4.6 Article

How does non-covalent Se center dot center dot center dot Se = O interaction stabilize selenoxides at naphthalene 1,8-positions: structural and theoretical investigations

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 33, 期 1, 页码 196-206

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b809763a

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [16550038, 19550041, 20550042]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bis-selenides (LL), such as 8-[MeSe(X)]-1-[MeSe(Z)]C10H6 (1 (LL)), 8-[EtSe(X)]-1-[EtSe(Z)]C10H6 (2(LL)), 8-[p-YC6H4Se(X)]-1-[MeSe(Z)] C10H6 (3(LL)) and 8-[p-YC6H4Se(X)]-1-[p-YC6H4Se(Z)]C10H6 (4(LL)) were oxidized with ozone at 0 degrees C, where (X, Z) = (lone pair, lone pair) for LL. Bis-selenoxides, 1(OO), 3(OO) and 4(OO) where (X, Z) = (oxygen, oxygen), were obtained in the oxidation of 1(LL), 3(LL) and 4(LL), respectively, via corresponding selenide-selenoxides, 1(LO), 3(LO) and 4(LO), respectively. A facile Se-C bond cleavage was observed in 2 (LL). The structures of 1(LO) and 1 (OO) were determined by the X-ray analysis. Three Se center dot center dot center dot Se=O atoms in 1(LO) and four O=Se center dot center dot center dot Se=O atoms in 1(OO) align linearly. While the non-covalent Se center dot center dot center dot Se=O 3c-4e interaction operates to stabilize 1(LO), the non-covalent O=Se center dot center dot center dot Se=O 4c-4e interaction would not stabilize 1(OO). The 3c-4e interaction must play an important role to control the stereochemistry of selenoxides. The 8-G-1-[MeSe(OH) 2]C10H6 (n(OH center dot OH)) are the key intermediates in the racemization of 8-G-1-[MeSe(O)]C10H6 (n(O)) in solutions, where G = SeMe (1), H (5), F (6), Cl (7) and Br (8). Energies of n(OH center dot OH), relative to n(O), are evaluated based on the theoretical calculations. G of SeMe is demonstrated to operate most effectively to protect from racemization of selenoxides among n = 1 and 5-8, since the relative energies for G of cis- and trans-SeMe are largest.

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

4.6
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