## 3 Results
### Structure and Morphology
However, even after the calcination of the powder for one hour, it can be seen that bigger aggregates are composed of smaller grains. For powders and ceramics codoped with different alkali ions, the energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) maps were prepared to check the elements distribution and confirm that there is no segregation of particular ions on grain boundaries (Figure 3). The EDS analysis reveals that the concentration of the sodium and potassium is 10 mol% of La, as was assumed at the preparation stage, also cobalt ions substitute about 10% of manganese ions. For the powders and ceramics codoped with lithium, it was impossible to register signal from the dopant alkali ions as these ions are too light to be reliably registered by the analyzer. It can also be concluded that oxygen content in ceramics is about 10% lower than in powders, which was also confirmed in the EDS maps (Figure 3). It should be noted that the assessment of oxygen content by the EDS method has a rather qualitative character; however, at the same time the obtained results can allow one to estimate the evolution in the oxygen content as a function of the dopant ions and to determine a difference in the oxygen content in powder and ceramic samples. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline  & **Crystallite Size** & **a, b** & **c** & **V** & **Strain** \\ \cline{2-6}  & **nm** & **Å** & **Å** & **Å\({}^{3}\)** & **\%** \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Powders} \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)Li\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 2.897; & 22 & 5.5073(3) & 13.3145(3) & 349.73(4) (58.29) & 0.008 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 1.991; & & & & & \\ GOF = 2.119 & & & & & \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)Na\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 3.216; & 26 & 5.5041(1) & 13.3375(4) & 349.92(9) (58.32) & 0.045 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 1.993; & & & & & \\ GOF = 3.113 & & & & & \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)K\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 4.285; & 33 & 5.5127(1) & 13.3567(3) & 351.52(8) (58.59) & 0.054 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 2.012; & & & & & \\ GOF = 4.899 & & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Ceramics} \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)Li\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 11.004; & 9 & 5.5060(8) & 13.3123(7) & 348.64(3) (58.11) & 0.063 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 8.322; & & & & & \\ GOF = 9.849 & & & & & \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)Na\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 13.415; & 11 & 5.5080(3) & 13.3198(7) & 349.47(6) (58.25) & 0.065 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 9.071; & & & & & \\ GOF = 10.185 & & & & & \\ \hline La\({}_{0.9}\)K\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) & & & & & \\ R\({}_{\rm wp}\) = 17.080; & 12 & 5.5058(7) & 13.3755(8) & 351.15(2) (58.55) & 0.077 \\ R\({}_{\rm exp}\) = 12.096; & & & & & \\ GOF = 14.003 & & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{R\({}_{\rm wp}\)—Weighted Profile Rietveld R-factor, R\({}_{\rm exp}\)—Expected Rietveld R-factor, GOF—goodness of fit.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Average crystallite size and the cell parameters calculated for La\({}_{0.9}\)A\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)M\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) powders and ceramics based on the XRD data. Figure 3: Energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) maps of La\({}_{0.9}\)A\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) powders (**left**) and ceramics (**right**). Figure 2: SEM images and particle size distribution of La\({}_{0.9}\)A\({}_{0.1}\)Mn\({}_{0.9}\)Co\({}_{0.1}\)O\({}_{3}\) (A: Li, Na, K) powders.