English

• Molybdenum disulfide (MoS₂), a graphene-like two-dimensional (2D) layered material, has recently exhibited expanding potentials in diverse applications, e.g., optoelectronics [1-4], catalysis [5, 6], sensing [7, 8], and biomedical fields [9, 10], due to its unique optical, electronic and catalytic properties. A variety of approaches including chemical vapor deposition growth [11, 12], chemical exfoliation [13, 14], or direct exfoliation in solvents [15], can lead to the production of ultra-thin and high-quality 2D MoS₂. To meet the requirement for diverse applications, the functionalization of MoS₂ is highly demanded to enhance its processibility, improve the compatibilities with solvents/environments and further modulate the electronic properties. However, due to its relatively inert character, functionalization of MoS₂ is usually more difficult than its graphene counterpart, e.g., functionalities can be easily introduced onto graphene after oxidization [16]. Most covalent functionalization strategies rely on sulfur chemistry in which thiol ligands containing functional groups or polymers were chemically conjugated to S vacancy defect on MoS₂ nanosheets [17, 18]. With the rapid development of MoS₂-based nanomaterials and increasing demand for diverse applications, more facile and efficient methods in tailoring 2D MoS₂ with synthetic polymers is demanded.

  The covalent modification of surfaces with functional polymer brushes has received increasing interest due to potential applications in sensing [19], combinatorial science [20], medicine [21], and anti-icing technology [22]. Polymer brushes provide the possibility in tailoring the surface functionalities with multiple functional sites on each grafted polymer chain while allowing for the fine-tuning of the topological architectures with the aid of living/controlled polymerization techniques [23]. Furthermore, covalently bound polymer chains provide both stable and soft environments which are compatible with further functionalization [24, 25]. Surface-initiated polymerization from chemically defined self-assembled monolayers on solid surfaces has been widely utilized for the formation of polymer brush layers with well controlled functionality, thickness, and density with high precision [26].

  Self-initiating photografting and photopolymerization (SIPGP) is a straightforward "grafting from" strategy which can covalently create grafted polymers on surface without the immobilization of initiators on the surface [27, 28]. As a facile surface modification method, the grafting reaction can be performed at room temperature and mild reaction conditions, avoiding the employment of chemical reactions in the presence of harsh conditions and elevated temperature. Thus, a variety of surfaces such as graphene, silicon, silicon carbide, glassy carbon, diamond, vanadium carbides, TiO₂ substrates, etc. could be modified via the abstraction of H from surfaces with relatively low bond dissociation energy of H-substrate [29-36]. Herein, we demonstrate it is possible to tailor the MoS₂ surface with different type of polymer brushes ranging from traditional PMMA, polystyrene to functional PIPOx brushes. We show that the selective modification, i.e., the formation of polymer brushes on one side or both sides of MoS₂ could be achieved by performing the SIPGP using MoS₂ suspension or deposited nanosheets on flat substrates.

  As outlined in Scheme 1, self-initiated photografting and photopolymerization (SIPGP) of various monomers, i.e., methyl methacrylate (MMA), styrene (St) and 2-isopropenyl-2-oxazoline (IPOx) was firstly attempted on exfoliated MoS₂ nanosheets via UV irradiation with a spectral distribution between 250 nm and 350 nm (λ_max= 300 nm). After the grafting polymerization, the modified MoS₂ nanosheets were rigorously ultrasonicated in different solvents with different polarities and subsequently centrifuged to remove physisorbed polymers and unreacted monomers. Infrared (IR) spectroscopy was used to confirm the formation of polymer brushes on MoS₂ nanosheets. As shown in Fig. 1, peaks at 1727 cm^-1 attributed to the stretching vibration of C＝O and 1147 cm^-1 originates from the C—O stretching mode indicating the successful formation of poly(methyl methacrylate) PMMA grafts on MoS₂. Strong band at 1659 cm^-1 is attributed to the stretching vibration of C＝N from oxazoline rings, indicating the successful formation of poly(2-isopropenyl-2-oxazoline) (PIPOx) brushes on the nanosheets. The appearance of peaks between 1599 cm^-1 and 1457 cm^-1 corresponding to the stretching of C＝C of benzene rings, demonstrating the existence of polystyrene (PS) grafts on MoS₂ nanosheets. Therefore, the UVinduced photografting polymerization allows the direct formation of a series of polymer brushes on the MoS₂ nanosheets without any immobilization of initiators on the MoS₂ surface.

  Scheme 1

  

  Scheme 1.  Preparation of polymer grafts on MoS₂ nanosheets and monolayer deposited on a silicon wafer substrate.

  DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

  Figure 1

  

  Figure 1.  IR spectra for exfoliated MoS₂ and polymer grafts of PS, PIPOx and PMMA brushes on MoS₂ nanosheets.

  DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

  It was demonstrated that the exfoliation process may produce structural defects such as S vacancy defect in the MoS₂ surface. The formation of polymer brushes on the MoS₂ surface is probably because of the grafting polymerization on these defects. To further confirm the formation of polymer brushes and gain insight into the grafting reaction, the PMMA modified MoS₂ nanosheets were characterized by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). The peaks at 284.6 and 532.9 eV could be assigned to the C 1s and O 1s from PMMA (Fig. 2). The C 1s peak can be deconvoluted into four components at 284.5, 285.2, 288.6, and 286.0 eV corresponding to the C＝C, C—O, O—C＝O and C—S, respectively. The XPS measurements corroborate the formation of PMMA brushes on MoS₂ and further indicate the generation of C—S bond between PMMA and substrate during the grafting polymerization.

  Figure 2

  

  Figure 2.  The C 1s high-resolution XPS spectrum of PMMA grafts onMoS₂ nanosheets.

  DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

  In order to investigate the morphology and thickness change, the resulted nanosheets were characterized by AFM. As shown in Fig. S1 in Supporting information, pristine MoS₂ has an average thickness less than 1 nm. This indicates the obtained MoS₂ are almost single layered. After the photografting reaction, the thickness increased to 21 nm (Fig. S2 in Supporting information), indicating the successful occurrence of the grafting reaction. Since the chemical compositions on both sides of MoS₂ nanosheet are identical, thus the grafting reaction should occur on both sides of MoS₂ during the grafting polymerization.

  Asymmetric functionalization of two dimensional (2D) nanosheets or membranes is of great interest, which can endow the 2D nanosheets with different properties leading to fascinating functions, e.g., self-assembled behaviors [18, 37-39]. In order to demonstrate the MoS₂ surface can be modified asymmetrically, we performed the UV grafting polymerization on MoS₂ monolayer deposited on a silicon wafer. Following the above-mentioned procedure, the silicon wafer substrate with a MoS₂ monolayer deposited via chemical vapor deposition (CVD) on the top layer was submerged in bulk monomer for the SIPGP. Monolayer of MoS₂ is a commercial product, which was prepared by CVD growth technique without obvious defects (Fig. S3 in Supporting information). The interaction between MoS₂ and the substrate is van der-waals forces. These forces are strong enough in making the MoS₂ layer remain adhered to the substrate during the grafting polymerization. This can be verified by the AFM measurement on the scratched area after the photopolymerization using a sharp needle. The height of the pristine commercial available monolayer MoS₂ film on Si/SiO₂ measured by AFM is around 0.7 nm. After SIPGP of MMA for 5 h, a homogeneous polymer layer with an average thickness of 20 nm was obtained (Fig. 3). The surface roughness was found to be 0.437 nm (Ra) for PMMA-g-MoS₂ nanosheets and 0.112 nm for pristine MoS₂ monolayer.

  Figure 3

  

  Figure 3.  AFM scan on a scratched area along with a section analysis of the PMMA grafts on MoS₂ monolayer on Si/SiO₂.

  DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

  During the photografting polymerization, bulk photopolymerization of monomers occurred simultaneously, resulting in the formation of free polymers in solution. According to our previous report, the SIPGP proceeds via a grafting from fashion. Moreover, the degree of polymerization for the grafted polymer chains and polymers formed simultaneously in solution are almost identical [35]. In our case, gel permeation chromatography (GPC) analysis of the PMMA obtained simultaneously from bulk solution gave a high molecular weight and a relatively broad polymer molecular weight distribution (M_n = 4.54 ×10⁵ g/mol, PDI = 1.92, Fig. S4 in Supporting information), which are typical of polymers obtained byfree radical polymerization. Therefore, we estimate the degree of the polymerization of the grafted PMMA is about 4000.

  In summary, we have provided a simple and robust strategy in the direct creation of polymer grafts on MoS₂ surfaces. A series of polymer class can be anchored on the MoS₂ surfaces. The polymer brushes can be created onto one side or both sides of the MoS₂ surfaces by performing the grafting polymerization using the MoS₂ dispersion or monolayer deposited on the silicon substrate, allowing the selective functionalization of MoS₂. The presented approach is of promising potential in applications requiring tailored polymer composition on the MoS₂ surfaces. Further investigation in the preparation of free-standing polymer carpets on MoS₂ monolayer and their applications is underway.

  Acknowledgments

  The financial support of this work from the Department of Science and Technology of Jilin Province (Nos. 20180101196JC and 20180101170JC) is greatly acknowledged. N. Zhang thanks the support of Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS (No. 2016207).

  Appendix A. Supplementary data

  Supplementary materialrelated tothis article canbefound, inthe online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2018.07.002.

• 1. [1]

     B. Radisavljevic, A. Radenovic, J. Brivio, V. Giacometti, A. Kis, Nat. Nanotechnol. 6(2011) 147-150. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2010.279

  2. [2]

     K.F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan, T.F. Heinz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105(2010) 136805. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.136805

  3. [3]

     Z.Y. Yin, H. Li, L. Jiang, et al., ACS Nano 6(2012) 74-80. doi: 10.1021/nn2024557

  4. [4]

     M.L. Tsai, S.H. Su, J.K. Chang, et al., ACS Nano 8(2014) 8317-8322. doi: 10.1021/nn502776h

  5. [5]

     C.T. Tye, K.J. Smith, Catal. Today 116(2006) 461-468. doi: 10.1016/j.cattod.2006.06.028

  6. [6]

     B.K. Miremadi, S.R. Morrison, J. Catal. 103(1987) 334-345. doi: 10.1016/0021-9517(87)90125-4

  7. [7]

     C. Zhu, Z. Zeng, H. Li, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135(2013) 5998-6001. doi: 10.1021/ja4019572

  8. [8]

     H. Li, Z.Y. Yin, Q.Y. He, et al., Small 8(2012) 63-67. doi: 10.1002/smll.201101016

  9. [9]

     W. Yin, L. Yan, J. Yu, et al., ACS Nano 8(2014) 6922-6933. doi: 10.1021/nn501647j

  10. [10]

      S.S. Chou, B. Kaehr, J. Kim, et al., Angew. Chem. 125(2013) 4254-4258. doi: 10.1002/ange.201209229

  11. [11]

      Y. Zhan, Z. Liu, S. Najmaei, P.M. Ajayan, J. Lou, Small 8(2012) 966-971. doi: 10.1002/smll.201102654

  12. [12]

      A. Berkdemir, H.R. Gutierrez, A.R. Botello-Mendez, et al., Sci. Rep. 3(2013) 1755. doi: 10.1038/srep01755

  13. [13]

      M. Chhowalla, H.S. Shin, G. Eda, et al., Nat. Chem. 5(2013) 263-275. doi: 10.1038/nchem.1589

  14. [14]

      G. Eda, H. Yamaguchi, D. Voiry, et al., Nano Lett. 11(2011) 5111-5116. doi: 10.1021/nl201874w

  15. [15]

      V. Nicolosi, M. Chhowalla, M.G. Kanatzidis, et al., Science 340(2013) 1226419. doi: 10.1126/science.1226419

  16. [16]

      C. Backes, N.C. Berner, X. Chen, et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54(2015) 2638-2642. doi: 10.1002/anie.201409412

  17. [17]

      S.S. Chou, M. De, J. Kim, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135(2013) 4584-4587. doi: 10.1021/ja310929s

  18. [18]

      L. Zhou, B. He, Y. Yang, Y. He, RSC Adv. 4(2014) 32570-32578. doi: 10.1039/C4RA04682J

  19. [19]

      R.C. Bailey, J.T. Hupp, Anal. Chem. 75(2003) 2392-2398. doi: 10.1021/ac026391c

  20. [20]

      M.P. Stoykovich, H.B. Cao, K. Yoshimoto, L.E. Ocola, P.F. Nealey, Adv. Mater. 15(2003) 1180-1184. doi: 10.1002/adma.200305059

  21. [21]

      L. Hou, J. Fang, W. Wang, et al., J. Mater. Chem. B 5(2017) 3348-3354. doi: 10.1039/C7TB00812K

  22. [22]

      Z. He, W.J. Xie, Z. Liu, et al., Sci. Adv. 2(2016) e1600345. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1600345

  23. [23]

      N. Zhang, S. Salzinger, F. Deubel, R. Jordan, B. Rieger, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134(2012) 7333-7336. doi: 10.1021/ja3027423

  24. [24]

      C. Padeste, P. Farquet, C. Potzner, H.H. Solak, J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 17(2006) 1285-1300. doi: 10.1163/156856206778667505

  25. [25]

      M.A.C. Stuart, W.T.S. Huck, J. Genzer, Nat. Mater. 9(2010) 101-113. doi: 10.1038/nmat2614

  26. [26]

      T. Chen, I. Amin, R. Jordan, Chem. Soc. Rev. 41(2012) 3280-3296. doi: 10.1039/c2cs15225h

  27. [27]

      M. Steenackers, A.M. Gigler, N. Zhang, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133(2011) 10490-10498. doi: 10.1021/ja201052q

  28. [28]

      M. Steenackers, R. Jordan, A. Küller, M. Grunze, Adv. Mater. 21(2009) 2921-2925. doi: 10.1002/adma.v21:28

  29. [29]

      M. Steenackers, I.D. Sharp, K. Larsson, et al., Chem. Mater. 22(2010) 272-278. doi: 10.1021/cm903051j

  30. [30]

      N. Zhang, M. Steenackers, R. Luxenhofer, R. Jordan, Macromolecules 42(2009) 5345-5351. doi: 10.1021/ma900329y

  31. [31]

      A.A. Reitinger, N.A. Hutter, A. Donner, et al., Adv. Funct. Mater. 23(2013) 2979-2986. doi: 10.1002/adfm.v23.23

  32. [32]

      J. Yang, L. Hou, B. Xu, et al., Macromol. Rapid Commun. 35(2014) 1224-1229. doi: 10.1002/marc.v35.13

  33. [33]

      J. Chen, K. Chen, D. Tong, et al., Chem. Commun. 51(2015) 314-317. doi: 10.1039/C4CC07220K

  34. [34]

      H. Bian, X. Dong, S. Chen, D. Dong, N. Zhang, Chin. Chem. Lett. 29(2018) 171-174. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2017.05.011

  35. [35]

      L. Hou, L. Wang, N. Zhang, Z. Xie, D. Dong, Polym. Chem. 7(2016) 5828-5834. doi: 10.1039/C6PY01008C

  36. [36]

      H. Bian, J. Yang, N. Zhang, et al., Polym. Chem. 7(2016) 1191-1196. doi: 10.1039/C5PY02013A

  37. [37]

      J.N. Coleman, M. Lotya, A. O'Neill, et al., Science 331(2011) 568-571. doi: 10.1126/science.1194975

  38. [38]

      D. Han, P. Xiao, J. Gu, et al., RSC Adv. 4(2014) 22759-22762. doi: 10.1039/c4ra02826k

  39. [39]

      P. Zhou, Q. Wang, C.L. Zhang, et al., Chin. Chem. Lett. 26(2015) 657-661. doi: 10.1016/j.cclet.2015.04.006

• 

  Scheme 1  Preparation of polymer grafts on MoS₂ nanosheets and monolayer deposited on a silicon wafer substrate.

  下载: 全尺寸图片 幻灯片
  

  Figure 1  IR spectra for exfoliated MoS₂ and polymer grafts of PS, PIPOx and PMMA brushes on MoS₂ nanosheets.

  下载: 全尺寸图片 幻灯片
  

  Figure 2  The C 1s high-resolution XPS spectrum of PMMA grafts onMoS₂ nanosheets.

  下载: 全尺寸图片 幻灯片
  

  Figure 3  AFM scan on a scratched area along with a section analysis of the PMMA grafts on MoS₂ monolayer on Si/SiO₂.

  下载: 全尺寸图片 幻灯片
•