Letters
J. Phys. Chem. B, Vol. 107, No. 34, 2003 8719
intersect with the Ewald sphere, and the 1/3{422} reflections
will be very easy to observe in the [111] diffraction pattern. It
is impossible to distinguish between these two models because
in both cases the projected crystal potential along [111] is
identical. The model described above is for a single stacking
fault. If two or more (111) stacking faults exist within the
nanodisk, because a different stacking fault will produce the
same supperlattice periodicity, the same effect will appear in
the HRTEM image and diffraction pattern, unless there are three
stacking faults produced by intrinsic/extrinsic of A, B, and C
layers, respectively.
The change in the intensity of the 1/3{422} forbidden
reflections observed with various samples (Figure 3) is due to
the fact that the intensity of the 3 × {422} supperlattice fringes
depend on the different stacking sequence and thickness of the
disks. By adjusting the [111] stacking sequence, the projected
potential of the 3 × {422} superlattice changes and this results
in different intensities of 1/3{422} forbidden reflections.
At this step, there is still one question open: is there a link
between the stacking fault and the disk growth? We propose
that the (111) stacking fault(s) play an important role to the
formation and growth of the (111) disk. It is likely that the
growth in parallel to the stacking fault plane is the fastest, and
the existence of the stacking fault may be the key for the
formation and growth of the diskette morphology. This has been
confirmed by Figure 4A, in which the (111) stacking fault planes
are apparent. The silver nanodisks observed in six of our samples
are directly related to the presence of (111) stacking faults. A
Figure 4. (A) TEM image of the silver nanodisk taken in side view,
showing the contrast from (111) stacking faults and a preferential growth
along the stacking faults. The orientation relationship of the SAED
pattern and the nanodisk is shown in Figure 3, parts A and B. (B) A
typical SAED pattern of silver nanodisk at 100 kV in the [01 1h ]
orientation (side view).
that have been observed in previous work for these silver
5
4
nanodisks as well as in the silver nanoprism. In Figure 3, the
SAED of the 6 samples showing the same spots is presented.
However, it can be note that the intensities differ from one
sample to other. The 1/3{422} forbidden reflections on the [111]
14
similar example has been reported by other authors: The (111)
microtwins play an important role in the evolution of the
microstructure of the nano-Ge precipitates in Al-Ge and
Ag-Ge alloys; An accelerated growth along the (111) twin
plane leads to triangular or hexagonal nanoplate precipitates.
We also suggest that the (111) stacking fault model proposed
SAED pattern have been observed previously in platelike Au
and Ag nanocrystals.3
,4,9-12
Figure 4A shows the TEM images
of disks in side view. The typical [0 1h 1] SAED pattern obtained
for a beam direction parallel to the (111) disk surface is shown
in Figure 4B.
4
here could be applied to the work reported by others. That work
reported the photoinduced conversion of silver nanospheres to
nanoprisms. The silver nanoprisms were formed from the small
spherical silver particles in the colloidal suspension and grow
with increased fluorescent irradiation. The similar [111] dif-
fraction pattern with 1/3{422} forbidden reflections was reported
for their silver nanoprisms. We suggest that photo irradiation
induced (111) stacking fault in small silver particles and the
growth was accelerated along (111) stacking fault, resulting in
the formation of the triangle silver nanoprisms.
In this letter, the structural study of silver nanodisks differing
by their sizes is presented. The nanodisks have a fcc crystal
structure with (111) stacking fault(s) lying parallel to the (111)
surface and extending across entire disk. We highlight that the
A number of models for the occurrence of such forbidden
3,9-12
reflections have been previously suggested
(see Appendix
II). Model 1 can be excluded because all over the nanodisk the
same lattice parameter is observed, whereas it is not the case
3
,10,17
for a fractional unit cell along [111] direction. Models
2,
3
, and 4 involve a twin parallel to the flat surface and can be
ruled out because the SAED in the [01 1h ] direction does not
exhibit a mirror symmetry (Figure 4B) as expected for twins
parallel to the 111 face. Model 5 could explain the above
observation. However, it requires a spacing between twins in
the order of ∼1 nm. Figure 4A shows a spacing of 5 nm, a
value far away from the 1 nm required. From these data presence
of twins can be rejected as a large density of stacking fault.
Let consider two types of stacking fault. (i) Stacking fault I
(111) stacking fault is the reason for the occurrence of the
1
/3{422} forbidden reflections and the 3 × {422} superlatice
1
8
(
intrinsic): An A layer is removed and the stacking sequence
fringes. We conclude that the stacking faults may be the key
for the formation and growth of the nanodisks. Therefore, by
controlling the nucleation, growth, and elimination of the defect
is then ABCBCABCABC... In this case the projected potential
in A positions will be lower than that in B and C positions by
one atom. (ii) Stacking fault II (extrinsic): An A layer is added
that means the insertion of an extra (111) layer (for instance,
the A layer) into the regular stacking sequence of ABCAB-
CABC ..., a sequence of AB(A)CABCABC...will be caused.
In this case, the projected potential in A positions will be higher
than that in B and C positions by one atom.
(stacking fault), the shape and size controlling of the nanocrystal
will be possible. This will provide an insight to the synthetically
controlling particle shape and size of the nanocrystals.
Appendix I
For a single stacking fault, a strong supperlattice (or forbid-
den) diffraction effect could be induced, similar to the effect
caused by a single surface mono-atomic step as mentioned in
the model 1. Because of the subnanometer thickness of the
stacking fault, their reciprocal points are strongly elongated
along the [111] direction. Therefore, they are very easy to
The nanodisks are obtained using the method described by
8
Maillard and al. Briefly, a micellar solution of 60% 0.1 M
1
5
15
Ag(AOT) and 40% 0.1 M Na(AOT) (AOT) 2 ethyl-hexyl
suffossucinate) with a water content w ) [H2O]/[AOT] ) 2 is
mixed with 0.1M Na(AOT) solution. The nanocrystals are
coated with dodecanethiol (40 µl per mL) and extracted from
9