in conjunction with other
methods. Various proposals for 'inversion of dynamical
scattering' in order to obtain structure factors (amplitudes
and phases) have been published, but have not been tested
as a means for solving unknown structures. The
availability of coherent CBED and holography in modern
TEM may increase the interest in this problem. . The
inclusion of approximate corrections for multiple beam
dynamical diffraction at various stages should be
addressed, including methods for independent measurement
of thickness. Development in this field could benefit
vastly from exchange of views, experience and structure
problems.
ii) Intensity measurement Intensity data are
crucial. There is a lot of work to do in establishing
good procedures for intensity measurement. New recording
media: imaging plates and slow-scan CCDs (with associated
soft-ware) should encourage this work. It is also
important to develop quantification procedures for the
many labs that cannot afford to buy this expensive
equipment. Define experimental conditions: electron
diffraction theory is usually formulated for a parallel
beam, whereas crystallographic procedures assume
integrated intensities. The way integration is performed
in reciprocal space should be analyzed in relation to
experimental situations, specimen characteristics,
recording procedures. Background subtraction procedures,
correction factors, influence of specimen quality
etcetera need to be considered. Spot patterns with
stationary beam, precession patterns, CBED-technique must
be treated. Theoretical expressions corresponding to real
experimental situations should be developped and tested.
Special attention to merging of data to three-dimensional
sets.
iii) Refinement The situation is characterized by
vast variations in the quality of intensity data, from
CBED-profiles obtained from perfect crystal areas under
well-defined condition, to spot intensities from bent
crystals of poor quality. The quality of data within one
structure determination may also contain large variations.
Parallel with improvement of the data it is important to
work on the refinement procedures. Refinement in Fourier
space is one option. Another possibility is to introduce
chemical constraints. A major challenge appears to be to
combine limited intensity data of high quality, e.g. from
CBED-measurement, with extensive data sets from spot
patterns. First step may be a discussion of refinement
strategies - and their relation to ways of intensity
measurement.
iv) Application of coherent beams and holographic
techniques
The motivation for these efforts must
be connected with needs in structure and materials
research:
a) Small crystals encountered in chemistry
and materials research. The options are: grow larger
crystals, use powder diffraction - or use electrons.
Electron microscopy is often necessary anyway, in order
to characterize the material, ascertain Bravias lattice
and unit cell dimension - or because small crystal size,
internal surfaces, defects or precipitates are inherent
aspects of the material.
b) Combination with powder diffraction. In
addition to supplying the correct Bravais lattice,
electron diffraction can provide important additional
information, such as modulations, anisotropic temperature
factors, ionicities and bond charges.
c) Nanostructured materials. With
materials that basically and deliberately is made up of
very small crystals, with properties different from bulk
material, it should be obvious that electron
crystallographic techniques must have a major r=F4le. It
is important to communicate this message in materials
communities.
d) Materials characterized with CTEM/HREM
as a main tool. At present the possibility to extract
quantitative crystallographic information in addition to
other TEM technique is often overlooked.
e) "Ill-defined" structures, i.e.
materials with poor or varying crystallinity. With
electron diffraction and high resolution imaging one can
select the most ordered parts for structure studies.
f) Biological macromolecules. Membrane
proteins are important examples. Comments and views on
these and other aspect on electron crystallography are
welcome!
Sven Hovmoller, Sweden svenh@tom.fos.su.se
Jon Gjonnes, Norway jon.gjonnes@fys.uio.no
Karimat El-Sayed, Egypt KARIMA@FRCU.EUN.EG
Chris J. Gilmore,
Scotland chris@chem.gla.ac.uk
Istvan Hargittai,
Hungary hargittai.aak@chem.bme.hu
Angel Landa-Canovas, Spain angel@pcbloody.quim.ucm.es
Marcello Mellini, Italy mellini@unisi.it
Genevieve Nihoul, France nihoul@univ-tln.fr=20
Pierre Stadelmann, Switzwerland pierre.stadelmann@epfl.ch
Gustaaf Van Tendeloo, Belgium gvt@ruca.ua.ac.be
Roger Vincent, England R.Vincent@bris.ac.uk
Ingrid G. Voigt-Martin, Germany voima@mwald5.chemie.uni-mainz.de
Marek Wolcyrz, Poland wolcyrz@intpan.wroc.pl
Henny W. Zandbergen, The
Netherlands h.w.zandbergen@stm.tudelft.nl
Boris Borisovich Zvyagin, Russia zvyagin@igem.msk.su
Thomas E. Weirich, Germany weirich@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de
For more information visit the Electron Crystallography SIG Home Page