How Solvent Mediates the Catalytic Fate of 2-Methoxyphenol in Hydrodeoxygenation Catalysis?

Kinetic and isotopic assessments combined with theoretical calculations shed light on the mechanistic differences in terms of the number of hydrogen addition steps and the electronic charges of reactive hydrogen in the catalytic sequence leading to the Ar–OCH3 scission of 2-methoxyphenol occurring at various interfaces of vapor–Ru, cyclohexane–Ru, and water–Ru. At vapor–Ru and cyclohexane–Ru interfaces, the initial hydrogen adatom (H*) additions on the phenyl ring disrupt its aromaticity, as a step required to occur before kinetically relevant Ar–OCH3 scission on an ensemble of Ru sites. The number of H* addition events prerequisite to the formation of the kinetically relevant Ar–OCH3 scission transition state, however, is larger at the cyclohexane–Ru interface than those at the vapor–Ru and water–Ru interfaces. The preferential solvation of 2-methoxyphenol derived reaction precursors and H* weakens their adsorption on Ru sites, which leads to a decrease in the activation barrier for the third H* addition step and in turn a larger number of H* additions. At the water–Ru interface, water as a polar protic solvent promotes the Ar–OCH3 scission by enabling a mechanistically distinct catalytic route─an adjacent water molecule from the solvent layer assists with the intramolecular proton shuttling from the hydroxyl group (−OH) to the vicinal methoxy group (−OCH3) of 2-methoxyphenol, evolving a highly charged transition state that is further stabilized by the water solvent layer, thereby leading to Ar–OCH3 scission rate constants that are much higher than those at the vapor–Ru interface and, when comparing at the same H2 chemical potential, higher Ar–OCH3 scission turnovers. These distinct mechanistic details of the Ar–OCH3 scission at various reaction interfaces, inferred from experiment and theory, illustrate how a solvent either solvates reaction intermediates and transition states or directly participates in the formation of kinetically relevant transition states, leading to changes in the free energy landscape, thus rewriting the catalytic fates in hydrodeoxygenation reactions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACS Catalysis
Published
2025-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.4c04693
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Catalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.14

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Solvent Mediates the Catalytic Fate of 2-Methoxyphenol in Hydrodeoxygenation Catalysis?

Junnan Shangguan, Ya-Huei Cathy Chin, Weihua Ma, J. M. Bray et al.
3 citations
ACS Catalysis
Catalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
2.14
article

How Solvent Mediates the Catalytic Fate of 2-Methoxyphenol in Hydrodeoxygenation Catalysis?

Junnan Shangguan, Ya-Huei Cathy Chin, Weihua Ma, J. M. Bray, Haoyu Nie, Jean‐Sabin McEwen, Alyssa J. R. Hensley, Junfeng Guo, Zhishan Li
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Kinetic and isotopic assessments combined with theoretical calculations shed light on the mechanistic differences in terms of the number of hydrogen addition steps and the electronic charges of reactive hydrogen in the catalytic sequence leading to the Ar–OCH3 scission of 2-methoxyphenol occurring at various interfaces of vapor–Ru, cyclohexane–Ru, and water–Ru. At vapor–Ru and cyclohexane–Ru interfaces, the initial hydrogen adatom (H*) additions on the phenyl ring disrupt its aromaticity, as a step required to occur before kinetically relevant Ar–OCH3 scission on an ensemble of Ru sites. The number of H* addition events prerequisite to the formation of the kinetically relevant Ar–OCH3 scission transition state, however, is larger at the cyclohexane–Ru interface than those at the vapor–Ru and water–Ru interfaces. The preferential solvation of 2-methoxyphenol derived reaction precursors and H* weakens their adsorption on Ru sites, which leads to a decrease in the activation barrier for the third H* addition step and in turn a larger number of H* additions. At the water–Ru interface, water as a polar protic solvent promotes the Ar–OCH3 scission by enabling a mechanistically distinct catalytic route─an adjacent water molecule from the solvent layer assists with the intramolecular proton shuttling from the hydroxyl group (−OH) to the vicinal methoxy group (−OCH3) of 2-methoxyphenol, evolving a highly charged transition state that is further stabilized by the water solvent layer, thereby leading to Ar–OCH3 scission rate constants that are much higher than those at the vapor–Ru interface and, when comparing at the same H2 chemical potential, higher Ar–OCH3 scission turnovers. These distinct mechanistic details of the Ar–OCH3 scission at various reaction interfaces, inferred from experiment and theory, illustrate how a solvent either solvates reaction intermediates and transition states or directly participates in the formation of kinetically relevant transition states, leading to changes in the free energy landscape, thus rewriting the catalytic fates in hydrodeoxygenation reactions.

ACS CatalysisVol. 15(6)
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US), University of Toronto (CA), Nanjing University of Science and Technology (CN), Institute of Catalysis and Petrochemistry (RU), Washington State University (US)
DuPont, Ontario Centres of Excellence, Suncor Energy Incorporated, Imperial Oil Limited, Canada Foundation for Innovation, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Basic Energy Sciences
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Catalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
2.14
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.