5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Mechanism of Markovnikov-Selective Epoxide Hydrogenolysis Catalyzed by Ruthenium PNN and PNP Pincer Complexes

      research-article
      , , ,
      Organometallics
      American Chemical Society

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The homogeneous catalysis of epoxide hydrogenolysis to give alcohols has recently received significant attention. Catalyst systems have been developed for the selective formation of either the Markovnikov (branched) or anti-Markovnikov (linear) alcohol product. Thus far, the reported catalysts exhibiting Markovnikov selectivity all feature the potential for Noyori/Shvo-type bifunctional catalysis, with either a RuH/NH or FeH/OH core structure. The proposed mechanisms of epoxide ring-opening have involved cooperative C–O bond hydrogenolysis involving the metal hydride and the acidic pendant group on the ligand, in analogy to the well-documented mechanism of polar double-bond hydrogenation exhibited by catalysts of this type. In this work, we present a combined computational/experimental study of the mechanism of epoxide hydrogenolysis catalyzed by Noyori-type PNP and PNN complexes of ruthenium. We find that, at least for these ruthenium systems, the previously proposed bifunctional pathway for epoxide ring-opening is energetically inaccessible; instead, the ring-opening proceeds through opposite-side nucleophilic attack of the ruthenium hydride on the epoxide carbon, without the involvement of the ligand N–H group. For both catalyst systems, the rate law and overall barrier predicted by density functional theory (DFT) are consistent with the results from kinetic studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Mercury: visualization and analysis of crystal structures

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            How to conceptualize catalytic cycles? The energetic span model.

            A computational study of a catalytic cycle generates state energies (the E-representation), whereas experiments lead to rate constants (the k-representation). Based on transition state theory (TST), these are equivalent representations. Nevertheless, until recently, there has been no simple way to calculate the efficiency of a catalytic cycle, that is, its turnover frequency (TOF), from a theoretically obtained energy profile. In this Account, we introduce the energetic span model that enables one to evaluate TOFs in a straightforward manner and in affinity with the Curtin-Hammett principle. As shown herein, the model implies a change in our kinetic concepts. Analogous to Ohm's law, the catalytic chemical current (the TOF) can be defined by a chemical potential (independent of the mechanism) divided by a chemical resistance (dependent on the mechanism and the nature of the catalyst). This formulation is based on Eyring's TST and corresponds to a steady-state regime. In many catalytic cycles, only one transition state and one intermediate determine the TOF. We call them the TOF-determining transition state (TDTS) and the TOF-determining intermediate (TDI). These key states can be located, from among the many states available to a catalytic cycle, by assessing the degree of TOF control (X(TOF)); this last term resembles the structure-reactivity coefficient in classical physical organic chemistry. The TDTS-TDI energy difference and the reaction driving force define the energetic span (δE) of the cycle. Whenever the TDTS appears after the TDI, δE is the energy difference between these two states; when the opposite is true, we must also add the driving force to this difference. Having δE, the TOF is expressed simply in the Arrhenius-Eyring fashion, wherein δE serves as the apparent activation energy of the cycle. An important lesson from this model is that neither one transition state nor one reaction step possess all the kinetic information that determines the efficiency of a catalyst. Additionally, the TDI and TDTS are not necessarily the highest and lowest states, nor do they have to be adjoined as a single step. As such, we can conclude that a change in the conceptualization of catalytic cycles is in order: in catalysis, there are no rate-determining steps, but rather rate-determining states. We also include a study on the effect of reactant and product concentrations. In the energetic span approximation, only the reactants or products that are located between the TDI and TDTS accelerate or inhibit the reaction. In this manner, the energetic span model creates a direct link between experimental quantities and theoretical results. The versatility of the energetic span model is demonstrated with several catalytic cycles of organometallic reactions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Asymmetric Catalysis by Architectural and Functional Molecular Engineering: Practical Chemo- and Stereoselective Hydrogenation of Ketones

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Organometallics
                Organometallics
                om
                orgnd7
                Organometallics
                American Chemical Society
                0276-7333
                1520-6041
                27 February 2023
                13 March 2023
                : 42
                : 5
                : 347-356
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Chemistry, Colgate University , 13 Oak Drive, Hamilton, New York 13346, United States
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5292-397X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9140-6115
                Article
                10.1021/acs.organomet.2c00503
                10015984
                36937786
                b6bec251-a861-4135-afd1-2596412ed453
                © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society

                Permits the broadest form of re-use including for commercial purposes, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 07 October 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Division of Chemistry, doi 10.13039/100000165;
                Award ID: CHE-1954924
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                om2c00503
                om2c00503

                Inorganic & Bioinorganic chemistry
                Inorganic & Bioinorganic chemistry

                Comments

                Comment on this article