4.7 Article

Unexpected binuclear O-O cleavage and radical C-H activation mechanism for Cu-catalyzed desaturation of lactone

期刊

DALTON TRANSACTIONS
卷 50, 期 8, 页码 2997-3004

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d0dt04311g

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21873107, 21673250]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study using density functional theory revealed unexpected binuclear di-tert-butyl peroxide (DTBP) homolysis with spin-crossover and a radical alpha-C-H bond activation mechanism in Cu-catalyzed desaturation of delta-valerolactone into alpha,beta-unsaturated counterparts. The rate-determining step was found to be the homolysis of the O-O bond in DTBP, while the alpha- and beta-H transfer steps had lower barriers than the O-O cleavage process. The substitution of CyPPh2 for pyridine in Cu complexes resulted in higher barriers for O-O bond cleavage and C-H bond activations with the formation of more stable binuclear Cu complexes.
A density functional theory study of Cu-catalyzed desaturation of delta-valerolactone into alpha,beta-unsaturated counterparts reveals an unexpected binuclear di-tert-butyl peroxide (DTBP) homolysis with spin-crossover and a radical alpha-C-H bond activation mechanism. The rate-determining step in the reaction catalyzed by (CuOAc)-O-I-CyPPh2 is the homolysis of the O-O bond in DTBP with a total free energy barrier of 26.9 kcal mol(-1), which is consistent with the observed first-order dependences on LCuI-PR3 and DTBP, as well as the pseudo-zeroth-order with lactone. The alpha- and beta-H transfer steps have 0.3 and 14.8 kcal mol(-1) lower barriers than the O-O cleavage process, respectively. Such different barriers well explain the observed weak kinetic isotopic effect (KIE) at alpha-H and no KIE at beta-H. In addition, we found that the replacement of CyPPh2 for pyridine in the Cu complexes leads to much higher barriers for O-O bond cleavage and C-H bond activations with the formation of more stable binuclear Cu complexes.

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