4.8 Article

The Origins of Dramatic Differences in Five-Membered vs Six-Membered Chelation of Pd(II) on Efficiency of C(sp3)-H Bond Activation

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 139, Issue 25, Pages 8514-8521

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b01801

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of the USA [CHE-1361104]
  2. National Science Foundation under CCI Center for Selective C-H Functionalization [CHE-1205646]
  3. Chinese Thousand Youth Talents Plan
  4. National Science Foundation [OCI-1053575]
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  6. Division Of Chemistry [1361104] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  8. Division Of Chemistry [1205646] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The origin of the unique effectiveness of six-membered chelates on the beta-methylene C(sp3)-H activation reactions by Pd(II) catalyst was explained with density functional theory. The Pd(II) catalysts that involve five-membered chelates are inactive in this transformation. Computational studies suggest that the C(sp3)-H bond activation is the rate-limiting step in both cases. The C(sp3)-H bond activation with a five-membered chelate is unfavorable by 7.7 kcal/mol compared to the corresponding six-membered chelate with Pd(II). Two factors cause the difference: (1) the dimeric Pd species with five-membered chelation square-planar structure is more stable than that with six-membered chelation by 2.0 kcal/mol; (2) steric repulsion between the ArF group of the substrate and the quinoline group of the acetyl-protected aminomethyl quinoline ligand destabilizes the five-membered chelate transition structure by 5.7 kcal/mol. The six-membered chelate of Pd(II) with an acetyl-protected aminoethyl quinoline ligand orients the ligand away from the ArF group of the substrate and alleviates the steric repulsion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available