Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 901465, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/901465

Research Article

The Mass Attenuation Coefficients, Electronic, Atomic, and Molecular Cross Sections, Effective Atomic Numbers, and Electron Densities for Compounds of Some Biomedically Important Elements at 59.5 keV

Burcu Akça and Salih Z. Erzeneoğlu

Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Atatürk University, 25240 Erzurum, Turkey

Received 4 May 2014; Accepted 21 August 2014; Published 12 November 2014

Academic Editor: Valerio Giusti

Copyright © 2014 Burcu Akça and Salih Z. Erzeneoğlu. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

The mass attenuation coefficients for compounds of biomedically important some elements (Na, Mg, Al, Ca, and Fe) have been measured by using an extremely narrow collimated-beam transmission method in the energy 59.5 keV. Total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities have been obtained by using these results. Gamma-rays of ²⁴¹Am passed through compounds have been detected by a high-resolution Si(Li) detector and by using energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (EDXRF). Obtained results have been compared with theoretically calculated values of WinXCom and FFAST. The relative difference between the experimental and theoretical values are −9.4% to +11.9% with WinXCom and −11.8% to +11.7% FFAST. Results have been presented and discussed in this paper.

1. Introduction

The photon mass attenuation coefficient, effective atomic number, and electron density are the basic quantities required in determining the penetration of X and γ-ray in matter. The mass attenuation coefficient is a measure of the probability of the interaction that occurs between incident photons and the matter of the unit mass per unit area. The knowledge of the mass attenuation coefficients of X and γ-ray in biological and other important materials is of significant interest for industrial, biological, agricultural, and medical applications [1]. Additionally, the mass attenuation coefficient provides a wide variety of information about fundamental properties of the matter in the atomic and molecular level. Accurate values of the photon mass attenuation coefficients are required to provide essential data in diverse fields such as nuclear diagnostics (computerized tomography), radiation protection, nuclear medicine, radiation dosimetry, gamma ray fluorescence studies, and radiation biophysics. The mass attenuation coefficients are also widely used in the calculation of the photon penetration and the energy deposition in biological shielding and other dosimetric materials.

Biomedically important elements are those that are required by an organism to maintain its normal physiological function. Without biomedically important elements, the organism cannot complete its normal life cycle or achieve normal healthy growth; such elements are the key components of the metalloenzymes and are involved in crucial biological functions, such as oxygen transport, free radical scavenging, and hormonal activity. Biomedically important elements deficiency or excess with respect to the human physiological level are found in the patients with certain diseases, including cancer [2–4].

In the literature, a variety of experimental data relevant to the measurement of the mass attenuation coefficients of different samples is available. The mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities of some amino acids in the energy range 0.122–1.330 MeV have been carried out [5]. The mass attenuation coefficients for mono- and disaccharides at photon energies 8.136, 13.596, 17.781, 22.581, and 32.890 keV have been measured [6]. The photon mass energy absorption coefficient for biological samples in the energy range 200–1500 keV has been measured [7]. The measured values have been compared with the computed values obtained using personal computer software package WinXCom [7].

In the present work, we have measured the mass attenuation coefficients, total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross sections, and effective atomic numbers and the electron densities have been obtained by using these results for Al, AlCl₃, Al(NO₃)₃, Ca, CaSO₄, CaF₂, CaHPO₄, CaO₆C₆H₁₀, Fe, FeCl₂, FeCl₃, Fe₂(SO₄)₃, Mg(NO₃)₂, MgO, NaO₂C₂H₃, Na₂CO₃, NaF, NaNO₃, Na₂SO₄, NaCl, and Na₂SO₃ in the energy 59.5 keV. The measured values have been compared with the theoretical ones calculated by using WinXCom and FFAST.

2. Theory

When γ-ray beam passes through an absorber, it is attenuated. The degree of attenuation depends on the scattering and various absorption processes. The absorption coefficient can be derived from the Lambert-Beer law

where is the incident γ-ray intensity when measured without sample, is γ-rays intensity transmitted through the sample, and is the sample thickness (cm). The experimental mass-absorption coefficient () of elements is given by

where is the material density (g/cm³). The theoretical mass-absorption coefficient (cm²/g) for any chemical compound or mixture of elements is given by mixture rule [1]

where and are the weight fraction and mass attenuation coefficient of the th constituent element, respectively. does not depend on the particular phase (gas, liquid, or solid) of the material; therefore, it is useful to define the mass attenuation coefficient. For a chemical compound, the fraction by weight is given by

Mass attenuation coefficients of the given materials have been calculated by the WinXCom program. This program which is based on the DOS-based compilation XCom [11] provides the total mass attenuation coefficient and the total attenuation cross-section data for about 100 elements as well as partial cross sections for incoherent and coherent scattering, photoelectric absorption, and pair production at energies from 1 keV to 100 GeV [12]. The values of the mass attenuation coefficients can be used to determine the total molecular cross section, , by the following relation [13]:

where is the molecular weight and is Avogadro’s number. The total atomic cross-section can be easily determined from the following equation [13]:

where is the fractional abundance of element with respect to the number of atoms; and are the number of formula units and the atomic weight, respectively, of the constituent element . The total electronic cross-section for the individual element is expressed by the following formula [14]:

The total atomic and electronic cross sections are related to the effective atomic number () through the following relation:

The effective electron number or electron density, (number of electrons per units mass), can be derived from [14–17]

The average atomic weight or average atomic mass is the ratio of the molecular weight of the sample divided by the total number of the atoms of all types presented in the compound. can be derived from [14]

3. Experimental Setup

The schematical arrangement of the experimental setup used in this study is shown in Figure 1. It consists of a 3.7 × 10⁹ Bq (100 mCi) ²⁴¹Am point source, which essentially emits monoenergetic (59.5 keV) γ-rays. The powder samples have been compressed into pellets for 10 s at 15 ton by using a manual hydraulic press. Target has had a diameter of 13 mm. The powder samples have been prepared for four different mass that the best mass attenuation coefficients to obtain. - graphs have been drawn by using Origin Pro8. Slope of graphs has obtained linear attenuation coefficients and later the mass attenuation coefficients have obtained the linear attenuation coefficients of the samples divided by density of the samples. Sample graph for Al(NO₃)₃ is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Experimental arrangement.

Figure 2: A sample graph for Al(NO₃)₃.

The intensities of γ-rays have been measured using a high-resolution Si(Li) detector (FWHM of 160 eV at 5.96 keV) and the data were collected into 4096 channels of a multichannel analyzer. The spectra have been collected for a period of 1000 s. The counting electronics have included a pile-up rejection circuit and a live-time clock used for dead time correction. The dead time has been observed for all the channels which vary at minimum 1.32% and at maximum 11.10%. A typical spectrum of 59.5 keV gamma ray transmissions through MgO is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Spectrum of 59.5 keV gamma rays obtained with absorber (MgO).

Theoretical values of mass attenuation coefficients for Al, AlCl₃, Al(NO₃)₃, Ca, CaSO₄, CaF₂, CaHPO₄, CaO₆C₆H₁₀, Fe, FeCl₂, FeCl₃, Fe₂(SO₄)₃, Mg(NO₃)₂, MgO, NaO₂C₂H₃, Na₂CO₃, NaF, NaNO3, Na₂SO₄, NaCl, and Na₂SO₃ have been obtained using WinXCom [12] and FFAST [18].

In this study, effort has been made to reduce the error sources in transmission measurements. In an ideal transmission experiment, all photons must be sent on absorber sample with a parallel beam. But in real experimental studies, there is the same errors. The errors in the present measurements are mainly due to counting statistics, nonuniformity of the absorber, impurity content of the samples, and scattered photons reaching the detector. These errors are attributed to the deviation from the average value in the and (<1.3%), sample thickness (<0.7%), the mass of sample (<0.2%), and systematic errors (<0.8%). Also, the ratio of theoretical (T) and experimental (E) values is ≤1.1% The maximum errors in the mass attenuation coefficients have been calculated from errors in incident () and transmitted () intensities and areal density () by using the propagation of error formula

where , , and are the errors in the intensities , , and thickness of the sample, respectively.

4. Results and Discussion

The theoretical mass attenuation coefficients, total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross-sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities have been investigated by using WinXCom and FFAST. WinXCom is a program or dataset based on the mixture rule. The values in the FFAST dataset have been calculated by different methods and may produce different results. The experimental results are in good agreement with the theoretical values, calculated by WinXCom and FFAST. This study and other several studies have been compared in Table 1. To the best of our knowledge there are no experimental data reported in the literature other than those shown in Table 1 for these compounds at 59.5 keV γ-rays.

Table 1: Comparison of this study and other several studies.

Samples
Some atomic parameters
[8]
[9]
[10]
This study

Al

—
12.4
—
12.6

—
12.4
—
12.6

13.0
13.0
—
13.0

Fe

—
119.3
—
117.8

—
119.3
—
117.8

26.0
26.0
—
26.8

MgO

—
—
—
15.3

—
—
—
7.6

—
—
10.2
10.0

Na₂CO₃

—
—
—
38.6

—
—
—
6.4

—
—
9.5
9.5

The theoretical and experimental mass attenuation coefficients, total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross-sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities for compounds of biomedically important elements are listed in Tables 2, 3, and 4. It is clearly seen that the mass attenuation coefficient depends on chemical content.

Table 2: The experimental mass attenuation coefficients (cm²/g), total atomic (barn/atom) and molecular (barn/atom) cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities (electrons/g) for compounds of biomedically important some elements.

Samples
μ/

  ×  10²³

Al
0.282 ± 0.026
12.638 ± 1.165
12.638 ± 1.165
13.029 ± 1.201
2.907 ± 0.268

AlCl₃
0.375 ± 0.010
20.765 ± 0.554
83.061 ± 2.215
14.832 ± 0.396
2.679 ± 0.071

Al(NO₃)₃
0.207 ± 0.005
5.633 ± 0.136
73.231 ± 1.769
8.535 ± 0.206
3.136 ± 0.076

Ca
0.647 ± 0.011
43.076 ± 0.732
43.076 ± 0.732
19.317 ± 0.328
2.901 ± 0.049

CaF₂
0.401 ± 0.051
17.337 ± 2.205
52.010 ± 6.615
14.569 ± 1.853
3.370 ± 0.429

CaHPO₄
0.354 ± 0.033
11.430 ± 1.066
80.009 ± 7.458
12.290 ± 1.146
3.806 ± 0.355

CaO₆C₆H₁₀
0.267 ± 0.007
4.208 ± 0.110
96.785 ± 2.537
6.474 ± 0.170
4.108 ± 0.108

CaSO₄
0.429 ± 0.035
16.169 ± 1.319
97.017 ± 7.915
15.698 ± 1.281
4.165 ± 0.340

Fe
1.270 ± 0.225
117.823 ± 23.657
117.823 ± 23.657
26.839 ± 5.389
2.893 ± 0.581

FeCl₂
0.785 ± 0.043
55.093 ± 3.018
165.280 ± 9.054
22.126 ± 2.040
3.153 ± 0.291

FeCl₃
0.689 ± 0.024
46.413 ± 1.617
185.652 ± 6.467
20.537 ± 0.715
3.049 ± 0.106

Fe₂(SO₄)₃
0.485 ± 0.056
18.950 ± 2.188
322.154 ± 37.197
15.661 ± 1.808
4.008 ± 0.463

Mg(NO₃)₂
0.191 ± 0.005
5.228 ± 0.137
47.052 ± 1.232
7.921 ± 0.207
2.894 ± 0.076

MgO
0.228 ± 0.031
7.632 ± 1.038
15.263 ± 2.075
10.042 ± 1.365
3.000 ± 0.408

NaO₂C₂H₃
0.208 ± 0.005
3.543 ± 0.085
28.343 ± 0.681
5.808 ± 0.140
3.410 ± 0.082

Na₂CO₃
0.219 ± 0.015
6.426 ± 0.440
38.558 ± 2.641
9.450 ± 0.647
3.221 ± 0.221

NaF
0.210 ± 0.040
7.324 ± 1.395
14.648 ± 2.790
9.897 ± 1.885
2.838 ± 0.541

NaNO₃
0.189 ± 0.011
5.337 ± 0.311
26.683 ± 1.553
8.086 ± 0.471
2.864 ± 0.167

Na₂SO₃
0.287 ± 0.020
10.015 ± 0.698
60.089 ± 4.187
12.364 ± 0.862
3.543 ± 0.247

Na₂SO₄
0.237 ± 0.023
9.202 ± 0.775
64.413 ± 5.427
11.648 ± 0.981
3.456 ± 0.291

NaCl
0.343 ± 0.026
16.649 ± 1.262
33.297 ± 2.524
14.230 ± 1.079
2.932 ± 0.222

Table 3: The theoretical (WinXCom) mass attenuation coefficients (cm²/g), total electronic (barn/atom), atomic (barn/atom), and molecular (barn/atom) cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities (electrons/g) for compounds of biomedically important some elements.

Samples
μ/

  ×  10²³

Al
0.281
0.970
12.597
12.594
12.983
2.897

AlCl₃
0.413
1.400
22.869
91.477
16.335
2.950

Al(NO₃)₃
0.201
0.660
5.470
71.108
8.288
3.046

Ca
0.671
2.230
44.674
44.674
20.033
3.009

CaF₂
0.438
1.190
18.936
56.809
15.913
3.681

CaHPO₄
0.371
0.930
11.979
83.851
12.880
3.989

CaO₆C₆H₁₀
0.281
0.650
4.429
101.860
6.813
4.323

CaSO₄
0.384
1.030
14.473
86.840
14.052
3.728

Fe
1.230
4.390
114.112
114.112
25.994
2.802

FeCl₂
0.792
2.490
55.585
166.754
22.324
3.181

FeCl₃
0.717
2.260
48.299
193.197
21.371
3.173

Fe₂(SO₄)₃
0.535
1.210
20.904
355.366
17.276
4.421

Mg(NO₃)₂
0.201
0.660
5.502
39.515
8.336
3.045

MgO
0.233
0.760
7.799
15.998
10.143
3.030

NaO₂C₂H₃
0.202
0.610
3.441
27.525
5.640
3.311

Na₂CO₃
0.206
0.680
6.045
36.269
8.889
3.029

NaF
0.213
0.740
7.428
14.857
10.038
2.878

NaNO₃
0.200
0.660
5.647
28.236
8.556
3.030

Na₂SO₃
0.261
0.810
9.108
54.645
11.244
3.222

Na₂SO₄
0.253
0.790
8.528
59.695
10.795
3.203

NaCl
0.361
1.170
17.522
35.045
14.976
3.085

Table 4: The theoretical (FFAST) mass attenuation coefficients (cm²/g), total electronic (barn/atom), atomic (barn/atom), and molecular (barn/atom) cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities (electrons/g) for compounds of biomedically important some elements.

Samples
μ/

  ×  10²³

Al
0.289
0.996
12.952
12.952
13.004
2.902

AlCl₃
0.425
1.441
23.534
94.135
16.332
2.949

Al(NO₃)₃
0.208
0.678
5.660
73.584
8.348
3.068

Ca
0.681
2.267
45.340
45.340
20.000
3.004

CaF₂
0.448
1.225
19.369
58.106
15.811
3.657

CaHPO₄
0.379
0.960
12.237
85.659
12.747
3.948

CaO₆C₆H₁₀
0.287
0.672
4.523
104.035
6.731
4.271

CaSO₄
0.393
1.053
14.813
88.875
14.067
3.732

Fe
1.260
4.496
116.895
116.895
26.000
2.802

FeCl₂
0.812
2.559
56.988
170.965
22.270
3.173

FeCl₃
0.735
2.316
49.512
198.047
21.378
3.174

Fe₂(SO₄)₃
0.549
1.243
21.451
364.665
17.257
4.417

Mg(NO₃)₂
0.206
0.676
5.639
50.747
8.342
3.048

MgO
0.236
0.768
7.899
15.799
10.285
3.073

NaO₂C₂H₃
0.208
0.628
3.543
28.343
5.642
3.312

Na₂CO₃
0.212
0.702
6.221
37.325
8.862
3.020

NaF
0.220
0.759
7.673
15.345
10.109
2.899

NaNO₃
—
—
—
—
—
—

Na₂SO₃
0.269
0.837
9.387
56.320
11.215
3.214

Na₂SO₄
0.261
0.812
8.797
61.582
10.834
3.214

NaCl
0.371
1.203
18.008
36.015
14.969
3.084

The effective atomic number is a useful parameter for low and medium- materials, encountered in biological and medical applications. It should be remembered that the concept of the effective atomic number is based on an underlying theory of X-ray and γ-ray interactions with matter [19]. In composite materials like alloys, soil, plastic, biological material, and so forth, for photon interactions, the atomic number cannot be represented uniquely across the entire energy region, as in the case of elements, by a single number. This number in composite materials is called “effective atomic number,” and it varies with energy [20]. The energy absorption in a given medium can be calculated if certain constants are known. These necessary constants are and electron density () of the medium. Therefore, the study of the effective atomic numbers of the biological samples is so useful for many technological applications. The effective atomic numbers are also useful in medical radiation dosimetry for the calculation of dose in radiation therapy and medical imaging [21]. The experimental effective atomic numbers are listed in Table 2. The effective atomic number for gamma ray interactions in materials composed of various elements cannot be expressed by a single number and for each of the partial processes the number has to be weighted differently [22]. A large generally corresponds to inorganic compounds and metals, while a small is an indicator of the organic substances [23]. Experimental determination of effective atomic number is important, and effective atomic number is studied as the only interpolation procedures and semiempirical expressions [16, 20, 22, 24–26]. The significant variation in effective atomic number is due to the relative dominance of the partial photon interaction processes. This confirms that effective atomic number depends on the number of elements and the range of atomic numbers in a compound. References [27, 28] confirm that the effective atomic numbers almost tend to be constant as a function of energy and attributes to the dominance of incoherent scattering and pair production in their respective energy region. But we have not confirmed this state, for our energy is below 100 keV (single energy 59.5 keV) and photoelectric cross sections are more dominant in respective energy region. [22, 29], especially, up to 50 keV. That is, the effective atomic number is affected by energy at <100 keV. The variation of effective atomic number with energy may be attributed to the relative domination of the partial processes, such as photoelectric effect, coherent scattering, incoherent scattering, and pair production. But at low energy, <100 keV, the photoelectric effect is dominant and so, the photoelectric effect is responsible for the change in the energy of effective atomic number.

The present experimental results are in accordance with the theoretical results. But the experimental results give better agreement with results of WinXCom. So, the present experimental work upholds the suitability of the WinXCom that estimated values by using the mixture rule. Such results have been observed by earlier investigators [30–32]. It is evident from Tables 2, 3, and 4 that the experimental values are in accord with the WinXCom values within the estimated error −9.4% to +11.9% and FFAST −11.8% to +11.7%. This may be attributed to the effects of chemical environment on value. The values are believed to be affected by the chemical, molecular, and thermal environments. These phenomena led to the deviation of the experimental value from that of the theoretical value, since the calculation of the theoretical value has been done by considering the cross section for an isolated atom. This deviation is termed as the breakdown or no validity of the mixture rule. Such effects have been observed by earlier investigators [33–38]. It is observed that the experimental value deviates by WinXCom +7.9% and FFAST +4.6% for Na₂SO₄, in order of −4.9% and −7.3% for Mg(NO₃)₂, +2.9 and −0.5% for Al(NO₃)₃, −9.3% and −11.7% for Fe₂(SO₄)₃, and −4.9% and −6.9% for CaO₆C₆H₁₀. In this case, we have concluded that these deviations may not be directly explained by the number of the atoms increasing or decreasing in a compound. We have not confirmed that when the number of atoms in a compound increases, the significant differences between experimental and theoretical values are observed for these compounds. In this respect, the validity of the mixture rule cannot be interpreted according to the number of atoms in a composition. It is important for compounds that the chemical environmental effect and molecular bonding are neglected by mixture rule. Such effects have been observed by earlier investigators [33, 34, 39, 40]. According to relative differences, there are the adaptation between experimental and theoretical (WinXCom) values for Al and FeCl₂. The differences between experimental and theoretical results may be attributed to chemical composition variations of the samples and mixture rule neglects present composition. Present results clearly reveal that the incapability of the mixture rule supports the new and sensitive experimental methods more than the semiempirical expressions and interpolation processes. The total experimental uncertainty of the measured quantity depends on the uncertainties of the thickness and the mass, while the uncertainty of the and measurement scarcely influences the results since both and have been measured with very good statistics (<1.3%). It is observed from Tables 2, 3, and 4 that the mass attenuation coefficients, total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities are closely related to FeCl₂ and FeCl₃ compounds. As seen in Tables 2, 3, and 4, the mass attenuation coefficients, total electronic, atomic, and molecular cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities for Na compounds do not change. Sodium is low-, so its compounds will not see a significantly large change in average . At low energies such as this, 60 keV, the main effects in photon absorption are the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering; these are dominated by the presence of the electrons in the material and the effects from the nuclei are only a perturbation, largely in the different binding energy of the electrons; inner electrons in higher- materials have a higher binding energy. So really one will expect that the dominant effect in absorption and scattering will be the electron density in the material, which is calculable with knowledge of the stoichiometric ratio of the elements in the compound or mixture and the density.

Further experimental studies on measurements of the mass attenuation coefficients, molecular, atomic, and total electronic cross sections, effective atomic numbers, and electron densities for compounds of biomedically important some elements will be useful to confirm, understand, and interpret the observed differences between the measured and calculated results. Also in order to reach more definitive conclusions on measurements, we project to extend these measurements for various compounds and different primer energies.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

D. F. Jackson and D. J. Hawkes, “X-ray attenuation coefficients of elements and mixtures,” Physics Reports, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 169–233, 1981.

R. K. Murray, D. K. Granner, P. A. Mayes, and V. W. Rodwell, Harpers Biochemistry, McGraw-Hill, Health Profession Division, 25th edition, 2000.

V. K. Malhotra, Biochemistry for Students, Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers, New Delhi, India, 10th edition, 1998.

V. W. Hays and M. J. Swenson, “Minerals and bones,” in Dukes' Physiology of Domestic Animals, 10th edition, 1985.

P. P. Pawar and G. K. Bichile, “Studies on mass attenuation coefficient, effective atomic number and electron density of some amino acids in the energy range 0.122-1.330MeV,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 92, pp. 22–27, 2013.

B. R. Kerur, V. T. Manjula, M. T. Lagare, and S. A. Kumar, “Mass attenuation coefficient of saccharides for X-rays in the energy range from 8 keV to 32 keV,” Radiation Measurements, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 63–67, 2009.

V. Manjunathaguru and T. K. Umesh, “Simple parametrization of photon mass energy absorption coefficients of H-, C-, N- and O-based samples of biological interest in the energy range 200–1500 keV,” Pramana - Journal of Physics, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 375–387, 2009.

R. C. Murty, “Effective atomic numbers of heterogeneous materials,” Nature, vol. 207, no. 4995, pp. 398–399, 1965.

P. Latha, A. M. Vinodkumar, K. M. Varier et al., “Effective atomic numbers for gamma ray interaction at 59.54keV in heterogeneous layers of materials using²⁴¹Am gamma rays,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 81, no. 12, pp. 1817–1822, 2012.

M. O. Pereira, C. D. C. Conti, M. J. Dos Anjos, and R. T. Lopes, “Correction of radiation absorption on biological samples using Rayleigh to Compton scattering ratio,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 280, no. 1, pp. 39–44, 2012.

M. J. Berger and J. H. Hubbell, “XCOM: Photon Cross Sections Database.Web Version 1.2,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Md, USA, 1987, http://www.nist.gov/pml/data/xcom/

L. Gerward, N. Guilbert, K. B. Jensen, and H. Levring, “WinXCom—a program for calculating X-ray attenuation coefficients,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 71, no. 3-4, pp. 653–654, 2004.

K. Singh and L. Gerward, “Summary of existing information on gamma-ray and X-ray attenuation coefficients of solutions,” Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Physics, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 643–649, 2002.

S. R. Manohara, S. M. Hanagodimath, and L. Gerward, “Energy dependence of effective atomic numbers for photon energy absorption and photon interaction: studies of some biological molecules in the energy range 1 keV-20 MeV,” Medical Physics, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 388–402, 2008.

S. R. Manohara and S. M. Hanagodimath, “Studies on effective atomic numbers and electron densities of essential amino acids in the energy range 1 keV-100 GeV,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 258, no. 2, pp. 321–328, 2007.

V. Manjunathaguru and T. K. Umesh, “Effective atomic numbers and electron densities of some biologically important compounds containing H, C, N and O in the energy range 145–1330 keV,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, vol. 39, no. 18, article 025, pp. 3969–3981, 2006.

S. Gowda, S. Krishnaveni, and R. Gowda, “Studies on effective atomic numbers and electron densities in amino acids and sugars in the energy range 30-1333 keV,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 239, no. 4, pp. 361–369, 2005.

C. T. Chantler, K. Olsen, R. A. Dragoset et al., X-Ray form Factor, Attenuation and Scattering Tables (Version 2.1), National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2005, http://www.nist.gov/pml/data/ffast/index.cfm.

S. R. Manohara, S. M. Hanagodimath, K. S. Thind, and L. Gerward, “The effective atomic number revisited in the light of modern photon-interaction cross-section databases,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, vol. 68, no. 4-5, pp. 784–787, 2010.

S. G. Prasad, K. Parthasaradhi, and W. D. Bloomer, “Effective atomic numbers for photoabsorption in alloys in the energy region of absorption edges,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 449–453, 1998.

G. J. Hine, “The effective atomic numbers of materials for various gamma ray interactions,” Physical Review, vol. 85, pp. 725–737, 1952.

T. Kiran Kumar, S. Venkataratnam, and K. Venkata Reddy, “Effective atomic number studies in clay minerals for total photon interaction in the energy region 10 keV-10 MeV,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 707–710, 1996.

H. Baltaş and U. Çevik, “Determination of the effective atomic numbers and electron densities for YBaCuO superconductor in the range 59.5–136 keV,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 266, no. 7, pp. 1127–1131, 2008.

Shivaramu, “Effective atomic numbers for photon energy absorption and photon attenuation of tissues from human organs,” Medical Dosimetry, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2002.

G. Kaur, K. Singh, B. S. Lark, and H. S. Sahota, “Photon interaction studies in solutions of some alkali metal chlorides - I,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 315–323, 2000.

K. Siddappa, N. G. Nayak, K. M. Balakrishna, and N. Lingappa, “Experimental effective atomic numbers for the photoelectric process in some alloys at 84 and 145 keV,” Nuclear Science and Engineering, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 57–61, 1986.

K. Singh, H. Singh, V. Sharma et al., “Gamma-ray attenuation coefficients in bismuth borate glasses,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 194, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2002.

G. S. Bhandal and K. Singh, “Total and partial mass attenuation coefficients and effective atomic number studies in different solid state nuclear track detectors,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 109–116, 1996.

V. Ramprasath, “Effective atomic numbers for photon energy absorption and energy dependence of some thermoluminescent dosimetric compounds,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 168, no. 3, pp. 294–304, 2000.

B. S. Sidhu, A. S. Dhaliwal, K. S. Mann, and K. S. Kahlon, “Study of mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and electron densities for some low Z compounds of dosimetry interest at 59.54 keV incident photon energy,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 42, pp. 153–157, 2012.

N. Chanthima and J. Kaewkhao, “Calculation of mass attenuation coefficient and related parameters Of BaO-SiO₂ glass system By WinXCom and FFAST,” in Proceedings of the 38th Congress on Science and Technology of Thailand (STT38 '12), Chiang Mai, Thailand, October 2012.

J. L. Glover, C. T. Chantler, Z. Barnea, N. A. Rae, and C. Q. Tran, “Measurement of the X-ray mass-attenuation coefficients of gold, derived quantities between 14 keV and 21 keV and determination of the bond lengths of gold,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, vol. 43, Article ID 085001, 2010.

O. İçelli, S. Erzeneoğlu, and R. Boncukçuoğlu, “Measurement of mass attenuation coefficients of some boron compounds and the trommel sieve waste in the energy range 15.746–40.930 keV,” Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 203–210, 2003.

U. Turgut, O. Simşek, E. Büyükkasap, and M. Ertuğrul, “X-ray attenuation coefficients at different energies and the validity of the mixture rule for compounds around the absorption edge,” Spectrochimica Acta B, vol. 57, pp. 261–266, 2002.

B. R. Kerur, S. R. Thontadarya, and B. Hanumaiah, “A study on the range of non-validity of the Bragg's additivity law for compounds at photon energies below 10 keV,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 893–898, 1992.

B. R. Kerur, S. R. Thontadarya, and B. Hanumaiah, “X-ray attenuation coefficients at 6.46 keV and the validity of the mixture rule for compounds,” X-Ray Spectrom, vol. 22, pp. 13–16, 1993.

A. T. L. Tan, V. Lakshminarayana, I. S. Giles, and A. Rajaratnam, “Photon cross-section measurements at low energies in some bromides,” Nuovo Cimento, vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 587–594, 1988.

V. Lakshminarayana, A. T. L. Tan, I. S. Giles, and A. Rajaratnam, “Gamma cross-sections close to the absorption edge in some bromides,” Il Nuovo Cimento A, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 331–338, 1986.

O. İçelli and S. Erzeneoğlu, “The mass attenuation coeffcients in some vanadium and nickel compounds,” Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, vol. 88, pp. 519–524, 2004.

Ö. Sögüt, S. Seven, E. Baydas, E. Büyükkasap, and A. Küçükönder, “Chemical effects on Kβ/Kα X-ray intensity ratios of Mo, Ag, Cd, Ba, La, Ce compounds and total mass attenuation coefficients of Fe and Cu,” Spectrochimica Acta B: Atomic Spectroscopy, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1367–1374, 2001.