4.6 Article

Abstraction of the I Atom from CH3I by Gas-Phase Aun- (n = 1-4) via Reductive Activation of the C-I Bond

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 3, 期 12, 页码 16874-16881

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.8b02809

关键词

-

资金

  1. Elements Strategy Initiative for Catalysts and Batteries (ESICB)
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) of Japan [17H01182, 17K05743, 17J04868]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17K05743, 17H01182, 17J04868] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gas-phase reactions of atomic gold anions and small gold cluster anions, Au-n(-) (n = 1-4), with CH3I were investigated to clarify the effect of the cluster size on C-I bond activation and to elucidate the key properties of Au clusters that govern the reactivity. AunI- identified by mass spectrometry was observed as a common reaction product. Photoelectron spectroscopy and density functional theory calculations revealed that Au2I- has a linear structure in which the I atom is bonded to Au-2, and Au3I- and Au4I- take a two-dimensional structure in which the I atom is bonded to triangular Au-3 moieties. Pseudo-first-order kinetic analyses of the reaction revealed the inverse correlation of the reactivity of Au-n(-) toward CH3I and the electron affinity of Au-n, indicating the reductive activation of the C-I bond. Especially, Au-2(-) showed the highest reactivity to form Au2I- as the main product, whereas the adduct compound Au2CH3I- was hardly formed, in sharp contrast to the reaction of Au- reported previously. On the basis of theoretical calculations, we propose that the reaction proceeded dominantly via the I atom abstraction pathway (attack of Au-2(-) from the I atom side), which is highly preferential from the viewpoint of both the energetics and a steric factor. This study demonstrates that not only the reactivity but also the reaction mechanisms and products are governed by the cluster size in C-I bond activation by Au clusters at the smallest size region.

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