Article

Manganese catalysts with molecular recognition functionality for selective alkene epoxidation.

Chemistry Department, Yale University, 225 Prospect Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06511, USA.
Inorganic Chemistry (Impact Factor: 4.79). 01/2009; 48(2):488-95. DOI: 10.1021/ic8013464
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Selective epoxidation of alkenes is possible with a new manganese porphyrin catalyst, C(PMR), that uses hydrogen bonding between the carboxylic acid on the substrate molecule and a Kemp's triacid unit. For two out of three olefin substrates employed, molecular recognition prevents the unselective oxidation of C-H bonds, and directs oxidation to the olefin moiety, giving only epoxide products. Weak diastereoselectivity is observed in the epoxide products, suggesting that molecular recognition affects the orientation of the catalyst-bound substrate. The previously reported manganese terpyridine complex C(TMR) is shown to be a superior epoxidation catalyst to the porphyrin catalyst C(PMR). Good conversion of 2-cyclopentene acetic acid (substrate S2) with C(PMR) is consistent with molecular modeling, which indicates a particularly good substrate/catalyst match. Evidence suggests that hydrogen bonding between the substrate and the catalyst is critical in this system.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
66 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A versatile class of heme monoxygenases involved in many vital functions for human health are the cytochromes P450, which react via a high-valent iron(IV) oxo heme cation radical species called Compound I. One of the key reactions catalyzed by these enzymes is C═C epoxidation of substrates. We report here a systematic study into the intrinsic chemical properties of substrate and oxidant that affect reactivity patterns. To this end, we investigated the effect of styrene and para-substituted styrene epoxidation by Compound I models with either an anionic (chloride) or neutral (acetonitrile) axial ligand. We show, for the first time, that the activation enthalpy of the reaction is determined by the ionization potential of the substrate, the electron affinity of the oxidant, and the strength of the newly formed C-O bond (approximated by the bond dissociation energy, BDEOH). We have set up a new valence bond model that enables us to generalize substrate epoxidation reactions by iron(IV)-oxo porphyrin cation-radical oxidants and make predictions of rate constants and reactivities. We show here that electron-withdrawing substituents lead to early transition states, whereas electron-donating groups on the olefin substrate give late transition states. This affects the barrier heights in such a way that electron-withdrawing substituents correlate the barrier height with BDEOH, while the electron affinity of the oxidant is proportional to the barrier height for substrates with electron-donating substituents.
    Inorganic Chemistry 07/2013; · 4.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Supramolecular catalysis is a rapidly expanding discipline which has benefited from the development of both homogeneous catalysis and supramolecular chemistry. The properties of classical metal and organic catalysts can now be carefully tailored by means of several suitable approaches and the choice of reversible interactions such as hydrogen bond, metal-ligand, electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. The first part of these two subsequent reviews will be dedicated to catalytic systems for which non-covalent interactions between the partners of the reaction have been designed although mimicking enzyme properties has not been intended. Ligand, metal, organocatalyst, substrate, additive, and metal counterion are reaction partners that can be held together by non-covalent interactions. The resulting catalysts possess unique properties compared to analogues lacking the assembling properties. Depending on the nature of the reaction partners involved in the interactions, distinct applications have been accomplished, mainly (i) the building of bidentate ligand libraries (intra ligand-ligand), (ii) the building of di- or oligonuclear complexes (inter ligand-ligand), (iii) the alteration of the coordination spheres of a metal catalyst (ligand-ligand additive), and (iv) the control of the substrate reactivity (catalyst-substrate). More complex systems that involve the cooperative action of three reaction partners have also been disclosed. In this review, special attention will be given to supramolecular catalysts for which the observed catalytic activity and/or selectivity have been imputed to non-covalent interaction between the reaction partners. Additional features of these catalysts are the easy modulation of the catalytic performance by modifying one of their building blocks and the development of new catalytic pathways/reactions not achievable with classical covalent catalysts.
    Chemical Society Reviews 12/2013; · 30.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The synthesis and structures of Fe, Co, and Zn halide complexes [MX2(H2L)] (M = Fe, X = Br; M = Co, Zn, X = Cl) of the N-donor extended dipyrromethane ligand H2L are described, from which it is clear that bond rearrangements from imine-pyrrole to amine-azafulvene tautomers occur on metal co-ordination, both in the solid state and in solution. In the structure of [FeBr2(H2L)], this H-migration results in a pendant amine that is involved in both inter- and intramolecular hydrogen bonds to the bromide ligands, so forming a dimer. As the tautomerisation renders the N–H protons less acidic, metal-based ligand substitution reactions can occur in favour of deprotonation. As such, the reaction between [MCl2(H2L)] (M = Co, Zn) and NaN3 results in the formation of the bis(azide) complexes [M(N3)2(H2L)] which for Co displays both inter- and intramolecular N–HN3–Co hydrogen bonds in the solid state. In contrast, reactions of the dihalides with the lithium bases LiNMe2 or LiMe (M = Fe), or reduction reactions with C8K (M = Fe, Co) result in the formation of the known dinuclear helicates [M2(L)2].
    Dalton Transactions 01/2010; 39(2). · 4.10 Impact Factor