Role of trinuclear Zn(II) complexes in promoting the hydrolysis of 4-nitrophenyl acetate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Potentiometric determination shows that trinuclear Zn(II) complexes of the four tripods 1,3,5-tri(2′,5′-diazahexyl)benzene (L1), 1,3,5-tri(2′,5′-diazaheptyl)benzene (L2), 1,3,5-tri(2′,5′-diazaoctyl)benzene (L3), and 1,3,5-tri(2′,5′-diazanonyl)benzene (L4) could be potential hydrolytic catalysts. CH3CN solutions containing [3Zn:L]T (0.5~2 × 103 mol·dm3) with I = 0.10 mol·dm3 of KNO3 and Good's buffer (10% volume fraction) were studied for the catalyzing hydrolysis of p-nitrophenyl acetate (NA, 0.5~2 × 103 mol·dm3), at 298 K, in the 6.58.2 pH range. The observed rate constants, kobs, fit the equilibrium equation kobs = kcom [3Zn:L]T + kOH[OH] + k0. The sigmoid pH~kcom profiles for NA hydrolysis suggest that either the Zn(II)-bound hydroxyl or the Zn(II)-bound water forms of the catalysts can be the active species. The observed second-order rate constants are 0.0082, 0.011, 0.0059, and 0.0019 mol1·dm3·s1 for the four Zn3LH2O complexes (kA) and 0.342, 0.257, 0.382, and 0.091 mol1·dm3·s1 for the four Zn3LOH- groups (kB), respectively. However, under the condition that [NA] = 0.5 × 103 mol·dm3 and [3Zn:L1]T = 2~4 × 102 mol·dm3 at pH 7.6, the observed rate constants, kobs, obey the equilibrium kobs = kcom[3Zn:L]T/(1/K′ + [3Zn:L]T). This indicates that the 3:1 complex (or its deprotonated hydroxide form) mediates NA hydrolysis by nucleophilic attack of the carboxyl center with the pre-formation of a coordination bond between the carboxyl oxygen atom and the Zn(II) ion. Comparison with other models was made, and the reasons for the high catalytic efficiency of the tripodal complexes were given.Key words: tripod, Zn(II), catalysis, NA hydrolysis, polynuclear.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".