4.8 Article

Counterion Effect in the Reaction Mechanism of NHC Gold(I)-Catalyzed Alkoxylation of Alkynes: Computational Insight into Experiment

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 5, 期 2, 页码 803-814

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cs501681f

关键词

alkynes; DFT calculations; homogeneous catalysis; N-heterocyclic carbene-gold complexes; reaction mechanism; anion effect

资金

  1. Italian MIUR
  2. FIRB-futuro-in-ricerca project: Novel Au(I)-based molecular catalysts: from know-how to know-why (AuCat) [RBFR1022UQ]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Experimental data suggest that anions that provide a compromise between the hydrogen-bond acceptor and the coordinating powers rather than poor coordinating anions unexpectedly increase the efficiency of L-Au-X (L = ligand, X = anion) catalyzed alkyne alkoxylation reactions, where the nucleophilic attack is the rate-determining step. No systematic computational studies about the role of the anion in the different steps of the catalytic cycle are available yet. In this paper, the remarkable anion influence on the catalytic efficiency of [NHCAuX] (X = BF4-, OTf-, OTs-, TFA(-), and OAC(-)) complexes in the intermolecular addition of methanol to 2-butyne process has been analyzed through a density functional theory (DFT) approach. The role of the anion has been considered in all the steps of the reaction mechanism: pre-equilibrium, nucleophilic addition, and protodeauration. In the nucleophilic attack step, the anion acts (i) as a template, holding the methanol in the right position for the outer-sphere attack; (ii) as a hydrogen-bond acceptor, enhancing the nucleophilicity of the attacking methanol; (iii) as catalyst deactivator, by either its strong coordinating and/or basicity power, preventing the alkyne coordination or forming free alkoxide, respectively. In the protodeauration step, the anion acts as a proton shuttle, lowering the activation barrier. DFT calculations support intermediate coordinating and basicity power anions as the most efficient catalysts.

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

4.8
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