Reply to Comment on "Tuning of Photoluminescence and Local Structures of Substituted Cations in xSr2Ca(PO4)2-(1-x)Ca10Li(PO4)7:Eu2+ Phosphors"

Mingyue Chen, Zhiguo Xia, Maxim S. Molokeev, and Quanlin Liu, author of the paper titled, 'Tuning of Photoluminescence and Local Structures of Substituted Cations in xSr2Ca(PO4)2-(1-x)Ca10Li(PO4)7:Eu2+ Phosphors' reply back to the comment by Prof. Bogdan I. Lazoryak. The authors feel that their results are reliable as they are based upon careful analysis of high quality XRD data. Prof. Lazoryak does not, however, have the original experimental data. Chen and colleagues agree that the Rietveld refinements of some samples (x = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4) show some discrepancy with respect to the calculated and observed intensities, which may be the reason for a two-phase system. However, the Rietveld refinement of two phases does not appear to work in this case. Even if one phase has 58 refined parameters, two phases will have two times more parameters, and the number of observed reflections will stay the same. The situation is complicated by the fact that there is no peak splitting of these hypothetical two phases. Third, based upon the suggestions of Prof. Lazoryak, the authors also performed simple Le Bail fitting using two phases for (x = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4) and using one phase for all other cases (x = 0, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 1). The difference plots were very good. Finally, they also disagree that the obtained XRD patterns could be used only to define the lattice parameters of the Le Bail method since the experimental data for these solid solution structures (9000-15000 counts) are insufficient for revealing subtle peculiarities of their structure.