Correlated rotations in benzylfluorene derivatives: Structure, conformation, and stereodynamics

Journal of Organic Chemistry

Volumn 73, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 2811-2818

  Casarini, Daniele ^a   Lunazzi, Lodovico ^b   Mazzanti, Andrea ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASILICATA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFORMATIONS; DENSITY FUNCTIONAL THEORY; ENANTIOMERS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY;

BENZYLFLUORENE DERIVATIVES; CORRELATED ROTATIONS;

DERIVATIVES;

FLUORENE; FLUORENE DERIVATIVE; FUNCTIONAL GROUP; METHYL GREEN;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL BOND; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CONFORMATION; DENSITY FUNCTIONAL THEORY; ENANTIOMER; EXPERIMENTATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; ROTATION; SIMULATION; STEREOCHEMISTRY; TEMPERATURE; X RAY DIFFRACTION;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; FLUORENES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR CONFORMATION; REFERENCE STANDARDS; ROTATION; STEREOISOMERISM; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 41649107327     PISSN: 00223263     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jo7026917     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Grell, M.; Knoll, W.; Lupo, D.; Meisel, A.; Miteva, T.; Neher, D.; Noyhofer, H.-G.; Scherf, U.; Uasuda, A. Adv. Mater. 1999, 11, 671-675.
2. Rathore, R.; Abdelwahed, S. H.; Guzei, I. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 8712-8713.
3. Geng, Y.; Trajkovska, A.; Culligan, S. W.; Ou, J. J.; Chen, H. M. P.; Katsis, D.; Chen, S. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14032-14038.
4. Nakano, T.; Yade, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 15474-15484.
5. Siddall, T. H., III; Stewart, W. E. Chem. Commun. 1968, 1116.
6. Siddall, T. H., III; Stewart, W. E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1968, 9, 5011.
7. Chandross, E. A.; Sheley, C. F., Jr. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1968, 90, 4345.
8. Rieker, A.; Kessler, H. Tetrahedron Lett. 1969, 10, 1227.
9. Bartle, K. D.; Bavin, P. M .G.; Jones, D. W.; L'Amie, D. Tetrahedron 1970, 26, 911.
10. Nakamura, M.; Oki, M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1974, 15, 505.
11. Ford, W. T.; Thompson, T. B.; Snoble, K. A.; Timko, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975, 97, 95.
12. Albert, K.; Rieker, A. Chem. Ber. 1977, 110, 1804.
13. Nakamura, M.; Nakamura, N. Oki, M. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1977, 50, 2986.
14. Murata, S.; Kanno, S.; Tanabe, Y.; Nakamura, M.; Oki, M. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1982, 55, 1522.
15. Tukada, H.; Iwamura, M.; Sugawara, T.; Iwamura, H. Org. Magn. Res. 1982, 19, 78.
16. Lam, Y.-L.; Koh, L.-L. Huang, H.-H.; Wang, L. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1999, 1137.
17. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Montgomery, J. A., Jr.; Vreven, T.; Kudin, K. N.; Burant, J. C.; Millam, J. M.; Iyengar, S. S.; Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.; Mennucci, B.; Cossi, M.; Scalmani, G.; Rega, N.; Petersson, G. A.; Nakatsuji, H.; Hada, M.; Ehara, M.; Toyota, K.; Fukuda, R.; Hasegawa, J.; Ishida, M.; Nakajima, T.; Honda, Y.; Kitao, O.; Nakai, H.; Klene, M.; Li, X.; Knox, J. E.; Hratchian, H. P.; Cross, J. B.; Bakken, V.; Adamo, C.; Jaramillo, J.; Gomperts, R.; Stratmann, R. E.; Yazyev, O.; Austin, A. J.; Cammi, R.; Pomelli, C.; Ochterski, J. W.; Ayala, P. Y.; Morokuma, K.; Voth, G. A.; Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Dapprich, S.; Daniels, A. D.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Malick, D. K.; Rabuck, A. D.; Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Ortiz, J. V.; Cui, Q.; Baboul, A. G.; Clifford, S.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.; Liashenko, A.; Piskorz, P.; Komaromi, I.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith, T.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson, B.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople, J. A. Gaussian 03, revision D.01; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, 2004.
18. The different behaviour is a consequence of the fact that compound 2 is more hindered than 1, having two methyl groups in the ortho positions of the aryl substituent.
19. α (J ≈ -15 Hz). The combination of these two large couplings yields, in practice, a triplet signal since the difference between these two values cannot be detected, owing to the quite broad line width of the methylene signals below -140°C.
20. These processes bear some analogy with those indicated as ring-flip pathways by Mislow et al. See: Gust, D.; Mislow, K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 95, 1535-1547.
21. Mislow, K. Acc. Chem. Res. 1976, 9, 26-33.
22. Iwamura, H.; Mislow, K. Acc. Chem. Res. 1988, 21, 175-182.
23. Mislow, K. Chemtracts: Org. Chem. 1989, 2, 151.
24. Glaser, R. In Acyclic Organonitrogen Stereodynamics; Lambert, J. B., Takeuchi, Y., Eds; VCH: New York, 1992; Chapter 4.
25. Rappoport, Z.; Biali, S. E. Acc. Chem. Res. 1997, 30, 307-314.
26. Lindner, A. B.; Grynszpan, F.; Biali, S. E. J. Org. Chem. 1993, 58, 6662-6670.
27. Grilli, S.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A.; Casarini, D.; Femoni, C. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 488-495.
28. Grilli, S.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A.; Mazzanti, G. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 748-754.
29. Grilli, S.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 4444-4446.
30. Grilli, S.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 5853-5858.
31. The doublet due to the coupling with the isopropyl CH hydrogen is not visible anymore at low temperature in the case of the methyl signal of the ortho isopropyl groups because the corresponding line width is broadened by a second motion (see Figure 6) which begins to affect the spectrum. This broadening does not occur for the methyl signal of the para isopropyl group because the latter is not affected by the mentioned second motion.
32. Mislow, K.; Raban, M. Top. Stereochem. 1967, 1, 1.
33. Jennings, W. B. Chem. Rev. 1975, 75, 307.
34. Eliel, E. L. J. Chem. Educ. 1980, 57, 52.
35. Casarini, D.; Lunazzi, L.; Macciantelli, D. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans 2 1992, 1363.
36. The computed difference between the methyl shifts of conformers C and D is 0.77 ppm, which agrees well with the experimental separation of 0.83 ppm.
37. 2 signals of C and that the upfield signal of the latter is separated by that of D by 0.79 ppm, in fair agreement with the 0.69 ppm separation experimentally observed (Figure 7).
38. Johansen, J. T.; Vallee, B. L. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1971, 68, 2532-2535.
39. Kessler, H. Fresenius Z. Anal. Chem. 1987, 327, 66-67.
40. Burke, L. P.; DeBellis, A. D.; Fuhrer, H.; Meier, H.; Pastor, S. D.; Rihs, G.; Rist, G.; Rodebaugh, R. K.; Shum, S. P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 8313-8323.
41. Paulus, E. F.; Kurz, M.; Matter, H.; Vértesy, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 8209-8221.
42. Perry, N. B.; Blunt, J. W.; Munro, M. H. Magn. Reson. Chem. 2005, 27, 624-627.
43. A Situation where it has been unambiguously demonstrated that the X-ray diffraction structure in the solids is that of the minor conformer present in solution has been reported in: Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A.; Minzoni, M.; Anderson, J. E. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 1291-1294.
44. A recent example where the type of conformer observed in the crystal depends on the crystallisation solvent was reported in: Coluccini, C.; Grilli, S.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 7266-7273.
45. The isopropyl methyl signals of 5 should be anisochronous in the -162°C spectrum of the major conformer, but the corresponding shift difference is smaller than the line width (about 85 Hz at this temperature). This is confirmed by the computed shift separation, which is predicted to be only 0.04 ppm (i.e., 24 Hz at 600 MHz).
46. Diemer, V.; Chaumeil, H.; Defoin, A.; Fort, A.; Boeglin, A.; Carré, C. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 2727-2738.
47. Liu, R; Gomes, P. T.; Costa, S. I.; Duarte, M. T.; Braquinho, R.; Fernandes, A. C.; Chien, J. C. W.; Singh, R. P.; Marques, M. M. J. Organomet. Chem. 2005, 690, 1314-1323.
48. Casarini, D.; Lunazzi, L.; Verbeeck, R. Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 2471-2480.
49. Rieche, A.; Gross, H.; Höft, E. Org. Synth. 1967, 47, 51.
50. Sieglitz, A.; Jassoy, H. Ber. D. Chem. 1921, 54B, 2133-2138.
51. Bradley, S. A.; Krishnamurthy, K. Magn. Res. Chem. 2005, 43, 117-123.
52. Willker, W.; Leibfritz, D.; Kerssebaum, R.; Bermel, W. Magn. Res. Chem. 1993, 31, 287-292.
53. Hurd, R. E.; John, B. K. J. Magn. Reson. 1991, 91, 648-653.