4.6 Article

Na4PMo11VO40-catalyzed one-pot oxidative esterification of benzaldehyde with hydrogen peroxide

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 11, 期 55, 页码 34979-34987

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1ra06718d

关键词

-

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (CAPES) [001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the activity of sodium salts of vanadium-doped phosphomolybdic acid in the oxidative esterification reaction of benzaldehyde with hydrogen peroxide in alkyl alcohol solutions. The catalyst Na4PMo11VO40 showed the highest activity and selectivity, regardless of the type of alcohol used. The reaction selectivity was influenced by the carbon chain length of the alcohol and steric hindrance on the hydroxyl group.
The activity of the sodium salts of vanadium-doped phosphomolybdic acid was assessed in the oxidative esterification reaction of benzaldehyde with hydrogen peroxide in alkyl alcohol solutions. The effect of main reaction parameters, such as temperature, catalyst load, vanadium doping level, and reactant stoichiometry, on the conversion and reaction selectivity was investigated. Among the tested heteropoly salts, Na4PMo11VO40 was the most active and selective catalyst, achieving almost complete conversion of benzaldehyde and high ester selectivity regardless of the alcohol investigated. The efficiency of the catalyst was correlated with its vanadium content. The size of the carbon chain of alcohol and the steric hindrance on the hydroxyl group played a key role in the reaction selectivity. While methyl and ethyl alcohols selectively provided the ester as the main product (ca. 90-95%) and benzoic acid as a subproduct, the other alcohols also afforded acetal, a condensation product, and benzaldehyde peroxide, an oxidation reaction intermediate, as secondary products. The use of an inexpensive, environmentally benign, and atom-efficient oxidant, mild conditions, and short reaction times were the positive aspects of this one-pot process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据