4.7 Article

Catalytic C-H Bond Oxidation Using Dioxygen by Analogues of Heme Superoxide

期刊

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 59, 期 11, 页码 7415-7425

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.9b03767

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, Government of India [SERB/EMR0008063]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heme active sites are capable of oxidizing organic substrates by four electrons using molecular oxygen (heme dioxygenases), where a dioxygen (O-2) adduct of heme (Fe-III-O-2(center dot-)) acts as the primary oxidant, in contrast to monooxygenases, where high-valent species are involved. This chemistry, although lucrative, is difficult to access using homogeneous synthetic systems. Over the past few years using a combination of selfassembly and in situ resonance Raman spectroscopy, the distribution of different reactive intermediates formed during the electrochemical reduction of oxygen has been elucidated. An Fe-III-O-2(center dot-) species, which is the reactive species of dioxygenase, is an intermediate in heterogeneous electrochemical O-2 reduction by iron porphyrins and its population, under electrochemical conditions, may be controlled by controlling the applied potential. Iron porphyrins having different axial ligands are constructed on a self-assembled monolayer of thiols on an electrode, and these constructs can activate O-2 and efficiently catalyze the dioxygenation of 3-methylindole and oxidation of a series of organic compounds having C-H bond energies between 80 and 90 kcal mo1(-1) at potentials where Fe-III-O-2(center dot-) species are formed on the electrode. Isotope effects suggest that hydrogen-atom transfer from the substrate is likely to be the rate-determining step. Axial thiolate ligands are found to be more efficient than axial imidazoles or phenolates with turnover numbers above 60000 and turnover frequencies over 60 s(-1). These results highlight a new reaction engineering approach to harness O-2 as a green oxidant for efficient chemical oxidation.

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