Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Interaction of Catechol and Gallic Acid with Titanium Dioxide in Aqueous Suspensions. 1. Equilibrium Studies

Open access
Araujo, Paula Z., Morando, Pedro J., Blesa, Miguel A.·2005·Langmuir

Abstract

The adsorption isotherms of catechol (1,2-dihydroxybenzene) and gallic acid (3,4,5-trihydroxybenzoic acid) onto titanium dioxide (Degussa P-25) were measured at various pH values and room temperature using attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared (FTIR-ATR) data, processed by singular value decomposition. The affinity is largely pH independent, although the deprotonatation of the carboxylic group in gallic acid might produce a slight increase in the affinity. Catechol was shown to form two complexes, with Langmuir stability constants log K of 4.66 (strong mode) and 3.65 (weak mode). Both complexes have the same spectral signature, and mononuclear and binuclear chelate structures are proposed for them. Gallic acid chemisorbs by complexation through two -OH groups and forms one complex only, log K = 4.70. The third -OH and the pendant carboxylate do not influence much the stability of the surface complex. Comparison with literature data demonstrates that the affinity of 4-chlorocatechol is also similar, whereas 2,3-dihidroxynaphthalene and 4-nitrocatechol form more stable complexes, probably because of the solvation contribution to the overall Gibbs adsorption energy. All quoted constants refer to the surface complexation equilibria written as follows: ([triple bond]Ti-OH)2 + H2L = ([triple bond]Ti)2-L + 2H2O, i.e., as electroneutral processes. The FTIR-ATR spectra of the surface complexes are also discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/la0476985

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Araujo, P. Z., Morando, P. J., & Blesa, M. A.
Venue
Langmuir
Published
2005-03-08
Volume
21
Issue
8
Pages
3470-3474
ISSN
  • 0743-7463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5827
OpenAlex
W1997836316
Cited by
158
References
0
FWCI
6.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.