Letter pubs.acs.org/JPCL
Tip-Induced Switch of Germanene Atomic Structure Regis Stephan, Mickael Derivaz, Marie-Christine Hanf, Didier Dentel, Natalia Massara, Ahmed Mehdaoui, Philippe Sonnet, and Carmelo Pirri* Institut de Science des Matériaux de Mulhouse IS2M UMR 7361 CNRS, Université de Haute Alsace, 3 bis rue Alfred Werner, 68093 Mulhouse, France ABSTRACT: A new germanene crystallographic structure is investigated by scanning tunnelling microscopy and density functional theory calculations. We found that germanene can crystallize in two stable but different structures when grown on Al(111) at the same temperature. These structures are evidenced in scanning tunnelling images by a honeycomb contrast and by a hexagonal contrast. These contrasts are relevant of a Ge network with one (hexagonal) or two (honeycomb) Ge atoms per unit cell shifted upward with respect to the other Ge atoms. These structures appear alternatively and can be turned on and off by a tip-induced process.
(HOPG),65 and Cu(111)66 with a honeycomb surface structure, and later on MoS267 and Sb.68 One key parameter is the germanene buckling because it is relevant of a band gap opening in the germanene band structure. This gap opening makes germanene very interesting with respect to novel physical properties, like the quantum Hall effect, due to a sizable spin−orbit coupling at a temperature high enough to be measured.72−74 The way that germanene is accommodated on the substrate governs its crystallographic structure and then its properties. This is reflected in the different proposed germanene structural models, depending on the substrate on which they are formed, and even on the same substrate, as shown below. This is due to the delicate balance between several possible Ge accommodations on a given substrate through a stable (or metastable) atomic structure associated with the faint interaction of 2D material with the substrate. This is observed for silicene on Ag(111)33 and for germanene on Au(111),57 for instance, characterized by different low-energy electron diffraction (LEED) superstructures coexisting on the same substrate within the same growth conditions. A dramatic consequence is sometimes the formation of size-limited sheets. The 2D germanene growth on Al(111), observed by scanning tunnelling microscopy (STM), exhibits only one single sheet orientation and surface periodicity over large Al(111) areas.62 It forms a continuous layer, with a (3 × 3) lattice periodicity with respect to the Al(111) surface periodicity. DFT study has already identified an atomic structure of the buckled germanene film, with a buckling of 1.23 Å, consistent with the experimental data. The unit cell is formed by eight Ge atoms arranged in a
2D materials are widely studied materials due to the extraordinary physical and chemical properties predicted. These materials are composed of a one-atom thick layer and can belong to two well-separated groups. The first one is deduced from layered bulk materials, such as graphene, h-BN single layers, metal dichalcogenides, or selenides single layers and all other van der Waals bonded layered materials.1−9 This first group also includes new 2D materials such as antimonene and phosphorene.10−25 These layers are the 2D counterpart of the elementary bricks of the 3D crystals. They have been obtained by exfoliation and have been thoroughly studied for the past 10 years. Their own physical and chemical properties are now routinely studied, and those 2D materials are used to form the so-called van der Waals heterostructures or components. To the second group belong 2D materials such as silicene, germanene, and stanene, whose crystallographic structures are not simple replicas of bulk material elementary bricks and which were predicted theoretically a few years ago. These 2D materials have been synthesized recently on metallic substrates first and then on band gap materials.26−71 Note that none of the 2D materials of the second group have been exfoliated from the substrate, and this is still challenging. This has made and still makes for some people the label “2D materials” quite questionable. We will show in this work that germanene can adopt different atomic configurations close each other, with a faint germanene−Al(111) interaction, and, therefore, that germanene exfoliation could be feasible. The growth of germanene was a great challenge because sp3 hybridization of Ge atoms seemed energetically favorable with respect to the sp2 configuration expected for hypothetical planar 2D sheets. Germanene formation needs a substrate, metallic or not. It was first successfully grown by Ge deposition on metallic substrates, namely, Au(111),57,58 Pt(111),59 Ge2Pt,60,61 Al(111),62,64 highly oriented pyrolitic graphite © 2017 American Chemical Society
Received: August 14, 2017 Accepted: September 8, 2017 Published: September 8, 2017 4587
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters honeycomb network, with two Ge atoms displaced upward in a top position with respect to the other Ge atoms. The electronic structure investigated by DFT clearly shows an electrostatic interaction between the germanene layer and the Al substrate. Also found is an only weak chemical interaction (no covalent bonds) between the Ge layer and the Al surface. More recently, Fukaya et al.75 investigated the (3 × 3) germanene layer deposited on Al(111) using total reflection high-energy positron diffraction (without STM measurements). Their study reveals the presence of asymmetric buckling due to protrusion of only one Ge atom in a top position, in contrast with the model proposed in ref 62 with two Ge atoms in top positions. Although the germanene growth seems to be made in the same experimental conditions, the model proposed by Fukaya et al. is no longer consistent with the STM images shown in ref 62. The aim of this Letter is to show that Ge atoms can accommodate two stable long-range atomic structures with different registry on Al(111). The (3 × 3) germanene periodicity with respect to the Al(111) surface periodicity is preserved for both registries, but two different sets of STM images are measured in the atomic resolution mode. Each STM image set corresponds to a given germanene atomic structure, as predicted by DFT calculations. DFT calculations have been performed using the Vienna ab initio simulation package (VASP)76−79 within the projector augmented plane wave (PAW) method.80,81 The generalized gradient approximation (GGA) has been taken to describe the electron−electron exchange−correlation interactions using the functional of Perdew, Burke, and Ernzerhof (PBE).82,83 The Brillouin zone is sampled using (5 × 5 × 1) k-points. The cutoff energy value for the plane wave is 312.3 eV, and the system is relaxed until the components of the forces are lower than 0.005 eV. Å−1. The system is described by means of a slab constituted of 10 layers of 9 Al atoms, 1 Ge layer of 8 atoms, and 1.7 nm vacuum spacing. The bottom Al layer is kept fixed during the relaxation procedure. Electronic charges are obtained using the Bader charge approach, with a precision, for a total of 302 electrons, of 2 × 10−4 e−.84,85 The energy barriers have been calculated by means of the climbing image nudged elastic band (cNEB) method.86 The WSXM software has been used to process the STM experimental images,87 while the atomic models and charge density map are presented with the visual molecular dynamics software developed by the Theoretical and Computational Biophysics Group in the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology at the University of Illinois at Urbana−Champaign.88 Sample preparation and STM measurements have been carried out in ultrahigh vacuum (base pressure: 3 × 10−11 mbar). A clean Al(111) substrate was obtained after numerous sputtering/500 °C annealing cycles. Surface order was checked by the presence of a sharp Al(1 × 1) LEED pattern. We looked for possible contaminants such as oxygen or carbon by means of X-ray photoemission (XPS) as well as STM (Omicron Nanotechnology GmbH). Ge was evaporated on the Al(111) substrate set at 85 °C, with a commercial evaporation cell (MBE Komponenten GmbH) and a rate of about 0.005 nm/ min. The Ge amount, measured by means of a quartz microbalance and by XPS, equals that of one germanene monolayer (ML). For all growth conditions in this work, LEED shows a (3 × 3) superstructure, as shown in ref 62. Figure 1a displays a largescale STM image and exhibits a flat and uniform germanene
Figure 1. STM images of a germanene layer deposited on Al(111) for V = +1.0 V: (a) large-scale (267 × 267 nm) image, (b) honeycomb contrast (8.5 × 8.1 nm), and (c) hexagonal contrast (8.5 × 8.1 nm). STM images displaying the contrast change from the hexagonal (lower part of the figure) to the honeycomb (upper part) contrast (5.4 × 4.3 nm) (d) and from the honeycomb (lower part) to the hexagonal (upper part) one (10.0 × 7.9 nm) (e). The black rhombuses indicate the germanene unit mesh. The vertical dashed line in (e) emphasizes the registry difference between the two structures.
layer. Both the (3 × 3) LEED pattern and large-scale STM image are relevant of germanene formation within the Al(111) sample temperature range during deposition (between about 65 and 110 °C, with an accuracy of about 20 °C). Figure 1b,c shows high-resolution STM images of a germanene layer at a sample bias of U = +1 V obtained within exactly the same experimental conditions as already published in ref 62. The honeycomb contrast in Figure 1b is relevant of a buckled germanene layer with two topmost Ge atoms per unit cell, located on top of the underlying Al atoms.62 This model will be called germanene-2T. The germanene layer has been also sometimes postannealed, and it is found to be stable up to about 170 °C, with the same (3 × 3) LEED superstructure and the same atomic-scale STM images, and thus, effects described below work for annealing temperatures up to 170 °C. Figure 1c displays a high-resolution image of the same sample but with a different contrast. The honeycomb contrast is lost, and germanene exhibits now a hexagonal periodicity. This contrast, at the same sample bias, can be turned on and off with some voltage pulses applied to the tip. Contrast modifications from that in Figure 1b to that in Figure 1c are even observed during image collection without applying a voltage pulse. Then, we can alternatively image the germanene surface with one or the other of the contrasts. Such a contrast change is generally 4588
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
Figure 2. Top views of the atomic structure before relaxation for the 1T (a), 1B (b), and 1H (c) models. Top (d) and side (e) views of the relaxed 1H model of germanene on Al(111). Only the first Al plane is displayed in (d). (f) Electron localization function (ELF) isosurface at a value of 0.75. (g) Experimental and calculated STM images of the 1H configuration.
no registry change between the 2T and the 1T structure that conflicts with the experimental observations presented in Figure 1 d,e. As a result, only the 1H model, displayed in Figure 2d,e, will be considered to interpret the hexagonal periodicity of the STM image in Figure 1c. In the 1H asymmetrical buckled unit cell model, the Ge−Ge distances are in the 0.258−0.261 nm range and the vertical distance between the uplifted Ge atom and the first Al plane is 0.406 nm. Six Ge atoms are located at a distance of 0.262 nm from an Al atom, which is smaller than the smallest Ge−Al distance in the 2T model (0.279 nm62). Therefore, there is a substantial effect on the electronic charge distribution between Ge and Al, as shown below. The predicted buckling is Δz = 0.153 nm in the 1H model, compared to Δz = 0.123 nm62 in the 2T model, and the distance Δz′ between the highest and the lowest Al atoms is 0.013 nm, smaller than that in 2T model. According to Table 1, the interaction energy (in absolute value) and the deformation energies of the Ge and Al lattices
attributed to tip apex termination modification during the scan. Nevertheless, this contrast change in STM images is observed for all germanene layers prepared on Al(111) and for different STM tips. Thus, this effect is completely reproducible, and it seems not associated with a specific tip. Alternatively, this contrast change could be due to sample−tip interaction and then germanene structure modification during the scan. This last comment suggests that germanene could have two distinct configurations on Al(111), at least. High-resolution images showing the STM image contrast change during STM image measurement are shown in Figure 1d,e. The most striking feature is that the bright protrusions (Ge top atoms) of the honeycomb contrast are not located on the same registry as those of the hexagonal one. This suggests that germanene could be accommodated in various ways on Al(111), with different adsorption sites for instance, as shown below. Further investigations of germanene formation on Al(111) give very surprising features, accordingly. Note although that the discovery of these two stable germanene structures on Al(111) would be in line with the choice of Al as a substrate for germanene formation because the Al(111) surface does not reconstruct and presents an electronic structure mainly characterized by s-type orbitals. As a result, the interaction between germanene and Al(111) should be weak, and small structural germanene changes could be expected. DFT calculations have been performed for adsorption registry of germanene on Al(111) compatible with the (3 × 3) surface superstructure. To explain the contrast observed in Figure 1c, new germanene structural configurations have been considered, with only one upward shifted Ge atom per (3 × 3) unit cell, located on top, bridge, and hollow sites of the Al(111) topmost layer. The latter configurations will be called germanene-1T, -1B, and -1H, respectively, and are displayed in Figure 2a−c before atomic relaxation, respectively. After structural relaxation, the adsorption energy of the 1H and 1T models are −0.48 and −0.47 eV, respectively, while the 1B model converged toward an atomic structure close to that of the 1H one, with the same adsorption energy. It appears that the 1T system is less stable than the 1H one. Moreover, there is
Table 1. Adsorption Energy, Interaction Energy, Deformation Energy (in eV per Ge atom), and Bader Charges (in |e|) for the 2T from References 62 and 64 and the 1H Germanene/Al(111) Models adsorption energy interaction energy germanene deformation energy Al deformation energy total bader charge: germanene total Bader charge: Al
2T
1H
−0.48 [from ref 62] −0.75 0.23 0.04 −2.43 [from ref 64] +2.43 [from ref 64]
−0.48 −0.69 0.20 0.01 −1.94 +1.94
are also smaller for the 1H model than those for the 2T one. As to the charge transfer, the germanene Bader charge is −1.94 |e|; for the 1H model, it also lower than that for the 2T model. These results (atomic structure, energies, Bader charges) suggest that the interaction between the germanene layer and the Al substrate is different for both models. Indeed, in contrast to the ELF calculated for the 2T model,62 the ELF of the 1H model displayed in Figure 2f indicates a stronger electronic 4589
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
Figure 3. Superimposition of the calculated network and experimental (V = +1 V) STM image, showing the structural change from the 2T configuration to the 1H one. Al, Ge, and uplifted Ge atoms are represented by beige, green, and red balls, respectively. The black rhombuses indicate the germanene unit mesh; for clarity, only the first Al plane is presented. The black circles emphasize the correspondence between the uplifted Ge atoms in the 1H model and the bright spots in the experimental STM image.
1 V) or even by electric field variation at room temperature during the image scan without bias pulse. In summary, DFT calculations predict that germanene can crystallize with different atomic structures, in agreement with our experimental data and in line with experimental work of Fukaya et al.75 The predicted structures are then germanene2T, evidenced by STM images with honeycomb contrast, and germanene-1H, with hexagonal contrast. Figure 3 shows for both models the predicted top-view Ge atomic positions on germanene structures, with respect to the same Al(111) surface network, along with the superimposition of the calculated network and experimental STM image in order to evidence the 2T−1H germanene structural change. The nice agreement between the calculated and measured network is amazing and shows a possible germanene configuration before and after the switch between two stable germanene structures on Al(111). Note that contrast modifications in experimental STM images are strong and seem associated with important Ge atom lateral displacements in germanene with respect to the Al(111) plane underneath. However, the structural germanene modifications from germanene-2T to germanene-1H need only small displacements, essentially vertical ones, of the low-lying as well as the uplifted Ge atoms, without significant Ge−Ge distance changes and then only small germanene lattice deformation. In conclusion, the nice agreement between experimental topmost Ge positions with respect to Al(111) before and after contrast change and DFT predictions in Figure 3 definitively confirms the germanene structural modification and the tipinduced switch between atomic structures of germanene on Al(111). The multiplicity of possible stable or metastable germanene structures on Al(111) confirms that the interaction between the Ge atoms and the Al(111) surface is faint. The Al(111) surface could be a model surface for other nontrivial 2D systems.
charge localization between Ge atoms and Al atoms. Finally, the 2T model is characterized by a large electrostatic interaction with delocalized charges at the interface,62 whereas for the 1H model, the electrostatic interaction is weaker, but the charge is more localized along Ge−Al couples, though the adsorption energy is the same for both germanene crystals. The adsorption energy involves several energetic contributions such as electrostatic interaction and network deformation energy. The electronic charge redistribution is counterbalanced by a change in elastic energy, for the overall germanene/Al(111) system, when switching from the 2T to the 1H germanene structure. Note that by using the optB86b-van der Waals density functional89−92 for the calculations, the 1H model also displays the same adsorption energy as the 2T one. We performed STM image simulations within the Tersoff− Hamann approximation for the 1H model. The calculated image is shown in Figure 2g and is in perfect agreement with the experimental STM image of Figure 1c. In conclusion, the honeycomb structure is related to the 2T model, as already published, while the single stable configuration with only one protruding Ge top atom per unit cell is the 1H model, with a hexagonal symmetry on the STM images. This suggests that experimental STM images are relevant for these most stable models, which have almost the same adsorption energy. However, this cannot explain the experimental contrast change in STM images. Indeed, germanene crystals with the same adsorption energy would grow concomitantly, but with different contrasts in STM images, related to domains with different structures, at odds with experimental observations. We never observed STM images with the two contrasts at the same time, except when a switch between 2T and 1H occurs, as in Figure 1d,e. After the switch, the STM contrast spreads over the whole image during STM scans, whatever the image size (with atomic resolution). An activation barrier must exist when going from one to another germanene structure to guarantee the relative stability of the selected germanene structure. We thus calculated the activation barrier height for jumping from one to another registry. The barrier height is about 0.11 eV/ unit cell in the 2T to 1H or in the 1H to 2T configuration change. Note that the barrier height is small enough to be counterbalanced by either a small applied voltage pulse (about
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Carmelo Pirri: 0000-0002-3629-1044 4590
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters Notes
(18) Li, L.; Yu, Y.; Ye, G. J.; Ge, Q.; Ou, X.; Wu, H.; Feng, D.; Chen, X. H.; Zhang, Y. Black Phosphorus Field-Effect Transistors. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2014, 9, 372−377. (19) Brent, J. R.; Savjani, N.; Lewis, E. A.; Haigh, S. J.; Lewis, D. J.; O’Brien, P. Production of Few-Layer Phosphorene by Liquid Exfoliation of Black Phosphorus. Chem. Commun. 2014, 50, 13338− 13341. (20) Liu, H.; Neal, A. T.; Zhu, Z.; Luo, Z.; Xu, X.; Tománek, D.; Ye, P. D. Phosphorene: An Unexplored 2D Semiconductor with a High Hole Mobility. ACS Nano 2014, 8, 4033−4041. (21) Sresht, V.; Pádua, A. A. H.; Blankschtein, D. Liquid-Phase Exfoliation of Phosphorene: Design Rules from Molecular Dynamics Simulations. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 8255−8268. (22) Woomer, A. H.; Farnsworth, T. W.; Hu, J.; Wells, R. A.; Donley, C. L.; Warren, S. C. Phosphorene: Synthesis, Scale-Up, and Quantitative Optical Spectroscopy. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 8869−8884. (23) Ospina, D. A.; Duque, C. A.; Correa, J. D.; SuarezMorell, E. Twisted Bilayer Blue Phosphorene: A Direct Band Gap Semiconductor. Superlattices Microstruct. 2016, 97, 562−568. (24) Li, Q.; Chen, J.; Feng, Z.; Feng, L.; Yao, D.; Wang, S. The Role of Air Adsorption in Inverted Ultrathin Black Phosphorus Field-Effect Transistors. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2016, 11, 521. (25) Akhtar, M.; Anderson, G.; Zhao, R.; Alruqi, A.; Mroczkowska, J. E.; Sumanasekera, G.; Jasinski, J. B. Recent Advances in Synthesis, Properties, and Applications of Phosphorene. npj 2D Materials and Applications 2017, 1, 5. (26) Takeda, K.; Shiraishi, K. Theoretical Possibility of Stage Corrugation in Si and Ge Analogs of Graphite. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 50, 14916−14922. (27) Guzman-Verri, G. G.; Lew Yan Voon, L. C. Electronic Structure of Silicon-based Nanostructures. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 76, 075131. (28) Cahangirov, S.; Topsakal, M.; Aktürk, E.; Sahin, H.; Ciraci, S. Two- and One Dimensional Honeycomb Structures of Silicon and Germanium. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 102, 236804. (29) Aizawa, T.; Suehara, S.; Otani, S. Silicene on Zirconium Carbide (111). J. Phys. Chem. C 2014, 118, 23049−23057. (30) Lalmi, B.; Oughaddou, H.; Enriquez, H.; Kara, A.; Vizzini, S.; Ealet, B.; Aufray, B. Epitaxial Growth of a Silicene Sheet. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 223109. (31) Cinquanta, E.; Scalise, E.; Chiappe, D.; Grazianetti, C.; van den Broek, B.; Houssa, M.; Fanciulli, M.; Molle, A. Getting through the Nature of Silicene: An sp2−sp3 Two-Dimensional Silicon Nanosheet. J. Phys. Chem. C 2013, 117, 16719−16724. (32) Le Lay, G.; de Padova, P.; Resta, A.; Bruhn, T.; Vogt, P. Epitaxial Silicene: Can it be Strongly Strained? J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2012, 45, 392001. (33) Liu, Z.-L.; Wang, M.-X.; Xu, J.-P.; Ge, J.-F.; Le Lay, G.; Vogt, P.; Qian, D.; Gao, C.-L.; Liu, J.-F.; Jia, C. Various Atomic Structures of Monolayer Silicene Fabricated on Ag(111). New J. Phys. 2014, 16, 075006. (34) Liu, Z.-L.; Wang, M.-X.; Liu, C.; Jia, J.-F.; Vogt, P.; Quaresima, C.; Ottaviani, C.; Olivieri, B.; de Padova, P.; Le Lay, G. The Fate of the 2√3 × 2√3 R(30°) Silicene Phase on Ag(111). APL Mater. 2014, 2, 092513. (35) Jamgotchian, H.; Colignon, Y.; Hamzaoui, N.; Ealet, B.; Hoarau, J. Y.; Aufray, B.; Biberian, J. P. Growth of silicene layers on Ag(111): Unexpected Effect of the Substrate Temperature. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2012, 24, 172001. (36) Feng, B.; Ding, Z.; Meng, S.; Yao, Y.; He, X.; Cheng, P.; Chen, L.; Wu, K. Evidence of Silicene in Honeycomb Structures of Silicon on Ag(111). Nano Lett. 2012, 12, 3507−3511. (37) Johnson, N. W.; Vogt, P.; Resta, A.; De Padova, P.; Perez, I.; Muir, D.; Kurmaev, E. Z.; Le Lay, G.; Moewes, A. The Metallic Nature of Epitaxial Silicene Monolayers on Ag(111). Adv. Funct. Mater. 2014, 24, 5253−5259. (38) Fleurence, A.; Friedlein, R.; Ozaki, T.; Kawai, H.; Wang, Y.; Yamada-Takamura, Y. Experimental Evidence for Epitaxial Silicene on Diboride Thin Films. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 245501.
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was performed using HCP resources from GENCIIDRIS (Grant No. 2017-092042) and the supercomputer facilities of the Mésocentre of Strasbourg.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Zhang, Y. B.; Tan, Y. W.; Stormer, H. L.; Kim, P. Experimental Observation of the Quantum Hall Effect and Berry’s Phase in Graphene. Nature 2005, 438, 201−204. (2) Novoselov, K. S.; Geim, A. K.; Morozov, S. V.; Jiang, D.; Katsnelson, M. I.; Grigorieva, I. V.; Dubonos, S. V.; Firsov, A. A. TwoDimensional Gas of Massless Dirac Fermions in Graphene. Nature 2005, 438, 197−200. (3) Castro Neto, A. H.; Guinea, F.; Peres, N. M. R.; Novoselov, K. S.; Geim, A. K. The Electronic Properties of Graphene. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 109−162. (4) Greber, T.; Brandenberger, L.; Corso, M.; Tamai, A.; Osterwalder, J. Single Layer Hexagonal Boron Nitride Films on Ni(110). e-J. Surf. Sci. Nanotechnol. 2006, 4, 410−413. (5) Morscher, M.; Corso, M.; Greber, T.; Osterwalder, J. Formation of Single Layer h-BN on Pd(111). Surf. Sci. 2006, 600, 3280−3284. (6) Alem, N.; Erni, R.; Kisielowski, C.; Rossell, M. D.; Gannett, W.; Zettl, A. Atomically Thin Hexagonal Boron Nitride Probed by Ultrahigh-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2009, 80, 155425. (7) Gao, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, P.; Li, Y.; Liu, M.; Gao, T.; Ma, D.; Chen, Y.; Cheng, Z.; Qiu, X.; et al. Toward Single-Layer Uniform Hexagonal Boron Nitride−Graphene Patchworks with Zigzag Linking Edges. Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 3439−3443. (8) Park, J.-H.; Park, J. C.; Yun, S. J.; Kim, H.; Luong, D. H.; Kim, S. M.; Choi, S. H.; Yang, W.; Kong, J.; Kim, K. K.; et al. Large-Area Monolayer Hexagonal Boron Nitride on Pt Foil. ACS Nano 2014, 8, 8520−8528. (9) Cartamil-Bueno, S. J.; Cavalieri, M.; Wang, R.; Houri, S.; Hofmann, S.; van der Zant, H. S. J. Mechanical Characterization and Cleaning of CVD Single-Layer h-BN Resonators. npj 2D Materials and Applications 2017, 1, 16. (10) Wang, G.; Pandey, R.; Karna, S. P. Atomically Thin Group V Elemental Films: Theoretical Investigations of Antimonene Allotropes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2015, 7, 11490−11496. (11) Zhang, S.; Yan, Z.; Li, Y.; Chen, Z.; Zeng, H. Atomically Thin Arsenene and Antimonene: Semimetal-Semiconductor and IndirectDirect Band-Gap Transitions. Angew. Chem. 2015, 127, 3155−3158. (12) Aktürk, O. Ü .; Ö zçelik, V. O.; Ciraci, S. Single-layer crystalline phases of antimony: Antimonenes. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2015, 91, 235446. (13) Singh, D.; Gupta, S. K.; Sonvane, Y.; Lukacevic, I. Antimonene: a Monolayer Material for Ultraviolet Optical Nanodevices. J. Mater. Chem. C 2016, 4, 6386−6390. (14) Ji, J.; Song, X.; Liu, J.; Yan, Z.; Huo, C.; Zhang, S.; Su, M.; Liao, L.; Wang, W.; Ni, Z.; et al. H. Two-Dimensional Antimonene Single Crystals Grown by van der Waals Epitaxy. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 13352. (15) Gibaja, C.; Rodriguez-San-Miguel, D.; Ares, P.; Gomez-Herrero, J.; Varela, M.; Gillen, R.; Maultzsch, J.; Hauke, F.; Hirsch, A.; Abellàn, G.; et al. Few-Layer Antimonene by Liquid-Phase Exfoliation. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 14345−14349. (16) Wu, X.; Shao, Y.; Liu, H.; Feng, Z.; Wang, Y.-L.; Sun, J.-T.; Liu, C.; Wang, J.-O.; Liu, Z.-L.; Zhu, S.-Y.; et al. Epitaxial Growth and AirStability of Monolayer Antimonene on PdTe2. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1605407. (17) Fortin-Deschenes, M.; Waller, O.; Mentes, T. O.; Locatelli, A.; Mukherjee, S.; Genuzio, F.; Levesque, P. L.; Hebert, A.; Martel, R.; Moutanabbir, O. Synthesis of Antimonene on Germanium. Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 4970−4975. 4591
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters (39) Tang, Q.; Zhou, Z. Graphene-Analogous Low-Dimensional Materials. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2013, 58, 1244−1315. (40) Molle, A.; Grazianetti, C.; Chiappe, D.; Cinquanta, E.; Cianci, E.; Tallarida, G.; Fanciulli, M. Fanciulli. Nanostructures: Hindering the Oxidation of Silicene with Non-Reactive Encapsulation. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2013, 23, 4339. (41) Gori, P.; Pulci, O.; Ronci, F.; Colonna, S.; Bechstedt, F. Origin of Dirac-Cone-Like Features in Silicon Structures on Ag(111) and Ag(110). J. Appl. Phys. 2013, 114, 113710. (42) Morishita, T.; Spencer, M.; Kawamoto, S.; Snook, I. K. A New Surface and Structure for Silicene: Polygonal Silicene Formation on the Al(111) Surface. J. Phys. Chem. C 2013, 117, 22142−22148. (43) Meng, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Du, S.; Wu, R.; Li, L.; Zhang, Y.; Li, G.; Zhou, H.; Hofer, W. A.; et al. Buckled Silicene Formation on Ir(111). Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 685−690. (44) Cahangirov, S.; Audiffred, M.; Tang, P.; Iacomino, A.; Duan, W.; Merino, G.; Rubio, A. Electronic Structure of Silicene on Ag(111): Strong Hybridization Effects. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2013, 88, 035432. (45) Cahangirov, S.; Ozcelik, V. O.; Xian, L.; Avila, J.; Cho, S.; Asensio, M. C.; Ciraci, S.; Rubio, A. Atomic Structure of the 3√ × 3√ Phase of Silicene on Ag(111). Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2014, 90, 035448. (46) Arafune, R.; Lin, C. L.; Kawahara, K.; Tsukahara, N.; Minamitani, E.; Kim, Y.; Takagi, N.; Kawai, M. Structural Transition of Silicene on Ag(111). Surf. Sci. 2013, 608, 297−300. (47) Yuan, Y.; Quhe, R.; Zheng, J.; Wang, Y.; Ni, Z.; Shi, J.; Lu. Strong Band Hybridization between Silicene and Ag(1 1 1) Substrate. Phys. E 2014, 58, 38−42. (48) Scalise, E.; Houssa, M.; Cinquanta, E.; Grazianetti, C.; van den Broek, B.; Pourtois, G.; Stesmans, A.; Fanciulli, M.; Molle, A. Engineering the Electronic Properties of Silicene by Tuning the Composition of MoX2 and GaX (X = S,Se,Te) Chalchogenide Templates. 2D Mater. 2014, 1, 011010. (49) Stephan, R.; Hanf, M.-C.; Sonnet, P. Spatial Analysis of Interactions at the Silicene/Ag Interface: First Principles Study. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2015, 27, 015002. (50) Houssa, M.; Dimoulas, A.; Molle, A. Silicene: a Review of Recent Experimental and Theoretical Investigations. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2015, 27, 253002. (51) Rahman, S. M. D.; Nakagawa, T.; Mizuno, S. Growth of Si on Ag(111) and Determination of Large Commensurate Unit Cell of High-Temperature Phase. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 2015, 54, 015502. (52) Tao, L.; Cinquanta, E.; Chiappe, D.; Grazianetti, C.; Fanciulli, M.; Dubey, M.; Molle, A.; Akinwande, D. Silicene Field-Effect Transistors Operating at Room Temperature. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2015, 10, 227−231. (53) Oughaddou, H.; Enriquez, H.; Tchalala, M.; Yildirim, H.; Mayne, A. J.; Bendounan, A.; Dujardin, M.; Ait Ali, G.; Kara, A. Silicene, a Promising New 2D material. Prog. Surf. Sci. 2015, 90, 46− 83. (54) Grazianetti, C.; Cinquanta, E.; Molle, A. Two-Dimensional Silicon: the Advent of Silicene. 2D Mater. 2016, 3, 012001. (55) Grazianetti, C.; Cinquanta, E.; Tao, L.; De Padova, P.; Quaresima, C.; Ottaviani, C.; Akinwande, D.; Molle, A. Silicon Nanosheets: Crossover between Multilayer Silicene and Diamond-like Growth Regime. ACS Nano 2017, 11, 3376−3382. (56) Cinquanta, E.; Fratesi, G.; dal Conte, S.; Grazianetti, C.; Scotognella, F.; Vozzi, C.; Onida, G.; Molle, A. Ultrafast Carrier Dynamics of Epitaxial Silicene. Proc. SPIE 10102, Ultrafast Phenomena and Nanophotonics XXI; February 23, 2017; p 101020J. (57) Davila, M. E.; Xian, L.; Cahangirov, S.; Rubio, A.; Le Lay, G. Germanene: a Novel Two-Dimensional Germanium Allotrope akin to Graphene and Silicene. New J. Phys. 2014, 16, 095002. (58) Dávila, M. E.; Le Lay, G. Few Layer Epitaxial Germanene: a Novel Two-Dimensional Dirac Material. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 20714. (59) Li, L.; Lu, S.-z.; Pan, J.; Qin, Z.; Wang, Y.-q; Wang, Y.; Cao, G.y.; Du, S.; Gao, H.-J. Buckled Germanene Formation on Pt(111). Adv. Mater. 2014, 26, 4820−4824.
(60) Bampoulis, P.; Zhang, L.; Safaei, A.; van Gastel, R.; Poelsema, B.; Zandvliet, H. J. W. Germanene Termination of Ge2Pt Crystals on Ge(110). J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2014, 26, 442001. (61) Acun, A.; Zhang, L.; Bampoulis, P.; Farmanbar, M.; van Houselt, A.; Rudenko, A.; Lingenfelder, M.; Brocks, G.; Poelsema, B.; Katsnelson, M. I.; et al. Germanene, the Germanium Analogue of Graphene. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2015, 27, 443002. (62) Derivaz, M.; Dentel, D.; Stephan, R.; Hanf, M.-C.; Mehdaoui, A.; Sonnet, P.; Pirri, C. Continuous Germanene Layer on Al(111). Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 2510−2516. (63) Liu, G.; Liu, S. B.; Xu, B.; Ouyang, C. Y.; Song, H. Y.; Guan, S.; Yang, S. A. Multiple Dirac Points and Hydrogenation-Induced Magnetism of Germanene Layer on Al (111) Surface. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2015, 6, 4936−4942. (64) Stephan, R.; Hanf, M. C.; Derivaz, M.; Dentel, D.; Asensio, M. C.; Avila, J.; Mehdaoui, A.; Sonnet, P.; Pirri, C. Germanene On Al(111) Interface Electronic States and Charge Transfer. J. Phys. Chem. C 2016, 120, 1580−1585. (65) Persichetti, L.; Jardali, F.; Vach, H.; Sgarlata, A.; Berbezier, I.; De Crescenzi, M.; Balzarotti, A. van der Waals Heteroepitaxy of Germanene Islands on Graphite. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2016, 7, 3246− 3251. (66) Qin, Z.; Pan, J.; Lu, S.; Shao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Du, S.; Gao, H.-J.; Cao, G. Direct Evidence of Dirac Signature in Bilayer Germanene Islands on Cu(111). Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1606046. (67) Zhang, L.; Bampoulis, P.; Rudenko, A. N.; Yao, Q.; van Houselt, A.; Poelsema, B.; Katsnelson, M. I.; Zandvliet, H. J. W. Erratum: Structural and Electronic Properties of Germanene on MoS2. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 117, 059902. (68) Gou, J.; Zhong, Q.; Sheng, S.; Li, W.; Cheng, P.; Li, H.; Chen, L.; Wu, K. Strained Monolayer Germanene with 1 × 1 Lattice on Sb(111). 2D Mater. 2016, 3, 045005. (69) Zhu, F.-f.; Chen, W.-j.; Xu, Y.; Gao, C.-l.; Guan, D.-d.; Liu, C.-h.; Qian, D.; Zhang, S.-C.; Jia, J.-f. Epitaxial Growth of Two-Dimensional Stanene. Nat. Mater. 2015, 14, 1020−1025. (70) Saxena, S.; Chaudhary, R. P.; Shukla, S. Stanene: Atomically Thick Free-standing Layer of 2D Hexagonal Tin. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 31073. (71) Wu, L.; Lu, P.; Bi, J.; Yang, C.; Song, Y.; Guan, P.; Wang, S. Structural and Electronic Properties of Two-Dimensional Stanene and Graphene Heterostructure. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2016, 11, 525. (72) Kane, C. L.; Mele, E. J. Z2 Topological Order and the Quantum Spin Hall Effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 146802. (73) Liu, C. C.; Feng, W.; Yao, Y. Quantum Spin Hall Effect in Silicene and Two-Dimensional Germanium. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 107, 076802. (74) Seixas, L.; Padilha, J. E.; Fazzio, A. Quantum Spin Hall Effect on Germanene Nanorod Embedded in Completely Hydrogenated Germanene. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2014, 89, 195403. (75) Fukaya, Y.; Matsuda, I.; Feng, B.; Mochizuki, I.; Hyodo, T.; Shamoto, S.-i. Asymmetric Structure of Germanene on an Al(111) Surface Studied by Total-Reflection High-Energy Positron Diffraction. 2D Mater. 2016, 3, 035019. (76) Kresse, G.; Hafner, J. Ab Initio Molecular Dynamics for Liquid Metals. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1993, 47, 558−561. (77) Kresse, G.; Hafner, J. Ab Initio Molecular-Dynamics Simulation of the Liquid-Metal−Amorphous-Semiconductor Transition in Germanium. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 49, 14251−14269. (78) Kresse, G.; Furthmüller. Efficiency of Ab-Initio Total Energy Calculations for Metals and Semiconductors using a Plane-Wave Basis Set. Comput. Mater. Sci. 1996, 6, 15−50. (79) Kresse, G.; Furthmüller, J. Efficient Iterative Schemes for Ab Initio Total-Energy Calculations using a Plane-Wave Basis Set. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1996, 54, 11169−11186. (80) Blochl, P. E. Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 50, 17953−17979. 4592
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
Letter
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters (81) Kresse, G.; Joubert, D. Ultrasoft Pseudopotentials to the Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1999, 59, 1758−1775. (82) Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996, 77, 3865−3868. (83) Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996, 77, 3865−3868]. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1997, 78, 1396. (84) Bader, R. F. W. A Quantum Theory of Molecular Structure and its Applications. Chem. Rev. 1991, 91, 893−928. (85) Henkelman, G.; Arnaldsson, A.; Jónsson, H. A Fast and Robust Algorithm for Bader Decomposition of Charge Density. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2006, 36, 354−360. (86) Henkelman, G.; Jónsson, H.; Uberuaga, B. P. A Climbing Image Nudged Elastic Band Method for Finding Saddle Points and Minimum Energy Paths. J. Chem. Phys. 2000, 113, 9901−9904. (87) Horcas, I.; Fernandez, R.; Gomez-Rodriguez, J.; Colchero, J.; Gomez-Herrero, J.; Baro, A. M. WSXM: a Software for Scanning Probe Microscopy and a Tool for Nanotechnology. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2007, 78, 013705. (88) Humphrey, W.; Dalke, A.; Schulten, K. VMD: Visual Molecular Dynamics. J. Mol. Graphics 1996, 14, 33−38 (Theoretical and Computational Biophysics Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois, Visual Molecular Dynamics software).. (89) Klimeš, J.; Bowler, D. R.; Michaelides, A. Van der Waals Density Functionals Applied to Solids. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2011, 83, 195131. (90) Dion, M.; Rydberg, H.; Schröder, E.; Langreth, D. C.; Lundqvist, B. I. Van der Waals Density Functional for General Geometries. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 246401. (91) Stephan, R.; Hanf, M.-C.; Sonnet, P. Molecular Functionalization of Silicene/Ag(111) by Covalent Bonds: A DFT study. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2015, 17, 14495−14501. (92) Tchalala, M. R.; Enriquez, H.; Yildirim, H.; Kara, A.; Mayne, A.; Dujardin, G.; Ali, M. A.; Oughaddou, H. Atomic and Electronic Structures of the (√13 × √13)R13.9° of Silicene Sheet on Ag(1 1 1). Appl. Surf. Sci. 2014, 303, 61−66.
4593
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02137 J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4587−4593
