Learn in your language
Skip to content
A Level · Cambridge (CIE) · 9701

Use ease of oxidation to distinguish aldehydes and ketones

Combine carbonyl confirmation with oxidation and silver/copper tests to classify an unknown.

Section 17 · Carbonyl compounds

Carbonyl compounds · Cambridge 9701 AS Chemistry · 17.1

AS Level; Cambridge International Chemistry 9701, 2025–2027 syllabus. Distinguish aldehydes from ketones by structure and evidence; state reagent, condition and observation. Written practice is self-checked

Before you begin

  • Use carbonyl structures, alcohol oxidation and reduction from Topics 13 and 16, nucleophiles and curly arrows, and the organic reaction patterns from Topic 15.

Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.

Quick readiness check

Why do aldehydes give positive Fehling's or Tollens' tests more readily than ketones?

What you will learn

  • Explain the relative oxidation behavior
  • Compare Fehling's and Tollens' tests
  • Draw a bounded conclusion from results
Each test answers a different question2,4-DNPHYellow/orange precipitateDetects: aldehyde or ketoneFehling’sBrick-red Cu₂O precipitateDetects: aldehyde positiveTollens’Silver mirrorDetects: aldehyde positiveAlkaline iodineYellow CHI₃ precipitateDetects: CH₃CO– groupA negative subgroup test does not identify every structure
Carbonyl identification uses tests that answer distinct questions. 2,4-DNPH gives a yellow/orange precipitate with aldehydes and ketones. Fehling's solution gives a brick-red copper(I) oxide precipitate with aldehydes; Tollens' reagent gives a silver mirror. Alkaline iodine gives yellow CHI₃ with a CH₃CO– group. Negative results need cautious interpretation.

Aldehydes oxidise more readily

Aldehydes are readily oxidised to carboxylic acids or carboxylates. Ketones resist oxidation under the mild syllabus test conditions.

Fehling's reagent gives brick-red Cu₂O with aldehydes; Tollens' reagent gives silver. Ketones do not give those positive results in the stated tests.

Use a carbonyl test before classifying

2,4-DNPH confirms a carbonyl group in an aldehyde or ketone. A positive Fehling's or Tollens' result then supports an aldehyde; a negative result after carbonyl confirmation supports a ketone.

The conclusion is only as strong as the test conditions and sample. Avoid using a negative aldehyde test to conclude 'ketone' if 2,4-DNPH did not establish a carbonyl first.

Pause and explain

What should a positive 2,4-DNPH result be followed by to distinguish aldehyde from ketone?

Put the idea to work

Worked example

An unknown gives an orange 2,4-DNPH precipitate, no Fehling's change and no Tollens' mirror. Interpret it.

Show the worked solution
  1. The precipitate confirms a carbonyl compound.
  2. Both aldehyde oxidation tests are negative.
  3. A ketone is supported under the stated test conditions.

Answer A ketone is supported: it gives a positive carbonyl test but resists the mild oxidation tests.

Try a topic test

Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.

Test this topic →

From guided practice to a new situation

Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.

1 · Guided

An unknown gives 2,4-DNPH positive and Fehling's positive. State the conclusion and evidence.

Give me a hint

Combine carbonyl presence with aldehyde reactivity.

Compare my reasoning
  1. 2,4-DNPH supports a carbonyl.
  2. Brick-red Cu₂O indicates Fehling's was reduced.
  3. This is consistent with an aldehyde.

An aldehyde is supported: carbonyl present and positive Fehling's oxidation result.

Look for these in your work

  • Both tests interpreted
  • Aldehyde supported
  • Evidence connected
2 · Independent

An unknown gives no 2,4-DNPH precipitate and no Tollens' mirror. Can you call it a ketone?

Give me a hint

Check whether the carbonyl group was confirmed first.

Compare my reasoning
  1. No 2,4-DNPH result gives no evidence for a carbonyl.
  2. The negative Tollens' result alone is not enough.
  3. A ketone conclusion is not justified from these results.

No. Confirm an aldehyde/ketone carbonyl with 2,4-DNPH before using negative Tollens' behavior to support a ketone.

Look for these in your work

  • Missing premise recognized
  • Negative evidence bounded
  • Conclusion withheld
3 · Transfer

Explain the link between aldehyde oxidation and the silver mirror test.

Give me a hint

Identify which species is oxidised and which is reduced.

Compare my reasoning
  1. The aldehyde is oxidised to carboxylate.
  2. Silver(I) ions gain electrons and become Ag(s).
  3. Metallic silver deposits on the glass.

Aldehyde oxidation supplies electrons that reduce Ag⁺ to silver metal, forming the mirror.

Look for these in your work

  • Oxidation identified
  • Reduction identified
  • Observation explained

Common mistakes

  • Treating 2,4-DNPH as an aldehyde/ketone distinction
  • Calling all negative results proof of ketone
  • Confusing oxidation with reduction
Recall without your notes

What can you explain now?

Why do aldehydes give positive Fehling's or Tollens' tests more readily than ketones?

Compare with the explanation

Aldehydes oxidise more readily

They are oxidised to carboxylate while reducing Cu²⁺ or Ag⁺.

After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.

Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.

Make it stick

How do 2,4-DNPH and an oxidation test work together to classify a carbonyl unknown?

If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.

Keep learning Chemistry

Course scope and assessment

Four hundred and forty-two original lessons map the published learning outcomes across AS Chemistry Topics 1–22 and A Level Topics 23–37, with guided, independent and transfer practice and explained answers. Every numbered subject-content topic and listed outcome tag now has a mapped lesson sequence. Topic 32 maps all 12 hydroxy-compound outcome tags in 11 lessons; Topic 33 maps all 15 carboxylic-acid and derivative outcome tags in 16 lessons; Topic 34 maps all 22 nitrogen-compound outcome tags in 20 lessons; Topic 35 maps all 12 polymerisation outcome tags in 16 lessons; Topic 36 maps all four organic-synthesis outcome tags in 14 lessons; Topic 37 maps all 22 chromatography and NMR outcome tags in 18 lessons. Cambridge's 2028–2030 Version 1 syllabus states that there are no significant changes which affect teaching from the preceding edition; the routes are aligned to that edition. This is 37 of the 37 numbered subject-content topics. Full cumulative exam assessment, Paper 3 laboratory competence, Paper 5 investigation practice and human subject-teacher review remain outstanding. Written practice is self-checked and does not certify exam readiness.

StudyForA · Learn with understanding

Original teaching content and links to official sources. Check your exam year and qualification before using a resource.