MG. We also employed NaN3 as the singlet oxygen quencher,13
and it had little effect on the photoreaction. In EPR experiments,
no ·OH radicals were detected under the experimental condi-
tions, and it was also found that addition of isopropanol, a
known scavenger of ·OH radicals, into the reaction system did
not cause any apparent changes in the photooxidation. This
indicates that singlet oxygen and the ·OH radicals are not the
main active oxygen species involved in the photoreaction
catalyzed by FeBY. The O2·2 radicals or the subsequent
converted form (high valent iron–oxo species FeIVNO)14,15
formed by activation of molecular O2 must be the main active
oxygen species for this photoreaction. The special structure of
the zeolite NaY provides a unique microenvironment for the
Table 1 GC-MS data and identified molecular structures of products formed
in the photooxidation of MG
Retention
time/min
Peak area
(%)
Peak
Products
A
B
C
D
E
F
Methyl benzoate
N,N-Dimethylaniline
Hydroquinone
4-Aminobenzophenone
(4-Dimethylamino)benzophenone
(4-Methylamino)benzophenone
(4-Dimethylamino-4A-
methylamino)benzophenone
Malachite green
7.05
12.37
13.29
21.72
22.15
22.50
1.0
0.4
6.4
0.3
51.7
37.5
G
23.25
27.71
0.9
1.2
H
2+
active sites of Fe(bpy)3 and leads to the high photoreaction
selectivity. The high-valent iron–oxo species (FeIVNO) as the
active intermediate are also reported by Collins’ group based on
another N-donor ligand system.16 According to their notion,
iron–oxo reactive intermediates are still very reactive but more
selective than the reactive intermediates of Fenton’s systems. In
the FeBY system, we proposed that the active intermediates
were superoxide species (L3FeIIIO·22) and high-valent iron–
oxo species (L3FeIVNO), which eventually triggers the oxidation
of the target organic compound. Further study is needed for the
detailed reaction mechanism.
of N-demethylation, these products were formed from the
oxidation of the central carbon atom of MG. TOC measure-
ments show almost no change in the total organic content before
and after photooxidation. This suggests that the process is a
selective oxidation rather than a mineralization.
The effect of subsequent UV irradiation after the complete
bleaching of MG was also studied. Neither further oxidation nor
mineralization was observed when the reaction system was
irradiated by a 100 W Hg lamp. Moreover, the same reaction
products were obtained when we employed the UV source at the
initial stage of the reaction. These observations illustrate that the
excitation wavelength does not affect the selectivity of the
FeBY photocatalytic system. This is different from Frei’s
system11 in which the reaction selectivity is dependent on the
wavelength of irradiation. In our system the FeBY but not the
substrate–O2 complex (as in Frei’s system) is excited.
We also examined the photooxidation of acridine orange,
methylene blue and bright green in aqueous solutions in the
presence of FeBY under visible light irradiation. It was found
that they could all be easily bleached in a short time without any
changes in TOC values. Additionally, in the photooxidation of
styrene, benzaldehyde was obtained after irradiation for 2 hours.
This provides sufficient evidence that the FeBY system
possesses good photocatalytic reactivity by oxidising the
organics through the activation of molecular O2 under visible
light irradiation.
EPR was employed to provide useful information on the
active radical intermediates.12 Upon visible light irradiation (l
> 420 nm), the six peaks of DMPO-OOH/O2·2 (DMPO,
5,5-dimethylpyrroline N-oxide) adducts were observed in the
MG/FeBY system, and the intensity increased slightly with the
irradiation time (Fig. 2). These results confirmed that ·OOH/
O2·2 radicals are generated from the activation of molecular
oxygen in the photocatalytic process. In the control experiments
no signals with a significant intensity were observed in the MG/
FeBY system in the dark, or in the MG/NaY system under
visible light irradiation. SOD, an efficient scavenger for O2·2,
was added into the FeBY/MG system, and it was found that
addition of SOD effectively suppressed the photooxidation of
Notes and references
1 J. C. Scaiano and Hermenegildo Garcia, Acc. Chem. Res., 1999, 32,
783.
2 A. Maldotti, A. Molinari and R. Amadelli, Chem. Rev., 2002, 102,
3811.
3 R. F. Parton, Ivo F. J. Vankelecom, Mark J. A. Casselman, C. P.
Bezoukanova, J. B. Uytterhoeven and P. A. Jacobs, Nature, 1994, 370,
541.
4 P-P. Knops-Gerrits, D. De Vos, F. Thibault-Starzyk and P. A. Jacobs,
Nature, 1994, 369, 543.
5 F. Blatter and H. Frei, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1993, 115, 7501; F. Blatter and
H. Frei, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1994, 116, 1812; H. Sun, F. Blatter and H.
Frei, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1994, 115, 7951; F. Blatter, H. Sun, Vasenkov
and H. Frei, Catal. Today, 1998, 41, 297.
6 X. Li and V. Ramamaurthy, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1996, 118, 10666; R. J.
Robbins and V. Ramamaurthy, Chem. Commun., 1997, 1071.
7 W. Ma, J. Li, X. Tao, J. He, Y. Xu, J. C. Yu and J. Zhao, Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed., 2003, 42, 1299.
8 FeY was prepared by ion exchanged of NaY (1 g) with a 2 mM aqueous
solution of FeCl2 (50 ml). The FeY zeolite was then washed, filtered and
dried at room temperature under a N2 flow. 0.6 g of the bpy ligand was
added to 1.0 g of dried FeY. The mixture was heated at 363 K for 24 h
in a closed system to stimulate complex formation, and Soxhlet-
extracted for 24 h with CH2Cl2 to remove the unreacted ligand and then
dried at 323 K under nitrogen atmosphere.
9 F. Chen, W. Ma, J. He and J. Zhao, J. Phys. Chem. A, 2002, 106, 9485;
Y. Xie, F. Chen, J. He, J. Zhao and W. Ma, J. Photochem. Photobiol. A:
Chem., 2000, 136, 235; F. Chen, J. He, J. Zhao and J. C. Yu, New J.
Chem., 2002, 36, 336.
10 All the irradiation experiments were carried out in a Pyrex vessel A 500
W halogen lamp as a visible light source was positioned within a
cylindrical Pyrex Vessel. A Pyrex jacket with water circulation was used
to cool the lamp. A light filter to cut completely light below 420 nm was
placed outside the Pyrex jacket to guarantee irradiation with visible
light.
11 F. Blatter, H. Sun and H. Frei, Catal. Lett., 1995, 35, 1; H. Frei, F.
Blatter and H. Sun, CHEMTECH, 1996, 24.
12 J. Zhao, T. Wu, K. Wu, H. Hidaka and N. Serpone, Environ. Sci.
Technol., 1998, 32, 2394.
13 In the experiments of additives, 10, 20, 50, and 80 equivalents of
isopropanol and sodium azide versus MG (2 3 1025 M) were
employed.
14 L. Weber, R. Hommel, J. Behling, G. Haufe and H. Hennig, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 1994, 116, 2400.
15 R. Richman and M. Peterson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1982, 104, 5795.
16 T. Collins, Acc. Chem. Res., 2002, 35, 782.
Fig. 2 EPR signals of the DMPO-·OOH/O2·2 adducts as a function of
visible illumination time. DMPO (0.15 M), pH = 4.6.
CHEM. COMMUN., 2003, 2214–2215
2215