[
C. Feng et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters 24 (2013) 539–541
Fig. 1. TEM image of graphene (a) and G-Fe3O4 composite (b).
stirred at 70 8C for an appropriate time depending upon the nature
of the substrate. Upon completion of the reaction (monitored by
TLC), 5 mL of ethanol was added and a homogeneous solution was
obtained. The mixture was cooled to room temperature and the
catalyst was separated by a magnet for recycling tests. The reaction
mixture was concentrated under reduced pressure. The residue
was subjected to silica-gel column chromatography using petro-
leum ether-ethyl acetate as an eluent to give pure product.
G-Fe3O4. Thus, it seemed to us that the graphene played an
important role in this more efficient catalyst.
To demonstrate the generality of this model reaction, the
reduction of a series of aromatic nitro compounds was studied
under the optimized reaction conditions. As shown in Table 2,
aromatic nitro compounds containing various electron-donating
or electron-withdrawing groups were converted to the corre-
sponding amines in good yields. In all cases, amines were found to
be the only product of the reactions and the usual side products of
nitro reduction were not observed in the final product mixtures.
The present method was highly chemoselective in the presence of
sensitive functional groups such as halogens and –COOH. In some
cases, the catalytic activity was significantly influenced by the
position of the substituents on the aromatic ring. For example, the
presence of a methyl group ortho to the nitro group required a
longer reaction time than the para-analogs due to steric effects.
The reusability and recycling of the G-Fe3O4 were also
investigated under the same condition, except that amount of
catalyst was reduced to 1%. At the end of the reduction, the catalyst
was separated by a magnet, washed with ethanol, dried at 100 8C
for 1 h and reused for the next reaction. The catalytic activity of the
G-Fe3O4 did not show significant decrease even after five runs. The
ferrum content in fresh G-Fe3O4 and used G-Fe3O4 (five times)
3. Results and discussion
The morphology of the G and G-Fe3O4 was determined by TEM.
As shown in Fig. 1(a), G consisted of randomly aggregated and
crumpled sheets to form a disordered solid. It was clear that these
graphenes were essentially transparent and no large graphitic
crystallites were observed. Fig. 1(b) shows that iron oxide
nanoparticles were successfully coated on the surface of the G
to form a G-Fe3O4 nanocomposite and the size of Fe3O4 particles
ranged from 25 nm to 50 nm.
The catalytic activity of G-Fe3O4 was evaluated by the reduction
of aromatic nitro compounds with hydrazine hydrate. In our initial
study, nitrobenzene was chosen as the model reactant in order to
examine the efficiency of different catalysts (i.e. graphene, Fe3O4
and G-Fe3O4). As shown in Table 1, no product was obtained in the
absence of the catalyst (Table 1, entry 1), indicating that the
catalyst was necessary for the reaction. Among the catalysts tested,
G-Fe3O4 was found to be the most effective catalyst since it gave
the highest yield of product (Table 1, entry 5). Similar but lower
yields were obtained when using graphene, Fe3O4 or their hybrid
as the catalyst. The results indicated that the graphene [13] and
Fe3O4 both were catalytically active for this reaction. From Fig. 1,
one can observe that the Fe3O4 was distributed on the graphene
sheets with an average size of 25–50 nm. This shows that the active
sites of the catalyst were stabilized and dispersed on graphene and
there may have a synergistic effect [19] on the catalytic activity of
Table 2
Reduction of nitroarenes by hydrazine hydrate in the presence of G-Fe3O4.a
Entry
Nitro compound
Product
T (8C)
Time
Yield
(%)b
(min)
1
2
70
70
20
85
88.4
89.0
]
[TD$INLE]
NO2
NH2
[DT$INLE]
[DT$INLE]
H C
NO
2
H C
NH
3
3
2
3
CH
70
360
83.9
CH
3
3
[
[TD$INLE]
NH
NO
2
2
4
5
70
70
80
90.5
91.9
]
[TD$INLE]
Br
NH2
Br
NO2
NH
NO
255
2
2
Table 1
[
[TD$INLE]
Reduction of nitrobenzene with different catalysts.a
Entry
Catalyst
Time (min)
Isolated yield (%)b
6
7
8
a
Reflux
Reflux
Reflux
240
300
300
91.4
90.5
82.4
]
[TD$INLE]
EtOOC
NO
EtOOC
NH2
NH2
2
1
2
3
4
5
–
90
90
90
90
90
0.0
85.9
84.9
87.7
93.6
Graphene
Fe3O4
]
[TD$INLE]
HOOC
NO2
HOOC
G+Fe3O4 (1:1 wt)
G-Fe3O4
[DT$INLE]
H2N
NO2
[TD$INLE]
H N
NH
2
2
a
Reaction condition: molar ratio of nitrobenzene to hydrazine hydrate is 1:2,
Reaction condition: molar ratio of nitroarenes to hydrazine hydrate is 1:2,
amount of catalyst is 5%.
amount of catalyst is 5%, reaction temperature is 70 8C.
The products were identified by IR and 1H NMR.
The products were characterized by IR and 1H NMR.
b
b