Following up on his previous studies of isotope effects on the ring opening of cyclopropylcarbinyl radical 1 to give 2 (see my previous post), Borden now reports on its kinetic isotope effect (KIE).¹

Using the small-curvature tunneling approximation along with structures and frequencies computed at B3LYP/6-31G(d), he finds a negligible KIE at C₁, consistent with little motion of C₁ in the transition vector. The KIE for substitution at C₄ is large (k(¹²C/¹⁴C)=5.46), also consistent with its large motion in the transition vector. What is surprising is the KIE for deuterium substitution at C₁: 0.37. This is a large inverse isotope effect!

Analysis of the vibrational frequencies that involve the C₁ hydrogens provides an explanation. In going to the TS for the ring opening, both the torsional motion about the C₁-C₂ bond (making the double bond) and the pyramidal motion increase in frequency. This leads to a higher activation barrier for H than D, and the inverse isotope effect.

References

(1) Zhang, X.; Datta, A.; Hrovat, D. A.; Borden, W. T., “Calculations Predict a Large Inverse H/D Kinetic Isotope Effect on the Rate of Tunneling in the Ring Opening of Cyclopropylcarbinyl Radical,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2009, 131, 16002-16003, DOI: 10.1021/ja907406q.

The longstanding unknown oxyallyl diradical (1) singlet-triplet gap has now been addressed with a very nice photoelectron spectroscopy study by Lineberger with interpretation greatly aided by computations provided by Hrovat and Borden.¹

The photoelectron detachment spectrum of oxyallyl radical anion shows 5 major peaks, one at 1.942 eV and a series of four peaks starting at 1.997 eV separated by 405 cm^-1.

B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) computations indicate that the energy for electron detachment from the radical anion to triplet oxyallyl diradical is 1.979 eV. (The structure of triplet 1 is shown in Figure 1.) Further, the computed vibrational frequency of the C-C-C bend is 408 cm^-1. These computations suggest that the four peak sequence represents a vibrational progression in the C-C-C bend of the triplet oxyallyl diradical.

1A1

3B2

Figure 1. Structures of the singlet and triplet oxyallyl diradical 1.¹

CASPT2 computations on singlet oxyallayl diradical indicate that it lies in a very shallow well, lower than the zero-point energy. (This structure is shown in Figure 1.) In fact, the singlet diradical can collapse without a barrier to cyclopropanone. Interestingly, the C-O stretching frequency of 1 is computed to be 1731 cm^-1, and close inspection of the photoelectron spectrum does show a progression of this magnitude originating from peak A. Therefore, both the singlet and triplet states of 1 are identified and their gap is extraordinarily small – the singlet is only 0.055 eV lower in energy than the triplet.

References

(1) Ichino, T.; Villano, S. M.; Gianola, A. J.; Goebbert, D. J.; Velarde, L.; Sanov, A.; Blanksby, S. J.; Zhou, X.; Hrovat, D. A.; Borden, W. T.; Lineberger, W. C., "The Lowest Singlet and Triplet States of the Oxyallyl Diradical," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 8509-8511, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200904417

Does the Carbon-Sulfur triple bond exist? There’s probably little doubt it does in the CS molecule. But now Schreiner and Mloston have offered up the H-C≡S-OH species as a possibility.¹ Obtained by flash photolysis of 1, giving 2, and upon irradiation at 254 nm, H-C≡S-OH 3 is the observed species and not the expected carbene HO-C-SH 4. 3 is confirmed by excellent agreement between the observed and computationally predicted IR spectra.

The CCSD(T)/cc-pVTZ structures of 3 and 4 are shown in Figure 1. It is interesting that the carbene is not observed, even though it is 26.6 kcal mol^-1 more stable than 3.

3

4

Figure 1. CCSD(T)/cc-PVTZ optimized structures of 3 and 4.¹

So is there a triple bond? The short C-S distance (1.547 Å) is very similar to that in CS (1.545 Å). NBO analysis indicates a triple bond. But the MOs indicate significant lone pair build-up on both C and S, consistent with the strongly non-linear angles about these two atoms. The authors conclude that 3 is a “structure with a rather strong CS double bond or a weak triple bond”.

References

(1) Schreiner, P. R.; Reisenauer, H. P.; Romanski, J.; Mloston, G., "A Formal Carbon-Sulfur Triple Bond: H-C≡S-O-H," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 8133-8136, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200903969

An emerging theme in this blog is Möbius systems, ones that can be aromatic or antiaromatic. Rzepa has led the way here, especially in examining annulenes with a twisted structure. Along with Schleyer and Schaefer, they have now explored a series of Möbius annulenes.¹ The particularly novel aspect of this new work is the examination of higher-order Möbius systems. In the commonly held notion of the Möbius strip, the strip contains a single half twist. Rzepa points out that the notion of twist must be considered as two parts, a part due to torsions and a part due to writhe.² We can think of the Möbius strip as formed by a ladder where the ends are connect such that the left bottom post connects with the top right post and the bottom right post connects with the top left post. Let’s now consider the circle created by joining the midpoints of each rug of the ladder. If this circle lies in a plane, then the torsion is π/N where N is the number of rungs in the ladder. But, the collection of midpoints does not have to lie in a plane, and if these points distort out of plane, that’s writhe and allows for less torsion in the strip.The sum of these two parts is called L_k and it will be an integral multiple of π. So the common Möbius strip has L_k = 1.

An example of a molecular analogue of the common Möbius strip is the annulene C₉H₉⁺ (1) – see figure 1. But Möbius strips can have more than one twist. Rzepa, Schleyer, and Schaefer have found examples with L_k = 2, 3, or 4. Examples are C₁₄H₁₄ (2) with one full twist (L_k = 2, two half twists), C₁₆H₁₆^2- (3) with three half twists, and C₂₀H₂₀²⁺ (4) with four half twists.

1	2
3	4

Figure 1. Structures of annulenes 1-4.

These annulenes with higher-order twisting, namely 2-4, are aromatic, as determined by a variety of measures. For example, all express negative NICS values, all have positive diagmagnetic exaltations, and all express positive isomerization stabilization energies (which are a measure of aromatic stabilization energy).

References

(1) Wannere, C. S.; Rzepa, H. S.; Rinderspacher, B. C.; Paul, A.; Allan, C. S. M.; Schaefer Iii, H. F.; Schleyer, P. v. R., "The Geometry and Electronic Topology of Higher-Order Charged M&oml;bius Annulenes" J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, ASAP, DOI: 10.1021/jp902176a

(2) Fowler, P. W.; Rzepa, H. S., "Aromaticity rules for cycles with arbitrary numbers of half-twists," Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2006, 8, 1775-1777, DOI: 10.1039/b601655c.

Schaefer, Csaszar, and Allen have applied the focal point method towards predicting the energies and structures of cysteine.¹ This very high level method refines the structures that can be used to compare against those observed by Alonso² in his laser ablation molecular beam Fourier transform microwave spectroscopy experiment (see this post). They performed a broad conformation search, initially examining some 66,664 structures. These reduced to 71 unique conformations at MP2/cc-pvTZ. The lowest 11 energy structures were further optimized at MP2(FC)/aug-cc-pV(T+d)Z. The four lowest energy conformations are shown in Figure 1 along with their relative energies.

I (0.0)	II (4.79)
III (5.81)	IV (5.95)

Figure 1. MP2(FC)/aug-cc-pV(T+d)Z optimized geometries and focal point relative energies (kJ mol^-1) of the four lowest energy conformers of cysteine.¹

The three lowest energy structures found here match up with the lowest two structures found by Alonso and the energy differences are also quite comparable: 4.79 kJ and 5.81 mol^-1 with the focal point method 3.89 and 5.38 kJ mol^-1 with MP4/6-311++G(d,p)// MP2/6-311++G(d,p). So the identification of the cysteine conformers made by Alonso remains on firm ground.

References

(1) Wilke, J. J.; Lind, M. C.; Schaefer, H. F.; Csaszar, A. G.; Allen, W. D., "Conformers of Gaseous Cysteine," J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, DOI: 10.1021/ct900005c.

(2) Sanz, M. E.; Blanco, S.; López, J. C.; Alonso, J. L., "Rotational Probes of Six Conformers of Neutral Cysteine," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008, 4, 6216-6220, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200801337

InChIs

Cysteine:
InChI=1/C3H7NO2S/c4-2(1-7)3(5)6/h2,7H,1,4H2,(H,5,6)/t2-/m0/s1
InChIKey: XUJNEKJLAYXESH-REOHCLBHBU

Torquoselectivity rules (discussed in Chapter 3.5 of my book) indicate that 3-phenylcyclobutene will ring-open to give the outward rotated product (Reaction 1). Houk and Tang report a seeming contradiction, namely the ring opening of 1 gives only the inward product 3 (Reaction 2).¹

B3LYP/6-31G* computations on the ring-opening of 4 indicate that the activation barrier for the outward path (leading to 5) is nearly 8 kcal mol^-1 lower than the barrier for the inward path (leading to 6, see Reaction 3). This is consistent with torquoselectivity rules, but what is going on in the experiment?

In the investigation of the isomerization of the outward to inward pathway, they discovered a low-energy pyran intermediate 7. This led to the proposal of the mechanism shown in Reaction 3. The highest barrier is for the electrocyclization that leads to the outward product 5. The subsequent barriers – the closing to the pyran 7 and then the torquoselective ring opening to 6 –  are about than 13 kcal mol^-1 lower in energy than for the first step. The observed product is the thermodynamic sink. And the nice thing about this mechanism is that torquoselection is preserved.

References

(1) Um, J. M.; Xu, H.; Houk, K. N.; Tang, W., "Thermodynamic Control of the Electrocyclic
Ring Opening of Cyclobutenes: C=X Substituents at C-3 Mask the Kinetic Torquoselectivity," J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 6664-6665, DOI: 10.1021/ja9016446.

InChIs

4: InChI=1/C16H16O6/c1-20-13(17)11-9-16(14(18)21-2,15(19)22-3)12(11)10-7-5-4-6-8-10/h4-9,12H,1-3H3
InChIKey=VBOGEHVOAGDMNG-UHFFFAOYAR

5: InChI=1/C16H16O6/c1-20-14(17)12(9-11-7-5-4-6-8-11)10-13(15(18)21-2)16(19)22-3/h4-10H,1-3H3/b12-9-
InChIKey=PZRWKBUUAFMPBC-XFXZXTDPBF

6: InChI=1/C16H16O6/c1-20-14(17)12(9-11-7-5-4-6-8-11)10-13(15(18)21-2)16(19)22-3/h4-10H,1-3H3/b12-9+
InChIKey=PZRWKBUUAFMPBC-FMIVXFBMBS

7: InChI=1/C16H16O6/c1-19-14(17)11-9-12(15(18)20-2)16(21-3)22-13(11)10-7-5-4-6-8-10/h4-9,13H,1-3H3/t13-/m0/s1
InChIKey=QSJZITDSTPMCEM-ZDUSSCGKBG

Back when I was first learning ab initio methods in Cliff Dykstra’s lab, I played a bit with the post-HF method CEPA (couple electron pair approximation). This method fell out of favor over the years with the rise of MP theory and then with DFT. Now, Neese and Grimme and co-workers are resurrecting it.¹ Their Accounts article provides a series of tests of CEPA/1 against benchmark computations (typically CCSD(T)) and lo and behold, CEPA performs remarkably well! It bests B3LYP (no surprise there), B2LYP and MP2 in virtually every category, ranging from reaction energies, hydrogen bond energies, van der Waals interaction energies, and activation barrier heights. As an example, for the isomerization energy of toluene to norbornadiene, CCSD(T) estimates the energy is 42.79 kcal mol^-1. B3LYP does miserably, with an error of nearly 14 kcal mol^-1, but the CEPA/1 estimate is off by only 0.04 kcal mol^-1. Since the computational time of CEPA/1 is competitive with MP2, the authors conclude that CEPA/1 is well-worth reinvestigating as an alternative post-HF methodology.

References

(1) Neese, F.; Hansen, A.; Wennmohs, F.; Grimme, S., "Accurate Theoretical Chemistry with Coupled Pair Models," Acc. Chem. Res. 2009, 42, 641-648 DOI: 10.1021/ar800241t.

The importance of dynamics in simple reactions is made yet again in a recent study by Doubleday and Houk in 1,3-dipolar cycloadditions.¹ They looked at the reaction of acetylene or ethylene with either nitrous oxide, diazonioazanide, or methanediazonium. The transition state for these 6 reactions all show a concerted reaction. The transition vector has three major components; (a) symmetric formation/cleavage of the two new σ bonds, (b) bending of the dipolar component, or (c) symmetric bending of the hydrogens of ethylene or acetylene.

Classical trajectories were traced from the transition state back to reactant and forward to product. In the approach of the two fragments, the dipole bend vibrates, but then after the TS, it needs to bend quickly to close the 5-member ring. This means that the bending mode effectively has to “turn a corner” in phase space, and without energy in this mode, the molecules will simple bounce off of each other. Analysis of the reactants indicates significant vibrational excitation of the dipole bending mode.

References

(1) Xu, L.; Doubleday, C. E.; Houk, K. N., "Dynamics of 1,3-Dipolar Cycloaddition Reactions of Diazonium Betaines to Acetylene and Ethylene: Bending Vibrations Facilitate Reaction," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 2746-2748, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200805906

I blogged on Bickelhaput’s examination of the stability of kinked vs. linear polycyclic aromatics¹ in this post. Bickelhaupt argued against any H^…H stabilization across the bay region, a stabilization that Matta and Bader² argued is present based on the fact that there is a bond path linking the two hydrogens.

Grimme and Erker have now added to this story.³ They prepared the dideuterated phenanthrene 1 and obtained its IR and Raman spectra. The splitting of the symmetric (a₁) and asymmetric (b₁) vibrational frequencies is very small 9-12 cm^-1. The computed splitting are in the same range, with very small variation with the computational methodology employed. The small splitting argues against any significant interaction between the two hydrogen (deuterium) atoms. Further, the sign of the coupling between the two vibrations indicates a repulsive interaction between the two atoms. These authors argue that the vibrational splitting is almost entirely due to conventional weak van der Waals interactions, and that there is no “bond” between the two atoms, despite the fact that a bond path connects them. This bond path results simply from two (electron density) basins forced to butt against each other by the geometry of the molecule as a whole.

References

(1) Poater, J.; Visser, R.; Sola, M.; Bickelhaupt, F. M., "Polycyclic Benzenoids: Why Kinked is More Stable than Straight," J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 1134-1142, DOI: 10.1021/jo061637p

(2) Matta, C. F.; Hernández-Trujillo, J.; Tang, T.-H.; Bader, R. F. W., "Hydrogen-Hydrogen Bonding: A Stabilizing Interaction in Molecules and Crystals," Chem. Eur. J. 2003, 9, 1940-1951, DOI: 10.1002/chem.200204626

(3) Grimme, S.; Mück-Lichtenfeld, C.; Erker, G.; Kehr, G.; Wang, H.; Beckers, H. W., H., "When Do Interacting Atoms Form a Chemical Bond? Spectroscopic Measurements and Theoretical Analyses of Dideuteriophenanthrene," Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 2592-2595, DOI: 10.1002/anie.200805751

InChIs

1: InChI=1/C14H10/c1-3-7-13-11(5-1)9-10-12-6-2-4-8-14(12)13/h1-10H/i7D,8D
InChIKey=YNPNZTXNASCQKK-QTQOOCSTEC

Another two benchmarking studies of the performance of DFT have appeared.

The first is an examination by Csonka and French of the ability of DFT to predict the relative energy of carbohydrate conformation energies.¹ They examined 15 conformers of α- and β-D-allopyranose, fifteen conformations of 3,6-anydro-4-O-methyl-D-galactitol and four conformers of β-D-glucopyranose. The energies were referenced against those obtained at MP2/a-cc-pVTZ(-f)//B3LYP/6-31+G*. (This unusual basis set lacks the f functions on heavy atoms and d and diffuse functions on H.) Among the many comparisons and conclusions are the following: B3LYP is not the best functional for the sugars, in fact all other tested hybrid functional did better, with MO5-2X giving the best results. They suggest the MO5-2X/6-311+G**//MO5-2x/6-31+G* is the preferred model for sugars, except for evaluating the difference between ¹C₄ and ⁴C₁ conformers, where they opt for PBE/6-31+G**.

The second, by Korth and Grimme, describes a “mindless” DFT benchmarking study.²
This is really not a “mindless” study (as the term is used by Schaefer and Schleyer³ and discussed in this post, where all searching is done in a totally automated way) but rather Grimme describes a procedure for removing biases in the test set. Selection of “artificial molecules” is made by first deciding how many atoms are to be present and what will be the distribution of elements. In their two samples, they select systems having 8 atoms. The two sets differ by the distribution of the elements. The first set the atoms Na-Cl are one-third as probable as the elements Li-F, which are one-third as probable as H. The second set has the probability distribution similar to those found in naturally occurring organic compounds. The eight atoms, randomly selected by the computer, are placed in the corners of a cube and allowed to optimize (this is reminiscent of the “mindless” procedure of Schaefer and Schleyer³). This process generates a selection of random bonding environments along with open- and closed shell species, and removes (to a large degree) the biases of previous test sets, which are often skewed towards small molecules, ones where accurate experiments are available or geared towards a select group of molecules of interest. Energies are then computed using a variety of functional and compared to the energy at CCSD(T)/CBS. The bottom line is that the functional nicely group along the rungs defined by Perdew:⁴ LDA is the poorest performer, GGA does much better, the third rung of meta-GGA functionals are slightly better than GGA functionals, hybrids do better still, and the fifth rung functionals (double hybrids) perform quite well. Also of interest is that CCSD(T)/cc-pVDZ gives quite large errors and so Grimme cautions against using this small basis set.

References

(1) Csonka, G. I.; French, A. D.; Johnson, G. P.; Stortz, C. A., "Evaluation of Density Functionals and Basis Sets for Carbohydrates," J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, ASAP, DOI: 10.1021/ct8004479.

(2) Korth, M.; Grimme, S., ""Mindless" DFT Benchmarking," J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, ASAP, DOI: 10.1021/ct800511q.

(3) Bera, P. P.; Sattelmeyer, K. W.; Saunders, M.; Schaefer, H. F.; Schleyer, P. v. R., "Mindless Chemistry," J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 4287-4290, DOI: 10.1021/jp057107z.

(4) Perdew, J. P.; Ruzsinszky, A.; Tao, J.; Staroverov, V. N.; Scuseria, G. E.; Csonka, G. I., "Prescription for the design and selection of density functional approximations: More constraint satisfaction with fewer fits," J. Chem. Phys. 2005, 123, 062201-9, DOI: 10.1063/1.1904565