Bromocresol purple is an acid-base indicator with a 90% content of dye. It is colored yellow at pH = 2–3, greenish-yellow at pH = 4–5, and blue-purple at pH = 6–7, and it changes to violet at pH ≥ 8. The UV-Vis spectrum of (1.85 ⋅ 10− 5 M) bromocresol purple in aqueous ethanol at various pH values was recorded. Sample of this spectrum at different pH values within the pH range (2–12) in aqueous ethanol mixtures are shown in Fig. 2. The spectrum for solutions of pH ≥ 6 is represented by three absorption bands focused at λmax = 305 nm is attributed to π-π* transition of the benzenoid system present in their structure6,7; at λmax = 380 nm is assigned to n-π* transition of OH group 7 and at λmax = 590nm (n-π* is assigned to CT nature due to the conjugation between the aromatic rings systems via the C atom link)6. Therefore, on increasing the medium's pH, the latter band's optical density (λmax = 590 nm) gradually grows due to the formation of BCP− 2, Fig. 3 III. The acidic solutions (pH ≤ 5) showed a band centered at 430 nm; this band disappeared with increasing the pH of the medium as a result formation of HBCP− in accordance with results in literature19, Fig. 3 II. The first band centered at λmax = 305 nm is shifted to a higher wavelength with decreasing the pH of the medium. Therefore, the change in color from violet to yellow of the compound with decreasing pH is attributed to the delocalization of the π system.20 The presence of fine isosbestic points at around 315 and 490 nm indicated the presence of acid-base equilibrium, with as possible different structures 21, Fig. 3. The sample of distribution diagrams for bromocresol purple species in various binary mixtures of water with ethanol are shown in Fig. 4. The variation of the species is due to the acid dissociation shifting as pH changes.7
The calculated values of acidity constants (logKa) for bromocresol purple in various binary mixtures of water with ethanol are listed in Table 1. Calculations at λmax = 590 nm using the two mentioned spectrophotometric approaches reveal two pKas. The logKa1 value, Fig. 3II, is assigned to the ionization of the sulphonic group7 from the neutral kind of H2BCP (Fig. 3I) because the sulphonic group is completely dissociated.22 The dissociation phenolic hydrogen group from the indicator form, Fig. 3 III, logKa2 in general, this pKa has a value around ten.23 In this work, the obtained acidity constants in pure water agreed with those reported previously, Table 1. The first pka1 is 5.47 in the pH range 2–8; this pKa is similar to the reported in literature24 while is different from the value reported by Barbosa ,25 in which a small difference is attributed to the different experimental approach used to estimate the pKa values. In contrast, the second pKa2 in pure water is above ten due to the inductive effect for substituents besides other factors affecting it. Moreover, these variations attributed to the various experimental settings, including intensity of heat, dye amount, pH extent, ionic strength, techniques of analysis, analyzed wavelength extent, and the BCP self-association ability in the water, are affected by the values of acidity constants 24–26.
Effect of solvent parameters on acidity constants of bromocresol purple
To clarify the dissimilarity of the values of acidity constant for a molecule own to the ethanol ratio in the mixtures using the relative permittivity of the solutions as the only factor is very difficult. Generally, the standard Gibbs free energy of dissociation equilibrium includes two parts: an electrostatic part, which can be evaluated by the born equation and a non-electrostatic part which involves specific interaction between solute and solvent. 30 In case, the electrostatic effects predominate on non-electrostatic effect, so the graph of pKa’s against the reciprocal of relative permittivity of the medium, ε, gives a linear correlation assigned to the born model (Eq. 1),
Where r is the ionic radius and n is the square summation of the charges; logKa1 and logKa2, the linear relationship was obtained with reciprocal of the relative permittivity of ethanol blends (with correlation coefficient 0.94 and 0.93 respectively), where the values of relative permittivity are obtained from31, Fig. 5. The slope of plots is related to the term n in Eq. 1. For first and second acid-base equilibria, n is -5 and − 10, respectively. A negative sign of n indicates that species on the left-hand side of reactions are more polar than those on the other side.30 Therefore, this result indicates that BCP dissociation was dependent on the electrostatic interactions and strongly depended on the specific solute-solvent and solvent-solvent 29,30. The ε can show the power of interaction between species in a solution.
To estimate the influence of solute-solvent interaction on the acidity constants. The Kamlet, Abboud, and Taft (KAT) were used32 (Eq. 2) to describe the solvent effect and solute-solvent interaction based on the linear solvation energy relationship. This equation includes electrostatic and non-electrostatic interactions separately. The partition of non-electrostatic interaction into solvent acidity interactions (HBA solute-HBD solvent) and solvent basicity interactions (HBD solute-HBA solvent). In contrast, all of these parameters reflect each intermolecular force that occurs between solute and solvent species because it measures the solvent polarity rather than the relative permittivity or other uni-parameter. Universal, this strategy has been vastly used in the relationship analysis of all kinds of solvent-dependent processes15. Multi-parametric strategy (Eq. 2) is used with the solvatochromic solvent parameters, α, β and π∗, which are reported previously31,33−36.
Where logKa represents the regression value, the Kamlet-Taft solvent parameters (π*, α, β) determine the dipolarity/polarizability, the acidity strength, and the basicity strength of the solvent. The regression coefficients a, b, and s are the parameters properties of the solute. Their values and sign define the impact of solute-solvent interactions on the acidity constants of bromocresol purple.
To explain the acidity constants magnitudes by the KAT strategy, the acidity constants were analyzed with the solvent terms using single, dual, and multiple regression analysis using the IBM-SPSS program.
The technique that is used in the regression analysis involves accurate statistical treatment to pick up which term in Eq. 2 is the best fit for aqueous ethanol mixtures; hence, a stepwise technique and least-squares analysis are applied to pick out the significant solvent characteristic to be impacted in the strategy and to extract the last formula for the acidity constants. In universal, the KAT model, Eq. 2, is minimized to single, dual, and multi-parameters for relation analysis of logKa in different ethanol blends. The SPSS program can create the magnitudes of logKa0, a, b, s, and some statistical terms involving the r2 regression factor, f-test (f), the residual sum of squares (RSS), the standard deviation of any term and the overall standard error (OSE) of logKa. For each studied solution in this work, the KAT parameters for the binary mixtures used were toked from Marcus et al.37 and are reported in Table 2.
Table 1
Dissociation constants of bromocresol purple in numerous binary Solutions of water and ethanol at ∼25°C, ionic strength 0.5M KCl.
%EtOH | Method1 | Method2 | Average | Slope | R | Ref. |
logka1 | logka2 | logka1 | logka2 | logka1 | logka2 | logka1 | logka2 | logka1 | logka2 | |
0.00 | 5.45 | 10.70 | 5.49 | 10.97 | 5.47 ± 0.03 | 10.84 ± 0.15 | 0.70 | 0.88 | 0.962 | 0.999 | This work |
30 | 5.50 | 11.20 | 5.49 | 10.93 | 5.49 ± 0.01 | 11.06 ± 0.21 | 0.99 | 0.32 | 0.998 | 0.458 |
40 | 5.50 | 11.25 | 5.49 | 10.90 | 5.50 ± 0.01 | 11.08 ± 0.25 | 0.99 | 0.83 | 0.977 | 0.834 |
50 | 5.55 | 11.45 | 5.50 | 10.80 | 5.52 ± 0.04 | 11.13 ± 0.46 | 0.99 | 0.84 | 0.995 | 0.781 |
60 | 5.60 | 11.50 | 5.53 | 11.02 | 5.57 ± 0.05 | 11.26 ± 0.34 | 1.07 | 0.59 | 0.999 | 0.947 |
70 | 5.65 | 11.55 | 5.58 | 11.52 | 5.62 ± 0.05 | 11.54 ± 0.02 | 1.02 | 1.98 | 0.998 | 0.999 |
0.00 | | | | | 5.40 | | | | | | 24 |
0.00 | | | | | 6.4a | 11.64b | | | | | 25 |
Where the slope and correlation coefficient(R) from method 2, a: H2O, b: isopropyl, Ref.: reference. |
Although the solvent polarity is an essential factor in the change of logKa magnitudes in various aqueous ethanol blends, the results with any single-parameter correlations of logKa1 and logKa2 magnitudes individually with π*, α, and β did not give appropriate results in all cases with lower of F-static. However, the correlation analyses of logKa1 and logKa2 magnitudes with multi-term equations become more pronounced with minimum overall standard deviation) corresponding to the single- or dual-term strategies. The expressions of the KAT model for each property are obtained and given as multi-term as follows; the standard deviation magnitudes for each term are shown inside the bracket using the SPSS program, see Table 2. The parameters of α, β and π* in Table 2 are different the positive value of β term in the correlation analysis of the multi-term of the KAT equation in the case of logka1 ( β > α>π*) and has a much more pronounced for system and the polarity term are significantly lower than the hydrogen ability. So, logka1 values growth with the rise in hydrogen bond basicity term. Correlation analysis of (the negative s and negative a) coefficients indicate that the rise in the polarity and the acidity terms of the ethanol blends causes a decrease in the constant acidity values.
Table 2
Solvent parameters and KAT regression coefficients for logKa’s values of bromocresol purple in various water-ethanol blends.
% EtOH | Solvent Parameters | Coefficients | logKa1 | logKa2 |
α | β | π∗ | ε | constant | 5.72 (0.59) | 18.73 (1.48) |
0 | 1.17 | 0.47 | 1.14 | 78.90 | a | -1.81(0.39) | -12.28(0.99) |
30 | 0.96 | 0.66 | 0.99 | 66.00 | b | 2.75 (0.52) | 7.37 (1.30) |
40 | 0.96 | 0.65 | 0.88 | 59.60 | s | -0.30(0.03) | -0.746(0.07) |
50 | 0.96 | 0.65 | 0.79 | 55.00 | R | 0.999 | 0.999 |
60 | 0.96 | 0.66 | 0.73 | 47.50 | F | 148.543 | 316.840 |
70 | 0.94 | 0.66 | 0.68 | 41.10 | OSD | 0.0051 | 0.0128 |
| | | | | RSS | 2.6 ⋅10− 5 | 1.7⋅ 10− 4 |
| | | | | P | 0.060 | 0041 |
Where ε: relative permittivity, β: basicity, α: acidity, π: dipolarity /polarizability, ( a, b and s): regression coefficients, R: correlation factor, F: f-test; P: the probability of variation, OSD: overall standard deviation, RSS: the residual sum of squares |
On scrutiny of the results in Table 2, the correlation analysis of logKa2 shows that the acidity parameter has a more impact with a negative value; this suggests that the rise in hydrogen donating ability of the medium causes a decrease in acidity constant. The observed solvent effects on different regions may relate to the structural change of binary mixtures due to solvent-solvent interactions and the possibility of preferential solvation29. Moreover, the negative value of α indicates that a decrease in the HBD ability of the mixed solvents leads to increased solubility of the formed anions. Consequently, the acidity constants grew when this term lowered.
In other words, negative values for this parameter are observed in most cases due to donor-acceptor interactions with a solvent, causing a displacement in the acid-base equilibrium towards phenolate anions due to the energy stabilization (Gibbs energy decrease).38
From Table 2, the negative sign of the s coefficient is attributed to a decrease in the polarity of the mixed solvents, causing increases in the logKa1 and logKa2 values. Thus, the rise in the polarity leads to increases in the solubility of the particles, and thus dissociation equilibrium becomes more likely. Finally, the negative sign of the s term, which is consistent with the idea of the influence of the dielectric constant on the acidity constant in accordance with the Born model, is often in good agreement with the results reported by Shorina and co-worker.39