4.7 Review

A chemical/computational approach to the determination of absolute configuration of flexible and transparent molecules: Aliphatic diols as a case study

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 73, 期 13, 页码 4865-4873

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jo800516f

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By reacting flexible and optically transparent in UV-vis molecules such as 1,2-, syn- and anti-1,3-diols, 1,3-sulfanylalcohols of known absolute configuration (AC) with fluorenone dimethyl acetal, the corresponding ketals are obtained. They are conformationally well-defined (only one conformer in most cases) compounds exhibiting medium-high optical rotation (OR) values, which are independent of the solvent, and electronic circular dichroism (ECD) spectra, which show several (up to five) Cotton effects in the 350-200 nm range due to valence shell pi ->pi* transitions. These features allow simulation of the chiroptical properties of these compounds at the TDDFT/B3LYP/6-31G* level of theory to obtain, using the known ACs of these compounds, a satisfactory reproduction of the OR values (sign and order of magnitude; quantitatively, the predicted values are twice the experimental ones), and a more than satisfactory reproduction of the ECD spectra (sign, intensity, and position of the lowest-energy four Cotton effects) for all the compounds studied. Therefore, this approach can be used to assign the AC of such flexible molecules, in particular, syn-1,3-diols, which are important substrates in organic synthesis and for which nonempirical methods of AC assignment have not been devised so far. Furthermore, since the fluorene chromophore leads to the presence of several Cotton effects from, say, 350 to 200 nm, their correct simulation of sign, intensity, and position is a guarantee of the correct assignment of AC: in this way, ECD spectroscopy gains the same advantages of VCD spectroscopy, that is, the need of reproducing many ECD bands and then a solid guarantee of a correct AC assignment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据