Hydrogenation of simple aromatic molecules: A computational study of the mechanism

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Volumn 129, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 924-933

  Zhong, George ^a   Chan, Bun ^a   Radom, Leo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AROMATIC MOLECULES; BELL EVANS POLANYI PRINCIPLE; HYDROGEN FLUORIDE; QUANTUM CHEMISTRY;

CATALYSIS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; HYDROGENATION; LINEAR SYSTEMS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; QUANTUM THEORY;

AROMATIC COMPOUNDS;

1,3 CYCLOHEXADIENE; 1,4 CYCLOHEXADIENE; ALKADIENE; AROMATIC COMPOUND; BENZENE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ACIDITY; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CATALYSIS; CONJUGATION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; ENTHALPY; HYDROGENATION; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; METAL BINDING; PREDICTION; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTUM CHEMISTRY; REACTION ANALYSIS;

CATALYSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HYDROCARBONS, AROMATIC; HYDROGEN; HYDROGENATION; QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 33846636504     PISSN: 00027863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ja066251a     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. For example, see: (a) Rylander, P. N. Hydrogenation over Platinum Metals; Academic Press: New York, 1967.
2. (b) Jacobsen, E. N., Pfaltz, A., Yamamoto, H., Eds.; Comprehensive Asymmetric Catalysis; Springer: Berlin, 1999; Vol. I.
3. (c) Nishimura, S. Handbook of Heterogeneous Catalytic Hydrogenation for Organic Synthesis; Wiley: New York, 2001.
4. (d) Genet, J.-P. Acc. Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 908.
5. For general reviews on hydrogenases, see: (a) Albracht, S. P. J. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1994, 1188, 167.
6. (b) Ermler, U.; Grabarse, W.; Shima, S.; Goubeaud, M. Thauer, R. K. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1998, 8, 749.
7. (c) Evans, D. J.; Pickett, C. J. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2003, 32, 268.
8. For example, see: (a) Baltes, J.; Cornils, B.; Frohning, C. D. Chem. -Ing. -Tech. 1975, 47, 522.
9. (b) Cecchi, G.; Ucciani, E. Riv. Ital. Sostanze Grasse 1979, 56, 235.
10. (c) Plourde, M.; Belkacemi, K.; Arul, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2004, 43, 2382.
11. For a recent review, see: Guthrie, R. D. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2000, 54, 89.
12. Rajagopal, V.; Guthrie, R. D.; Shi, B.; Davis, B. H. Prepr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Fuel Chem. 1994, 39, 673.
13. (a) Walling, C.; Bollyky, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1961, 83, 2968.
14. (b) Walling, C.; Bollyky, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 3750.
15. (c) Siskim, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1974, 96, 3641.
16. (d) Berkessel, A.; Schubert, T. J. S.; Müller, T. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 8693.
17. (a) Sano, T.; Hagiwara, H.; Okabe, K.; Okado, H.; Saito, K.; Takaya, H. Sekiyu Gakkaishi 1986, 29, 89.
18. (b) Bader, R. R.; Baumeister, P.; Blaser, H.-U. Chimia 1996, 50, 99.
19. (a) Scott, A. P.; Golding, B. T.; Radom, L. New J. Chem. 1998, 1171.
20. (b) Senger, S.; Radom, S. J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 7375.
21. (c) Senger, S.; Radom, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 2613.
22. (d) Chan, B.; Radom, L. Aust. J. Chem. 2004, 57, 659.
23. (e) Chan, B.; Radom, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 2443.
24. For example, see: (a) Hehre, W. J.; Radom, L.; Schleyer, P. v. P.; Pople, J. A. Ab Initio Molecular Orbital Theory; Wiley: New York, 1986.
25. (b) Jensen, F. Introduction to Computational Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Wiley: Chichester, 2007.
26. (c) Koch, W.; Holthausen, M. C. A Chemist's Guide to Density Functional Theory, 2nd ed.; Wiley: New York, 2001.
27. Frisch, M. J., et al. Gaussian 03, revision B.03; Gaussian, Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
28. (a) Henry, D. J.; Sullivan, M. B.; Radom, L. J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 118, 4849.
29. (b) Henry, D. J.; Parkinson, C. J.; Mayer, P. M.; Radom, L. J. Phys. Chem. A 2001, 105, 6750.
30. Henry, D. J.; Sullivan, M. B.; Radom, L. J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 4849.
31. Zhao, Y.; Truhlar, D. G. J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 6908.
32. Scott, A. P.; Radom, L. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 16502.
33. (a) Foster, J. P.; Weinhold, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980, 102, 7211.
34. (b) Reed, A. E.; Weinhold, F. J. Chem. Phys. 1983, 78, 4066.
35. (c) Reed, A. E.; Weinstock, R. B.; Weinhold, F. J. Chem. Phys. 1985, 83, 735.
36. Benson, S. W.; Shaw, R. Trans. Faraday Soc. 1967, 63, 985.
37. (a) Alfassi, Z. B.; Benson, S. W.; Golden, D. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 4784.
38. (b) Orchard, S. W.; Thrush, B. A. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1973, 14.
39. The fact that such catalysis leads to an increased barrier in most cases of course implies that in reality the reaction is not likely to utilize the catalyst in this way but would proceed either in an uncatalyzed manner or with the "catalyst" in almost a spectator role. Nonetheless, the lower barriers observed in some cases demonstrate the subtleties in such catalytic reactions. The purpose of our calculations is to illustrate what happens in a constrained situation so as to indicate the fundamental principles at work and, thus, provide insights into the design of potential catalysts for such reactions.
40. For example, see: (a) Woodward, R. B.; Hoffmann, R. The Conservation of Orbital Symmetry; Verlag Chemie: Weinheim, 1970.
41. (b) Anh, N. The Woodward-Hoffmann Rules, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1980.
42. (c) Fleming, I. Pericyclic Reactions; Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1999.
43. (d) David, C. W. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 999.
44. (e) Patterson, R. T. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 1002.
45. In a simplified treatment, the 1,2-hydrogenation may be regarded as a [2 + 2]-type reaction, which is also symmetry forbidden.
46. -1, respectively.
47. 298 values of benzene, 1,3-cyclohexadiene, and 1,4-cyclohexadiene from the NIST Chemistry Webbook (Linstrom P. J., Mallard W. G., Eds. NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69; National Institute of Standards and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD 20899, June 2005 (http://webbook.nist.gov)).
48. Zimmerman, H. E. Acc. Chem. Res. 1972, 5, 393.
49. 2 substantially lowers the barrier for the uncatalyzed 1,2-hydrogenation of ethene and several other unsaturated substrates.
50. 2 moieties of the TS of Figure 8, and the derived barrier is not significantly affected by the presence of HF; i.e., the HF molecule is effectively a spectator in these cases. The results in Figure 7 demonstrate the principles at work when the acid catalysts are more actively involved.
51. 2 moieties of the uncatalyzed TS of Figure 9 show that the barrier (measured from the reactant complex) is only very slightly lowered from that for the uncatalyzed reaction.
52. All proton affinities were computed at the G3(MP2)-RAD level and are taken from ref 8d with the exception of HBr, for which the proton affinity was computed as part of the present study.
53. (a) Bell, R. P. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 1936, 154, 414.
54. (b) Evans, M. G.; Polanyi, M. Trans. Faraday Soc. 1938, 34, 11.
55. Hammond, G. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 334.