Bergman, Aza-Bergman, and protonated Aza-Bergman cyclizations and intermediate 2,5-arynes: Chemistry and challenges to computation

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Volumn 120, Issue 25, 1998, Pages 6261-6269

  Cramer, Christopher J ^a  

^a University of Minnesota   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; ARTICLE; CYCLIZATION; CYTOTOXICITY; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; PROTON TRANSPORT;

EID: 0032125865     PISSN: 00027863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ja9806579     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Jones, R. R.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94, 660.
2. Bergman, R. G. Acc. Chem. Res. 1973, 6, 25.
3. Hoffmann, R. W. Dehydrobenzene and Cycloalkynes; Academic Press: New York, 1967.
4. Gilchrist, T. L.; Rees, C. W. Carbenes, Nitrenes, and Arynes; Nelson: London, 1969.
5. Wentrup, C. Reactive Molecules; Wiley: New York, 1984; p 288.
6. Levin, R. H. In Reactive Intermediates; Jones, M., Moss, R., Eds.; Wiley: New York, 1985; Vol. 3, p 1.
7. Lee, M. D.; Dunne, T. S.; Chang, C. C.; Ellestad, G. A.; Siegel, M. M.; Morton, G. O.; McGahren, W. J.; Borders, D. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1987, 109, 3466.
8. Nicolaou, K. C.; Smith, A. L. Acc. Chem. Res. 1992, 25, 497.
9. Gleiter, R.; Kratz, D. Angrew. Chem. 1993, 105, 884.
10. Enediyne Antibiotics as Antitumor Agents; Borders, D. B., Doyle, T. W., Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1995.
11. Nicolaou, K. C.; Dai, W.-M. Angew. Chem. 1991, 103, 1453.
12. Scheiner, A. C.; Schaefer, H. F., III; Liu, B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 3118.
13. Nicolaides, A.; Borden, W. T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 11951.
14. Wierschke, S. G.; Nash, J. J.; Squires, R. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 11958.
15. Kraka, E.; Cremer, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 4929,
16. Lindh, R.; Persson, B. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 4963.
17. Lindh, R.; Lee, T. J.; Bemhardsson, A.; Persson, B. J.; Karlström, G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 7186.
18. Cramer, C. J.; Nash, J. J.; Squires, R. R. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 277, 311.
19. Cramer, C. J.; Squires, R. R. J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 9191.
20. Kraka, E.; Cremer, D.; Bucher, G.; Wandel, H.; Sander, W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 268, 313.
21. Lindh, R.; Ryde, U.; Schütz, M. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1997, 97, 203.
22. Schreiner, P. R. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1998, 483.
23. Chen, W.-C; Chang, N.-y.; Yu, C.-h. J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 2584.
24. Cramer, C. J.; Debbert, S. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1998, 287, 320.
25. Schreiner, P. R. J, Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 4184.
26. Logan, C. F.; Chen, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 2113.
27. Schottelius, M. J.; Chen, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 4896.
28. Chen, P. Angew. Chem. 1996, 108, 1584.
29. Hoffner, J.; Schottelius, M. J.; Feichtinger, D.; Chen, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 376.
30. Roos, B. O.; Taylor, P. R.; Siegbahn, P. E. M. Chem. Phys. 1980, 48, 157.
31. Borden, W. T.; Davidson, E. R. Acc. Chem. Res. 1996, 29, 67.
32. von Ardenne, M. Adv. Pharmacol. Chemot. (San Diego) 1972, 10, 339.
33. David, W. M.; Kerwin, S. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 1464.
34. McDouall, J. J.; Peasley, K.; Robb, M. A. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1988, 148, 183.
35. Andersson, K.; Malmqvist, P.-Å.; Roos, B. O. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 96, 1218.
36. Roth, W. R.; Hopf, H.; Horn, C. Chem. Ber. 1994, 127, 1765.
37. Wenthold, P. G.; Squires, R. R.; Lineberger, W. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 5279-5290.
38. Dunning, T. H. J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 1007.
39. Becke, A. D. Phys. Rev. A 1988, 38, 3098.
40. Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Wang, Y. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 6533.
41. Andersson, K.; Malmqvist, P.-Å.; Roos, B. O.; Sadlej, A. J.; Wolinski, K. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5483.
42. Andersson, K.; Roos, B. O. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 1993, 45, 591.
43. Andersson, K.; Blomberg, M. R. A.; Fülscher, M. P.; Karlström, G.; Kellö, V.; Lindh, R.; Malmqvist, P.-Å.; Noga, J.; Olsen, J.; Roos, B. O.; Sadlej, A. J.; Siegbahn, P. E. M.; Urban, M.; Widmark, P.-O. MOLCAS3; University of Lund: Sweden, 1994.
44. Cizek, J. Adv. Chem. Phys. 1969, 14, 35.
45. Purvis, G. D.; Bartlett, R. J. J. Chem. Phys. 1982, 76, 1910.
46. Gauss, J.; Cremer, C. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1988, 150, 280.
47. Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479.
48. Handy, N.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 164, 185.
49. Lim, M. H.; Worthington, S. E.; Dulles, F. J.; Cramer, C. J. In Density-Functional Methods in Chemistry; Laird, B. B., Ross, R. B., Ziegler, T., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1996; p 402.
50. Easton, R. E.; Giesen, D. J.; Welch, A.; Cramer, C. J.; Truhlar, D. G. Theor. Chim. Acta 1996, 93, 281.
51. Cramer, C. J.; Truhlar, D. G. In Solvent Effects and Chemical Reactivity; Tapia, O., Bertrán, J., Eds.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, 1996; p 1.
52. Li, J.; Zhu, T.; Cramer, C. J.; Truhlar, D. G. J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 1820.
53. Zhu, T.; Li, J.; Hawkins, G. D.; Cramer, C. J.; Truhlar, D. G. J. Chem. Phys. Submitted for publication.
54. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson, B. G.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Keith, T.; Petersson, G, A.; Montgomery, J. A.; Raghavachari, K.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Ortiz, J. V.; Foresman, J. B.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Peng, C. Y.; Ayala, P. Y.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Andres, J. L.; Replogle, E. S.; Gomperts, R.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Binkley, J. S.; Defrees, D. J.; Baker, J.; Stewart, J. P.; Head-Gordon, M.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople, J. A. Gaussian 94 RevD.1; Gaussian Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 1995.
55. The CCSD(T) calculations of Kraka and Cremer included excitations from the heavy atom core orbitals. The energies listed as CCSD(T)/6-31G** in Table 3, however, were computed with frozen core orbitals, and thus the absolute energies differ from those reported by Kraka and Cremer in ref 15. The effect on the relative energies of including core excitations is very small: the energy of 1a drops by 0.4 kcal/mol relative to 1b and s1c. One would further expect including or freezing the core orbitals to have no noticeable impact on the geometries. Note that the published CCSD(T)/6-31G** geometry for 1a lists the innermost CCC valence angle as 120.6°, but the correct value is 124.1° (Kraka, E.; Cremer, D. Personal communication). All computations in Table 3 used the correct structure.
56. Noodleman, L.; Case, D. A. Adv. Inorg. Chem. 1992, 38, 423.
57. Lovell, T.; McGrady, J. E.; Stranger, R.; Macgregor, S. Inorg. Chem. 1996, 35, 3079.
58. Slater, J. C. Adv. Quantum Chem. 1972, 6, 1.
59. Ziegler, T.; Rauk, A.; Baerends, E. J. Theor. Chim. Acta 1977, 43, 261.
60. Cramer, C. J.; Dulles, F. J.; Giesen, D. J.; Almlöf, J. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1995, 245, 165.
61. Wenthold, P.; Squires, R. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 6401.
62. Roth, W. R.; Adamczak, O.; Breuckmann, R.; Lennartz, H.-W.; Boese, R. Chem. Ber. 1991, 124, 2499.
63. Ruiz, E.; Salahub, D.; Vela, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 1141.
64. Bally, T.; Sastry, G. N. J. Phys. Chem. 1997, 101, 7923.
65. Jones, R. O. J. Chem. Phys. 1985, 82, 325.
66. Radzio, E.; Salahub, D. R. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 1986, 29, 241.
67. Density Functional Methods in Chemistry; Labanowski, J., Andzelm, J., Eds.; Springer-Verlag: New York, 1991.
68. Gutsev, G. L.; Ziegler, T. J. Phys. Chem. 1991, 95, 7220.
69. Murray, C. W.; Handy, N. C.; Amos, R. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 7145.
70. Russo, N.; Sicilia, E.; Toscano, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1993, 213, 245.
71. Jacobsen, H.; Ziegler, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 3667.
72. Arduengo, A. J.; Bock, H.; Chen, H.; Denk, M.; Dixon, D. A.; Green, J. C.; Herrmann, W. A.; Jones, N. L.; Wagner, M.; West, R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 6641.
73. Arduengo, A. J.; Rasika Dias, H. V.; Dixon, D. A.; Harlow, R. L.; Klooster, W. T.; Koetzle, T. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 6812.
74. Cramer, C. J.; Dulles, F. J.; Storer, J. W.; Worthington, S. E. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1994, 218. 387.
75. Cramer, C. J.; Dulles, F. J.; Falvey, D. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 9787.
76. Cramer, C. J.; Worthington, S. E. J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 1462.
77. Matzinger, S.; Bally, T.; Patterson, E. V.; McMahon, R. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 1535.
78. Nash, J. J.; Squires, R. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 11872.
79. Smith, B. A.; Cramer, C. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 5490.
80. Schreiner, P. R.; Karney, W. L.; Schleyer, P. v. R.; Borden, W. T.; Hamilton, T. P.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Org. Chem. 1996, 61, 7030.
81. Worthington, S. E.; Cramer, C. J. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1997, 10, 755.
82. Bettinger, H. F.; Schreiner, P. R.; Schleyer, P. v. R.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 16147.
83. Xie, Y. M.; Schreiner, P. R.; Schleyer, P. v. R.; Schaefer, H. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 1370.
84. Cramer, C. J.; Falvey, D. E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1997, 38, 1515.
85. Cramer, C. J.; Truhlar, D. G.; Falvey, D. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 12338.
86. Cramer, C. J.; Smith, B. A. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 9664.
87. Miehlich, B.; Stoll, H.; Savin, A. Mol. Phys. 1997, 97, 527.
88. Borowski, P.; Jordan, K. D.; Nichols, J.; Nachtigall, P. Theor. Chem. Acc. 1998, 99, 135.
89. Gräfenstein, J.; Kraka, E.; Cremer, D. Chem. Phys. Lett. In press.
90. Gordon, M. S. Personal communication.
91. This is not to say that the formalism of hybrid HF-DFT functionals is intrinsically flawed, but rather that present implementations of this level of theory, perhaps because HF character decreases the quality of the Kohn-Sham orbitals, are contraindicated in these systems.
92. Stanton, J. Personal communication.
93. Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968.
94. Stanton, J. F. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 281, 130.
95. Brueckner, K. A. Phys. Rev. 1954, 96, 508.
96. Nesbet, R. K. Phys. Rev. 1958, 109, 1632.
97. Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III Chem. Phys. Lett. 1987, 142, 354.
98. Kobayashi, R.; Koch, H.; Jørgensen, P.; Lee, T. J. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1993, 211, 94.
99. Scuseria, G. E. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1994, 226, 251.
100. I have also surveyed the QCISD(T) method (Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968) for these systems. It appears to be much less unstable than CCSD(T), giving relative energies within 1 kcal/mol of the BCCD(T) results. This is somewhat surprising, since the single excitation amplitudes in the QCISD(T) calculations are even larger than those for the CCSD(T) calculations. Given this potential for instability, and given other criticisms of QCISD(T) theory relative to CCSD(T) or BCCD(T) (Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 3700; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479. Lee, T. J.; Rendell, A. P.; Taylor, P. R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5463. He, Z.; Cremer, D. Theor. Chim. Acta 1993, 85, 305), I consider BCCD(T) to be the best choice in low-symmetry aryne systems where large single excitation amplitudes are observed with HF orbitals. However, further studies germane to this point are warranted.
101. I have also surveyed the QCISD(T) method (Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968) for these systems. It appears to be much less unstable than CCSD(T), giving relative energies within 1 kcal/mol of the BCCD(T) results. This is somewhat surprising, since the single excitation amplitudes in the QCISD(T) calculations are even larger than those for the CCSD(T) calculations. Given this potential for instability, and given other criticisms of QCISD(T) theory relative to CCSD(T) or BCCD(T) (Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 3700; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479. Lee, T. J.; Rendell, A. P.; Taylor, P. R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5463. He, Z.; Cremer, D. Theor. Chim. Acta 1993, 85, 305), I consider BCCD(T) to be the best choice in low-symmetry aryne systems where large single excitation amplitudes are observed with HF orbitals. However, further studies germane to this point are warranted.
102. I have also surveyed the QCISD(T) method (Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968) for these systems. It appears to be much less unstable than CCSD(T), giving relative energies within 1 kcal/mol of the BCCD(T) results. This is somewhat surprising, since the single excitation amplitudes in the QCISD(T) calculations are even larger than those for the CCSD(T) calculations. Given this potential for instability, and given other criticisms of QCISD(T) theory relative to CCSD(T) or BCCD(T) (Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 3700; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479. Lee, T. J.; Rendell, A. P.; Taylor, P. R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5463. He, Z.; Cremer, D. Theor. Chim. Acta 1993, 85, 305), I consider BCCD(T) to be the best choice in low-symmetry aryne systems where large single excitation amplitudes are observed with HF orbitals. However, further studies germane to this point are warranted.
103. I have also surveyed the QCISD(T) method (Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968) for these systems. It appears to be much less unstable than CCSD(T), giving relative energies within 1 kcal/mol of the BCCD(T) results. This is somewhat surprising, since the single excitation amplitudes in the QCISD(T) calculations are even larger than those for the CCSD(T) calculations. Given this potential for instability, and given other criticisms of QCISD(T) theory relative to CCSD(T) or BCCD(T) (Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 3700; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479. Lee, T. J.; Rendell, A. P.; Taylor, P. R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5463. He, Z.; Cremer, D. Theor. Chim. Acta 1993, 85, 305), I consider BCCD(T) to be the best choice in low-symmetry aryne systems where large single excitation amplitudes are observed with HF orbitals. However, further studies germane to this point are warranted.
104. I have also surveyed the QCISD(T) method (Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M.; Raghavachari, K. J. Chem. Phys. 1987, 87, 5968) for these systems. It appears to be much less unstable than CCSD(T), giving relative energies within 1 kcal/mol of the BCCD(T) results. This is somewhat surprising, since the single excitation amplitudes in the QCISD(T) calculations are even larger than those for the CCSD(T) calculations. Given this potential for instability, and given other criticisms of QCISD(T) theory relative to CCSD(T) or BCCD(T) (Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F., III J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 3700; Raghavachari, K.; Trucks, G. W.; Pople, J. A.; Head-Gordon, M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 157, 479. Lee, T. J.; Rendell, A. P.; Taylor, P. R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 5463. He, Z.; Cremer, D. Theor. Chim. Acta 1993, 85, 305), I consider BCCD(T) to be the best choice in low-symmetry aryne systems where large single excitation amplitudes are observed with HF orbitals. However, further studies germane to this point are warranted.
105. Cramer, C. J. Unpublished calculations.
106. Hammond, G. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 334.