Q.Which is a stronger reducing agent Cr2+ or Fe2+ and why?
🔒You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.
🔒 Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →Concept understanding — Stability of Oxidation States
Stability of Oxidation States – From Intuition to Precision
Imagine you're holding a ball on a hill. If you place it exactly at the top, it's balanced — but the slightest push sends it rolling down. That's an unstable position. If you place it in a small dip on the hillside, it stays put even if nudged — that's stable. Oxidation states work the same way: some are like the hilltop (easily changed), others like the dip (hard to change).
The Core Intuition
An oxidation state is just a number we assign to an atom to track how many electrons it has gained or lost compared to its neutral state. But atoms don't "want" to stay in arbitrary oxidation states — they want to reach a configuration that minimises their energy.
Stability here means: how reluctant is that oxidation state to change under normal conditions? A stable oxidation state resists being oxidised further or reduced further. An unstable one readily changes into something else.
The Precise Statement
Stability of an oxidation state refers to the tendency of an element to maintain that particular oxidation state under given conditions (temperature, pH, presence of other reagents). A stable oxidation state is one that does not easily undergo redox reactions — it is neither easily oxidised nor easily reduced.
This depends on three key factors:
- Electronic configuration – Half-filled and fully-filled d or f subshells confer extra stability (e.g., Fe3+ with d5 is more stable than Fe2+ with d6 in some contexts).
- Inert pair effect – Heavier p-block elements (like Tl, Pb, Bi) show lower oxidation states (e.g., +1 for Tl) as more stable than higher ones (+3 for Tl), because the s-electrons become reluctant to participate.
- Disproportionation tendency – Some oxidation states are unstable because they spontaneously convert into two other states (e.g., Cu+ in aqueous solution gives Cu2+ and Cu).
Stability is relative — it depends on the environment. Mn2+ is stable in acidic solution but easily oxidised in alkaline medium. Always specify conditions when discussing stability.
Examples That Make It Concrete
Transition metals – Cr3+ (d3) and Mn2+ (d5) are exceptionally stable because half-filled/half-filled-like configurations have low energy. Cr2+ (d4) is easily oxidised to Cr3+ — it's unstable.
p-block elements – Pb2+ is stable, Pb4+ is a strong oxidising agent (unstable). Sn2+ is a reducing agent (easily oxidised to Sn4+), so Sn4+ is more stable for tin.
Common pattern – For most elements, the most common oxidation state is the most stable one under standard conditions. But "most common" isn't always "most stable" — e.g., Fe3+ is common but Fe2+ is more stable in acidic solution.
Do not confuse "stability" with "occurrence". Mn7+ (as MnO4−) is common in the lab but is a powerful oxidising agent — it is not stable in the sense of resisting change. It readily accepts electrons.
How to Think About It in Exams …
Why this formula?
Stability of Oxidation States: Why It Works
This concept explains why certain oxidation states of an element are more stable than others — and why some states are never observed at all.
The Core Idea: Energy Minimisation
An oxidation state is stable when the total energy of the system is at a minimum. This depends on three competing factors:
- Ionisation energy (energy needed to remove electrons)
- Lattice energy (for ionic compounds) or bond energy (for covalent compounds)
- Electronic configuration (half-filled / fully-filled subshells)
There is no single formula for stability — instead, we use trends and principles that act as "formulae" for prediction.
Key Principle 1: Inert Pair Effect (for p-block elements)
Why it holds:
For heavier elements (e.g., Tl, Pb, Bi), the 6s² electrons are held very tightly due to poor shielding and relativistic effects. They resist removal.
- Result: Lower oxidation state (e.g., +1 for Tl, +2 for Pb) becomes more stable than the higher state (+3, +4).
- Example: TlX3+ is a strong oxidising agent — it readily gains two electrons to become TlX+.
Derivation logic:
The energy cost to remove the 6s² electrons is greater than the energy gained by forming additional bonds or lattice. So the system stays in the lower state.
Key Principle 2: Half-Filled / Fully-Filled Subshell Stability
Why it holds:
A half-filled (d5, f7) or fully-filled (d10, f14) subshell has extra exchange energy and symmetry — making it unusually stable.
- Example: MnX2+ (d5) is more stable than MnX3+ (d4). FeX3+ (d5) is more stable than FeX2+ (d6).
Derivation logic:
The exchange energy (Hund's rule) is maximum for half-filled configurations. Removing an electron from a half-filled shell costs extra energy — so the half-filled state is favoured.
Key Principle 3: Lattice Energy / Hydration Energy Compensation
For transition metals, stability of a particular oxidation state in aqueous solution depends on:
ΔG∘=ΔHhydration∘−ΔHionisation∘
Why it holds:
- Higher oxidation states have higher ionisation energy (harder to remove electrons).
- But they also have higher hydration energy (smaller, more charged ions attract water more strongly).
- The balance determines which state is stable.
Example:
- CuX+ is unstable in water because its hydration energy is too low to compensate for the loss of the second electron.
- CuX2+ is stable in water.
Key Principle 4: Disproportionation
Some oxidation states are unstable and spontaneously convert to two other states:
2CuX+Cu+CuX2+
Why it holds: …
Concept: Stability of Oxidation States — the tendency of an ion to get oxidised depends on how stable its higher oxidation state is in the given medium.
Reasoning:
-
Cr2+ has the configuration 3d4. It readily loses one electron to become Cr3+ (3d3), which is a half-filled t2g level in an octahedral field — this is an exceptionally stable configuration.
-
Fe2+ has the configuration 3d6. It loses one electron to become Fe3+ (3d5), which is a half-filled d subshell — also stable, but the energy gain is smaller than for Cr2+→Cr3+.
-
The standard reduction potentials confirm this: …
The key idea is that the stability of the +3 oxidation state relative to the +2 state determines reducing strength. Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent than Fe2+ because oxidation takes it from d4 to d3 — and in an aqueous medium the d3 configuration (a half-filled t2g level) is especially stable — whereas the oxidation of Fe2+ is a d6→d5 change with a smaller stability gain.
Why this approach works
The question asks you to compare the reducing power of two transition metal ions. A reducing agent is a species that donates electrons and gets oxidized itself. So, the stronger the tendency of M2+ to lose an electron and become M3+, the stronger the reducing agent.
This tendency depends on the stability of the +3 oxidation state relative to the +2 state. In transition metals, stability is heavily influenced by electronic configuration — particularly the achievement of half-filled (d5) or fully-filled (d10) subshells, which are extra stable due to exchange energy and symmetry.
Let’s examine each ion.
-
Electronic configurations of the ions
- Chromium (Cr, atomic number 24): Cr2+: [Ar]3d4 Cr3+: [Ar]3d3
- Iron (Fe, atomic number 26): Fe2+: [Ar]3d6 Fe3+: [Ar]3d5
Notice that oxidation is a d4→d3 change for chromium but a d6→d5 change for iron. In an aqueous (octahedral) medium, d3 means a half-filled t2g level (t2g3) — an especially stable arrangement (see CFSE).
-
Which ion wants to lose an electron more?
-
For Cr2+ to become Cr3+, it loses one electron. The d4 configuration of Cr2+ (high-spin t2g3eg1) is not particularly stable. The resulting Cr3+ (d3) has a half-filled t2g set (t2g3), which in an aqueous medium is an especially stable arrangement — so the d4→d3 oxidation is strongly favoured. In fact, Cr2+ is so eager to oxidize that it can even reduce water to hydrogen gas in acidic conditions.
-
For Fe2+ to become Fe3+, it also loses one electron. But Fe2+ (d6) is reasonably stable — it has a paired electron in one t2g orbital, but the configuration is not as unstable as d4. More importantly, Fe3+ (d5) is extremely stable due to the half-filled subshell. So while Fe2+ can be oxidized, the d6→d5 stability gain in water is smaller than chromium's d4→d3 gain — NCERT's own answer notes that in a medium like water, d3 is more stable than d5 (see CFSE).
The critical point: Cr2+ is much more unstable than Fe2+, and its oxidation to Cr3+ is highly favourable. This makes Cr2+ a stronger reducing agent.
-
-
Standard reduction potentials confirm this
The standard reduction potentials for the M3+/M2+ couples are:
- Cr3++e−→Cr2+: E∘=−0.41 V …
Method: Standard Electrode Potential (E° Value) Comparison
This method uses the standard reduction potential (E∘) to determine reducing strength. A more negative E∘ means the species is more easily oxidised — hence a stronger reducing agent.
Steps
-
Write the relevant half-reactions for oxidation of each ion to its common stable state.
- For Cr2+:
Cr3++e−→Cr2+E∘=−0.41V
- For Fe2+:
Fe3++e−→Fe2+E∘=+0.77V
-
Interpret the sign:
- A more negative E∘ means the reverse reaction (oxidation) is more favourable.
- Cr2+ has E∘=−0.41V (negative), while Fe2+ has E∘=+0.77V (positive).
-
Compare reducing power:
- Cr2+ is more easily oxidised to Cr3+ than Fe2+ is to Fe3+.
- Therefore, Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent.
Why? — The Concept Behind
- Stability of oxidation states:
- Cr2+ has an unstable d4 configuration (high-spin in aqueous solution) and readily loses one electron to give Cr3+ (d3), whose half-filled t2g3 level is especially stable in aqueous solution. …
Here is a breakdown of the common mistakes students make on this specific question, along with the correct reasoning to avoid them.
The Core Concept (The "Why")
To compare reducing power, you must compare the tendency to get oxidized (lose electrons). A stronger reducing agent is one that is more easily oxidized.
For Cr2+ and Fe2+, the key is the stability of the +3 oxidation state in aqueous solution.
- Cr2+ is easily oxidized to Cr3+ because Cr3+ has a half-filled t2g configuration (d3), which is extra stable.
- Fe2+ is harder to oxidize to Fe3+ because Fe3+ has a half-filled d subshell (d5), but the difference in stability between Fe2+ (d6) and Fe3+ (d5) is not as dramatic as the jump from Cr2+ (d4) to Cr3+ (d3).
Result: Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent than Fe2+.
Common Mistake #1: Confusing "Reducing Agent" with "Oxidizing Agent"
- The Mistake: Students think a stronger reducing agent is one that gains electrons easily (like Fe3+). They might say "Fe2+ is a stronger reducing agent because it becomes Fe3+ which is stable."
- Why it's wrong: A reducing agent donates electrons (gets oxidized itself). You are comparing the reactant (Cr2+ vs Fe2+), not the product.
- How to Avoid:
- Memorize the definition: "Reducing agent → gets oxidized (loses e⁻)."
- Ask yourself: "Which of these two ions wants to lose an electron more?" The one that loses it more easily is the stronger reducing agent.
Common Mistake #2: Relying Only on the "Half-filled d⁵" Rule for Fe3+
- The Mistake: Students see that Fe3+ has a half-filled d5 configuration and immediately assume Fe2+ is a very strong reducing agent because it "wants" to become d5.
- Why it's wrong: While d5 is stable, the difference in stability between Fe2+ (d6) and Fe3+ (d5) is not as large as the difference between Cr2+ (d4) and Cr3+ (d3). The Cr2+ to Cr3+ jump involves moving from an unstable d4 to a stable d3 (half-filled t2g). The Fe2+ to Fe3+ jump involves moving from a stable d6 to a very stable d5.
- How to Avoid:
- Compare the starting configuration. Cr2+ (d4) is less stable than Fe2+ (d6). An unstable starting point makes it more eager to change.
- Use the standard reduction potential (E∘) as a numeric check. The more negative the E∘ for M3+/M2+, the stronger the reducing agent.
- E∘(Cr3+/Cr2+)=−0.41 V (negative → strong reducing agent)
- E∘(Fe3+/Fe2+)=+0.77 V (positive → weak reducing agent)
Common Mistake #3: Ignoring the Aqueous Medium
- The Mistake: Students discuss stability in terms of solid-state or gas-phase configurations, forgetting the question is about aqueous solution.
- Why it's wrong: Hydration energy and ligand field effects in water significantly alter the stability of oxidation states. For example, Cr2+ is rapidly oxidized by air in water, while Fe2+ is more stable in acidic solution.
- How to Avoid:
- Always assume aqueous medium unless stated otherwise for such comparisons.
- Mention hydration energy in your answer: Cr3+ has a high hydration energy due to its small size and high charge, which stabilizes it in water.
Common Mistake #4: Giving a Vague or Incomplete "Why"
- The Mistake: Writing only: "Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent because it has a d4 configuration."
- Why it's wrong: This is incomplete. You must explain why d4 makes it a strong reducing agent.
- How to Avoid: …
- KCET 2025Set D-41 markMCQQ.Which of the following statements are true about [NiCl4]2−?(a) The complex has tetrahedral geometry(b) Co-ordination number of Ni is 2 and oxidation state is +4(c) The complex is sp3 hybridised(d) It is a high spin complex(e) The complex is paramagnetic (A) a, c, d and e (B) a, b, d and e (C) b, c, d and e (D) a, b, c and d
›Reveal solutionSolution
Find the oxidation state (+2, so d8), note Cl⁻ is a weak-field ligand so no pairing occurs, giving a high-spin sp3 tetrahedral paramagnetic complex — every statement is true except (b), whose CN and oxidation state are both wrong.
Step 1 — Oxidation state and d-configuration of nickel
Let the oxidation state of Ni be x. Chloride carries −1 each, and the overall charge is −2:
x+4(−1)=−2⟹x=−2+4=+2
So the metal is NiX2+.
Nickel is Z=28: Ni=[Ar]3d84s2. Removing the two 4s electrons:
NiX2+=[Ar]3d8(a d8 ion)
Step 2 — Coordination number
Chloride is a unidentate ligand (one donor atom, Cl). With four of them:
Coordination number=4
Step 3 — This already settles statement (b)
(b) "Co-ordination number of Ni is 2 and oxidation state is +4"
Both halves are wrong — the CN is 4 (Step 2) and the oxidation state is +2 (Step 1). (b) is FALSE.
This is decisive: every option containing (b) — namely (B), (C) and (D) — is eliminated at once. Only (A) a, c, d and e remains. Let us verify that all four of those statements are indeed true.
Step 4 — Ligand field strength decides everything else
In the spectrochemical series, chloride sits near the weak-field end:
IX−<BrX−<Cl−<FX−<HX2O<NHX3<en<CNX−≈CO
ClX− is a weak-field ligand, so the splitting energy Δ it produces is small — smaller than the electron pairing energy P:
Δ<P
When Δ<P, it costs less energy for an electron to occupy a higher orbital than to pair up in a lower one. Therefore no pairing occurs — the 3d8 configuration is left untouched, with its two unpaired electrons intact.
Since the 3d orbitals are not vacated, no inner 3d orbital is available for hybridisation.
Step 5 — Hybridisation and geometry ⇒ statements (a) and (c)
With the 3d set unavailable, Ni²⁺ must use its outer orbitals: one 4s and three 4p.
4s+4px+4py+4pz⟶four sp3 hybrid orbitals
Four sp3 orbitals point to the corners of a tetrahedron (109.5∘).
- (a) "The complex has tetrahedral geometry" — TRUE ✓
- (c) "The complex is sp3 hybridised" — TRUE ✓ …
- COMEDK 2025Set 2025-A1 markMCQQ.Larger number of oxidation states are exhibited by the actinoids than those of lanthanoids. The reason is: (A) Lesser energy difference between 5 f and 6 d than between 4 f and 5 d orbitals (B) More energy difference between 5 f and 6 d than between 4 f and 5 d orbitals (C) 4 f orbitals are more diffused than 5 f orbitals (D) Highly reactive nature of the actinoids
›Reveal solutionSolution
The key idea is that actinoids show more oxidation states because their 5f and 6d orbitals are closer in energy than the 4f and 5d orbitals of lanthanoids, making it easier to involve f-electrons in bonding. The correct option is (A).
The question asks why actinoids exhibit a larger number of oxidation states than lanthanoids. This is a classic comparison in f-block chemistry, rooted in the electronic structure of the two series.
Concept and Intuition
Oxidation states arise when an atom loses electrons. For f-block elements, the electrons lost can come from both the f and d orbitals. The ease of removing f-electrons depends on how tightly they are held, which is related to the energy gap between the f and d orbitals. A smaller gap means f-electrons can be promoted to d orbitals more readily, allowing a wider range of oxidation states. Actinoids (5f series) have a smaller 5f–6d energy difference than lanthanoids (4f–5d), so they can access more oxidation states.
Let’s break it down step by step.
-
Understand the orbital energy trends
In lanthanoids, the 4f orbitals are deeply buried inside the atom, shielded by outer electrons. The 5d orbitals are at a significantly higher energy. This large 4f–5d energy gap makes it difficult to remove or promote 4f electrons, so lanthanoids typically show only +3 (and occasionally +2 or +4) oxidation states.
In actinoids, the 5f orbitals are less shielded and more extended (diffuse). The 5f and 6d orbitals are much closer in energy. This small energy difference allows 5f electrons to be easily promoted to 6d orbitals or directly lost, enabling a variety of oxidation states (e.g., +3, +4, +5, +6, and even +7 in some cases like neptunium and plutonium).
-
Evaluate the options
- (A) Lesser energy difference between 5f and 6d than between 4f and 5d orbitals — This matches the explanation above.
- (B) More energy difference — This would make it harder to involve f-electrons, reducing oxidation states, so incorrect.
- (C) 4f orbitals are more diffused than 5f orbitals — Actually, 5f orbitals are more diffused (less tightly held) due to poorer shielding, so this is false. …
-
- COMEDK 2024Set 2024-E1 markMCQQ.Identify the correct statement from the following. (A) The green manganate ion shows diamagnetic nature but the permanganate ion exhibits paramagnetic nature (B) Interstitial compounds of transition metals have lower melting points than that of pure transition metals and their compounds are chemically reactive (C) Cerium is a lanthanoid metal which exists in a stable oxidation state of +4 , besides exhibiting an oxidation state of +3 (D) Cr(VI) is more stable than W(VI) and hence acts as a good oxidising agent
›Reveal solutionSolution
The question tests knowledge of transition metal chemistry: magnetic properties of manganate vs. permanganate, properties of interstitial compounds, oxidation states of cerium, and stability of Cr(VI) vs. W(VI). Only statement (C) is correct.
Let’s examine each statement carefully, using chemical principles to decide which one is accurate.
-
Statement (A): “The green manganate ion shows diamagnetic nature but the permanganate ion exhibits paramagnetic nature.”
- The manganate ion is MnO42−, where manganese is in the +6 oxidation state. Electronic configuration of Mn in +6: [Ar]3d1. That’s one unpaired electron → paramagnetic, not diamagnetic.
- The permanganate ion is MnO4−, with Mn in +7: [Ar]3d0. No unpaired electrons → diamagnetic.
- So the statement gets both magnetic natures backwards. False.
-
Statement (B): “Interstitial compounds of transition metals have lower melting points than that of pure transition metals and their compounds are chemically reactive.”
- Interstitial compounds (e.g., carbides, nitrides, hydrides) form when small atoms like C, N, or H occupy holes in the metal lattice. This usually increases hardness and melting point (often very high), and they are chemically inert (not reactive).
- Both claims here are opposite to reality. False.
-
Statement (C): “Cerium is a lanthanoid metal which exists in a stable oxidation state of +4, besides exhibiting an oxidation state of +3.”
- Cerium (Ce, atomic number 58) has the electron configuration [Xe]4f15d16s2. The common +3 state arises from losing the 5d and 6s electrons.
- The +4 state is also stable because losing one more electron gives a 4f0 configuration (empty f-subshell), which is especially stable. Ce(IV) is well-known in compounds like CeO2 and ceric ammonium nitrate.
- This is a textbook fact. True. …
-
- COMEDK 2024Set 2024-M1 markMCQQ.Choose the incorrect statement from the following (A) The ability of Fluorine to stabilise the higher oxidation states of transition metals exceeds that of Oxygen (B) Cu (I) compounds in aqueous medium undergo disproportionation reaction (C) Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent than Fe2+ (D) MoO3 and WO3 are not as strong oxidants as CrO3
›Reveal solutionSolution
The key idea is to evaluate each statement about transition-metal chemistry using periodic trends and redox stability; the incorrect statement is (A) because fluorine cannot exceed oxygen in stabilising high oxidation states.
Let’s go through each option carefully, building the reasoning step by step.
-
Option (A): “The ability of Fluorine to stabilise the higher oxidation states of transition metals exceeds that of Oxygen”
- In transition-metal oxyanions (like CrO42−, MnO4−), oxygen stabilises high oxidation states via strong π-bonding (O donates electron density to the metal, reducing its effective charge).
- Fluorine is more electronegative than oxygen, but it is a poor π-donor (it has no available d-orbitals for back-bonding) and forms weaker multiple bonds.
- For example, Mn2O7 (Mn in +7) is stable, but MnF7 does not exist; the highest fluoride of Mn is MnF4 (+4).
- Conclusion: Oxygen stabilises high oxidation states better than fluorine. So statement (A) is false.
-
Option (B): “Cu(I) compounds in aqueous medium undergo disproportionation reaction”
- Disproportionation: 2Cu+→Cu+Cu2+.
- In water, the standard reduction potentials: Cu++e−→Cu (E∘=+0.52V) and Cu2++e−→Cu+ (E∘=+0.16V).
- The net cell potential for disproportionation is Ecell∘=0.52−0.16=+0.36V>0, so it is spontaneous.
- Conclusion: Statement (B) is true.
-
Option (C): “Cr2+ is a stronger reducing agent than Fe2+”
- Standard reduction potentials: Cr3++e−→Cr2+ (E∘=−0.41V) Fe3++e−→Fe2+ (E∘=+0.77V)
- A more negative reduction potential means the reduced form (here Cr2+) is more easily oxidised — i.e., a stronger reducing agent. …
-
- KCET 2023Set D-21 markMCQQ.In which one of the following pairs, both the elements does not have (n−1)d10ns2 configuration in its elementary state? (A) Zn, Cd (B) Cd, Hg (C) Hg, Cn (D) Cu, Zn
›Reveal solutionSolution
The configuration (n−1)d10ns2 is the ground-state pattern of group-12 elements. Copper is the exception — it is (n−1)d10ns1, not ns2 — so the pair in which the configuration fails is (D) Cu, Zn.
The pattern (n−1)d10ns2 means a filled (n−1)d subshell together with a filled ns subshell. This is the hallmark of the group-12 elements — Zn, Cd, Hg and Cn — in their ground state. To find the pair that breaks the pattern, we check each element's configuration.
-
Option (A): Zn, Cd.
Zn (Z=30) is [Ar]3d104s2; Cd (Z=48) is [Kr]4d105s2. Both group 12 — both fit the pattern.
-
Option (B): Cd, Hg.
Cd fits; Hg (Z=80) is [Xe]4f145d106s2. Both group 12 — both fit.
-
Option (C): Hg, Cn.
Hg fits; Cn (Z=112) is the group-12 element [Rn]5f146d107s2. Both fit.
-
Option (D): Cu, Zn.
Zn is 3d104s2 (fits), but Cu (Z=29) is the classic exception: its ground state is [Ar]3d104s1, not 3d94s2, because a completely filled d10 subshell is especially stable and pulls one electron out of 4s. So Cu is (n−1)d10ns1 and does not show the ns2 configuration. …
-
- COMEDK 2023Set 2023-E1 markMCQQ.Identify the incorrect statement. (A) Ability of Fluorine to stabilise higher oxidation states in transition metals is due to the low lattice enthalpy of the fluorides. (B) The second and third Ionisation enthalpies of Mn2+ and Fe3+ respectively have lower values than expected. (C) Transition metals readily form alloys because their metallic radii are within about 15% of each other. (D) Cr2+ acts as reducing agent while Mn3+ acts as an oxidising agent though both the ions have d4 configuration.
›Reveal solutionSolution
The incorrect statement is (A): fluorine stabilises higher oxidation states because of the high lattice (and bond) enthalpy of its compounds, not the low lattice enthalpy. B, C and D are correct NCERT statements.
Option (A) — incorrect. Fluorine, being small and highly electronegative, forms fluorides with high lattice enthalpy (and high M–F bond enthalpy). It is this high lattice/bond enthalpy that lets fluorine stabilise the highest oxidation states of transition metals. The statement wrongly attributes it to "low lattice enthalpy."
Option (B) — correct. The irregular ionisation enthalpies in this series arise from the stability of the half-filled d5 configurations produced (Mn2+, Fe3+), as noted in NCERT.
Option (C) — correct. Transition metals form alloys readily because their metallic radii are similar (within ~15%). …
- KCET 2019Set A-11 markMCQQ.Incorrect statement with reference to Ce(Z=58) (A) Ce4+ is a reducing agent. (B) Atomic size of Ce is more than that of Lu. (C) Ce in +3 oxidation state is more stable than in +4. (D) Ce shows common oxidation states of +3 and +4.
›Reveal solutionSolution
The question tests your understanding of lanthanide chemistry, specifically the stability and redox behaviour of cerium. The incorrect statement is (A): Ce4+ is an oxidising agent, not a reducing agent.
Concept & Intuition
Cerium is the first element in the lanthanide series (Z=58). Its ground-state electronic configuration is [Xe]4f15d16s2. The key to its chemistry lies in the stability of the empty 4f subshell (4f0) and the half-filled 4f subshell (4f7). For cerium, losing four electrons gives the Ce4+ ion with a [Xe] configuration — a noble gas core, which is exceptionally stable. This stability makes Ce4+ a strong oxidising agent (it readily accepts electrons to go back to the more common Ce3+ state). In contrast, Ce3+ has a [Xe]4f1 configuration and is the most stable oxidation state for cerium in aqueous solution.
Now let’s examine each statement.
-
Statement (A): Ce4+ is a reducing agent.
A reducing agent is a substance that donates electrons (gets oxidised itself). Ce4+ has a strong tendency to gain one electron and become Ce3+ (the 4f1 configuration is more stable than 4f0 in most chemical environments). This means Ce4+ is an oxidising agent, not a reducing agent. In fact, Ce4+ is a well-known oxidising agent in analytical chemistry (e.g., in cerimetric titrations). So this statement is false.
-
Statement (B): Atomic size of Ce is more than that of Lu.
This is true. Across the lanthanide series (from Ce, Z=58, to Lu, Z=71), there is a steady decrease in atomic and ionic radii — the lanthanide contraction. The 4f electrons are poorly shielding, so as nuclear charge increases, the electron cloud is pulled inward. Ce is near the beginning of the series, Lu at the end, so Ce has a larger atomic radius than Lu.
-
Statement (C): Ce in +3 oxidation state is more stable than in +4. …
-
🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days
- ✓Full step-by-step solutions
- ✓Concept-first explanations
- ✓Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
- ✓PYQ mapping + timed mock tests
Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.