iucr

commissions

principles
aperiodic crystals
biological macromolecules
quantum crystallography
crystal growth and characterization of materials
crystallographic computing
crystallographic nomenclature
crystallographic teaching
crystallography in art and cultural heritage
crystallography of materials
electron crystallography
high pressure
inorganic and mineral structures
international tables
journals
magnetic structures
mathematical and theoretical crystallography
neutron scattering
nmr crystallography
powder diffraction
small-angle scattering
structural chemistry
synchrotron and xfel radiation
xafs

congress

2020 iucr xxv
2017 iucr xxiv
2014 iucr xxiii
2011 iucr xxii
2008 iucr xxi
2005 iucr xx
2002 iucr xix
1999 iucr xviii
1996 iucr xvii
1993 iucr xvi
1990 iucr xv
1987 iucr xiv
1984 iucr xiii
1981 iucr xii
1978 iucr xi
1975 iucr x
1972 iucr ix
1969 iucr viii
1966 iucr vii
1963 iucr vi
1960 iucr v
1957 iucr iv
1954 iucr iii
1951 iucr ii
1948 iucr i

people

nobel prize

all
agre
anfinsen
barkla
boyer
w.h.bragg
w.l.bragg
brockhouse
de broglie
charpak
crick
curl
davisson
debye
deisenhofer
geim
de gennes
hauptman
hodgkin
huber
karle
karplus
kendrew
klug
kobilka
kornberg
kroto
laue
lefkowitz
levitt
lipscomb
mackinnon
michel
novoselov
pauling
perutz
ramakrishnan
roentgen
shechtman
shull
skou
smalley
steitz
sumner
thomson
walker
warshel
watson
wilkins
yonath

resources

commissions

aperiodic crystals
biological macromolecules
quantum crystallography
crystal growth and characterization of materials
crystallographic computing
crystallographic nomenclature
crystallographic teaching
crystallography in art and cultural heritage
crystallography of materials
electron crystallography
high pressure
inorganic and mineral structures
international tables
journals
magnetic structures
mathematical and theoretical crystallography
neutron scattering
NMR crystallography
powder diffraction
small-angle scattering
structural chemistry
synchrotron radiation
xafs

outreach

openlabs

calendar
OpenLab Costa Rica
IUCr-IUPAP-ICTP OpenLab Senegal
Bruker OpenLab Cameroon
Rigaku OpenLab Bolivia
Bruker OpenLab Albania
Bruker OpenLab Uruguay 2
Rigaku OpenLab Cambodia 2
Bruker OpenLab Vietnam 2
Bruker OpenLab Senegal
PANalytical OpenLab Mexico 2
CCDC OpenLab Kenya
Bruker OpenLab Tunisia
Bruker OpenLab Algeria
PANalytical OpenLab Turkey
Bruker OpenLab Vietnam
Agilent OpenLab Hong Kong
PANalytical OpenLab Mexico
Rigaku OpenLab Colombia
grenoble-darmstadt
Agilent OpenLab Turkey
Bruker OpenLab Indonesia
Bruker OpenLab Uruguay
Rigaku OpenLab Cambodia
PANalytical OpenLab Ghana
Bruker OpenLab Morocco
Agilent OpenLab Argentina
Bruker OpenLab Pakistan

- Letter from the President
- Editorial
- Charge density
- Beevers-Lipson strips
- Congratulations
- Request for XRD standard data
- Urea-phosphoric acid
- Inclusion compounds
- Furanosides
- Powder world
- CrSJ meeting
- CRSJ awards
- ECA
- Training in Cairo
- DGK anniversary
- Powder diffraction schools
- ICDD clinics
- BCA Industrial Group workshop
- Denver conference
- Singapore software workshop
- ACA 2000
- International school on crystal growth
- Sagamore XIII
- Indo-French workshop
- Bruker AXS and Nonius
- Canadian institutes
- NIST centennial
- Art with Small Molecules Competition
- ORTEP of the year
- Women in science
- Bacteria silver lined
- Going 3D
- Fankuchen Award to Stewart
- Megaw Honored
- Hawthorne awarded Chair
- News of crystallographers
- Books
- PDB update
- New tools at ISIS
- Shizuo Miyake (1911-2000)
- Joshua Ladell (1923-2000)
- Harry Brumberger (1926-2000)

LAPW partial density of states at Cu in cuprite. Peaks indicate hybridization of 3*d*_{z}^{2} partially unoccupied and holes in the experimental difference map. There's no evidence of hybridization of 4*p*, suggested by Wang and Schwartz (*Angew Chem. Int Ed 2000*, **39**, 21)

Dear Bill,An exchange of letters between Spackman *et al.*, Humphreys and Coppens (*IUCr Newsletter*, Vol. 8, Nos 1 and 3), commenting on our combined electron and X-ray diffraction measurement of charge-density in cuprite (*Nature*, **401**, p. 49, 1999), raised three substantial points.

1. *Accuracy of methods*. Is kinematic X-ray diffraction sufficiently accurate to give meaningful charge densities? What standard is meaningful? If our goal is to understand bonding, we must compare experiment and theory. Due to recent progress, charge densities can be calculated with an accuracy comparable to the best experimental measurement [e.g. Pendellösung X-ray, Convergent-Beam Electron Diffraction (QCBED) data]. For the silicon standard, experiment and local density approximation (LDA) theory agree to within 0.24% (*R* factor), while LDA differs from Generalised Gradient Approximation theory by 0.1% (*J. Phys.* **C9**, 7541, 1997). The accuracy of kinematic X-ray work is limited by extinction. A detailed comparison of electron and X-ray data revealed that the error in the X-ray data, corrected for extinction, is about 1%, twice the structure factor difference between superimposed ions and the crystal for the three lowest order structure factors (*Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.** 2000*, **39**, p. 3791). We believe that this situation is typical for most inorganic materials referred to by Spackman, since the difference between results reported by different groups using different samples of the same material usually exceed experimental errors. The uncorrectable errors are due to statistical variation in the mosaic block distribution, and differences in crystal samples. QCBED patterns are taken from volumes of the order of 10^{4} nm^{3}, much smaller than one 'mosaic block', allowing use of the many-beam perfect crystal theory. Electron diffraction also benefits from the fact that electron intensities increase inversely as the scattering angle to the fourth power for the low angle bond-sensitive reflections. Our results for low order in MgO (P.R. L. 78, p. 4777, 1998), NiO (*Phys. Rev.* **B61**, p. 2506, 2000) and cuprite are the most accurate, lie closest to *ab-initio* band-structure calculations, and, with the Pendellösung results, are indeed the only ones capable of distinguishing many-electron approximations in the theory. The MgO work achieved a tenfold improvement in accuracy over previous X-ray work. The critical voltage method (Smart and Humphreys *Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser.* **52**, p. 211, 1980) provides comparably accurate ratios of structure factors. Three-phase invariants may be measured by many-beam electron diffraction with better than one degree accuracy in phase (*Acta Cryst.* **A49**, 422, 1993), P.R.L. **62**, 547, 1989).

2. *Use of the term 'orbital'.* We agree with Scerri (*J. Chem. Ed.* **77**, p. 1492, 2000) that orbital wavefunctions are unobservable and that 'the orbital model remains enormously useful...and lies at the heart of much of computational chemistry; but it is just that, a model'. Aware of this, we use many-electron theory in all the calculations reported in our paper. However, it would be perverse not to mention the resemblance of the shape of the hole in our difference map to the simple one-electron model of a *d*-orbital charge-density distribution. This similarity indicates that the one-electron model retains validity, even in a transition metal oxide, and that one particular choice of basis functions converges more efficiently than others. Continued use of terms and concepts such as '*d*-electron', 'molecular orbital diagram', 'orbital degeneracy', 'orbital angular momentum', 'anti-bonding orbital' etc. by workers in the field suggests that one-electron theory is too useful an approximation to be abandoned.

3. *The significance of difference charge density.* Our charge density image shows the difference between the experiments and the spherical ion model of Cu^{+} and O^{2-}. the negative difference charge density around Cu is due to the *d*_{z}^{2} hole formed by 3*d*_{z}^{2} and 4*s* hybridization, a picture supported by both theory and experiment (Marksteiner *et al**.*, *Zeit. Phys.* **B64**, 119 (1989); Grioni *et al.*, *Phys. Rev.* **B45**, 3309 (1992)). The figure above shows the partial density of states around Cu calculated by the LAPW method. Restori and Schwarzenbach, (*Acta Cryst.* **B42**, 201, (1986)) show that in the molecular-orbital model the charge density around Cu is a sum of partially occupied |ψ_{z}^{2}|^{2} and |ψ|^{2}, other fully-occupied *d*-states and the interference terms, Re(ψ_{z}^{2}ψ_{s}) and Re(ψ_{xz}ψ_{yz}). These, when subtracted from the charge density of a closed-shell Cu^{+} with a fully occupied *d*_{z}^{2} state, would give a negative charge density for |ψ_{z}^{2}|^{2}. The resemblance of our difference map to the *d*_{z}^{2} orbital arises from the fact that the radial distributions are very different for the *d*_{z}^{2} (<1) and 4*s *(>1) electrons, thus spatially separating the *d*_{z}^{2} and 4*s* electrons. The agreement between this single-electron model and our experiment, supported by many-electron calculations and spectroscopic evidence, vindicates the quantum mechanical single electron approximation for this case.

In closing, we note that while the electron community has consistently taken full account of X-ray works (which is vital, since QCBED remains inaccurate for high orders and temperature factors), this practice has rarely been reciprocated. It seems clear that both methods are needed for greatest accuracy, especially for high symmetry inorganic materials with small unit cells.

J.C.H. Spence, J.M. Zuo* and M. O'Keefe ASU (spence@asu.edu)*UIUC (jianzuo@uiuc.edu)

The International Union of Crystallography is a non-profit scientific union serving the world-wide interests of crystallographers and other scientists employing crystallographic methods.

© International Union of Crystallography