StejskalTanner Equation

Derived in Full
PHILIP W. KUCHEL, GUILHEM PAGE
`
S, KAZ NAGASHIMA, SENDHIL VELAN,
VIMALAN VIJAYARAGAVAN, VIJAYASARATHI NAGARAJAN, KAI HSIANG CHUANG
Singapore Bioimaging Consortium, A*STAR, 11 Biopolis Way, #02-02 Helios Building, 138667 Singapore
ABSTRACT: The pulsed eld gradient spin-echo nuclear magnetic resonance method
is used to measure the translational diffusion of solvents and solutes in homogeneous
and heterogeneous systems. It is widely used in the characterization of molecules and
materials in general, via phenomena such as diffusion interference. It is also the basis of
tissue discrimination in magnetic resonance imaging, via diffusion tensor imaging. The
mathematical equation used to analyze data from a simple noninteracting solute (using a
pair of magnetic eld gradient pulses that are applied in the experiment) was rst
derived by Stejskal and Tanner. However, in the article and in subsequent presentations
the basic derivation, which we call the the theoretical physics of the theory, is not pre-
sented in extenso. Conversely, many papers in which the exploration of the effects of mag-
netic eld gradient pulses of shapes other than simple rectangles generally begin with
the time-dependent integral that emerges from the original theoretical physics. To ll
this pedagogical gap we use here a rigorous step-by-step approach to the theoretical
physics of the StejskalTanner equation and indicate how it was based on earlier
theories. We also take the opportunity to indicate a contemporary approach to deriving
new relationships between user-dened magnetic eld gradient pulse shapes and
the diffusion coefcient; and we show how these can be rapidly and accurately derived
using symbolic computation. 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part A
40A: 205214, 2012.
KEY WORDS: Diffusion; Ficks equation; magnetization; Mathematica; pulsed eld
gradient
INTRODUCTION
The pulsed eld gradient spin-echo (PGSE) nuclear
magnetic resonance (NMR) experiment was devel-
oped to measure the diffusion coefcient (D) of a
solute in a homogeneous medium (1, 2) and later the-
oretical and practical developments have enabled its
use in the study of diffusion in heterogeneous
systems. While the PGSE is the basic pulse
sequence, several more complicated pulse sequences
have been developed such as: to use a stimulated-
echo-based sequence instead of a spin-echo (3); to
avoid eddy currents (46); to suppress solvent signal
(79); to cancel the effects of convection on the
Received 20 June 2012; accepted 23 August 2012
We also bring the readers attention to the fact that JE Tanners
PhD Thesis entitled Use of a pulsed magnetic-eld gradient for
measurements of self-diffusion by spin-echo nuclear magnetic
resonance with applications to restricted diffusion in several tis-
sues and emulsions, The University of Wisconsin, 1966, is
available through University Microlms, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
as 66-5, 951.
Correspondence to: Philip W. Kuchel. E-mail: philip_kuchel@
sbic.a-star.edu.sg
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A, Vol. 40A(5) 205214 (2012)
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.
com). DOI 10.1002/cmr.a.21241
2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
205
estimate of D (8, 1012); to measure diffusion over a
very short time (13, 14); to use a multiple-quantum
lter (12, 15); to decrease the experiment time,
including the use of single-shot diffusion measure-
ments (1618); and to add dimensionality to the
experiment (19, 20), as examples. Several excellent
books (2, 21, 22) and reviews (2330) have been pub-
lished on PGSE experiments, and since the focus of
this article is on the mathematical-physical description
of the measurement of D, interested readers are
encouraged to refer to the previous references.
Briey, the data are obtained from a sequence
of NMR signal intensities from a nucleus in the dif-
fusing solute, obtained with a range of intensities
of magnetic eld gradient pulses, disposed in a
spin-echo radio-frequency (RF) pulse sequence. In
the classical experiment there are two such
gradient pulses and they are rectangular in shape. The
relative timings of the RF and eld gradient pulses
are shown in Fig. 1 along with labels that denote the
echo time 2s, the duration of the pulses d, and the
time interval between the eld gradient pulses D.
A graph of the natural logarithm of the ratio of the
spin-echo signal intensity obtained with a range of
values of the magnetic eld gradient intensity [pro-
portional to (area)
2
of each rectangle in the simplest
case described here] to that when the value is zero,
versus a lumped parameter now denoted in the lit-
erature by b, gives a straight line with a negative
slope that is the value of D.
There are two main parts to the derivation of this
expression. The rst we call the theoretical
physics and the second is the tedious mathematical
analysis that entails the solution of many integrals
of time, over time domains that are specied by
the experimenter when setting up the pulse
sequence. The latter aspect has been described
comprehensively in several articles including, for
example, (31, 32).
The theoretical physics part of the analysis is not
dealt with in detail in the original paper (1, see text
footnote), and yet the expression that is used to
derive the counterpart of b in cases where the pulsed
eld gradient waveform is not rectangular have been
considered in detail. The latter is the starting point
for several older and indeed more recent treatments
of cases where the gradient waveforms are quite
complicated (4, 32).
The aim of the present article is to give an exten-
sive step-by-step derivation of the StejskalTanner
equation (1, see text footnote). We begin the analysis
with a mathematical description of the physical sys-
tem that is under study and nish it with the main
data-analysis equation (the StejskalTanner equa-
tion). The nal form of this equation is reproduced
here, and it constitutes the target for our analysis:
ln A2s=A0 D c
2
d
2
D
1
3
dg
2
: [31]
After the theoretical-physics part of the derivation of
the equation we note the somewhat curious squared
term in the time integral and ask how this comes
about? In short, it arises from the second derivative of
the magnetization vector-function with respect to the
spatial variable (z) as specied by Ficks second law
of diffusion (33). Reaching Eq. [31] involves careful
thought about integrals of nonsmooth time-dependent
functions which are discretized (also called piece-
wise continuous) on the time domain [0, 2s].
THEORETICAL PHYSICS
An ensemble of magnetic nuclei with net magnetiza-
tion M is placed in a static eld of magnetic induction
(also called ux density) B
0
. M is perturbed by an RF
pulse of electromagnetic radiation at or close to the
Larmor (precession) frequency of the nuclei. In a Car-
tesian coordinate frame this yields a net magnetization
vector in the x,y-plane, M
x,y
, that can be resolved into x
and y components of magnitudes M
x
and M
y
, respec-
Figure 1 PGSE NMR pulse sequence. The RF pulse
sequence consists of a p/2 and a p pulse separated by the
time s ; and the FID is recorded after a further time s, at
the peak of the spin echo. The magnetic eld gradient
pulses are of equal duration d, and separated by the time
interval D. Their amplitude at the plateau of the rectangu-
lar pulse is denoted by g
i
, the subscript indicating that a
sequence of values, i 1, . . ., N is used in the experi-
ment; in routine practice for a single diffusing species N
is often chosen to be around 12.
Abbreviations
D diffusion coefcient
DTI diffusion tensor imaging
FID free induction decay
MRI magnetic resonance imaging
NMR nuclear magnetic resonance
PGSE pulsed eld gradient spin-echo
RF radio frequency
206 KUCHEL ET AL.
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
tively. As we will be focusing attention on the x,y-
plane, and rotation of M
x,y
about the z-axis, it is
convenient to consider the plane as the complex
plane. Thus,
M
x;y
M
x
iM
y
[1]
where the y-axis is the imaginary one. Since the mag-
netization rotates (precesses) at a frequency x around
the origin in the complex plane, it makes an angle xt
with the real (x) axis at any time t. Hence,
M
x;y
M
0
cos x t i sin x t [2]
and by Eulers formula:
M
x;y
M
0
e
i x t
: [3]
However, we must consider the magnitude of the
magnetization at t 0, M
0
, after the RF pulse and the
fact that the magnetization decays with a relaxation
time constant T
2
, the transverse (plane) relaxation-time
constant; hence Eq. [3] is elaborated on to become
M
x;y
M
0
e
i x 1=T
2
t
: [4]
If a constant magnetic eld gradient G is applied such
that it is collinear with B
0
(z-axis in a modern vertical-
bore cryomagnet, while Stejskal and Tanner actually
used G
x(y)
because they used a 20 MHz electromagnet
with a transverse B
0
eld) then the component of the
magnetic eld vector in the z-direction, and that which
causes the precession of M about it, is
B
z
B
0
G r [5]
where r is the position vector for a given nucleus.
Hence, by factoring out the contribution of B
0
to the
precession of M
x,y
(in other words transforming the
physical description of the system to the rotating
frame of reference centred on the Cartesian origin),
the Larmor equation gives the precession frequency
in the rotation frame as
x
R
c G r
^
k [6]
x
R
c G r [7]
where c is the magnetogyric ratio of each nucleus in
the ensemble and k

is the unit Cartesian vector in the

z-direction; and henceforth in the interests of simpli-
fying the nomenclature we drop the subscript on x
R
and use its magnitude and hence denote it by the
italics form, x. Therefore, substitution of Eq. [7] into
Eq. [3] gives the expression:
M
x;y

M
0
e
icGrt
[8]
where the vertical lines denote the magnitude of the
vector; we have removed the T
2
-containing term [as
did Stejskal and Tanner (1)] and consider the system
to not undergo transverse spinspin relaxation. This
is a reasonable approximation as we will be consider-
ing the signal attenuation that occurs due to diffusion
with and without the magnetic eld gradient, so the
spinspin relaxation will be normalized out in our
data analysis.
In the original derivation of the signal attenuation,
in the pulsed eld gradient experiment, Stejskal and
Tanner (1) followed the nomenclature in Eq. (45) in
Chapter III of Abragam (34). However, in the present
article, we use the classical mathematical notation
for vectors, viz., bold typeface that was apparently
rst advanced by Oliver Heaviside in the 19th cen-
tury. Therefore, Eq. [8] takes the following form in
which we replace M
x,y
by italics w, noting that w
w (r, t) (and for brevity we leave the arguments off
the specication of w) then,
w M
0
e
i c Gr t
: [9]
The derivative of Eq. [9] with respect to time is
@w
@t
i c G r M
0
e
icGrt
[10]
where the partial derivative is required because w is
a function of the spatial variable r (eld position) as
well as time. Substituting Eq. [9] into Eq. [10] gives
@w
@t
i c G rw: [11]
Integration of this differential equation leads to
_
w
w
0
@w
0
w
0

_
t
0
i c G r @t
0
[12]
ln w
0
j
w
w
0
i c r
_
t
0
Gt
0
@t
0
[13]
w w
0
e
icrFt
[14]
where
Ft
_
t
0
Gt
0
dt
0
: [15]
The latter equation describes so-called spatial
encoding that is invoked by the eld gradient pulses.
At this stage, we have introduced the effect of the
STEJSKALTANNER EQUATION DERIVED IN FULL 207
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
gradient pulse on the magnetization, but we have not
yet built in the fact that the spins are diffusing.
If diffusion is considered to be part of the motion
of the system then the expression for the rate of
change of magnetization is augmented by Ficks sec-
ond law (33, 35), viz.,
@w
@t
D r
2
w [16]
where r
2
is the Laplacian or double derivative with
respect to the independent spatial variable(s), in this
case z only; but we choose to keep the equation gen-
eral for the sake of completeness. Therefore, the mas-
ter equation that must be solved (integrated) to
describe the time dependence of magnetization in a
pulsed eld gradient experiment is
@w
@t
i c G r w D r
2
w: [17]
If the behavior of the magnetization is to be described
in the absence of diffusion then the solution of Eq.
[17] is of the same form as Eq. [9] but the leading
term is replaced by a function of time A : A(t)
(which represents the transverse magnetization at any
point in time), such that immediately after the p/2 RF
pulse in the spin-echo sequence w(0) A(0). Eq. [14]
is now rewritten in general (for any t) as
w At e
icrFt
: [18]
At a later time in the pulse sequence the p RF pulse
rotates (in effect it reects it across the axis) the posi-
tion of the magnetization vector about the axis of the
pulse (or it can be said to have been advanced by
twice the angle it had previously precessed in time
s). So, we replace the exponent in the expression:
w At e
i c rFt 2f
[19]
where f is a constant dened by f : F (s), and it cor-
responds to the phase angle that has accumulated
between the p/2 and p RF pulses, due to the gradients.
The rotating frame axis (referred to as the phase of
the pulse) along which the p RF pulse is applied, is
assumed to be the same as that of the p/2 pulse in this
case. A problem with Eq. [19] is that it does not cor-
rectly describe the magnetization before the p pulse.
Hence, a new parameter, n 1 for t \s and n 1
for t [s, is introduced to set up a single expression
for the magnetization before and after the p pulse:
w At e
i c r Ft n1f
: [20]
The second exponent, icr (n 1)f, remains as 0
from t 0 to s during which F(t) increases from
F(0) to F(s) (Fig. 2). After the p pulse, the second
exponent turns into 2f (constant), while the rst
exponent continues to increase from F(s) to F(2s). A
spin echo is formed when F(2s) 2f and the expo-
nential term equates to one.
Differentiation of Eq. [20] with respect to time,
using the product rule of differentiation, yields
@w
@t

dAt
dt
e
i c rFtn1f
At i c r
d Ft
dt
n 1
d f
dt
_ _
e
icrFtn1f
21
where
d Ft
dt
Gt [22]
and
d f
dt
0: [23]
The zero arises because f is a constant, viz., f F(s).
Now consider the diffusion part of Eq. [17], and
yet with the expression for w as given by Eq. [18] in
which A(t) is exclusively a function of t, and the
Figure 2 Timing parameters of the PGSE sequence and
its separation into ve time domains for deriving the Stej-
skalTanner time integrals. The evolution of F(t), F(t)
2
and
(n 1) F(t) are also illustrated along the same time axis.
The presence of a small but discernible g
0
gradient is
illustrated so that G(t) has a non-zero value from t 0
and a slope is seen in the F(t) line during domains I, III
and V. For integration of F(t) and F(t)
2
, the integrals in
each time domain are separately evaluated and then
summed at the end; note how at t 2s, F(t) (n 1)
f becomes zero. The coherence order is denoted by p, and
we see its change in value brought about by the RF pulses.
208 KUCHEL ET AL.
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
Laplacian double derivative is taken with respect to
r, the spatial vector:
Dr
2
Ate
icrFtn1f
DAtr
2
e
icrFtn1f
[24]
DAt ic Ft n 1f re
icrFtn1f
[25]
DAt cFt n 1f
2
e
icrFtn1f
:
[26]
Substituting Eq. [26] into Eq. [17] gives
@w
@t
icG rw DAt cFt n 1f
2
e
icrFtn1f
: 27
Equate Eqs. [21] and [27], using Eq. [20] for w and
setting f ic (F(t) (n 1)f) to simplify the no-
menclature:
dAt
dt
e
/
Aticr Ge
/
Aticr Ge
/
DAt cFt n 1f
2
e
/
: 28
Dividing both sides by e
f
and clearing terms alge-
braically gives
dAt
dt
AtD cFt n 1f
2
: [29]
Equation [29] is solved by integration using separa-
tion of variables:
_
A2s
A0
dAt
At
Dc
2
_
2s
0
Ft n 1f
2
dt:
[30]
It evaluates to
ln
A2s
A0
_

_
_

_ Dc
2
g
2
d
2
D d=3 : [31]
It is noted that Eq. [31] is the very, so-called, Stej-
skalTanner equation that virtually all contemporary
diffusion NMR/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
people know by heart. However, in the original pa-
per (1), the authors did not even assign an equation
number to this important formula. So, we can
exclaim that: often, a major scientic nding may not
be highly appreciated even by the discoverers on
their rst encounter with it!
This is the end of the theoretical physics but what
follows is some tedious mathematics that is best done
by using Mathematica
1
or a related package that
handles symbolic computation, like Maple
1
or
MATLAB
1
.
COMPLICATED TIME INTEGRALS
Notwithstanding, our injunction to use symbolic com-
putation to save time and avoid transcription or even
careless errors, it is instructive to evaluate the integral
of the quadratic term on the right hand side of Eq. [30]
by hand. We begin by expanding the quadratic:

1
Dc
2
ln
A2s
A0
_

_
_

_
_
s
0
Ft
2
dt
_
2s
s
Ft2f
2
dt
[32]

_
s
0
Ft
2
dt
_
2s
s
Ft
2
4f Ft 4f
2
_ _
dt
[33]

_
s
0
Ft
2
dt
_
2s
s
Ft
2
dt 4f

_
2s
s
Ftdt 4f
2
2s s 34

_
2s
0
Ft
2
dt 4f
_
2s
s
Ftdt 4f
2
s: [35]
Note carefully, the discrete time intervals in the de-
nition of G(t) for this simplest PGSE experiment:
Gt
g
0
; 0 < t < t
1
g
0
g ; t
1
< t < t
1
d < s
g
0
; t
1
d < t < t
1
D
g
0
g ; t
1
D < t < t
1
D d < 2s
g
0
; t
1
D d < t
_

_
[36]
Also note that Stejskal and Tanner (1) introduced
g
0
as a possible background magnetic eld gradi-
ent that was present during the experiment, as this
was relevant for technical reasons at the time of
their work. However, modern NMR systems no
longer have this as a problem, so it is mathemati-
cally expedient to set g
0
0 in the subsequent
analysis. Figure 2 displays the timing parameters
of RF and gradient pulses G(t), and for complete-
ness in the presence of a background gradient (g
0
= 0) along with the evolution of F(t) and F(t)
2
.
The whole time interval is separated into ve
domains in order to conduct integral calculations
as specied below. Thus, we set up integration
domains for this piecewise continuous function,
F(t):
STEJSKALTANNER EQUATION DERIVED IN FULL 209
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
F
I
t
_
t
0
g
0
t
0
dt
0
for 0<t\t
1
F
II
t F
I
t
1

_
t
t
1
g
0
t
0
gt
0
dt
0
for t
1
<t<t
1
d
F
III
t F
II
t
1
d
_
t
t
1
d
g
0
t
0
dt
0
for t
1
d<t\t
1
D
F
IV
t F
III
t
1
D
_
t
t
1
D
g
0
t
0
gt
0
dt
0
for t
1
D<t\t
1
dD
F
V
t F
IV
t
1
D d
_
t
t
1
Dd
g
0
t
0
dt
0
for t
1
D d<t
[37]
where the subscripts on F(t) correspond to the ve
domains in Fig. 2. Then, we will substitute them into
the three terms of Eq. [35]:
1st term
_
2s
0
Ft
2
dt

_
t
1
0
F
I
t
2
dt
_
t
1
d
t
1
F
II
t
2
dt

_
t
1
D
t
1
d
F
III
t
2
dt
_
t
1
Dd
t
1
D
F
IV
t
2
dt

_
2s
t
1
Dd
F
V
t
2
dt;
2nd term 4f
_
2s
s
Ftdt
4 F
III
s
__
t
1
D
s
F
III
t dt

_
t
1
Dd
t
1
D
F
IV
t dt
_
2s
t
1
Dd
F
V
t dt
_
3rd term 4F
2
s 4F
III
s
2
s 38
Evaluating the integrals followed by the summation
of the three terms in Eq. [38] in the Mathematica
program below (Appendix) yields Eq. [31], with g
0

0. Evaluating Eq. [35] for many different waveforms

of the eld gradients has been done before by us (4,
14) and others (32).
CONCLUSIONS
The derivation of the StejskalTanner equation
required deep insights by the original authors into the
theoretical physics of the system that they wished to
represent. Some of the subtle mathematical steps
were glossed over in the original paper, and some of
the nomenclature was not fully rigorous by modern
mathematical standards. However, the outcome of
the analysis has been amply veried in a vast number
of papers since the rst presentation of the theory in
1965. What we set out to achieve here was a formal
derivation of the StejskalTanner equation that is
both pedagogically sound and formally/mathemati-
cally consistent. This task was greatly simplied by
the use of symbolic computation (in Mathematica in
our case); and the scope for generating explicit
expressions different from the original equation,
using gradient waveforms of almost any analytical-
functional form, is vast and yet it is made tractable
by using modern symbolic computation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper emerged from the NMR Theory Discus-
sion Group at the Singapore Bioimaging Consortium,
Biomedical Research Institutes (BMSI), Singapore.
The latter is thanked for intramural funding to support
the research of the authors using NMR imaging and
spectroscopy.
APPENDIX
What Does exp[D(cgd)
2
(Dd/3)] Mean?
For heuristic purposes, some physical interpretations
of the StejskalTanner equation, Eq. [31], are useful.
To begin, we consider the following items. D repre-
sents the time interval between the two gradient
pulses and is called the diffusion time. The func-
tionality of a gradient pulse can be regarded as gener-
ating a magnetic helix along a Cartesian axis (25).
While a constant current is being applied to a gradient
coil, the pitch of a helix that traces out the tip of the
bulk magnetization vectors continues to develop a
ner pitch (distance in the z-direction between each
turn of the helix), so the number of turns of the helix
increases as a function of time. The spatial encoding,
namely, the tagging, of the spatial position of a spin,
actually takes place with the narrowest pitch occur-
210 KUCHEL ET AL.
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
ring at the end of the rst gradient pulse, while the
decoding of its position nishes at the end of the sec-
ond gradient pulse when no turns of the helix remain
after rewinding. A helix can never be wound instanta-
neously no matter how strong a gradient may be; this
characteristic is often called the nite-pulse-width
issue in the context of q-space diffusion-diffraction
NMR (19). A small correction term is subtracted
from the diffusion time D because molecular diffu-
sion cannot be halted while gradient pulses are being
applied. This correction term is typically d/3 for
classical diffusion-measuring pulse sequences that
use a rectangular gradient pulse; but, it changes to
other values when non-rectangular gradient pulses, or
bipolar gradients with a polarization-switching
interval are used (30). In a strict sense, the exponent,
that is, the slope of the signal decay in the logarithmic
plot, becomes proportional to a reduced diffusion
time, D
r
Dd/3 (21). However, the d/3 term
does not contribute greatly to the diffusion time as D
is typically set by the experimenter to be much longer
than the gradient pulse length d. A diffusion spatial
length scale (s) measured by PGSE NMR is usually
dened by the Einstein equation as being one-
dimensional along the z-direction, so s

2 DD
r
p
.
This expression applies to an isotropic system without
thermal or concentration gradients and if D 10
9
m
2
s
1
and D
r
is 1 ms then s 1.414 lm which is of the
order of 1/5th of a cell diameter. Recall that the expo-
nent in the StejskalTanner equation involves a time-
cubed term (d
2
D
r
), which emerges when translational
diffusion is considered in the presence of a magnetic
eld gradient (21, 36, 37). The square relationship in
(cgd)
2
reects the Gaussian behavior of phase disper-
sion of magnetization due to Brownian-type motion of
molecules (21, 35, 36). Polarization of the gradient
pulse, viz., g or g, should not change the results of
NMR diffusion experiments in the absence of a back-
ground gradient (inhomogeneous static eld B
0
) or
other gradients that originate from heterogeneities in
the magnetic eld in the sample, due to variations in
the magnetic susceptibility.
Mathematica Program
The symbolic computation used for the time integrals
is presented below to underscore the relative ease of
solving this problem. The names of symbols were cho-
sen to be roughly consistent with those used in the
equations in the text above, although subscripts were
changed to lowercase letters and Greek numbers were
changed to Roman numbers while t
0
in the text was
substituted with tp (p denotes prime) in the program.
It was written using Mathematica version 8.0.
A Modern Approach
The use of n in the theory above does not have a
simple physical interpretation. Conversely, the more
modern concept of coherence order and coher-
ence pathways in RF pulse sequences does. We
have used this approach in the recent development
of a new convection-compensating PGSE pulse
sequence (31). Therefore in using this concept, we
modify the denition of Eq. [15] to include the sca-
lar p (the coherence order) and proceed with the
analysis as follows:
Ft p
_
t
0
Gt
0
dt
0
[A1]
where
p
1; 0<t\s
1; s<t\2s
_
[A2]
Thus, the dependence of F(t) on s reects the
effect of the p RF pulse. Indeed both gradients
have the same sign during a spin-echo pulse
sequence but their effects on the spins are oppo-
site, due to the refocusing p RF pulse. F(t) (inde-
pendent of any RF pulses) is multiplied by the co-
herence order p (which only depends on the prop-
erties of the RF pulses) and the expression is used
instead of f in the original analysis of Stejskal and
Tanner. In the case of the simplest PGSE pulse
sequence, the initial excitation p/2 RF pulse
changes the coherence order of the spins from 0 to
1 (F(t) multiplied by 1) while the p RF pulse
changes the sign of the coherence order (F(t) mul-
tiplied by 1). More details on the application of
this concept in the context of PGSE experiments
are given in (31, 32).
Differentiating Eq. [18] with respect to time
using the product rule of differentiation yields
@w
@t

dAt
dt
e
i c rFtp
At i c r
pdFt
dt
e
icrFtp
:
[A3]
Now consider the diffusion part of Eq. [17]. We use
the expression for w as given by Eq. [18] in which
A(t) is exclusively a function of t, and the Laplacian
double derivative is with respect to r the spatial
vector:
Dr
2
Ate
icrFtp
DAtr
2
e
i c rFtp
DAt i c pFt re
icrFtp
DAt c p Ft
2
e
icrFtp
A4
Substituting Eq. [A4] into Eq. [17] gives
STEJSKALTANNER EQUATION DERIVED IN FULL 211
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
212 KUCHEL ET AL.
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
@w
@t
i c G r w DAt c p Ft
2
e
i c rF tp
:
[A5]
Equating Eqs. [A4] and [A5], and to simplify the no-
menclature as before letting f (i c r F(t)p) gives
dAt
dt
e
/
Ati c r Ge
/
Ati c r Ge
/
DAt c Ftp
2
e
/
: [A6]
Dividing both sides by e
f
and clearing terms alge-
braically gives
dAt
dt
AtD c Ftp
2
: [A7]
Eq. [A7] is solved by separation of variables to give
_
A2s
A0
dAt
At
D c
2
_
2s
0
Ftp
2
dt; [A8]
that evaluates to Eq. [31] as required.
REFERENCES
1. Stejskal EO, Tanner JE. 1965. Spin diffusion meas-
urements: spin echoes in the presence of a time-de-
pendent eld gradient. J Chem Phys 42:288292.
2. Price WS. 2009. In: Saykally R, Zewail A, King D,
eds. NMR studies of translational motion. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
3. Tanner JE. 1970. Use of the stimulated echo in NMR
diffusion studies. J Chem Phys 52:25232526.
4. Price WS, Kuchel PW. 1991. Effect of nonrectangular
eld gradient pulses in the Stejskal and Tanner (diffu-
sion) pulse sequence. J Magn Reson A 94:133139.
5. Merrill MR. 1993. NMR diffusion measurements
using a composite gradient PGSE sequence. J Magn
Reson 103:223225.
6. Wu DH, Chen AD, Johnson CS. 1995. An improved
diffusion-ordered spectroscopy experiment incorporat-
ing bipolar-gradient pulses. J Magn Reson A
115:260264.
7. Price WS, Elwinger F, Vigouroux C, Stilbs P. 2002.
PGSE-WATERGATE, a new tool for NMR diffu-
sion-based studies of ligand-macromolecule binding.
Magn Reson Chem 40:391395.
8. Momot KI, Kuchel PW. 2004. Convection-compensating
PGSE experiment incorporating excitation-sculpting water
suppression (CONVEX). J Magn Reson 169:92101.
9. Zheng G, Stait-Gardner T, Kumar APG, Torres AM,
Price WS. 2008. PGSTE-WATERGATE: An STE-
based PGSE NMR sequence with excellent solvent
suppression. J Magn Reson 191:159163.
10. Jerschow A, Muller N. 1997. Suppression of convec-
tion artifacts in stimulated-echo diffusion experi-
ments. Double-stimulated-echo experiments. J Magn
Reson 125:372375.
11. Esturau N, Sanchez-Ferrando F, Gavin JA, Roumestand
C, Delsuc M-A, Parella T. 2001. The use of sample rota-
tion for minimizing convection effects in self-diffusion
NMR measurements. J Magn Reson 153:4855.
12. Momot KI, Kuchel PW. 2005. Convection-compen-
sating diffusion experiments with phase-sensitive dou-
ble-quantum ltering. J Magn Reson 174:229236.
13. Schachter M, Does MD, Anderson AW, Gore JC.
2000. Measurements of restricted diffusion using an
oscillating gradient spin-echo sequence. J Magn
Reson 147:232237.
14. Momot KI, Kuchel PW, Chapman BE. 2005. Acquisi-
tion of pure-phase diffusion spectra using oscillating-
gradient spin echo. J Magn Reson 176:151159.
15. Dingley AJ, Mackay JP, Shaw GL, Hambly BD, King
GF. 1997. Measuring macromolecular diffusion using
heteronuclear multiple-quantum pulsed-eld-gradient
NMR. J Biomol NMR 10:18.
16. Velan SS, Chandrakumar N. 1996. High-resolution
NMR measurement of molecular self-diffusion by fast
multi-spin-echo diffusion sequences. J Magn Reson
123:122125.
17. Loening NM, Keeler J, Morris GA. 2001. One-dimen-
sional DOSY. J Magn Reson 153:103112.
18. Page`s G, Kuchel PW. 2007. NMR methods for the
fast-recording of diffusion. In: Brandani S, Chmelik
C, Karger J, Volpe R, eds. Diffusion Fundamentals
II. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitatsverlag. p5268.
19. Viel S, Caldarelli S. 2008. Improved 3D DOSY-
TOCSY experiment for mixture analysis. Chem Com-
mun 20132015.
20. Shukla M, Dorai K. 2011. Resolving overlaps in dif-
fusion encoded spectra using band-selective pulses in
a 3D BEST-DOSY experiment. J Magn Reson
213:6975.
21. Callaghan PT. 1993. Principles of Nuclear Magnetic
Microscopy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Callaghan PT. 2011. Translational Dynamics and Mag-
netic Resonance. Principles of Pulsed Gradient Spin
Echo NMR. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Stilbs P. 1987. Fourier transform pulsed-gradient
spin-echo studies of molecular diffusion. Progress
Nucl Magn Reson 19:145.
24. Price WS. 1997. Pulsed-eld gradient nuclear magnetic
resonance as a tool for studying translational diffusion:
Part 1. Basic theory. Concepts Magn Reson 9:299336.
25. Waldeck AR, Kuchel PW, Lennon AJ, Chapman BE.
1997. NMR diffusion measurements to characterise
membrane transport and solute binding. Progress Nucl
Magn Reson 30:3968.
26. Price WS. 1998. Pulsed-eld gradient nuclear mag-
netic resonance as a tool for studying translational
diffusion. II. Experimental aspects. Concepts Magn
Reson 10:197237.
STEJSKALTANNER EQUATION DERIVED IN FULL 213
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a
27. Johnson CS. 1999. Diffusion ordered NMR spectros-
copy: principles and applications. Progress Nucl
Magn Reson 34:203256.
28. Momot KI, Kuchel PW. 2003. Pulsed eld gradient nu-
clear magnetic resonance as a tool for studying drug
delivery systems. Concepts Magn Reson 19A:5164.
29. Dehner A, Kessler H. 2005. Diffusion NMR spectros-
copy: folding and aggregation of domains in p53.
ChemBioChem 6:15501565.
30. Cohen Y, Avram L, Frish L. 2005. Diffusion NMR
spectroscopy in supramolecular and combinatorial
chemistry: an old parameternew insights. Angew
Chem Int Ed Engl 44:520554.
31. Momot KI, Kuchel PW. 2006. PFG NMR diffusion
experiments for complex systems. Concepts Magn
Reson 28A:249269.
32. Sinnaeve D. 2012. The StejskalTanner equation gen-
eralized for any gradient shapean overview of most
pulse sequences measuring free diffusion. Concepts
Magn Reson 40A:3965.
33. Fick A. 1995 (Reprinted). On liquid diffusion. J
Membr Sci 100:3338.
34. Abragam A. 1978. The Principles of Nuclear Magne-
tism. Oxford: Claredon Press.
35. Torrey HC. 1956. Bloch equations with diffusion
terms. Phys Rev 104:563565.
36. Hahn EL. 1950. Spin echoes. Phys Rev 80:580594.
37. Carr HY, Purcell EM. 1954. Effects of diffusion on
free precession in nuclear magnetic resonance experi-
ments. Phys Rev 94:630638.
BIOGRAPHIES
Philip Kuchel was Executive Director of the
Singapore Bioimaging Consortium (SBIC) in
Singapore from October 2010; and after almost
2 years there, he returned to the University of
Sydney. There, he has been a Professor of Bio-
chemistry since 1980. His research involves
NMR spectroscopy in the study of chemical
and physical aspects of cellular systems,
including metabolism, molecular mobility via
diffusion, and membrane transport.
Guilhem Page`s obtained his PhD in Physi-
cal Chemistry from the University Paul
Cezanne, Marseille, France, in 2006. He
performed postdoctoral studies at the Uni-
versity of Sydney (2007-2009), and at the
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in
Stockholm (2010). He joined the SBIC in
2011. In his career, he has focussed on
applications of NMR spectroscopy to
chemical and biochemical systems with major emphasis on diffu-
sion studies. His current research interests are on the use of
dynamic nuclear polarisation combined with NMR/MRI to study
metabolic pathways, and on building appropriate mathematical
models to extract quantitative estimates of kinetic parameters.
Kaz Nagashima is a Senior Research Fel-
low at the SBIC. He obtained his PhD and
did postdoctoral studies in North America,
and then worked in national laboratories and
companies in Japan and the United States.
He joined the SBIC in March 2012. His
main research interest is in the development
of novel magnetic resonance technologies,
current topics of which include solution-
state hyperpolarization, long-lived spin states, and their application
to PFG NMR diffusion experiments. As with Philip Kuchel, he is
a heavy Mathematica user and many of his publications involve at
least some calculations with it, as presented in this article.
Sendhil Velan is Head of the MRS and
Metabolic Imaging Group at SBIC, Singa-
pore. His research interests include develop-
ment of advanced MR techniques driven by
spin physics for investigating metabolism in
animals and human.
Vimalan Vijayaragavan is a graduate in
chemistry. He obtained his PhD from the In-
dian Institute of Technology, Madras (IITM),
in 2010. For his thesis, he focussed on pulse
sequence design for NMR spectroscopy, focus-
sing mainly on coherence transfer experiments.
The experimental applications were mainly in
NMR quantum computing, multiple quantum
ltering, and volume localized spectroscopy.
He is now a post doctoral fellow in the SBIC. His research interests
are in vivo imaging and spectroscopy in rodent models of human dis-
eases. He is also involved in characterising the MR properties of novel
contrast agents and their applications in vivo.
Vijayasarathi Nagarajan obtained his PhD
in physics from the University of Leipzig,
Germany, with an emphasis on theory and
applications of electron paramagnetic reso-
nance. After 2 years in Israel at the Weiz-
mann Institute of Science, in the Depart-
ment of Chemical Physics, he moved to the
SBIC. In the SBIC, he has been developing
advanced MRI/MRS techniques for in vivo
studies of cardiac metabolism in rodents.
Kai-Hsiang Chuang received his PhD in
electrical engineering in 2001 from the
National Taiwan University, Taipei. There he
studied methods for detecting brain function
using MRI. He did his post doctoral work at
the National Institutes of Health, USA until
2007; there, he focused on contrast enhance-
ment methods especially using manganese as
a functional contrast agent in the brain.
He joined the SBIC in 2008 and has been Head of the MRI Group
since then. His research interests involve the development of func-
tional imaging methods, including novel pulse sequences and con-
trast agents, for early detection of cancer and neurodegenerative dis-
eases.
214 KUCHEL ET AL.
Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part A (Bridging Education and Research) DOI 10.1002/cmr.a