化学
催化作用
转化(遗传学)
环境化学
活性氧
生化工程
环境科学
鉴定(生物学)
工程类
有机化学
生物化学
生态学
生物
基因
作者
Lingli Wang,Xu Lan,Wenya Peng,Zhaohui Wang
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124436
摘要
The identification of reactive radical species using quenching and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) tests has attracted extensive attention, but some mistakes or misinterpretations are often present in recent literature. This review aims to clarify the corresponding issues through surveying literature, including the uncertainty about the identity of radicals in the bulk solution or adsorbed on the catalyst surface in quenching tests, selection of proper scavengers, data explanation for incomplete inhibition, the inconsistent results between quenching and EPR tests (e.g., SO4•− is predominant in quenching test while the signal of •OH predominates in EPR test), and the incorrect identification of EPR signals (e.g., SO4•− is identified by indiscernible or incorrect signals). In addition, this review outlines the transformation of radicals for better tracing the origin of radicals. It is anticipated that this review can help in avoiding mistakes while investigating catalytic oxidative mechanism with quenching and EPR tests.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI