Periodic trends
specific recurring patterns that are present in the modern periodic table
In chemistry, periodic trends are specific patterns present in the periodic table that illustrate different aspects of certain elements when grouped by period and/or group. They were discovered by the Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev in 1863. Major periodic trends include atomic radius, ionization energy, electron affinity, electronegativity, nucleophilicity, electrophilicity, valency, nuclear charge, and metallic character. Mendeleev built the foundation of the periodic table. Mendeleev organized the elements based on atomic weight, leaving empty spaces where he believed undiscovered elements would take their places. Mendeleev's discovery of this trend allowed him to predict the existence and properties of three unknown elements, which were later discovered by other chemists and named gallium, scandium, and germanium. English physicist Henry Moseley discovered that organizing the elements by atomic number instead of atomic weight would naturally group elements with similar properties.
Summary of trends
Atomic radius
The atomic radius is the distance from the atomic nucleus to the outermost electron orbital in an atom. In general, the atomic radius decreases as we move from left-to-right in a period, and it increases when we go down a group. This is because in periods, the valence electrons are in the same outermost shell.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Periodic trends” as specific recurring patterns that are present in the modern periodic table. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as specific recurring patterns that are present in the modern periodic table. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2622089. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1863.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Periodic trends”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Periodic trends primary sources, Periodic trends archive and Periodic research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Periodic trends”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Periodic trends” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.