Comparison of mechanistic models for correlation of activation energies of liquid-phase addition of carbon-centered radicals to terminal olefins

Journal of Physical Organic Chemistry

Volumn 21, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 758-782

  Poutsma, Marvin L ^a  

^a OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Enthalpy effects; Mechanistic models; Polar effects; Radical addition; Thermochemical properties of radicals

Indexed keywords

ACTIVATION ENERGY; ENTHALPY; KETONES; LIQUID PHASE EPITAXY; OLEFINS; REACTION KINETICS; THERMODYNAMICS;

ADDITIONAL DATA; ADDUCT RADICALS; ADJUSTABLE PARAMETERS; BASE SET; CARBON-CENTERED RADICALS; ENTHALPY EFFECTS; EXTENSIVE DATA; HYPERFINE CONSTANTS; LIQUID-PHASE; MECHANISTIC MODELING; MECHANISTIC MODELS; MOLECULAR PROPERTIES; POLAR EFFECTS; RADICAL ADDITION; RADICAL ADDITIONS; SUBSTITUENT CONSTANTS; TERMINAL OLEFINS; THERMOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF RADICALS;

CORRELATION METHODS;

EID: 49749144951     PISSN: 08943230     EISSN: 10991395     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/poc.1375     Document Type: Article

References (168)

1. J. M. Tedder, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1982, 21, 401.
2. Recent computational evidence suggests that this preference also has an electronic component; for example, Reference [3].
3. A. K. Chandra, M. T. Nguyen, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 1997, 1415.
4. K. Riemenschneider, H. M. Bartels, R. Dornow, E. Drechsel-Grau, W. Eichel, H. Luthe, Y. M. Matter, W. Michaelis, P. Boldt, J. Org. Chem. 1987, 52, 205.
5. B. Giese, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1983, 22, 753.
6. H. Fischer, L Radom, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 1340.
7. K. Munger, H. Fischer, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1985, 17, 809.
8. F. Jent, H. Paul, E. Roduner, M. Heming, H. Fischer, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1986, 18, 1113.
9. I. Beranek, H. Fischer, in Free Radicals in Synthesis and Biology (Ed.: F. Minisci,), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1989.
10. K. Heberger, M. Walbiner, H. Fischer, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Eng. 1992, 31, 635.
11. K. Heberger, H. Fischer, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1993, 25, 249.
12. K. Heberger, H. Fischer, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1993, 25, 913.
13. J. Q. Wu, H. Fischer, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1995, 27, 167.
14. J. Q. Wu, I. Beranek, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1995, 78, 194.
15. M. Walbiner, J. Q. Wu, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1995, 78, 910.
16. T. Zytowski, H. Fischer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 437.
17. H. Rubin, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1996, 79, 1670.
18. S. N. Batchelor, H. Fischer, J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 9794.
19. R. Martschke, R. D. Farley, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1997, 80, 1363.
20. T. Zytowski, H. Fischer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 12869.
21. M. Weber, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1998, 87, 770.
22. T. Zytowski, B. Knuhl, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta 2000, 83, 658.
23. B. Knuhl, S. Marque, H. Fischer, Helv. Chim. Acta. 2001, 84, 2290.
24. M. W. Wong, A. Pross, L Radom, J. Am. Chem. Soc 1993, 115, 11050.
25. M. W. Wong, A. Pross, L. Radom, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 6284.
26. M. W. Wong, A. Pross, L. Radom, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 11938.
27. Computational approaches to rate constants are making steady progress towards chemical accuracy but are still method and basis set dependent. M. K. Sabbe, A. G. Vandeputte, M.-F. Reyniers, V. Van Speybroeck, M. Waroquier, G. B. Marin, J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111, 8416.
28. R. Gomez-Balderas, M. L. Coote, D. J. Henry, L. Radom, J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 2874; and references therein.
29. A few kinetic studies involved optical detection of radical decay or CIDNP development in a radical disproportionation product.
30. Since only terminal olefins were considered, steric effects were assumed to be trivial. Of course, the deduced systematic variation of A with radical structure may be considered to be at least partly 'steric' in origin (References [6] and [35]).
31. For the very rapid reactions of the highly nucleophilic POH with electron-deficient olefins, k approached or even exceeded the assigned A; these E values were set at zero.
32. -1 for constant A) was reported for the highly nucleophilic-electrophilic pair 1-(diethylamino)ethyl radical and methyl acrylate in going from hexane to acetonitrile (or methanol/acetonitrile (20:80)); J. Lalevee, X. Allonas, J. P. Fouassier, D. Rinaldi, M. F. Ruiz Lopez, J. L. Rivail, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2005, 415, 202.
33. 2; D. P. Curran, E. Eichenberger, M. Collis, M. G. Roepel, G. Thoma, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 4279.
34. B. Giese, J. Meister, Chem. Ber. 1977, 110, 2588.
35. A. L. J. Beckwith, J. S. Poole, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 9489.
36. Additional kinetic data for which X and Y are both functional groups are not included because of a lack of data for the correlating variables for these more complex olefins.
37. A. Citterio, A. Arnoldi, F. Minisci, J. Org. Chem. 1979, 44, 2674.
38. C. Chatgilialoglu, K. U. Ingold, J. C. Scaiano, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1981, 103, 7739.
39. Cf. L. J. Johnston, J. C. Scaiano, K. U. Ingold, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984, 106, 4877 for an example of this correction.
40. -1 slightly dependent on the olefin.
41. D.V.Avila, K.U. Ingold, J.Lusztyk, W.R. Dolbier, Jr., H.-Q. Pan, M. Muir, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 99.
42. D. V. Avila, K. U. Ingold, J. Lusztyk, W. R. Dolbier, Jr., H.-Q. Pan, Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 12351.
43. M. Weber, N. J. Turro, J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 3326.
44. All thermochemical quantities used herein refer to gas-phase standard-state values at 298 K.
45. 2CXY-H).
46. fH values for radicals and their stable precursors.
47. Y. R. Luo, Comprehensive Handbook of Chemical Bond Energies. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2007.
48. We have restricted ourselves to experimental data; computational values are still rather method-dependent, particularly for radicals; for example, E. I. Izgorodina, D. R. B. Brittain, J. L. Hodgson, E. H. Krenske, C. Y. Lin, M. Namazian, M. L Coote, J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111, 10754.
49. Ed.: D. R. Lide, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, Internet Version 2007, (87th edn), http://www.hbcpnetbase.com; Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL, 2007.
50. Eds.: PJ. Linstrom, W.G. Mallard, NIST Chemistry Webbook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69, http://webbook.nist.gov; National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, June, 2005.
51. S. G. Lias, J. E. Bartmess, J. F. Liebman, J. L. Holmes, R. D. Levin, W. G. Mallard, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1988, 17, Supplement No. (1).
52. J. D. Cox, G. Pilcher, Thermochemistry of Organic and Organometallic Compounds, Academic Press, London, 1970.
53. N. Cohen, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1996, 25, 1411.
54. S. G. Lias, J. F. Liebman, R. D. Levin, S. A. Kafafi, S. E. Stein, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 25, Structures and Properties, v. 2.02; National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, January, 1994.
55. V. S. F. Muralha, R. M. Borges dos Santos, J. A. Martinho Simoes, J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 936.
56. J.-L. M. Abboud, P. Jimenez, M. V. Roux, C. Turrion, C. Lopez-Mardomingo, J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1995, 8, 15.
57. W. V. Steele, R. D. Chirico, N. K. Smith, J. Chem. Thermodyn. 1995, 27, 671.
58. C. Aubry, J. L. Holmes, Eur. J. Mass Spectrom. 2000, 6, 369.
59. D. A. Robaugh, S. E. Stein, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986, 108, 3224.
60. J. J. Brocks, H.-D. Beckhaus, A. L. J. Beckwith, C. Ruchardt, J. Org. Chem. 1998, 63, 1935.
61. R. D. Mead, K. R. Lykke, W. C. Lineberger, J. Marks, J. I. Brauman, J. Chem. Phys. 1984, 81, 4883.
62. Cf., G. Bouchoux, J. Chamot-Rooke, D. Leblanc, P. Mourgues, M. Sablier, Chem. Phys. Chem. 2001, 4, 235.
63. L. S. Alconcel, H.-J. Deyerl, V. Zengin, R. E. Continetti, J. Phys. Chem. A 1999, 103, 9190.
64. acidH(R-H) for propionaldehyde (366.4, Reference [65]), and the EA(R) from its enolate (38.9, Reference [66]). The revised acidity (365.2, Reference [50]) would reduce this value to 90.5. However, individual EA(R) values of 37.3 and 40.0 have more recently been reported from the (E) and (Z) enolates, respectively, generated stereoselectively (References [67,68]). EA(R) measurements for the enolate formed by gas-phase deprotonation of propionaldehyde (References [69,70]) suggest that it is the (E) isomer (References [67,68]). If its EA(R) is then the appropriate one to use, D(R-H) would be reduced further to 88.9 (91.6 for the other EA(R)). However, several factors engender skepticism concerning this low value. First, recent computational evidence suggests that the (Z) isomer of the radical is 0.5-0.7 more stable than the (E) isomer (References [71,72]), and the individual EA(R) values would then place the (Z) enolate 3.4 lower in energy than the (E) enolate. Since the lowest energy conformer of pro-pionaldehyde has the methyl group and the carbonyl oxygen in the (Z)-like geometry (Reference [73]), this stability ordering would indicate that its deprotonation is contrathermodynamic. Second, the ΔD(R-H) = 5.4 value between propionaldehyde and acetaldehyde would be atypically large (as in footnote d of Table 2). Third, one does not know what mixture of radical isomers is formed in radical addition to acrolein.
65. J. B. Cumming, P. Kebarle, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 5818.
66. A. H. Zimmerman, K. J. Reed, J. I. Brauman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 7203.
67. B. C. Romer, J. I. Brauman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 2054.
68. L. S. Alconcel, H.-J. Deyerl, R. E. Continetti, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 12675.
69. E. A. Brinkman, S. Berger, J. Marks, J. I. Brauman, J. Phys. Chem. 1982, 86, 7586.
70. G. B. Ellison, P. C. Engelking, W. C. Lineberger, J. Phys. Chem. 1982, 86, 4873.
71. N. Sebbar, H. Bockhorn, J. W. Bozzelli, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2002, 4, 3691.
72. S. Williams, L. B. Harding, J. F. Stanton, J. C. Weisshaar, J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 9906.
73. S. S. Butcher, E. B. Wilson, Jr., J. Chem. Phys. 1964, 40, 1671.
74. K. Rakus, S. D. Verevkin, H.-D. Beckhaus, C. Ruchardt, Chem. Ber. 1994, 127, 2225.
75. K. D. King, R. D. Goddard, J. Phys. Chem. 1976, 80, 546.
76. J. A. Manion, R. Louw, Recl. Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas 1986, 105, 442.
77. J. A. Seetula, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. 1996, 92, 3069.
78. K. Miyokawa, E. Tschuikow-Roux, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1999, 72, 1.
79. A. M. El-Nahas, J. W. Bozzelli, J. M. Simmie, M. V. Navarro, G. Black, H. J. Curran, J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 13618.
80. A. S. Rodgers, W. G. F. Ford, Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1973, 5, 965.
81. B. Ruscic, J. E. Boggs, A. Burcat, A. G. Csaszar, J. Demaison, R. Janoschek, J. M. L. Martin, M. L. Morton, M. J. Rossi, J. F. Stanton, P. G. Szalay, P. R. Westmoreland, F. Zabel, T. Berces, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 2005, 34, 573.
82. J. L. Holmes, F. P. Lossing, P. M. Mayer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 9723.
83. J. M. Karty, G. A. Janaway, J. I. Brauman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 5213.
84. R. D. Lafleur, B. Sztaray, T. Baer, J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 1450.
85. J. Berkowitz, G. B. Ellison, D. Gutman, J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 8, 2744.
86. D. J. Henry, C. J. Parkinson, L. Radom, J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106, 7927.
87. E. A. Brinkman, S. Berger, J. Marks, J. I. Brauman, J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 99, 7586.
88. M. Kranenburg, M. V. Ciriano, A. Cherkasov, P. Mulder, J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 915.
89. M. V. Ciriano, H.-G. Korth, W. B. van Scheppingen, P. Mulder, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 6375.
90. D. Griller, J. M. Kanabus-Kaminska, A. Maccoll, J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem.) 1988, 163, 125.
91. K. C. Ferguson, E. Whittle, Trans. Faraday Soc. 1971, 67, 2618.
92. S. S. Chen, A. S. Rodgers, R. C. Wilhoit, B. J. Zwolinski, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1975, 4, 441.
93. M. D. Bartberger, W. R. Dolbier, Jr., J. Lusztyk, K. U. Ingold, Tetrahedron 1997, 53, 9857.
94. T. Yamada, J. W. Bozzelli, R. J. Berry, J. Phys. Chem. A 1999, 103, 5602.
95. X.-M. Zhang, J. Org. Chem. 1998, 63, 3590.
96. P. Marshall, M. Schwartz, J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 2906.
97. There is still be some confusion between vertical and adiabatic values in the various sources; the NIST compilation (Reference [50]) appears to consciously list, or adjust to, adiabatic values.
98. M. Allan, Helv. Chim. Acta 1982, 65, 2008.
99. K. D. Jordan, P. D. Burrow, Acc. Chem. Res. 1978, 11, 341.
100. P. D. Burrow, A. Modelli, N. S. Chiu, K. D. Jordan, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1981, 82, 270.
101. J. C. Giordan, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 6544.
102. J.-P. Morizur, J. Mercier, M. Sarraf, Org. Mass Spectrom. 1982, 17, 327.
103. D. Nelson, M. J. S. Dewar, J. M. Buschek, E. McCarthy, J. Org. Chem. 1979, 44, 4109.
104. W.-C. Tam, D. Yee, C. E. Brion, J. Electron Spectrsc. Rel. Phenom. 1974, 4, 77.
105. H. A. Jimenez-Vasquez, M. E. Ochoa, G. Zepeda, A. Modelli, D. Jones, J. A. Mendoza, J. Tamariz, J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 107, 10082.
106. C.-G. Zhan, J. A. Nichols, D. A. Dixon, J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 4184.
107. K. Hayashibara, G. H. Kruppa, J. L. Beauchamp, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986, 108, 5441.
108. C. H. DePuy, S. Gronert, S. E. Barlow, V. M. Bierbaum, R. Damrauer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 1968.
109. F. P. Lossing, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 7526.
110. A. Mayoshi, H. Matsui, N. Washida, J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 3016.
111. K. M. Downard, J. C. Sheldon, J. H. Bowie, D. E. Lewis, R. N. Hayes, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 8112.
112. J. L. Holmes, F. P. Lossing, P. M. Mayer, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1993, 212, 134.
113. R. P. Thorn, Jr., P. S. Monks, L. J. Stief, S.-C. Kuo, Z. Zhang, S. K. Ross, R. B. Klemm, J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 846.
114. D. A. Shea, J. J. M. Steenvoorden, P. Chen, J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 107, 9728.
115. F. A. Houle, J. L. Beauchamp, J. Phys. Chem. 1981, 85, 3456.
116. R. F. Pottie, A. G. Harrison, F. P. Lossing, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1961, 83, 3204.
117. R. A. L. Peerboom, G. J. Rademaker, L. J. deKoning, N. M. M. Nibbering, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1992, 6, 394.
118. P. P. Bera, L Horny, H. F. Schaefer, III, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 6692.
119. R. L. Asher, B. Ruscic, J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 106, 210.
120. H.-J. Deyerl, L. S. Alconcel, R. E. Continetti, J. Phys. Chem. A 2001, 105, 552.
121. Denisov (References [122-125]) has applied intersecting parabola models to deduce changes in transition state geometries from experimental values of E and ΔH. These models in principle offer a circuitous iterative route to derive E from ΔH, but the required inputs include the distance and the force constant of the forming bond, quantities that can only be obtained from computations or from previously derived empirical correlations based on paired E and ΔH data.
122. E. T. Denisov, A. F. Shestakov, N. S. Emel'yanova, Kinet. Catal 2006, 47, 647.
123. E. T. Denisov, Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2005, 54, 914.
124. A. F. Shestakov, E. T. Denisov, N. S. Emel'yanova, Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2005, 54, 905.
125. E. T. Denisov, Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2004, 53, 1602.
126. J. S. Clarke, H. A. Rypkema, J. H. Kroll, N. M. Donahue, J.G. Anderson, J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 4458.
127. K. Héberger, A. Lopata, J. C. Jaszberenyi, J. Phys. Org. Chem. 2000, 73, 151.
128. C. Hansch, A. Leo, Substituent Constants for Correlation Analysis in Chemistry and Biology. Wiley, New York, 1979.
129. X. Creary, J. Org. Chem. 1980, 45, 280.
130. X. Creary, M. E. Mehrsheikh-Mohammadi, S. McDonald, J. Org. Chem. 1987, 52, 3254.
131. X. Creary, Acc. Chem. Res. 2006, 39, 761.
132. J. M. Dust, D. R. Arnold, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 1221.
133. D. D. M. Wayner, D. R. Arnold, Can. J. Chem. 1984, 62, 1164.
134. Updated values were taken from R. A. Jackson, M. Sharifi, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 1996, 775.
135. This treatment makes the common assumption that the σ values are still applicable when X and Y are directly substituted on the reaction center without the intervening p-phenylene group which is integral to their definition; cf. Y-.W. Wu, H.-T. Huang, Z.-J. Huang, H.-M. Huang, J.-F. Yang, Tetrahedron 2005, 61, 4461.
136. K. Heberger, A. Lopata, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 1995, 91.
137. K. Heberger, A. Lopata, J. Org. Chem. 1998, 63, 8646.
138. 2 for the Evans-Polanyi plots with our updated values of E and ΔH(R,X,Y) are typically lower than those reported by FR with the use of their values (as described below). It also appears that FR excluded the points for the phenyl-substituted olefins H,Ph, Me,Ph, and Ph,Ph in many of their individual correlations.
139. 2 value but a negative slope. It also gave the only negative Evans-Polanyi slope.
140. T. Alfrey, Jr., C. C. Price, J. Polym. Sci. 1947, 2, 101.
141. F. R. Mayo, C. Walling, Chem. Rev. 1950, 45, 191.
142. P. J. Flory, Principles of Polymer Chemistry. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1953.
143. R. Z. Greenley, in Polymer Handbook, 4th edn, Vol 1 (Eds.: J. Brandrup, E. H. Immergut, E. A. Grulke,), Wiley, New York, 1999.
144. G. C. Laurier, K. F. O'Driscoll, P.M. Reilly, J. Polym. Sci. Polym. Symp. Ed. 1995, 72, 17.
145. S. C. Rogers, W. C. Mackrodt, T. P. Davis, Polymer 1994, 35, 1258.
146. C.-G. Zhan, D. A. Dixon, J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106, 10311.
147. S. Shaik, A. Shurki, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 1999, 38, 586.
148. S. S. Shaik, E. Canadell, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 1446.
149. J. Lalevee, X. Allonas, J.-P. Fouassier, J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 4326.
150. J. Lalevee, X. Allonas, J.-P. Fouassier, J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 814.
151. J. Lalavee, X. Allonas, J.-P. Fouassier, Macromolecules 2005, 38, 4521.
152. For another rather 'non-conventional' additive method that relies on empirically optimized parameters and computational input, refer A. V. Sokolov, Int. J. Quant. Chem. 2002, 88, 358.
153. R. G. Parr, R. G. Pearson, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983, 105, 7512.
154. R. G. Pearson, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107, 6801.
155. polar in the Parr-Pearson treatment refers to an A:B acid-base complex at its equilibrium bond distance, whereas we are attempting to estimate the polar stabilization at a transition state distance.
156. As the equations are formulated, a positive value of S corresponds to electron transfer from the radical to the olefin.
157. R. A. Marcus, J. Phys. Chem. 1968, 72, 891.
158. A. O. Cohen, R. A. Marcus, J. Phys. Chem. 1968, 72, 4249.
159. P. Blowers, R. L. Masel, J. Phys. Chem. A 1999, 103, 7047.
160. av and sd(ΔE) were evaluated for each. The most promising quartets from this random screening were further fine-tuned until an optimum quartet emerged. While we cannot guarantee that an even broader search might not reveal an even better optimum, we believe this protocol gives a reliable route to approach the absolute optimum closely.
161. P.B. Ayscough, Electron Spin Resonance in Chemistry. Methuen & Co., London, 1967. pp 69ff.
162. Reference [60] and references therein.
163. This treatment assumes that delocalization will affect C and γ similarly, and it makes no provision for 'special' values for the phenylated cases.
164. Assume that the fraction of spin delocalization of magnitude(1-g) is accompanied by a fractional modulation of C* or γ* of magnitude of (1 - f); let h be the ratio (1 - f)/(1 - g); then f = [1 +h(g - 1)].
165. Values of for methylene or methine hydrogens cannot be used because they are strongly affected by preferred rotational conformations.
166. 2CHCI all fit well on the reported relationships between and D(R-H) (Reference 162).
167. Eds.: H. Fischer, K. H. Hellwege, Landolt-Bornstein Numerical Data and Functional Relationships in Science and Technology, New Series, Vol II/9b, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.
168. Olefin held at unity, as well as the inverse case. Both results fell approximately half-way between those of rows 3 and 5.