| Literature DB >> 29784934 |
Derang Cao1,2, Lining Pan3, Jianan Li3, Xiaohong Cheng3, Zhong Zhao4, Jie Xu4, Qiang Li4, Xia Wang4, Shandong Li4, Jianbo Wang3, Qingfang Liu3.
Abstract
Carbon orEntities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29784934 PMCID: PMC5962609 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26341-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the simple experimental process.
Figure 2XRD patterns for all C-doped CoFe2O4 samples with different citric acid concentrations.
Figure 3SEM imagines for all C-doped CoFe2O4 samples with different citric acid concentration: (a) 0 mol·L−1, (b) 0.05 mol·L−1, (c) 0.1 mol·L−1, (d) 0.18 mol·L−1, (e) 0.3 mol·L−1, and (f) 0.5 mol·L−1, respectively. The inset in each picture is the amplifying results. The right picture is the simply formation process of the samples with the increase of citric acid concentration.
Figure 4C-doped CoFe2O4 sample with citric acid concentration of 0.5 mol·L−1. (a,b) Typical TEM images, (c) HRTEM image, (d) SAED; Elemental mappings: (e) Fe element; (f) Co element; (g) O element, and (h) C element.
Figure 5XPS data for the pure CoFe2O4 (0 mol·L−1) and C-doped CoFe2O4 samples with citric acid (0.5 mol·L−1): (a) the full scan, (b) C 1 s level.
Figure 6(a) M-H loops for C-doped CoFe2O4 nanoparticles with different citric acid concentration; the inset is citric acid concentration dependence of Ms for the corresponding samples. (b,c) Mössbauer spectra for the pure CoFe2O4 (0 mol·L−1) and C-doped CoFe2O4 nanoparticles (0.5 mol·L−1). (d) Mössbauer parameters for two samples obtained from the mössbauer spectra. (e) Comparison of our work and other typical CoFe2O4 nanoparticles for the variability of Ms after doping.