Comments on the papers recently published by Kalaivani et al

TL;DR

This paper critically examines recent crystal studies, arguing that the characterization methods used, particularly EDAX, are inappropriate for verifying the authenticity of the claimed new materials.

Contribution

The paper provides a critical analysis of recent crystal reports, highlighting the inadequacy of EDAX for proper material characterization and questioning the validity of the reported compounds.

Findings

Recent crystal reports are questionable due to improper characterization methods.

EDAX is insufficient for confirming new crystal structures.

Many claimed new materials may be dubious based on current evidence.

Abstract

We argue that the so-called l lysinium succinate (journal of crystal growth 426 (2015) 135), zinc chloride doped l lysinium succinate (journal of crystal growth 428 (2015) 24), and l threonine phthalate (journal of crystal growth 427 (2015) 29) and sodium acetate doped l tyrosine (spectrochimica acta 136a (2015) 168) are all dubious crystals. Taking these compounds as examples we show that that edax is an inappropriate method for characterization of new materials based on elemental composition data.