Skip to main content

Magnetic resonance of the NiFe2O4 nanoparticles in the gigahertz range


We report an adjustable magnetic resonance frequency from 1.45 to 2.54 GHz for NiFe2O4 nanoparticles which were prepared by a sol–gel process. X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy results indicate that the samples are polycrystalline nanoparticles, and the size of the particles increases obviously with the thermal treatment temperature. The consequence of the surface composition suggests that the oxygen defects are present in the nanoparticle surface, and this surface magnetic state can show a strong surface anisotropy. With decreasing size of the particle, the surface magnetic effect is predominant, resulting in an increase of resonance frequency for NiFe2O4 nanoparticles. This finding provides a new route for NiFe2O4 materials that can be used in the gigahertz range.


Soft magnetic ferrites have attracted much attention in recent years because they have large saturation magnetization (Ms), low electrical conductivity, and excellent chemical stabilities [1, 2] and can be used as ferrofluids [3], in magnetic resonance imaging [4], and in microwave devices [5, 6]. Furthermore, nanoscale soft magnetic ferrites exhibit special magnetic-like, magneto-resistive, and magneto-optical properties compared with bulk magnetic materials [7]. Because the surface-to-volume ratio becomes very large with the reduction of the particle size at nanoscale, they are potentially useful for a broad range of applications. Soft magnetic ferrites have a potential application in electronic devices when used in the gigahertz (GHz) range. This is because in this frequency region, magnetic metals exhibit strong eddy current loss [8] compared to soft magnetic ferrites [9, 10]. For soft magnetic ferrites, there is magnetic resonance, resulting in magnetic losses. This provides some limitations (like threshold frequency) of the application. Nakamura [11] and Tsutaoka et al. [12] reported that the resonance frequency of bulk soft magnetic ferrites is much lower than 1 GHz. It seems to be an urgent issue to improve the resonance frequency of soft magnetic ferrites. Guo et al. reported that Ni-Zn ferrite thin films exhibit much higher natural resonance frequency, thanks to bianisotropy [13]. There is strong surface anisotropy in ferrite nanoparticles (NPs), which has been reported before [1416]. Owing to this surface anisotropy, ferrite NPs will likely show high resonance frequency. NiFe2O4 is a typical soft magnetic ferrite with high electrical resistivity [17], and it is an inverse spinel with metal ions occupying the octahedral and tetrahedral sites. The magnetic moments placed in the tetrahedral site and octahedral site couple in an antiparallel manner by a superexchange interaction which is mediated through adjacent oxygen atoms and forms a collinear ferrimagnetic ordering. Additionally, the magnetic behaviors of nanoscale NiFe2O4 are extremely sensitive to their size [18]. There is already a significant interest in synthesizing NiFe2O4 NPs for achieving optimal magnetic properties [1921]. In this work, NiFe2O4 NPs were prepared using the sol–gel method. The morphology, structure, and magnetic characterization of the NiFe2O4 NPs have been systemically investigated. Importantly, an adjustable magnetic resonance has been observed in the GHz range, implying that NiFe2O4 is a candidate for microwave devices in the GHz range.


NiFe2O4 NPs were synthesized by the sol–gel method with a postannealing process [22]. All chemical reagents used as starting materials are of analytical grade and purchased without any further treatment. In a typical synthesis process, 0.01 M Ni(NO3)4·5H2O, 0.02 M Fe(NO3)3·9H2O, and 0.03 M citric acid were firstly dissolved in 100 ml of deionized water. The molar ratio of metal ions to citric acid was 1. A small amount of ammonia was added to the solution to adjust the pH value at about 7 with continuous stirring. Then, the dissolved solution was stirred for 5 h at 80°C and dried in the oven to form the precursor at 140°C. The precursor was preannealed at 400°C for 2 h and then calcined at different temperatures (700°C, 800°C, 900°C, and 1,000°C) for 2 h in the air, which were denoted as S700, S800, S900, and S1000, respectively.

X-ray diffraction (XRD; X'Pert PRO PHILIPS with Cu Kα radiation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) was employed to study the structure of the samples. The morphologies of the samples were characterized using a scanning electron microscope (SEM; Hitachi S-4800, Tokyo, Japan). The measurements of magnetic properties were made using a vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM; LakeShore 7304, Columbus, OH, USA). The chemical bonding state and the compositions of the samples were determined by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS; VG Scientific ESCALAB-210 spectrometer, East Grinstead, UK) with monochromatic Mg Kα X-rays (1,253.6 eV). The complex permeability μ of the particles/wax composites were measured on a vector network analyzer (PNA, E8363B, Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA). Then, 63 vol.% of particles and 37 vol.% of wax were mixed together and pressed into a coaxial cylindrical specimen, in which the magnetic particles were randomly dispersed. Electron spin resonance (ESR) measurements were performed with a Bruker ER200D spectrometer (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan).

Results and discussion

The XRD patterns of NiFe2O4 NPs annealed at 700°C to 1,000°C for 2 h are depicted in Figure 1. All diffraction peaks of the samples can be well indexed to the standard spinel phase without any additional peak. The average crystallite size of the synthesized powders is estimated by the X-ray peak broadening of the (400) diffraction peak, via the Scherrer equation [23]. The results indicate that the powders are nanocrystalline with an average crystallite size of 31 to 46 nm for S700 to S1000. Figure 2a,b,c,d shows the SEM images of NiFe2O4 NPs. It is clearly seen that all the NiFe2O4 NPs are partly accumulated together with different sizes, and the size of the sample particles increases obviously with the thermal treatment temperature. The average particle size is about 60 nm for S700 (200 nm for S1000), which is much larger than the crystallite size estimated by XRD. These results indicate that the obtained sample particles are polycrystalline.

Figure 1
figure 1

X-ray diffraction patterns for samples S700, S800, S900, and S1000.

Figure 2
figure 2

SEM images of samples S700 (a), S800 (b), S900 (c), and S1000 (d).

The room temperature magnetic properties of NiFe2O4 NPs were studied using VSM. Figure 3a shows the hysteresis loops of the samples, and the inset of Figure 3a shows the initial magnetization curves. It is found that Ms is a monotonic function of the annealing temperature, and the value of Ms is 38.7, 41.1, 42.6, and 45.8 emu/g for S700 to S1000, respectively. Generally, the Ms of NiFe2O4 NPs is lower than that of the bulk form (56 emu/g) [24, 25], which can be attributed to the greater fraction of surface spins in NPs that tend to be canted or the spin disorder with a smaller net moment [26]. The spin disorder is due to the presence of considerable defects which can destroy the superexchange interaction. Ms increases as the sintering temperature increases, which is due to the reduction of the specific surface area. The initial magnetization curves suggest that the initial magnetic permeability increases with increasing annealing temperature.

Figure 3
figure 3

M - H curves of the samples and XPS spectra of S700. (a) Magnetic hysteresis loops of the samples (inset: the initial magnetization curves), (b) XPS survey spectrum of sample S700, and (c) fitted XPS spectra of O 1s of sample S700. The vertical axis represents the signal intensity. KCPS, kilo counts per second; B.E., binding energy.

The evidence for the composition of products in the surface was obtained by XPS. Figure 3b shows the XPS survey scan spectrum of a representative sample, S700, indicating that no impurities were detected in the sample within the detection limit. An asymmetric high-resolution XPS spectrum for the O 1s peak is observed (shown in Figure 3c), which has a shoulder at the higher binding energy side. By fitting, we obtained three peaks at 529.8, 531.2, and 532.4 eV. The dominant peak located at 529.8 ± 0.2 eV (Oa), which corresponds to O2− ions of the pure composites [27, 28], and the highest binding energy peak at 532.4 ± 0.2 eV (Oc) can be attributed to the chemisorbed oxygen of surface hydroxylation, oxygen atoms in carbonate ions, and adsorbed H2O or O2[29]. Furthermore, the medium binding energy component (Ob) located at 531.2 ± 0.2 eV (Oc) is associated with the O2− ions in the oxygen-deficient regions (O vacancies) [30]. The result obviously demonstrates the presence of oxygen defects in the surface, and the oxygen defects can destroy the superexchange interaction. This indicates that surface and internal magnetic states are different, and the surface magnetic state can show a strong surface anisotropy [14].

Figure 4 shows the complex permeability μ of the NiFe2O4/wax with 63 vol.%. At a frequency of 0.1 GHz, the real part of the complex permeability (μ'; Figure 4a) increases from 2.0 to 2.8 with the increase of sintering temperature. The spectra of the imaginary part (μ'') are shown in Figure 4b; it is worth noting that a resonance phenomenon in the effective permeability is observed at around 1 ~ 3 GHz for NiFe2O4 NPs. Meanwhile, with the increase of sintering temperature, continuous modification in the resonance frequency of the samples in the range of 1.45 to 2.54 GHz has been achieved, which is much higher than previously reported [31]. Pascard and Globus reported that the magnetic resonance frequency is approximately 102 MHz for NiFe2O4 microparticles [32]. Based on the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation, the resonance frequency is fr = (1 + α2) × γ × H a / 2π (α is the magnetic damping parameter, γ is the gyromagnetic ratio, H a is the magnetic effective anisotropy field), and Vittoria et al. reported that α is less than 0.01 [33]. As a result, an approximately effective anisotropy field is 900, 760, 610, and 510 Oe for S700, S800, S900, and S1000, respectively. The data unambiguously show that the magnitude of the effective anisotropy field is on the decline with the increase of sintering temperature. For NiFe2O4 NPs, a strong effective anisotropy has been obtained, which is consistent with previous theoretical results [1416]. This effective anisotropy field is much bigger than the magnetocrystalline anisotropy field for NiFe2O4; therefore, it is related to the strong surface anisotropy for NPs. The magnitude of this surface anisotropy is related to the concentration of the defects in the surface and the fraction of broken exchange bonds relative to the total number of neighboring pairs of surface cations [14], for an individual particle. When the NiFe2O4 particles gradually grow, as the sintering temperature increases, the specific surface area decreases while the defects in the surface are also reduced. This weakens the surface anisotropy and then reduces the resonance frequency.

Figure 4
figure 4

Effective complex permeability μ of the samples. (a) Spectra of the real part (μ'eff). (b) Spectra of the imaginary part (μ''eff).

In order to further identify this magnetic resonance, ESR measurement was performed. The results for the samples are displayed in Figure 5. It can be seen that all the samples show an obvious ferromagnetic resonance, and the resonance field is proportional to the sintering temperature. The particle diameter is directly proportional to the sintering temperature as can be seen from Figure 2. This behavior can be explained by the core-shell morphology of the NPs consisting of ferrimagnetically aligned core spins and the surface in which part of the superexchange interaction is destroyed. The magnetic behavior of the NPs has a marked dependence on the particle size, and the surface effects start to dominate as the particle size decreases. geff is the effective g-factor introduced by analogy with the Lande g-factor and calculated via geff = / μBH r [34], where h is the Planck constant, ν is the microwave frequency, μB is the Bohr magneton, and H r is the resonance field. Fe3+ ions usually exhibit two well-defined signals of geff = 2.0 and 4.3; the signal of geff = 4.3 has been ascribed to the isolated Fe3+ ions, while the signal of geff = 2.0 has been assigned to the Fe3+-coupled pair (Fe3+-O-Fe3+) [35]; Ni2+ ions normally show geff values of 2.2 and 2.0, corresponding to the Ni2+-coupled pair (Ni2+-O-Ni2+) and the isolated Ni2+ ions, respectively [36, 37]. The value of geff characterizing polycrystalline NiFe2O4 is 2.4 as reported before [35]. As can be seen from Figure 5, geff is gradually decreasing as the sintering temperature increases. For S700, the ESR spectrum exhibits a large geff of 3.19 corresponding to the low H r . This is because, first, there is a dipole interaction between the magnetic moments of the neighboring metal ions which destroys the superexchange interaction between them and leads to the strong surface anisotropy [14]. Second, the internal magnetic moment is coupled to the magnetic moment in the surface, and the sample shows a low H r , when the size of particles is small enough. In contrast, when the size of particles increases, the internal magnetic state becomes independent of the surface, owing to a finite exchange interaction length. Therefore, sample S1000 exhibits two resonance peaks. This is the further evidence of our previous inference.

Figure 5
figure 5

ESR spectra of samples.


In summary, NiFe2O4 NPs were obtained using the sol–gel method, and the magnetic properties of NiFe2O4 NPs regularly change with the sintering temperature. Notably, NiFe2O4 NPs exhibit magnetic resonance in the GHz range. Through the study of the surface composition, the presence of oxygen defects, which can destroy the superexchange interaction, in the surface can be deduced. The strong surface anisotropy field for NiFe2O4 NPs has an effect on the core of particles, and this leads to a strong effective anisotropy field, thereby generating high-frequency magnetic resonance for NiFe2O4. ESR spectra measured at room temperature further confirm that surface magnetism plays a great role.


  1. Deng H, Li XL, Peng Q, Wang X, Chen JP, Li YD: Monodisperse magnetic single-crystal ferrite microspheres. Angew Chem 2005, 44: 2782–2785. 10.1002/anie.200462551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Laurent S, Forge D, Port M, Roch A, Robic C, Elst LV, Muller RN: Magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: synthesis, stabilization, sectorization, physicochemical characterizations, and biological applications. Chem Rev 2008, 108: 2064–2110. 10.1021/cr068445e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jacintho GVM, Brolo AG, Corio P, Suarez PAZ, Rubim JC: Structural investigation of MFe2O4 (M = Fe, Co) magnetic fluids. J Phys Chem C 2009, 113: 7684–7691. 10.1021/jp9013477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jun YW, Lee JH, Cheon J: Chemical design of nanoparticle probes for high-performance magnetic resonance imaging. Angew Chem Int Ed 2008, 47: 5122–5135. 10.1002/anie.200701674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shenoy SD, Joy PA, Anantharaman MR: Effect of mechanical milling on the structural, magnetic and dielectric properties of coprecipitated ultrafine zinc ferrites. J Magn Magn Mater 2004, 269: 217–226. 10.1016/S0304-8853(03)00596-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. George M, Nair SS, John AM, Joy PA, Anantharaman MR: Structural, magnetic and electrical properties of the sol–gel prepared Li0.5Fe2.5O4 fine particles. J Phys D Appl Phys 2006, 39: 900–910. 10.1088/0022-3727/39/5/002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lu AH, Salabas EL, Schüth F: Magnetic nanoparticles: synthesis, protection, functionalization, and application. Angew Chem Int Ed 2007, 46: 1222–1244. 10.1002/anie.200602866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim SS, Kim ST, Yoon YC, Lee KS: Magnetic, dielectric, and microwave absorbing properties of iron particles dispersed in rubber matrix in gigahertz frequencies. J Appl Phys 2005, 97: 10F905. 10.1063/1.1852371

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jacob J, Khadar MA: Investigation of mixed spinel structure of nanostructured nickel ferrite. J Appl Phys 2010, 107: 114310. 10.1063/1.3429202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ebrahimi SAS, Azadmanjiri J: Evaluation of NiFe2O4 ferrite nanocrystalline powder synthesized by a sol–gel auto-combustion method. J Non-Cryst Solids 2007, 353: 802–804. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2006.12.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakamura T: Snoek's limit in high-frequency permeability of polycrystalline Ni–Zn, Mg–Zn, and Ni–Zn–Cu spinel ferrites. J Appl Phys 2000, 88: 348–353. 10.1063/1.373666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tsutaoka T, Ueshima M, Tokunaga T, Nakamura T, Hatakeyama K: Frequency dispersion and temperature variation of complex permeability of Ni‒Zn ferrite composite materials. J Appl Phys 1995, 78: 3983–3991. 10.1063/1.359919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Guo D, Zhang Z, Lin M, Fan X, Chai G, Xu Y, Xue D: Ni–Zn ferrite films with high resonance frequency in the gigahertz range deposited by magnetron sputtering at room temperature. J Phys D Appl Phys 2009, 42: 125006. 10.1088/0022-3727/42/12/125006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kodama RH, Berkowitz AE: Atomic-scale magnetic modeling of oxide nanoparticles. Phys Rev B 1999, 59: 6321–6336. 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.6321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nathani H, Gubbala S, Misra RDK: Magnetic behavior of nanocrystalline nickel ferrite: part I. The effect of surface roughness. Mater Sci Eng: B 2005, 121: 126–136. 10.1016/j.mseb.2005.03.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Köseoğlu Y, Yıldız F, Slazar-Alvarez G, Toprak M, Muhammed M, Aktaş B: Synthesis, characterization and ESR measurements of CoNiO nanoparticles. Physica Status Solidi (b) 2005, 242: 1712–1718. 10.1002/pssb.200440046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang J: Prepare highly crystalline NiFe2O4 nanoparticles with improved magnetic properties. Mater Sci Eng: B 2006, 127: 81–84. 10.1016/j.mseb.2005.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li XH, Xu CL, Han XH, Qiao L, Wang T, Li FS: Synthesis and magnetic properties of nearly monodisperse CoFe2O4 nanoparticles through a simple hydrothermal condition. Nanoscale Res Lett 2010, 5: 1039–1044. 10.1007/s11671-010-9599-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maaz K, Karim S, Mumtaz A, Hasanain SK, Liu J, Duan JL: Synthesis and magnetic characterization of nickel ferrite nanoparticles prepared by co-precipitation route. J Magn Magn Mater 2009, 321: 1838–1842. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2008.11.098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vidal-Abarca C, Lavela P, Tirado JL: The origin of capacity fading in NiFe2O4 conversion electrodes for lithium ion batteries unfolded by 57Fe Mossbauer spectroscopy. J Phys Chem C 2010, 114: 12828–12832. 10.1021/jp103888a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Deraz NM, Alarifi A, Shaban SA: Removal of sulfur from commercial kerosene using nanocrystalline NiFe2O4 based sorbents. J Saudi Chem Soc 2010, 14: 357–362. 10.1016/j.jscs.2010.04.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Azadmanjiri J, Seyyed Ebrahimi SA, Salehani HK: Magnetic properties of nanosize NiFe2O4 particles synthesized by sol–gel auto combustion method. Ceram Int 2007, 33: 1623–1625. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2006.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kluge HP, Alexander LE: X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials. New York: Wiley; 1997:637.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Salavati-Niasari M, Davar F, Mahmoudi T: A simple route to synthesize nanocrystalline nickel ferrite (NiFe2O4) in the presence of octanoic acid as a surfactant. Polyhedron 2009, 28: 1455–1458. 10.1016/j.poly.2009.03.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chkoundali S, Ammar S, Jouini N, Fievet F, Molinie P, Danot M, Vallain F, Greneche JM: Nickel ferrite nanoparticles: elaboration in polyol medium via hydrolysis, and magnetic properties. J Phys Condens Matter 2004, 16: 4357–4372. 10.1088/0953-8984/16/24/017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kodama RH, Berkowitz AE, McNiff EJ Jr, Foner S: Surface spin disorder in NiFe2O4 nanoparticles. Phys Rev Lett 1996, 77: 394–397. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Natile MM, Glisenti A: Study of surface reactivity of cobalt oxides: interaction with methanol. Chem Mater 2002, 14: 3090. 10.1021/cm0211150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McIntyre NS, Zetaruk DG: X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic studies of iron oxides. Anal Chem 1977, 49: 1521–1529. 10.1021/ac50019a016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Grace BPJ, Venkatesan M, Alaria J, Coey JMD, Kopnov G, Naaman R: The origin of the magnetism of etched silicon. Adv Mater 2009, 21: 71. 10.1002/adma.200801098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gao DQ, Zhang J, Yang GJ, Zhang JL, Shi ZH, Qi J, Zhang ZH, Xue DS: Ferromagnetism in ZnO nanoparticles induced by doping of a nonmagnetic element: Al. J Phys Chem C 2010, 114: 13477–13481. 10.1021/jp103458s

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Globus A, Guyot M: Control of the susceptibility spectrum in polycrystalline ferrite materials and frequency threshold of the losses. IEEE Trans Magn 1970, 6: 614–617. 10.1109/TMAG.1970.1066878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pascard H, Globus A: Exchange striction, the origin of polycrystalline magnetoelastic anisotropy. Phys Rev B 1981, 24: 6610. 10.1103/PhysRevB.24.6610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vittoria C, Yoon SD, Widom A: Relaxation mechanism for ordered magnetic materials. Phys Rev B 2010, 81: 014412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Cullity BD: Introduction to Magnetic Materials. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Li L, Li G, Smith RL, Inomata H: Microstructural evolution and magnetic properties of NiFe2O4 nanocrystals dispersed in amorphous silica. Chem Mater 2000, 12: 3705–3714. 10.1021/cm000481l

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. De Paiva JAC, Graça MPF, Monteiro J, Macedo MA, Valente MA: Spectroscopy studies of NiFe2O4 nanosized powders obtained using coconut water. J Alloys Compd 2009, 485: 637–641. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2009.06.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Guang-She L, Li-Ping L, Smith RL Jr, Inomata H: Characterization of the dispersion process for NiFe2O4 nanocrystals in a silica matrix with infrared spectroscopy and electron paramagnetic resonance. J Mol Struct 2001, 560: 87–93. 10.1016/S0022-2860(00)00772-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work is supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (grant no. 2012CB933101), the NSFC (grant no. 11034004 and no. 51202101), the National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (grant no. 50925103), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (no. lzujbky-2012-28).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Desheng Xue.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

ZS prepared all the samples, participated in all the measurements and data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. DX and DG conceived and designed the manuscript. JZ carried out the XPS measurements and data analysis. ZZ1 carried out the XRD measurements and data analysis. ZZ2 participated in the VSM measurements. ZY participated in the data analysis and interpretation of the results. All authors have been involved in revising the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ original submitted files for images

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shi, Z., Zhang, J., Gao, D. et al. Magnetic resonance of the NiFe2O4 nanoparticles in the gigahertz range. Nanoscale Res Lett 8, 404 (2013).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • NiFe2O4 nanoparticles
  • Sol–gel method
  • High-frequency magnetic resonance