Next Article in Journal
Structure-Function and Industrial Relevance of Bacterial Aminopeptidase P
Previous Article in Journal
Reply to Inoue et al. Comment on “Weber et al. Mayenite-Based Electride C12A7e: A Reactivity and Stability Study. Catalysts 2021, 11, 334”
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Effect of Gold Nanoparticles on the Catalytic Activity of NiTiO3 for Hydrodeoxygenation of Guaiacol
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Pre-Coking Strategy Strengthening Stability Performance of Supported Nickel Catalysts in Chloronitrobenzene Hydrogenation

Catalysts 2021, 11(10), 1156; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal11101156
by Ping Wang 1, Shiyi Wang 1, Ronghe Lin 1, Xiaoling Mou 1,* and Yunjie Ding 1,2,3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Catalysts 2021, 11(10), 1156; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal11101156
Submission received: 1 September 2021 / Revised: 17 September 2021 / Accepted: 19 September 2021 / Published: 26 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue State-of-the-Art of Catalytical Technology in China)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors report a vapor-phase continuous-flow process for the chemoselective hydrogenation of 1,2-dichloro-4-nitrobenzene (DCNB) into the targeted product 3,4-di-chloroaniline (DCAni) over the support nickel catalysts at ambience pressure. 

The manuscript is very interesting and well organized. I would suggest some minor changes before accepting it for publishing:

Please change X-Ray diffraction into Powder X-Ray diffraction through all the text. XRD usually refers to the monocrystalline samples, which is not the case here. Which kind of holder was used for PXRD experiments? Please insert it into the experimental section.

TG analysis please add which kind of crucible was used for the analysis. Further could you corellate the experimental weight loss values with the theoretical one, especially for the first step that should correspond to the moisture? What was the final product after the TG anaylsis and how was it confirmed?

Figures 5 a and c: please insert the legend at the graphs since its hard to follow the curves. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper describes a pre-coking strategy for reducing the deactivation of Ni/Zirconia catalyst in chlornitrobenzene hydrogenation. While adequate studies have been carried out to support the authors' hypotheses, the one thing lacking from this paper is any kind of benchmarking. How effective is this catalyst, both before and after pre-coking, in comparison to others used in literature for a similar application? How do the TON/TOFs compare? How does pre-coking affect product selectivities? What are some of the other strategies used to regenerate similar catalysts after poisoning by halides (or prevent such poisoning in the first place)? How effective is this protocol in comparison to existing literature protocols?

I'd like to see these concerns addressed before the manuscript is accepted for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

accept as-is.

Back to TopTop