# Fileset

[Tachibana_2025_J._Phys.__Condens._Matter_37_405401.pdf](https://mdr.nims.go.jp/filesets/a7c5f95f-2963-4ec9-8b58-4efc5a831616/download)

## Creator

[Makoto Tachibana](https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5907-5563), [Cédric Bourgès](https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9056-0420), [Takao Mori](https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-1846)

## Rights

[Creative Commons BY Attribution 4.0 International](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## Other metadata

[High-temperature thermal conductivity of yttrium and rare-earth iron garnets](https://mdr.nims.go.jp/datasets/2bf2ff1e-2b81-4a9a-b8d7-7232b92734b7)

## Fulltext

High-temperature thermal conductivity of yttrium and rare-earth iron garnetsJournal of Physics:Condensed Matter      PAPER • OPEN ACCESSHigh-temperature thermal conductivity of yttriumand rare-earth iron garnetsTo cite this article: Makoto Tachibana et al 2025 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 405401 View the article online for updates and enhancements.You may also likeEffective criteria for entanglementwitnesses in small dimensionsukasz Grzelka, ukasz Marcin Skowronekand Karol yczkowski-Design of beam direction controllablemultijunction rectangular VCSELYufei Wang, Yibo Yang, Sidra Farouk etal.-Gradient-descent methods for fastquantum state tomographyAkshay Gaikwad, Manuel SebastianTorres, Shahnawaz Ahmed et al.-This content was downloaded from IP address 144.213.253.16 on 30/09/2025 at 09:21https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ae09e6/article/10.1088/1751-8121/ae0c49/article/10.1088/1751-8121/ae0c49/article/10.1088/2631-8695/ae090a/article/10.1088/2631-8695/ae090a/article/10.1088/2058-9565/ae0baa/article/10.1088/2058-9565/ae0baaJournal of Physics: Condensed MatterJ. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 (7pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ae09e6High-temperature thermal conductivityof yttrium and rare-earth iron garnetsMakoto Tachibana1,∗, Cédric Bourgès2,3 and Takao Mori1,41 Research Center for Materials Nanoarchitechtonics, National Institute for Materials Science, 1-1Namiki, Tsukuba 305-0044, Japan2 International Center for Young Scientists, National Institute for Materials Science, 1-1 Namiki, Tsukuba305-0044, Japan3 University of Limoges, CNRS, IRCER, UMR 7315, Limoges F-87000, France4 Graduate School of Pure and Applied Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennoudai, Tsukuba305-8577, JapanE-mail: TACHIBANA.Makoto@nims.go.jpReceived 28 July 2025, revised 5 September 2025Accepted for publication 22 September 2025Published 30 September 2025AbstractYttrium and rare-earth iron garnets (R3Fe5O12) are ferrimagnetic insulators that have beenwidely studied for magnetic and spintronic applications. In this study, we report the thermalconductivity (κ) between 300 and 773 K for the single crystals of R3Fe5O12, where R = Y, Gd,Dy, and Yb. For Y3Fe5O12, the κ up to the Curie temperature (TC ≈ 555 K) can be describedwell with a pure phononic model, without considering conduction or scattering by the magnons.The iron garnets containing magnetic rare-earth ions exhibit smaller κ, with Dy3Fe5O12showing the smallest values due to the strong interactions of heat-carrying phonons with thecrystal field excitations of Dy3+ ions.Keywords: thermal conductivity, heat capacity, iron garnets, single crystal, phonon, magnon1. IntroductionThe ferrimagnetic insulator Y3Fe5O12 (yttrium iron garnet orYIG) has been a compound of great importance in spintron-ics, as its spin waves or magnons possess a long lifetime evenat room temperature [1,2]. In 1962−63, thermal conductivity(κ) from magnons was reported for the first time using YIGsingle crystals [3–5]. These experiments, conducted at liquidhelium temperatures, confirmed Sato’s earlier prediction [6]that ferro- and ferrimagnetic magnon κ follow a T2 power law∗Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.Original content from this work may be used under theterms of the Creative CommonsAttribution 4.0 licence. Anyfurther distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) andthe title of the work, journal citation and DOI.for T → 0 K, unlike the T3 dependence of the familiar phononκ. Since the magnon κ can be suppressed under magneticfield, it was also shown that magnon and phonon contributionsbecome comparable in size below∼1 K, while phonons dom-inate the heat transport at higher temperatures [3–5]. In morerecent times, YIG has been used extensively to explore the spinSeebeck effect (SSE) [7, 8], where spin currents are generatedfrom a thermal gradient. It is within this context that the κ ofYIG was revisited by various authors, both from experimental[9–13] and theoretical [14–17] perspectives.YIG is a member of R3Fe5O12 garnets [18], or RIGs, whereR can be Y or a rare earth from Sm to Lu. The cubic garnetstructure of RIGs (space group Ia 3̄ d) is rather complex, withfour formula units in the primitive unit cell. The R3+ ions,being 8-fold coordinatedwith oxygen, are located at the c sites.Of the five Fe3+ ions in the formula unit, three at the d sites are4-fold coordinated with oxygen, while two at the a sites are 6-fold coordinated. As a result of antiferromagnetic interactions1 © 2025 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltdhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ae09e6https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5907-5563https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9056-0420https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-1846mailto:TACHIBANA.Makoto@nims.go.jphttp://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1088/1361-648X/ae09e6&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2025-9-30https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et albetween the majority d-site and minority a-site Fe3+ (S= 5/2)spins, YIG and other RIGs undergo a second-order ferrimag-netic transition at a Curie temperature of TC ≈ 550 −560 K[18]. The similar TCs found for the entire series indicatethat the rare-earth ions, even when magnetic, do not visiblyaffect the interactions between the Fe3+ spins. Nonetheless,the exchange coupling between Fe3+ and R3+ polarizes theR3+ moments below TC. For R=Gd−Yb there is a compens-ation temperature below 300 K where the magnetization ofthe rare-earth ions exactly cancels the net Fe3+ magnetization[18]. Recent studies [19–22] have shown that magnetic R3+ions produce features in the SSE that are not found in YIGwith the nonmagnetic Y3+ ions.Despite the continuing interest in the iron garnets, espe-cially in regard to the SSE, their κ above room temperaturehave not been studied in detail. For YIG, much of previousκ studies have focused at low temperatures, where the mag-netic field needed to suppress the magnon excitations is exper-imentally attainable. Though some high-temperature data [10,23–25] exist, they do not yet provide a clear picture on howthe κ evolves below and above the ferrimagnetic transition.As for other RIGs, no κ data appears to be available in theliterature. These situations thus prompted the present invest-igation, which reports on the κ between 300 and 773 K forthe single crystals of YIG and other RIGs (R = Gd, Dy, andYb, denoted as GdIG, DyIG, and YbIG, respectively). Ourdata on YIG up to TC strictly follow the T−1 dependenceand the values predicted by the Slack equation. These res-ults demonstrate that the κ in this temperature region is fullydescribed by anharmonic phonon-phonon scattering, withoutany visible contributions from magnon–phonon scattering ormagnon heat transport. In contrast, much weaker temperat-ure dependence (∝T−0.6) is found above TC, suggesting thatphonons are scattered from fluctuating Fe3+ spins in the para-magnetic phase. Smaller κ are found in other RIGs. In partic-ular, DyIG shows the smallest values due to the strong inter-actions between phonons and the crystal field excitations ofDy3+ ions.2. Experimental detailsSince the iron garnets melt incongruently, bulk single crys-tals are usually grown by a flux method [26] or the float-ing zone (FZ) method using excess Fe2O3 as a solvent [27].For this study, an FZ-grown YIG crystal was purchased fromSurfaceNet GmbH. We also grew single crystals of YIG,GdIG, DyIG, and YbIG using a PbO-PbF2-B2O3 flux [28].These flux-grown crystals had large {110} faces and theirphase purities were confirmed by x-ray powder diffraction.From electron probe microanalysis, small amounts of Pb weredetected uniformly in these crystals. Assuming that Pb ionssubstitute solely the R ions [29], the concentration of Pb atthe c site is 1.7% for YIG, 1.2% for GdIG, 1.5% for DyIG,and 0.87% for YbIG. As described below, this study alsoused a flux-grown single crystal of Y3Al5O12 (YAG) [30, 31]with an impurity content of Pb/Y = 0.03% [30] and a poly-crystalline pellet of Yb3Al5O12 (YbAG). The YbAG pelletwas obtained in a manner similar to that of Dy3Al5O12 inTachibana et al [32].The κ between 300 and 773 K was determined from therelation κ = DCpρ, where D is thermal diffusivity, Cp isheat capacity, and ρ is density. D was obtained by the flashmethod in a nitrogen atmosphere using Netzsch LFA 567. Forthe measurements, crystals were cut into square plates with6 ×6 mm2 faces and ∼1.0 mm thicknesses, and a thin layerof graphite was coated on both sides. The large faces coin-cided with {110} for the flux-grown RIGs and YAG crystals,and {111} for the FZ-grown YIG crystal. The D values havean accuracy of ⩽3% and are shown in the appendix. Cp upto 390 K was measured on smaller samples using the relax-ation method of a quantum design physical property meas-urement system, which has an accuracy of 1% [33]. Cp athigher temperatures was determined as described below. ρbetween 300 and 773 K was calculated from literature x-rayvalues. For YIG, GdIG, YAG, and YbAG, x-ray data up to773 K are available [34, 35] and these were used to obtain ρ.As only room-temperature x-ray data are available for DyIGand YbIG [36], the thermal expansion of GdIG was adoptedfor these compounds; this should be justified since R3Ga5O12(R=Gd, Dy, and Yb) show nearly identical thermal expansioncoefficient at 300 K [37]. Our own ρ measurements at 295 Kusing the Archimedes method confirmed the x-ray values towithin ±1%.3. Results and discussion3.1. Heat capacityWe first examine the high-temperature Cp of YIG, which isshown in figure 1. Our present data up to 390 K agree wellwith those of Devyatkova and Tikhonov [23]. At higher tem-peratures, there are two sets of data from differential scanningcalorimetry (DSC) that provide somewhat conflicting pictures:(1) Uchida et al’s Cp [10], while agreeing with our data below390 K, shows an unusual hump around 500 K. This broad fea-ture appears to be unrelated to the ferrimagnetic ordering ofFe3+ spins, since their magnetization data show a sharp trans-ition at TC = 553 K [10]. Also, their Cp lacks the expectedpeak at TC, which leads us to suspect some error in the meas-urement. (2) Denisov et al’s Cp [38] on Y2.93Ho0.07Fe5O12exhibits a clear peak at TC, and the overall values at highertemperatures are consistent with those of other iron garnetsdiscussed below. The λ-shape of the peak is consistent witha second-order transition that is strongly affected by criticalfluctuations. Although the 2% Ho3+ dopant in this samplesomewhat broadens the Cp peak, this level of impurity shouldnot significantly affect Cp away from TC. For T < TC, themost reasonableCp is obtained by interpolating our data below390 K and Denisov et al’s data above 450 K, which is shownwith a red solid line. These values andDenisov et al’sCp aboveTC are thus used to obtain the κ for YIG.2J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et alFigure 1. Heat capacity Cp of Y3Fe5O12. Present data are plottedalong with those of Denisov et al [38], Uchida et al [10], andDevyatkova and Tikhonov [23]. Note that Denisov et al’s samplecontains Ho3+. The Cp shown with the red solid line is used toobtain thermal conductivity. The black solid line is the Cp ofY3Al5O12 [39], and the dashed line corresponds to the estimatedlattice Cp of Y3Fe5O12.The black solid line in figure 1 represents the Cp forYAG [39], which is a nonmagnetic isomorph of YIG. TheDebye temperature Θ of YAG is 741 K, whereas that ofYIG is 560 K [40]. From these data, the lattice Cp forYIG can be roughly estimated by multiplying the temperat-ure scale of Cp for YAG by 560/741 [41], as shown withthe dashed line. Bearing in mind the crude nature of thisestimate, we obtain the magnetic Cp contribution in YIG at300 K as 27.4 JK−1mol−1. This value is much larger than2.4 JK−1 mol−1 calculated from the single parabolic magnonband formula [16, 17], but rather close to 10.3 JK−1 mol−1obtained from the ‘semi-quantum’ calculation using allmagnon modes [42]. (The latter predicts TC = 680 K[42].) Perhaps even better agreement may be achievedif finite temperature effects are fully incorporated intothe calculation.The Cp for other RIGs (R = Sm −Lu) have been meas-ured by Parida et al using DSC [43]. Their data for GdIG,DyIG, and YbIG are reproduced in figure 2. Compared toYIG, these compounds have slightly larger Cp due to the heav-ier molecular mass and crystal-field contributions (for Dy3+)from the rare-earth ions. (Θ = 491 K for GdIG [40], whilethe values are not known for DyIG and YbIG.) The sharppeak at TC affirms the high quality of the samples. However,Parida et al’s Cp contains a shoulder structure near 400 K,an extrinsic feature found in all their data [43]. We thusdiscard this contribution by extrapolating our Cp to highertemperatures, as shown with the red solid lines. The Cp forYbAG is also presented in figure 2(c). Here, the black solidline refers to the Neumann–Kopp (NK) values, which areobtained by adding the weightedCp of Yb2O3 and Al2O3 [44].The agreement with our experimental data below 390 K isexcellent.Figure 2. Heat capacity Cp of (a) Gd3Fe5O12, (b) Dy3Fe5O12, and(c) Yb3Fe5O12. Present data are plotted along with those of Paridaet al [43]. The Cp shown with the red solid lines are used to obtainthermal conductivity. In (c), the Cp of Yb3Al5O12 from the presentstudy and the Neumann–Kopp (NK) values are also shown.3.2. Thermal conductivity of YIGWenow discuss heat transport data, starting with those of YIG.The inset of figure 3 shows D near TC for our FZ crystal,our flux-grown crystal, and Hofmeister’s crystal [25] (growthmethod not specified). In each case, D exhibits a sharp, inver-ted λ-type dip at TC, similar in shape to that of sound velocity[45] and signifying interaction of acoustic phonons with thecritical fluctuations of the Fe3+ spins. There is excellent agree-ment between our FZ crystal and Hofmeister’s crystal, forwhich TC ≈ 555 K can be located. On the other hand, the flux-grown crystal exhibits smaller values of D and TC (≈535 K),most likely due to the presence of Pb impurity. These resultson D are then combined with the Cp in figure 1 to yield threesets of κ data shown in the main panel of figure 3. Due to thesample dependence of Cp, the κ near TC is plotted with opensymbols for our crystals and should be disregarded. However,one may expect the dip in D and the peak in Cp to mirror andcancel each other, as occurs in the κ of ferrimagnetic NiFe2O4(TC = 860 K) [46] and ferromagnetic EuO (TC = 69 K) [47],for example. As expected for a nonmetallic crystal, the κ ofYIG decreases rapidly on heating. The κ at 300 and 773 K forour FZ crystal are 6.6 and 3.0 Wm−1K−1, respectively, andnearly identical values are seen for Hofmeister’s crystal. Thus,3J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et alFigure 3. Thermal conductivity κ of Y3Fe5O12. Present data fromthe FZ- and flux-grown crystals are plotted along with four sets ofpublished data [10, 23–25]. The κ for Hofmeister is calculated usingthe Cp obtained in this study. Due to the sample dependence of Cp,κ near the Curie temperature are plotted with open symbols for ourcrystals. The inset shows thermal diffusivity D near the Curietemperature for the FZ- and flux-grown crystals and Hofmeister’scrystal [25].these data likely represent the κ of high-quality YIG crystals.In contrast, our flux-grown crystal shows ∼10% lower κ val-ues for the entire temperature range, signifying strong phononscattering from the Pb impurity.Also shown in figure 3 are the literature κ data from threesources [10, 23, 24]. Two of these [23, 24] were obtained onpolycrystalline YIG. Their overall agreement with our singlecrystal data indicates that the κ is not severely affected bygrain-boundary scattering. On the other hand, Uchida et al.’ssingle crystal data [10] exhibit much larger κ, exceeding othervalues by ∼30% at 600 K. Although the origin of this dis-crepancy is not clear, it is worth pointing out that both theirκ and Cp data (see figure 1) do not show any anomaly at TC.This indicates that their D (not reported in [10].) also lacksany anomaly at TC, which is surprising in view of the resultsshown in the inset of figure 3.3.2.1 Thermal conductivity below TC. An important issueto address on YIG is whether magnons play any visible rolein the κ at room temperature, either as (1) carriers of heat or(2) scatterers of heat-carrying phonons. In regard to (1), manystudies have assumed the magnon κ to be very small, of theorder of <0.1 Wm−1 K−1 at 300 K [16, 17], while two theor-etical studies [14, 15] predicted much larger values of 5 and12 Wm−1 K−1, respectively. For (2), various studies reportedthe evidence of magnon–phonon interactions [8, 48–50], buttheir impact on κ has not been explored. These questions canbe examined from two approaches. First, we evaluate the abso-lute magnitude of κ using the Slack equation [51, 52]κ=AM̄δΘ3γ2N 2/3T, (1)where A = (2.43 × 10−8)/[1 − (0.514/γ) + (0.228/γ2)],M̄ = 36.9 u is the mean atomic mass, δ = 2.28 Å is thecubic root of the average volume of each atom, Θ = 560 Kis the Debye temperature [40], γ = 1.15 is the Grüneisenparameter [53], and N = 80 is the number of atoms in theprimitive unit cell. This equation assumes that only acous-tic phonons contribute to the heat transport, and that phon-ons interact only among themselves via anharmonic three-phonon Umklapp processes [51, 52]. Using the above values,we obtain κ = 6.75 Wm−1 K−1 at 300 K, which is nearlyidentical to the experimental value of 6.6 Wm−1K−1. Sincethere is some uncertainty in the value of γ [53], the near per-fect agreement is most likely fortuitous. Nevertheless, this res-ult clearly shows that a pure phononicmodel can reproduce theheat transport in YIG at room temperature.We next evaluate the temperature dependence of κ. Infigure 4, the κ of the FZ- and flux-grown YIG are comparedwith that of nonmagnetic YAG on a log-log scale. For YAG,the best fit to κ = AT−α over the entire temperature rangeyields α = 1.02. This is the T−1 dependence due to three-phonon scattering processes [54], a feature widely seen inweakly anharmonic insulators and which is captured in theSlack equation. The figure also shows that essentially the sameT−1 dependence (α= 1.01 and 0.97) is found for the two YIGcrystals up to TC. (The slightly smaller α in the flux-growncrystal may arise from the Pb impurity scattering.) Thus, thepresence of ferrimagnetically ordered Fe3+ spins in YIG hasno apparent effect on the temperature dependence of κ, and itis reasonable to conclude that magnons in YIG do not play anysignificant role as carriers or scatterers of heat from 300 K toTC. It should be noted that this conclusion does not contradictthe observation of the SSE: previous studies have shown thatthe SSE in YIG is driven mostly by low-energy (<1.5 meV)magnons [9, 17], which constitute only a tiny fraction of themagnons excited at room temperature. Since the majority ofthermal magnons have very short mean free paths (<severalnm) [9], the total magnon κ can be negligibly small. Moreover,the reported magnon–phonon interactions in YIG occur onlyat specific positions in the Brillouin zone (the magnon andphonon dispersion crossing points [49] and the Raman-activezone center phonon mode [50]), such that their effects onthe overall phonon heat transport can be insignificant. Indeed,no evidence for magnon–phonon interaction was found whenthe entire magnon spectrum was studied by inelastic neutronscattering [55].3.2.2 Thermal conductivity above TC. Figure 4 also showsthat the phase transition from the ferrimagnetic state to theparamagnetic state has a strong impact on the κ: for both theFZ- and flux-grown YIG, the obtained α ≈ 0.6 demonstrates4J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et alFigure 4. Thermal conductivity κ of Y3Al5O12 and the FZ- andflux-grown Y3Fe5O12, plotted in logarithmic scales. The solid linesthrough the data are fit by κ= AT−α, and the resulting α are shown.a weaker temperature dependence above TC. In the paramag-netic phase, the Fe3+ spins are no longer ordered and fluctuaterandomly, which can become an additional source of phononscattering. Although similar suppression of κ in the paramag-netic phase is reported for various transition metal oxides [57–59], it is still not clear whether phonons couple directly withfluctuating spins [58] or with the exchange striction inducedby spin fluctuations [59]. In this regard, YIG could serve as asimple system to further explore this problem, since the 3d5configuration of Fe3+ lacks additional orbital degree of free-dom that complicates the problem.3.3. Thermal conductivity of RIGsWenowmove on to discuss heat transport in other iron garnets.Figure 5 shows κ for the flux-grown single crystals of RIGs(R=Y, Gd, Dy, and Yb). Due to Pb impurity in these crystals,a small dip in D occurs at a lower temperature than the liter-ature TC, and there is likely up to ∼10% reduction in κ fromthe intrinsic values. However, these changes should not signi-ficantly affect the relative κ of the four compounds, which isthat replacing Y3+ with Gd3+ or Yb3+ reduces the κ at 300 Kby ∼30%, whereas replacing with Dy3+ reduces the value by55%. As the difference in cubic lattice parameter is less than0.8% [18], these results can be attributed to (1) the reductionin average phonon velocity arising from the heavier rare-earthions (‘mass effect’) [31, 60], and (2) the reduction in phononmean free path due to additional scattering from the magneticmoment of rare-earth ions (‘magnetic effect’). We note thatin RIGs, (a) Gd3+ has a half-filled 4 f shell (4f 7, 8S7/2) suchthat the crystal-field (CF) effects can be neglected, (b) Dy3+(4f 9, 6H15/2) has eight CF doubles, with six of them thermallyFigure 5. Thermal conductivity κ of flux-grown crystals forY3Fe5O12, Gd3Fe5O12, Dy3Fe5O12, and Yb3Fe5O12. The inset plotsthe κ for Yb3Fe5O12 and Yb3Al5O12 in logarithmic scales. The datafor Yb3Al5O12 are obtained from the single-crystal thermaldiffusivity of Marquardt et al [56] and the Cp in figure 2(c). Thesolid lines through the data are fit by κ = AT−α, and the resulting αare shown.populated at 300 K [61], and (c) Yb3+ (4f 13, 2F7/2) has the firstCF excited state located at ∼550 cm−1 (1 cm−1 = 1.44 K)[62], such that only the ground-state doublet is populated at300 K. (Here, we do not consider the additional small splittingdue to the exchange field caused by the magnetic ordering ofthe Fe3+ spins [62])As the three rare-earth ions (Gd3+, Dy3+, and Yb3+) allcontain magnetic moments, the mass effect and the magneticeffect cannot be identified separately. However, a comparisonbetween the κ of YAG and LuAG (Lu3Al5O12) shows thatreplacing Y3+ (89 u) by heavier nonmagnetic Lu3+ (175 u)reduces the κ at 300 K from ∼12 to ∼9 Wm−1 K−1 [63–65], indicating that the mass effect is operative in garnets.Similarly, the magnetic effect can be identified by compar-ing the κ of LuAG and YbAG [56], since Yb3+ (173 u) issimilar in mass to Lu3+: as shown in the inset of figure 5,κ = 7.0 Wm−1 K−1 at 300 K for YbAG is indeed lower thanthe value in LuAG. The inset also shows that YbAG and theferrimagnetic phase of YbIG share similar power law behaviorwith α ≈ 0.8. This supports the view that the ordered Fe3+spins in YbIG do not significantly affect the thermal transport,as was already seen for YIG. The smaller α (=0.54) foundabove TC is also consistent with the result in YIG. Lookingnow at the main panel of figure 5, we find similar κ values forGdIG and YbIG in the entire temperature range. This is per-haps due to the slightly lighter mass of Gd3+ (157 u) beingcompensated by its spin quantum number S = 7/2, which islarger than the pseudospin value of S = 1/2 in Yb3+ [62]. For5J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et alGdIG, M̄ = 47.2 u, δ = 2.30 Å, Θ = 491 K [40], λ = 1.08[53], and N = 80. Calculating the κ at 300 K with the Slackequation yields 6.65 Wm−1 K−1, which is much larger thanthe experimental value of 4.0Wm−1 K−1. This result also sup-ports the view that the magnetic moment of Gd3+ is involvedin the additional scattering of phonons at room temperature.Compared to other RIGs, the κ of DyIG is much smallerand exhibits saturating behavior on cooling. This result is sim-ilar to that seen in DyAG (Dy3Al5O12) [32], where the sup-pression has been attributed to strong resonant scattering ofphonons between the CF levels of Dy3+ ions [32, 66, 67]. InDyAG, the low-lying excited doublets are located at 70 and116 cm−1 [66], and detailed calculations [67] showed thatexcitations between these doublets (∆res = 46 cm−1) explainthe resonant scattering. In DyIG, there are more CF excitedlevels in the same low-frequency region (at 20, 53, 63, 71, and87 cm−1) [61], such that similar calculations should reproducethe strongly suppressed κ of this compound. It is interestingto mention that a recent theoretical study [68] has identifiedCF excitations as an important tuning parameter of the SSE inRIGs.4. ConclusionsWe have presented the κ between 300 and 773 K for the singlecrystals of RIGs (R = Y, Gd, Dy, and Yb), which provideimportant insights into the heat transport properties of thesecompounds. In particular, the results on YIG demonstrate thelack of any visible role ofmagnons below TC. This solid exper-imental finding is a step forward from the discussions in previ-ous studies, where the magnon κ was only assumed to be verysmall at room temperature. Also, the lower κ found for otherRIGs underscore the strong effects of rare-earth ions in modi-fying the heat transport, which should be considered whenthese compounds are employed in SSE devices.Data availability statementAll data that support the findings of this study are includedwithin the article (and any supplementary files).AcknowledgmentWe thank M. Nishio for performing the electron probemicroanalysis. This study was supported by the funding fromJST-Mirai JPMJMI19A1.Appendix. Thermal diffusivity dataThe thermal diffusivity data obtained in this study, which weremeasured on single crystals using the flash method, are shownin figure A1. A photograph of a YbIG single crystal grown bythe flux method is shown in the inset. The large, rhombohedralplanes correspond to the {110} faces of the garnet crystal [26].Figure A1. Thermal diffusivity (D) of Y3Fe5O12, Gd3Fe5O12,Dy3Fe5O12, Yb3Fe5O12, and Y3Al5O12 single crystals. Data forboth the FZ- and flux-grown crystals are shown for Y3Fe5O12. Othercrystals are flux-grown. The inset is a photograph of a flux-grownYb3Fe5O12 crystal. Scale in mm.ORCID iDsMakoto Tachibana 0000-0002-5907-5563Cédric Bourgès 0000-0001-9056-0420Takao Mori 0000-0003-2682-1846References[1] Chumak A V, Vasyuchka V I, Serga A A and Hillebrands B2015 Nat. Phys. 11 453[2] Serga A A, Chumak A V and Hillebrands B 2010 J. Phys. D:Appl. Phys. 43 264002[3] Lüthi B 1962 J. Phys. Chem. Solids 23 35–38[4] Friedberg S A and Harris E D 1962 Proc. 8th Int. Conf. onLow Temperature Physics (Butterworths, London) p 302[5] Douglass R L 1963 Phys. Rev. 129 1132[6] Sato H 1955 Prog. Theor. Phys. 13 119[7] Uchida K, Ishida M, Kikkawa T, Kirihara A, Murakami T andSaitoh E 2014 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 26 343202[8] Kikkawa T and Saitoh E 2023 Annu. Rev. Condens. MatterPhys. 14 129[9] Boona C S R and Heremans J P 2014 Phys. Rev. B 90 064421[10] Uchida K, Kikkawa T, Miura A, Shiomi J and Saitoh E 2014Phys. Rev. X 4 041023[11] Iguchi R, Uchida K, Daimon S and Saitoh E 2017 Phys. Rev. B95 174401[12] Ratkovski D R, Balicas L, Bangura A, Machado F L A andRezende S M 2020 Phys. Rev. B 101 1744426[13] Pan B Y, Guan T Y, Hong X C, Zhou S Y, Qiu X, Zhang H andLi S Y 2013 Europhys. Lett. 103 370056https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5907-5563https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5907-5563https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9056-0420https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9056-0420https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-1846https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-1846https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3347https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3347https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/43/26/264002https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/43/26/264002https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3697(62)90054-9https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3697(62)90054-9https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.129.1132https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.129.1132https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.13.119https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.13.119https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/26/34/343202https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/26/34/343202https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-040721-014957https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-040721-014957https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.064421https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.064421https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.4.041023https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.4.041023https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.174401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.174401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.174442https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.174442https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/103/37005https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/103/37005J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37 (2025) 405401 M Tachibana et al[14] Rezende S M, Rodríguez-Suárez R L, Ortiz J C L andAzevedo A 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89 134406[15] Costa S S and Sampaio L C 2019 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter31 275804[16] Schreier M, Kamra A, Weiler M, Xia J, Bauer G E W, Gross Rand Goennenwein S T B 2013 Phys. Rev. B 88 094410[17] Jamison J S, Yang Z, Giles B L, Brangham J T, Wu G,Hammel P C, Yang F and Myers R C 2019 Phys. Rev. B100 134402[18] Gilleo M A 1980 Ferromagnetic Materials vol 2, edE P Wohlfarth (North-Holland) p 1[19] Geprägs S et al 2016 Nat. Commun. 7 10452[20] Cramer J et al 2017 Nano Lett. 17 3334[21] Kawamoto Y et al 2024 Appl. Phys. Lett. 124 132406[22] Li Y et al 2024 Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 056702[23] Devyatkova E D and Tikhonov V V 1967 Sov. Phys. SolidState 9 604[24] Padture N P and Klemens P G 1997 J. Am. Ceram. Soc.80 1018[25] Hofmeister A M 2006 Phys. Chem. Miner. 33 45[26] Tachibana M 2017 Beginner’s Guide to Flux Crystal Growth(Springer)[27] Kimura S and Shindo I 1977 J. Cryst. Growth 41 192–8[28] Van Uitert L G, Bonner W A, Grodkiewicz W H,Pictroski M L and Zydzik G J 1970 Mater. Res. Bull. 5 825[29] Fratello V J, Slusky S E G, Rana V V S, Brandle C D andBallintine J E 1986 J. Appl. Phys. 59 564[30] Tachibana M, Iwanade A and Miyakawa K 2021 J. Cryst.Growth 568–569 126191[31] Tachibana M, Muchtar A R and Mori T 2022 Phys. Rev. Mater.6 045405[32] Tachibana M, Bourgès C and Mori T 2023 Appl. Phys. Express16 061003[33] Kennedy C A, Stancescu M, Marriott R A and White M A2007 Cryogenics 47 107[34] Geller S, Espinosa G P and Crandall P B 1969 J. Appl. Cryst.2 86–88[35] Wang X, Xiang H, Sun X, Liu J, Hou F and Zhou Y 2014 J.Mater. Res. 29 2673[36] Espinosa G P 1962 J. Chem. Phys. 37 2344[37] Kolmakova N P, Levitin R Z, Orlov V N and Vedernikov N F1990 J. Mag. Mag. Mater. 87 218[38] Denisov V M, Denisova L T, Irtyugo L A, Patrin G S,Volkov N V and Chumilina L G 2012 Phys. Solid State54 2205[39] Konings R J M, van der Laan R R, van Genderen A C G andvan Miltenburg J C 1998 Thermochim. Acta 313 201[40] Kitaeva V F, Zharikov E V and Chistyi I L 1985 Phys. StatusSolidi a 92 475[41] Gopal E S R 1966 Specific Heat at Low Temperatures (PlenumPress)[42] Barker J and Bauer G E W 2019 Phys. Rev. B 100 140401(R)[43] Parida S C, Rakshit S K and Singh Z 2008 J. Solid State Chem.181 101[44] Barin I 1995 Thermochemical Data of Pure Substances (VCH)[45] Kamilov I K and Aliev K K 1974 Sov. Phys.–JETP 38 954[46] Nelson A T, White J T, Andersson D A, Aguiar J A,McClellan K J, Byler D D, Short M P and Stanek C R 2014J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 97 1559[47] Salamon M B, Garnier P R, Golding B and Buehler E 1974 J.Phys. Chem. Solids 35 851[48] Kikkawa T, Shen K, Flebus B, Duine R A, Uchida K, Qiu Z,Bauer G E W and Saitoh E 2016 Phys. Rev. Lett.117 207203[49] Man H, Shi Z, Xu G, Xu Y, Chen X, Sullivan S, Zhou J,Xia K, Shi J and Dai P 2017 Phys. Rev. B 96 100406(R)[50] Olsson K S, Choe J, Rodriguez-Vega M, Khalsa G,Benedek N A, He J, Fang B, Zhou J, Fiete G A and Li X2021 Phys. Rev. B 104 L020401[51] Slack G A 1979 Solid State Physics vol 34, ed H Ehrenreichet al (Academic) p 1[52] Morelli D T and Slack G A 2006 High Thermal ConductivityMaterials ed S L Sindé and J S Goela (Springer) p 37[53] Saunders G A, Parker S C, Benbattouche N and Alberts H L1992 Phys. Rev. B 46 8756[54] Berman R 1976 Thermal Conduction in Solids (OxfordUniversity Press)[55] Pricep A J, Ewing R A, Ward S, Tóth S, Carsten Dubs D P andBoothroyd A T 2017 npj Quantum Mater. 2 63[56] Marquardt H, Ganschow S and Schilling F R 2009 Phys.Chem. Miner. 36 107[57] Sun O et al 2023 Mater. Today Phys. 35 101094[58] Sharma P A, Ahn J S, Hur N, Park S, Kim S B, Lee S,Park J-G, Guha S and Cheong S-W 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett.93 177202[59] Zhou J-S and Goodenough J B 2002 Phys. Rev. B 66 052401[60] Wang L-W, Xie L-S, Xu P-X and Xia K 2020 Phys. Rev. B101 165137[61] Kang T D, Standard E C, Rogers P D, Ahn K H, Sirenko A A,Dubroka A, Bernhard C, Park S, Choi Y J and Cheong S-W2012 Phys. Rev. B 86 144112[62] Peçanha-Antonio V, Prabhakaran D, Balz C, Krajewska A andBoothroyd A T 2022 Phys. Rev. B 105 104422[63] Kuwano Y, Suda K, Ishizawa N and Yamada T 2004 J. Cryst.Growth 260 159[64] Aggarwal R L, Ripin D J, Ochoa J R and Fan T Y 2005 J.Appl. Phys. 98 103514[65] Talik E et al 2017 Mater. Res. Express 4 056201[66] Slack G A and Oliver D W 1971 Phys. Rev. B 4 592[67] Neelmani and Verma G S 1972 Phys. Rev. B 6 3509[68] Mori M, Tomasello B and Ziman T 2025 Phys. Rev. B111 0144077https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.134406https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.134406https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ab1691https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ab1691https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.88.094410https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.88.094410https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.134402https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.134402https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10452https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10452https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b04522https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b04522https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0197831https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0197831https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.056702https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.056702https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb02937.xhttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb02937.xhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00269-005-0056-8https://doi.org/10.1007/s00269-005-0056-8https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0248(77)90045-8https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0248(77)90045-8https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(70)90033-4https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(70)90033-4https://doi.org/10.1063/1.336614https://doi.org/10.1063/1.336614https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2021.126191https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2021.126191https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.6.045405https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.6.045405https://doi.org/10.35848/1882-0786/acda0fhttps://doi.org/10.35848/1882-0786/acda0fhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryogenics.2006.10.001https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryogenics.2006.10.001https://doi.org/10.1107/S0021889869006625https://doi.org/10.1107/S0021889869006625https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2014.319https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2014.319https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1733008https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1733008https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-8853(90)90218-Fhttps://doi.org/10.1016/0304-8853(90)90218-Fhttps://doi.org/10.1134/S1063783412110078https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063783412110078https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6031(98)00261-5https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6031(98)00261-5https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.2210920217https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.2210920217https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.140401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.140401https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2007.11.003https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2007.11.003https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.12901https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.12901https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3697(74)80266-0https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3697(74)80266-0https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.207203https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.207203https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.96.100406https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.96.100406https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L020401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L020401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.8756https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.8756https://doi.org/10.1038/s41535-017-0067-yhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41535-017-0067-yhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00269-008-0261-3https://doi.org/10.1007/s00269-008-0261-3https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtphys.2023.101094https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtphys.2023.101094https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.177202https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.177202https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.052401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.052401https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.165137https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.165137https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.144112https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.144112https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.105.104422https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.105.104422https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2003.08.060https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2003.08.060https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2128696https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2128696https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa6be5https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa6be5https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.4.592https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.4.592https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.6.2026https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.6.2026https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.111.014407https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.111.014407 High-temperature thermal conductivity of yttrium and rare-earth iron garnets 1. Introduction 2. Experimental details 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Heat capacity 3.2. Thermal conductivity of YIG 3.2.1 Thermal conductivity below TC. 3.2.2 Thermal conductivity above TC. 3.3. Thermal conductivity of RIGs 4. Conclusions Appendix. Thermal diffusivity data References