4.6 Article

The influence of electron delocalization upon the stability and structure of potential N-heterocyclic carbene precursors with 1,3-diaryl-imidazolidine-4,5-dione skeletons

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 34, 期 7, 页码 1295-1308

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b9nj00771g

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Academy of Finland
  3. Alberta Science and Research Investments Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Targeting N-heterocyclic carbenes (NHCs) with increased pi-acceptor character featuring N-fluorophenyl substituents, the molecular 2-chloro-1,3-bis(fluorophenyl) imidazolidine-4,5-diones (1a-c) were isolated from the condensation of the corresponding formamidine with oxalyl chloride. These formal adducts of NHCs with hydrogen chloride demonstrated reactivity akin to that of alkyl halides: 1,3,1',3'-tetrakis(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-[2,2']diimidazolidinyl-4,5,40,50- tetraone (2b) was formed via the reductive coupling of 1b, while 1,3-bis(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)-4,5-dioxoimidazolidin-2-yl acetate (3c) was formed as the result of a metathesis reaction with mercury(II) acetate. Chloride abstraction resulted in the formation of imidazolium-4,5-dione salts (4a-c) that decomposed rapidly, except in the case of the kinetically-stabilized 1,3-bis(2,6-diisopropylphenyl) imidazolium-4,5-dione hexafluorophosphate 4c. All imidazolium-4,5-dione hexafluorophosphate salts decomposed to neutral 2-fluoro-1,3-bis(aryl)imidazolidine-4,5-diones (5a-c) via fluoride abstraction. 2-Methoxy-1,3-di(aryl)imidazolidine-4,5-diones (6a-c) were also prepared and they failed to undergo thermolysis and yield the free NHCs. Computational analyses revealed that the instability of NHCs with an oxalamide skeleton, as well as that of imidazolium-4,5-diones, results from a pi-framework which extends over both carbonyl moieties and gives rise to a very low energy LUMO, rendering the compounds in question highly electrophilic.

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