Planar palladium-Schiff base complexes are synthesized, maintaining the order of their molecular dimensions as PdL1 < PdL2 < PdL3 < PdL4 < PdL5 in free state, as well as encapsulated in zeolite Y, where L1: N,N'-bis(salicylidene)ethylenediamine and L2, L3, L4, and L5 are derivatives of L1. All encapsulated complexes have shown better catalytic activity for the sulfoxidation of methyl phenyl sulfide in comparison to their homogeneous counter parts. These hybrid systems are characterized with the help of different characterization techniques such as X-ray diffraction analysis, scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared, and UV-visible spectroscopy; all of these studies have suggested that the largest complex deviates by the maximum from its free-state properties, and a radical change in the reactivity of the complex is observed.
Planar palladium-Schiff base complexes are synthesized, maintaining the order of their molecular dimensions as PdL1 < PdL2 < PdL3 < PdL4 < PdL5 in free state, as well as encapsulated in zeolite Y, where L1: N,N'-bis(salicylidene)ethylenediamine and L2, L3, L4, and L5 are derivatives of L1. All encapsulated complexes have shown better catalytic activity for the sulfoxidation of methyl phenyl sulfide in comparison to their homogeneous counter parts. These hybrid systems are characterized with the help of different characterization techniques such as X-ray diffraction analysis, scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared, and UV-visible spectroscopy; all of these studies have suggested that the largest complex deviates by the maximum from its free-state properties, and a radical change in the reactivity of the complex is observed.
The selective oxidation
of thioethers is a significant reaction
in organic synthesis[1] because the product
sulfoxides are the important intermediate of various biological advances
in natural compounds.[2] These products also
have versatile applications in agrochemical,[3] pharmaceutical,[4] and polymer[5] industries and also can be used as ligands in
asymmetric catalysis,[6] oxo-transfer reagents,
and solvents.[4] They often play an important
role as therapeutic agents such as antiulcer,[7] antibacterial, antifungal, antiatherosclerotic,[8] anthelmintic,[9] antihypertensive,[10] and vasodilators.[11] As a result, there are substantial amounts of work done to develop
varieties of competent catalysts for the sulfoxidation process.[12] Most of the conventional synthesis routes for
the sulfoxidation process are quite efficient, but they require the
use of lots of organic and inorganic oxidants and solvents which obviously
leads to the production of a large amount of toxic waste.[13] Consequentially, it is essential to develop
a “greener approach” to synthesize the desired sulfoxidation
products. To adopt the environmentally benign methodology, there should
be some modification in the traditional procedures such as uses of
environment-friendly oxidants, solvent-free reaction medium, and eco-friendly
catalysts. Aqueous hydrogen peroxide is a most popular oxidant for
the sulfoxidation process because of its easy handling, greater availability,
and eco-friendly approach for the reaction due to the formation of
water as the only byproduct.[12h] Schiff
base transition-metal complexes have played a vital role in the progress
of catalytic processes with greater effectiveness in biological and
industrial applications.[14] However, the
homogeneous catalysts generally have some disadvantages in the catalytic
processes such as their instability, difficulty in the separation,
lack of reusability, and lack of greener approach.[15] The modern catalytic science favors those catalysts, which
can conquer the limitation of these homogeneous catalysts without
the loss of reactivity. In this direction, heterogenization of conventional
homogeneous catalysts is a suitable route to couple the reactivity
of the complex with the additional shape and size selectivity and
site isolation properties appended by the host materials. Encapsulation
of transition-metal complexes in different hosts such as microporous
and mesoporous materials is an alternative contemporary approach to
accomplish the synthesis of designer catalysts.[16] To synthesize designer catalysts, especially biomimetic
systems, zeolites are found as competent hosts for the encapsulation
of transition-metal complexes having a molecular dimension comparable
with that of the cavity of the host zeolites.[16c,17] Among those, employment of zeolite-encapsulated metal complexes
in the field of oxidation or epoxidation of alkanes, alkenes, alcohols,
and aromatic compounds has been extensively studied and reporte[16b,16d,18] but comparatively fewer reports
are available on the sulfoxidation process.[19] Maurya and co-workers have investigated different vanadium complexes
entrapped in zeolite Y and explored their catalytic activities for
the oxidation and sulfoxidation reactions.[19a−19d] The authors have stated that the encapsulated complexes in zeolite
Y have shown almost a similar reactivity for the sulfoxidation reaction
when compared with their free states. However, higher turnover frequencies
and reusability make the zeolite-encapsulated complexes more suitable
than their free-state analogues.In the present work, we have
synthesized some novel palladium–Schiff
base complexes in the encapsulated state in zeolite Y as well as in
the free state. The molecular dimensions of the complexes follow the
order as PdL1 < PdL2 < PdL3 < PdL4 < PdL5 (where L1: N,N′-bis(salicylidene)ethylenediamine,
L2: N,N′-bis(5-hydroxy-salicylidene)ethylenediamine,
L3: N,N′-bis(5-bromo-salicylidene)ethylenediamine,
L4: N,N′-bis(5-methyl-salicylidene)ethylenediamine,
and L5: N,N′-bis(5-methoxysalicylidene)ethylenediamine)
(given in Figure ).
Figure 1
Molecular
dimensions of palladium complexes.
Molecular
dimenn class="Chemical">sions of palladium complexes.
These systems are employed as catalysts for the sulfoxidation
of
methyl phenyl sulfide to study the steric and electronic effect of
different substituent groups which are attached on the complexes and
their consequences on the reactivity upon encapsulation. These systems
are characterized by powder X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron
spectroscopy (XPS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM)–energy-dispersive
X-ray spectrometry (EDXS), IR, and UV–visible (UV–vis)
spectroscopy. It is quite fascinating to observe that as compared
to their neat forms, encapsulated complexes have shown quite a modified
catalytic activity toward the conversion of methyl phenyl sulfide
to corresponding sulfoxide, and interestingly the steric environment
imposed by zeolitic topology has a significant control over the reactivity
of the encapsulated systems.
Results and Discussion
Elemental Analysis
The pure Na-zeolite Y has the unit
cell formula as Na58Al58Si136O388·yH2O, and the Si/Al ratio
is 2.34. The elemental analysis (EDXS spectra) of the encapsulated
complexes PdL1, PdL2, PdL3, PdL4, and PdL5 has suggested that the
Si/Al ratio remains nearly unaffected even after the encapsulation
for all cases (shown in Table ), indicating that no significant dealumination takes place
during the process of encapsulation. The wt % data of palladium metal
ions in the Pd-exchanged zeolite and encapsulated metal complexes
(given in Table )
highlight the reasonable observation that the concentration of palladiummetal ions in Pd-exchanged zeolite Y is greater than those of all
zeolite-encapsulated complexes. It is perhaps obvious because in the
process of encapsulation, slight leaching of metal ions may occur
which eventually leads to the reduction of the wt % of palladium in
encapsulated metal complexes.
Table 1
Concentration of
Palladium (wt %)
Content in the Different Samples
s. no.
samples
palladium (wt %)
Si/Al ratio
1
parent Y
2.90
2
Pd-Y
0.65
2.79
3
PdL1-Y
0.51
2.85
4
PdL2-Y
0.27
2.89
5
PdL3-Y
0.27
1.28
6
PdL4-Y
0.26
2.78
7
PdL5-Y
0.22
2.79
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Scanning
electron microscopic
studies of pure zeolite Y and the Soxhlet extracted hybrid PdL1-Y,
PdL2-Y, PdL3-Y, PdL4-Y, and PdL5-Y systems are carried out (the SEM
images are shown in Figure ). Zeolite boundaries are evidently observable in the SEM
images of zeolite-entrapped complexes and also comparable with that
of the pure zeolite Y which is a clear manifestation of the absence
of unreacted species or impurities on the surface of the host lattice
in the final host–guest products.[20]
Figure 2
SEM
images of (A) Pd-Y, (B) PdL1-Y, (C) PdL2-Y (before Soxhlet
extraction), (D) PdL2-Y (after Soxhlet extraction), (E) PdL3-Y, and
(F) PdL5-Y.
SEM
images of (A) Pd-Y, (B) n class="Gene">PdL1-Y, (C) PdL2-Y (before Soxhlet
extraction), (D) PdL2-Y (after Soxhlet extraction), (E) PdL3-Y, and
(F) PdL5-Y.
Powder XRD Analysis
Powder XRD patterns of the parent
zeolite Y, Pd-zeolite Y, and palladium–salen complexes encapsulated
in zeolite Y have been recorded (shown in Figure ). The complexes are synthesized within the
supercage of zeolite Y via the flexible ligand synthesis method, and
the unreacted ligands and complexes are completely removed by the
Soxhlet extraction technique; however, during the whole process, the
host framework is remained intact. The X-ray diffractograms of PdL1-Y,
PdL2-Y, PdL3-Y, PdL4-Y, and PdL5-Y samples and that of the pure zeolite
Y exhibit no shift in peak positions when compared. This observation
is indeed a significant one as it specifies the preservation of host
lattice integrity even after the encapsulation of a large complex
into it. However, XRD patterns of PdL1-Y, PdL2-Y, PdL3-Y, PdL4-Y,
and PdL5-Y evidently illustrate a substantial reversal in the intensity
of the peaks at 2θ = 10° and 12°, that is, I220 < I311 in
comparison to those in the XRD patterns of pure and Pd-exchanged zeolite
Y. This intensity reversal has already been empirically correlated
with the existence of the large complex inside the cavity of zeolite
Y.[21] Interestingly, a tethered complex
on the host surface does not show such type of intensity reversal
in XRD patterns. Moreover, the absence of new peaks in the XRD patterns
of palladium-encapsulated complexes is a signature of the formation
of the complexes in low concentrations inside the host lattice.
Figure 3
XRD pattern
of (a) pure zeolite Y, (b) Pd-exchanged zeolite Y,
(c) PdL1-Y, (d) PdL2-Y, (e) PdL3-Y, (f) PdL4-Y, and (g) PdL5-Y.
XRD pattern
of (a) pure zeolite Y, (b) n class="Chemical">Pd-exchanged zeolite Y,
(c) PdL1-Y, (d) PdL2-Y, (e) PdL3-Y, (f) PdL4-Y, and (g) PdL5-Y.
X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy
XPS is an important
technique which provides an indirect proof about the complex formation
in free as well as encapsulated states. All core constituent elements
of the complexes such as C (1s), N (1s), O (1s), and Pd (3d) of PdL1,
PdL1-Y, PdL2-Y, and PdL5-Y complexes are presented in the form of
survey spectra and high-resolution spectra (Figures and 5 and Figures
S1–S3 in the Supporting Information), and the corresponding binding energy data are tabulated in Table . The low concentration
of palladium in the encapsulated complexes makes the XPS signal for
metal weak which is actually in accordance with the concentration-dependent
EDXS, IR, and UV–vis spectroscopic studies. The observed data
evidently indicate the presence of C, N, O, Na, Si, Al, and Pd in
their respective chemical states, which is in accordance with the
literature.[16d,22] Intense and broad carbon (1s)
XPS spectra have been observed for palladium–salen complexes
in both the states, are further deconvoluted into two peaks, and confirmed
the presence of sp3 and sp2carbon atoms in
those complexes. Similarly, these complexes have shown the XPS signals
for nitrogen (1s), oxygen (1s), and validated for the (M–N),
(N=C) and (C–O), (M–O) elemental state, respectively.[22e] All encapsulated complexes show a very weak
signal for palladium metal because of its low loading level within
the host lattice. High-resolution XPS spectra of palladium in the
PdL1 complex have shown two signals at the binding energies of 335.96
and 340.96 eV which are attributed to 3d5/2 and 3d3/2, respectively. However, when the complex is encapsulated
in zeolite Y, 3d5/2 and 3d3/2 XPS signals are
broader and appear at the almost same binding energies (335.13 and
340.49 eV) and additionally a new signal originates at a relatively
higher binding energy of 347.87 eV. This additional XPS signal at
a higher binding energy has been observed for all encapsulated complexes
(PdL1-Y, PdL2-Y, and PdL5-Y) but not for the free-state complex (PdL1).
The higher shift in binding energy is definitely a consequence of
the removal of electron density from the metal center.[16d,22f] In this context, it could have relevant significance as the geometry
which the metal complex adopts under encapsulation might play the
major role in the depletion of electron density from the metal center.
Furthermore, XPS signals of Na (1s), Si (2p), and Al (2p) elements
are also observed at their expected positions in the XPS spectra of
all encapsulated complexes.
Figure 4
High-resolution XPS signals of (A) Pd (3d),
(B) C (1s), (C) N (1s),
and (D) O (1s) for PdL1 complex (black-colored graphs are experimental
data, and green- and blue-colored peaks are peak-fitted data).
Figure 5
High-resolution XPS signals of (A) Pd (3d),
(B) C (1s), (C) N (1s),
and (D) O (1s) for PdL1-Y complex (black-colored graphs are experimental
data, and green- and blue-colored peaks are peak-fitted data).
Table 2
Binding Energy Data
of the Free-State
and Encapsulated Complexes
s. no.
samples
Si (2p)
Al (2p)
C (1s)
N (1s)
O (1s)
Pd (3d5/2)
Pd (3d3/2)
1
PdL1
284.04, 282.82
399.11, 396.54
532.84
335.92
340.96
2
PdL1-Y
101.52
75.15
285.23, 283.65
398.88, 397.72
530.96
335.13
340.49, 347.87
3
PdL2-Y
101.55
72.94, 73.79
285.23, 283.65
398.81, 397.76
530.95
335.39
340.21, 346.72
4
PdL5-Y
102.72
73.16,
75.47
285.66, 283.64
399.93, 397.88
532.63, 530.69
337.11
343.34, 346.64
High-resolution XPS signn class="Chemical">als of (A) Pd (3d),
(B) C (1s), (C) N (1s),
and (D) O (1s) for PdL1 complex (black-colored graphs are experimental
data, and green- and blue-colored peaks are peak-fitted data).
High-resolution XPS signn class="Chemical">als of (A) Pd (3d),
(B) C (1s), (C) N (1s),
and (D) O (1s) for PdL1-Y complex (black-colored graphs are experimental
data, and green- and blue-colored peaks are peak-fitted data).
IR Spectroscopy
Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectral
data of ligands and palladium–Schiff base complexes in neat
as well as encapsulated states along with the pure zeolite Y have
been recorded (Figure and Table S1 in the Supporting Information). IR spectroscopic data have provided information about the retention
of integrity of the zeolite Y framework and also indicated the successful
complex formation within the supercage of zeolite Y. The four major
zeolitic IR bands are observed in the region of 450–1200 cm–1, and two additional peaks appear at 1643 and 3500
cm–1. The IR bands at 560, 717, 786, and 1018 cm–1 are attributed to (Si/Al–O)4 bending
mode, double ring, symmetric stretching, and asymmetric stretching
vibrations, respectively,[23] whereas IR
bands at 3500 and 1643 cm–1 are assigned to surface
hydroxylic group and lattice water molecules, respectively.[20a] All of these bands mostly remain unaffected
for all of the encapsulated systems (PdL1-Y, PdL2-Y, PdL3-Y, PdL4-Y,
and PdL5-Y) because the host framework does not experience any structural
modifications during the process of encapsulation. However, the salen
ligands and corresponding complexes are primarily identified by the
IR studies as C=N stretching, C=C stretching, and C–O
stretching vibrations of the salen ligands appear at the expected
positions. Upon complexation, these FTIR bands show an essentially
identical vibration with shifts to lower energies as an outcome of
the coordination with the metal ion. IR peaks of the encapsulated
complexes are mostly difficult to identify because of the appearance
of the strong zeolitic bands in the 450–3500 cm–1 region. Advantageously, some characteristic IR peaks of relatively
low intensities are observed in the range of 1600–1200 cm–1 which is mainly due to the guest complex and are
suitable to study because zeolitic IR bands are silent particularly
in this region. These bands in encapsulated complexes have appeared
with little shifts with respect to that of the nearly planar free-state
complex. These shifts could be attributed to the altered geometry
the complex adopts to accommodate itself in the rigid host supercage
under encapsulation. Furthermore, a shift in C–H deformation
bands has already been identified as an indication of the encapsulation
of the complex inside the zeolite Y.[24]
Figure 6
FTIR spectra
of encapsulated palladium–salen complexes in
zeolite Y: (a) pure zeolite Y, (b) PdL1-Y, (c) PdL2-Y, (d) PdL3-Y,
(e) PdL4-Y, and (f) PdL5-Y.
FTIR spectra
of encapsulated palladium–n class="Chemical">salen complexes in
zeolite Y: (a) pure zeolite Y, (b) PdL1-Y, (c) PdL2-Y, (d) PdL3-Y,
(e) PdL4-Y, and (f) PdL5-Y.
Solid-State UV–Vis Spectroscopy
Electronic spectra
of the ligand and corresponding complex in solution (Figure S4 in
the Supporting Information) or solid states
have been studied for the justification of complex formation. In addition
to that, comparative optical spectra of palladium–Schiff base
complexes in both states have been studied thoroughly to understand
the nature of the geometry they adopt under encapsulation (given in Figure and Table ). Electronic transitions of
the Schiff base ligands appearing in the range of 210–240 nm
are assigned to the π–π* transition and in the
range of 240–300 nm are assigned to the n−π* transition.
However, in the free-state transition-metal complexes, these transitions
are shifted relatively toward a lower energy; π–π*
transition has been observed in the range of 210–240 nm, and
n−π* transition has been observed in the range of 240–300
nm. The most evident confirmation of free-state complex formation
is the appearance of charge-transfer (CT) and d–d transitions
bands, which are clearly observed in the solid-state electronic spectra
in the range of 335–450 nm for different palladium–Schiff
base complexes. However, the appearance of d–d bands in square
planar palladium complexes is indistinguishable in comparison with
those of nickel–salen complexes. In palladium–salen
complexes, these bands appear in the range of 335–450 nm, whereas
in nickel complexes, these are identified in the 510–570 nm
region.[25] According to the ligand field
theory, for 4d series elements, d orbital splitting is much higher
as compared to that of the corresponding 3d series elements and hence
d–d bands in palladium–salen complexes have shifted
toward the high-energy region and merged with CT bands. After encapsulation,
palladium–salen complexes have shown a comparable pattern;
however, the CT and d–d bands which are instigated from the
metal center are primarily affected, that is, intensified[26] and blue-shifted on encapsulation.[24b] Such an observation eventually signifies the
deviation of the free-state geometry of the complexes when encapsulated,
especially around the metal center. Interestingly, PdL2-Y, PdL3-Y,
PdL4-Y, and PdL5-Y complexes have shown a blue shift in greater extent
compared to that observed for PdL1-Y because these complexes have
larger molecular dimensions and might experience more space constraint
imposed by the topology of the supercage which in turn causes more
distortion in the geometry of these complexes.
Figure 7
(A) UV–vis spectra
of (a) PdL1 and (b) PdL1-Y; (B) UV–vis
spectra of (a) PdL2 and (b) PdL2-Y; (C) UV–vis spectra of (a)
PdL3 and (b) PdL3-Y; (D) UV–vis spectra of (a) PdL4 and (b)
PdL4-Y; and (E) UV–vis spectra of (a) PdL5 and (b) PdL5-Y.
Table 3
Solid-State UV–Vis
Data of
Palladium–Schiff Base Complexes in Both States
s. no.
samples
π–π* transitions
n−π* transitions
CT/d–d transitions
1
PdL1
224
255
380–415
2
PdL1-Y
222
262
350–370
3
PdL2
231
261, 296
424–447
4
PdL2-Y
225
255
364, 479
5
PdL3
235
261
404–433
6
PdL3-Y
220
247
323–364, 465
7
PdL4
231
288
372–415
8
PdL4-Y
217
278
335–357
9
PdL5
235
288, 366
435–445
10
PdL5-Y
224
259, 299
346–366, 470
(A) UV–vis spectra
of (a) PdL1 and (b) n class="Gene">PdL1-Y; (B) UV–vis
spectra of (a) PdL2 and (b) PdL2-Y; (C) UV–vis spectra of (a)
PdL3 and (b) PdL3-Y; (D) UV–vis spectra of (a) PdL4 and (b)
PdL4-Y; and (E) UV–vis spectra of (a) PdL5 and (b) PdL5-Y.
Catalytic Study
Transition-metal
complexes are efficient
catalysts for sulfoxidation reaction using aqueous hydrogen peroxide
as an oxidant.[27] However, among the zeolite-encapsulated
transition-metal complexes, palladium–Schiff base complexes
are comparatively less investigated catalysts for sulfoxidation. Therefore,
in the present report, free-state as well as encapsulated Pd complexes
have been employed as catalysts for sulfoxidation reaction in the
presence of H2O2; the objective is to, however,
investigate how encapsulation affect the catalytic activity of the
complex. For all cases, methyl phenyl sulfide is converted into corresponding
sulfoxide selectively (Scheme ), and it is quite interesting to note that the catalytic
activities of these encapsulated complexes in terms of percentage
conversion as well as turnover number (TON) are significantly higher
than those of their corresponding free state (catalytic data are given
in Table ).
Scheme 3
Schematic Representation
of the Sulfoxidation Reaction
Table 4
Oxidation of Methyl Phenyl Sulfide
after 4 h Reaction Time with H2O2 as an Oxidant
s. no.
samples
% conversion
TON
selectivity for sulfoxide
selectivity for sulfone
1
pure zeolite Y
7
82.1
17.9
2
PdL1
39
30
98.66
1.33
3
PdL1-Y
48
201
97.25
2.74
4
PdL2
30
25
99.51
0.49
5
PdL2-Y
60
477
98.95
1.04
6
PdL3
63
67
98.98
1.01
7
PdL3-Y
71
564
95.45
4.54
8
PdL4
36
30
98.31
1.68
9
PdL4-Y
76
623
92.01
7.98
10
PdL5
26
23
98.18
1.81
11
PdL5-Y
86
835
92.23
7.76
Surface
impurities in the form of ligands and surface complexes
are minimized by extensive Soxhlet extraction using different solvents,
and the uncoordinated palladium ions are removed by further ion-exchange
reaction with sodium ions. The exercise of removal of impurities is
truly significant so as to comprehend better the origin of modified
catalysis with respect to the parent zeolite Y as it has been observed
that the parent zeolite Y (Na-zeolite Y) shows fairly less % conversion
as well as selectivity (shown in Table ). Though another direction of research could be with
the change in Si/Al ratio as it definitely affects the catalytic activity
of the encapsulated complexes,[28] the present
work highlights on the catalysis of hybrid host–guest systems
with the Si/Al ratio of the host kept constant by taking the same
lot of parent zeolite Y for the synthesis of all encapsulated complexes.The reactivity order of free-state complexes follows the order
as PdL3 > PdL1 ≈ PdL4 > PdL2 > PdL5, whereas after
encapsulation,
the order of reactivity is just in accordance with the molecular dimension
of the complexes and it is PdL5 > PdL4 > PdL3 > PdL2 >
PdL1. The proposed
mechanism for this catalytic reaction includes the nucleophilic attack
of H2O2 on the electropositive metal center.
As a result, in the transition state, electron-rich nucleophile is
bonded through the axial position to the metal complex. Plausible
mechanism for the oxidation of sulfides to the corresponding sulfoxides
catalyzed by the PdL complexes entrapped in zeolite Y using H2O2 as an oxidant is given in Scheme , and it is obvious that the electropositive
character of the metal drives the first step of the reaction.[29]
Scheme 1
Possible Mechanism for the Oxidation of
Sulfides (Adapted from Ref (30))
Bhadbhade and Srinivas
have already reported that an electron-withdrawing
group (Cl–) makes the copper–salen complex
distorted from its square planar geometry,[30] whereas an electron-donating group (−OCH3) on
the same position tries to maintain the planarity of the complex,
especially around the metal. Distortion around the metal atom by any
means makes the complex more susceptible to nucleophilic attack by
removing electron density from the metal center; on the contrary,
the metal center in planar effectively conjugated systems becomes
electron-rich and less efficient for the nucleophilic attacks. We
also have observed a similar effect for the nickel–salen complexes
encapsulated in zeolite with different molecular dimensions in series.[25]Currently, while exploring the catalytic
activity of the Pd complexes
in their free states, PdL3 having electron-withdrawing (−Br)
groups is identified as the most efficient catalyst which is just
in line with the previous arguments. Electron-withdrawing (−Br)
groups in PdL3 make the complex distorted even in the free state and
subsequently more reactive. Electron-releasing groups (−OH
and −OCH3 in PdL2 and PdL5, respectively) make those
palladium–salen complexes less reactive. PdL1 and even PdL4
complexes showing nearly the same TON have exhibited intermediate
reactivity, as they do not have a noteworthy push–pull effect
of substituents. As expected, the PdL5 complex has shown most exciting
modified enhancement in reactivity on encapsulation, as the complex
is most distorted to be fitted into the supercage because of its largest
molecular dimensions. The modified reactivity of the encapsulated
complexes is indeed a consequence of the geometry they adopt under
encapsulation in zeolite Y. It is quite evident and well-supported
by the optical spectroscopic and XPS studies and even theoretical
studies[25] that the rigid spherical walls
of the zeolite supercage impose significant space constraint which
in turn leads the complexes to suffer from noteworthy structural distortion.
The observed relative shifts toward higher values of binding energy
in XPS signals for the zeolite-encapsulated complexes indicate the
enhancement of the electropositive character of the metal center after
encapsulation. Distortion around the metal atom by any means makes
the complex more susceptible to nucleophilic attack by removing electron
density from the metal center; on the contrary, the metal center in
planar effectively conjugated systems becomes electron-rich and less
efficient for the nucleophilic attacks.The reusability of PdL5-Y
is evaluated for the same sulfoxidation
reaction (shown in Figure ); the catalyst could be effectively used for up to four cycles
without much loss in catalytic activity. In conclusion, it can be
stated that the reactivity of free-state complexes is mainly governed
by the electronic factor, whereas after encapsulation, the catalytic
activity order of the complexes is in accordance with the molecular
dimensions or the extent of distortion.
Figure 8
Recyclability of the
PdL5-Y catalyst for sulfoxidation reaction.
Recyclability of the
PdL5-Y catn class="Chemical">alyst for sulfoxidation reaction.
Conclusions
Zeolite-encapsulated complexes are indeed
better heterogeneous
catalysts with enhanced adapted reactivity for the oxidation process,
for example, sulfoxidation reaction. The comparative studies of palladium–Schiff
base complexes in free as well as encapsulated states provide clear
insights about the modified reactivity for the catalytic oxidation
processes of such systems after encapsulation. The observed blue shift
in d–d bands in the electronic spectra of encapsulated complexes
has demonstrated the effect of the space restrictions imposed by rigid
host frameworks on the coordination environment around the metal as
space restrictions compel the encapsulated guest complex to adopt
an unusual nonplanar geometry for better accommodation inside the
supercage to minimize the van der Waals interaction. High-resolution
XPS spectra of Pd (3d) of encapsulated complexes showing an additionalsignal toward a higher binding energy also confirms the change in
the electronic environment around the metal upon encapsulation. Comparative
catalytic studies of these hybrid systems provide a fascinating corelation
between modified structural aspects and adapted functionality of complexes,
and therefore it can be concluded as the degree of distortion in the
structure of the encapsulated complex is the key point for the remarkable
modified catalytic activity of the systems.
Experimental Section
Materials
and Preparation
Pure zeolite Y is purchased
from n class="Chemical">Sigma-Aldrich, India. Salicylaldehyde and its derivatives and
ethylenediamine are purchased from Alfa Aesar, and palladium acetate
is purchased from TCI chemicals, India. All solvents (ethanol, acetone,
methanol, and diethyl ether) are purchased from S.D. Fine, India.
Preparation of Ligands (L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5)[24b,31]
Two molar ratios of salicylaldehyde (or its derivatives)
dissolved inn class="Chemical">ethanol is refluxed for 10–15 min. One molar ratio
of ethylenediamine is added into it. The reaction mixture is refluxed
for 30 min at 60–70 °C and then ice-cooled for an hour.
Bright yellow solid flakes are obtained as a product, thoroughly washed
with ethanol, and then dried in air (given in Scheme ).
Scheme 2
(a) Synthesis of Palladium–Salen
Complexes, (b) Palladium-Exchanged
Zeolite Y, and (c) Zeolite-Encapsulated Palladium–Salen Complexes
via the Flexible Ligand Synthesis Method
Preparation of Complexes[32]
Ligands (L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5 in the respective reactions) taken
in ethanol are refluxed, and then aqueous solution of equimolar ratio
of palladium acetate is added dropwise into them. The reaction mass
is further refluxed for 30 min. For the synthesis of these Schiff
base complexes, an inert environment is used. The final greenish-yellow
colored product is recovered, washed with ethanol and diethyl ether,
and then dried at room temperature (Scheme ).
Preparation of Palladium-Exchanged Zeolite
Y
Pure Na-zeolite
Y (10 g) (n class="Chemical">Na58Al58Si136O388·yH2O) is allowed to disperse in
0.01 M palladium salt [Pd(CH3COO)2 = 0.224 g]
in 100 mL of water to acquire the required loading level of palladium
ions and stirred at room temperature for 24 h. The slurry is filtered,
washed repeatedly with water, and then desiccated for 12 h at 150
°C (Scheme ).
Synthesis of Encapsulated Pd(II)–Schiff Base Complexes
in Zeolite Y[24b,31]
Schiff base ligands
are flexible in nature; thus, one of the methods of encapsulation
of metal complexes inside the supercage of zeolite Y could be possible
via the “flexible ligand” approach (Scheme ). The palladium-exchanged
zeolite and excess amount of the ligand (L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5 in
each respective reaction) are allowed to react at 200–250 °C
for 24 h under constant stirring to synthesize the complex inside
the supercage of zeolite Y. The reaction mass is then recovered and
further subjected to the Soxhlet extraction with the different solvents
such as acetone, methanol, and diethyl ether in a sequence. The product
is dried in a muffle furnace for 10–12 h at 150 °C. The
recovered material is further reacted with 0.01 M NaCl solution for
12 h to remove the unreacted metal ions, followed by filtration and
washing until the filtrate is negative for the chloride ion test.
Sulfoxidation of Methyl Phenyl Sulfide
Aqueous 30%
H2O2 (0.57 g, 5 mmol), methyl phenyl sulfide
(0.62 g, 5 mmol), and the catalyst (0.015 g) are mixed in a minimum
amount of solvent (3 mL of CH3CN), and the reaction mixture
is stirred at 60 °C temperature for 4 h. The progress of the
reaction is monitored by gas chromatography (GC) at different time
intervals, and the products are identified and quantified (by using
an internal standard method) with the help of GC (Scheme ). The calibration curve of thioanisole is provided in the Supporting Information (Figure S5). To attain
the maximum efficiency, reaction conditions are optimized by varying
the different reaction parameters such as temperature, time duration
of reaction, and amount of catalysts, considering the PdL1-Y complex
as the representative catalyst (Figure S6 is given in the Supporting Information).