## 3 Results and Discussion  
### Crystallinity and Morphological Characterization  
Figure 1 shows the XRD pattern of the ammonia-treated AC. No sharp diffraction peaks were detected for the AC due to its poor crystallinity. However, broad, low intensity peaks, at 20\({}^{\circ}\) around 21.9\({}^{\circ}\) (002), 43.2\({}^{\circ}\) (101), and 78.9\({}^{\circ}\) (110), might correspond to the planes of graphite, indicating some alignment of carbon layer planes [99; 100]. Figure 2 shows the X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrum of the ammonia-treated AC, where carbon and nitrogen were detected with the convolution of the nitrogen signal under the carbon signal. As per the result of CHNS analysis, a value of 2.0 wt.% reflected the nitrogen content. The XRF and the micro-elemental analysis indicated the successfulness of our procedure for doping AC with nitrogen. Figure 1: X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of the ammonia-treated AC. Figure 3 shows the XRD diffraction patterns for the transition metal-decorated (Pd, Ni, Rh, Ir and Ru), ammonia-treated AC samples. Their corresponding backscattered scanning electron micrographs and EDX analyses are shown in Figures 4-8. The ACs were fibrous, layered structures, while the transition metal nanoparticles were spherical and homogenously distributed, as supported by the close match between the average crystallite size, calculated from XRD, and the particle size, estimated from the SEM, confirming no agglomeration of the decorated metal particles. The presence of the transition metals was also supported by the EDX analysis, where platinum signals were detected in all of the samples around 2.1 keV, as platinum plating was used for removing the surface charge accumulation. The results of platinum-decorated samples were reported earlier by [PERSON] et al. [90]. All of the decorated metals were found in their zero state, as a result of complete reduction. The data dragged from the XRD and their corresponding SEM is summarized in Table 1.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Peak Position (20\({}^{\circ}\)), and Its**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**JCPDS Card No. **} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Corresponding**} & **Ave. Crystallite** & \multirow{2}{*}{**Ave Particle Size from XRD**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Ave Particle Size from SEM, nm**} \\  & & & **nm** & **nm** & **nm** \\ \hline Pd-decorated, & 40.6\({}^{\circ}\) (111), 47.2\({}^{\circ}\) (200), 68.6\({}^{\circ}\) (220), & 03-065-2867 & 59.37, 54.36, 62.57, & \multirow{2}{*}{61} \\ NH\({}_{3}\)-treated AC & 82.5\({}^{\circ}\) (311), and 86.9\({}^{\circ}\) (222) & & 59.72, and 63.37 & \multirow{2}{*}{78.14} & \multirow{2}{*}{64} \\ Ni-decorated, & 44.7\({}^{\circ}\) (111), 52.1\({}^{\circ}\) (200), 76.5\({}^{\circ}\) (220), & 00-004-0850 & 65.96, 65.37, 74.18, & \multirow{2}{*}{78.14} & \multirow{2}{*}{64} \\ NH\({}_{3}\)-treated AC & 93.1\({}^{\circ}\) (311), and 89.5\({}^{\circ}\) (222) & & 93.87, and 91.32 & \multirow{2}{*}{69.46} & \multirow{2}{*}{59} \\ \cline{4-4} Rh-decorated, & 41.5\({}^{\circ}\) (111), 47.8\({}^{\circ}\) (200), 69.9\({}^{\circ}\) (220), & 00-005-0685 & 68.51, 62.59, 70.07, & \multirow{2}{*}{67.35} & \multirow{2}{*}{63} \\ \cline{4-4} NH\({}_{3}\)-treated AC & 84.4\({}^{\circ}\) (311), and 89.1\({}^{\circ}\) (222) & & 73.14, and 72.99 & \multirow{2}{*}{78.14} & \multirow{2}{*}{35} \\ \cline{4-4} Ir-decorated, & 40.8\({}^{\circ}\) (111), 47.4\({}^{\circ}\) (200), 69.2\({}^{\circ}\) (220), & 03-065-1686 & 58.16, 58.52, 70.94, & \multirow{2}{*}{69.46} & \multirow{2}{*}{59} \\ NH\({}_{3}\)-treated AC & 83.5\({}^{\circ}\) (311), and 88.2\({}^{\circ}\) (222) & & 81.60, and 67.52 & \multirow{2}{*}{67.35} & \multirow{2}{*}{63} \\ \cline{4-4}  
Figure 3: XRD patterns of (**A**) Pd-, (**B**) Ni-, (**C**) Rh-, (**D**) Ir-, and (**E**) Ru- decorated, ammonia-treated AC. Figure 4: Scanning electron micrograph of Pd-decorated, ammonia-treated AC and its corresponding EDX spectrum.