Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aqueous solution equilibria have been investigated for the systems caffeate (trans-3-(3,4-dihydroxy-phenyl)-propenoate)-manganese(II),-cobalt(II),-nickel(II) and -cadmium(II) by means of glass electrode potentiometry. The identities of the complex species formed and the corresponding formation constants have been determined with the aid of computer analysis. Conditions were: temperature, 25[ddot]C; ionic strength, 0.100 mol dm−3 with respect to chloride. Defining the ligand species, L2−, as the dianion, I, (one proton firmly bound to the catecholic moiety), the titration data can best be explained by postulating the following complexes: MnLH− −1, logβ11–1, = -4.88; MnLH2− −2, logpβ11–2 = -15.55; NiLH− −1, logβ11–1 = -3.62; NiLH2− −2, logβ11–2 = -13.45; Ni2LH+ −1, logβ21–1 = -1.56; CoLH− −1, logβ11–1, = -4.12; Co2LH+ −1, logβ21–1 = 1.75; CdLH− −1, logβ11–1, = -4.91; CdL2H4− −2, logβ12–2 = -12.29; CdL3H− −3, Iogβ13_3 = -19.50. In each case the MLH−1, complex constitutes the major species. By comparison with literature formation constants for related ligands, and considerations of the pH-ranges in which the MLH−1 complexes form, it is concluded that the metal coordinates to the catecholate site of the caffeate ion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cocks et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: