The synthesis, characterization, and zinc coordination chemistry of the three proligands 2-tert-butyl-4-[tert-butyl (1)/methoxy (2)/nitro (3)]-6-{[(2'-dimethylaminoethyl)methylamino]methyl}phenol are described. Each of the ligands was reacted with diethylzinc to yield zinc ethyl complexes 4-6; these complexes were subsequently reacted with phenylsilanol to yield zinc siloxide complexes 7-9. Finally, the zinc siloxide complexes were reacted with phenylsilane to produce the three new zinc hydride complexes 10-12. The new complexes 4-12 have been fully characterized by NMR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and elemental analyses. The structures of the zinc hydride complexes have been probed using VT-NMR spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction experiments. These data indicate that the complexes exhibit mononuclear structures at 298 K, both in the solid state and in solution (d8-toluene). At 203 K, the NMR signals broaden, consistent with an equilibrium between the mononuclear and dinuclear bis(μ-hydrido) complexes. All three zinc hydride complexes react rapidly and quantitatively with carbon dioxide, at 298 K and 1 bar of pressure over 20 min, to form the new zinc formate complexes 13-15. The zinc formate complexes have been analyzed by NMR spectroscopy and VT-NMR studies, which reveal a temperature-dependent monomer-dimer equilibrium that is dominated by the mononuclear species at 298 K.
The synthesis, characterization, and zinccoordination chemistry of the three proligands 2-tert-butyl-4-[tert-butyl (1)/methoxy (2)/nitro (3)]-6-{[(2'-dimethylaminoethyl)methylamino]methyl}phenol are described. Each of the ligands was reacted with diethylzinc to yield zinc ethyl complexes 4-6; these complexes were subsequently reacted with phenylsilanol to yield zinc siloxidecomplexes 7-9. Finally, the zinc siloxidecomplexes were reacted with phenylsilane to produce the three new zinc hydridecomplexes 10-12. The new complexes 4-12 have been fully characterized by NMR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and elemental analyses. The structures of the zinc hydridecomplexes have been probed using VT-NMR spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction experiments. These data indicate that the complexes exhibit mononuclear structures at 298 K, both in the solid state and in solution (d8-toluene). At 203 K, the NMR signals broaden, consistent with an equilibrium between the mononuclear and dinuclear bis(μ-hydrido) complexes. All three zinc hydridecomplexes react rapidly and quantitatively with carbon dioxide, at 298 K and 1 bar of pressure over 20 min, to form the new zinc formatecomplexes 13-15. The zinc formatecomplexes have been analyzed by NMR spectroscopy and VT-NMR studies, which reveal a temperature-dependent monomer-dimer equilibrium that is dominated by the mononuclear species at 298 K.
Zinc hydridecomplexes
and clusters have attracted attention as
efficient catalysts for the hydrosilylation of carbon dioxide, for
the methanolysis of silanes, and for the hydrozincation of olefins.[1] Furthermore, tris(pyrazolyl)hydroborate zinchydridecomplexes have been studied as potential models for the active
site of zinc-dependent metalloenzymes, such as liver alcohol dehydrogenase
or carbonic anhydrase.[2] The insertion of
carbon dioxide into well-defined zinc hydridecomplexes is relevant
for an improved understanding of the key steps in the hydrosilylation
catalyticcycle and as a potential model for reactions occurring on
the surface of heterogeneous Cu/ZnO/Al2O3catalysts
for carbon dioxidehydrogenation.[3] Nevertheless,
the range of well-defined zinc hydridecomplexes remains narrow and
studies of carbon dioxide insertion into zinc hydride bonds are limited.Zinc dihydride, ZnH2, is a thermally unstable material
whose precise structure remains unknown, although its properties indicate
that it is a polymer.[4] It is a powerful
reducing agent—for example, it reduces coordinated pyridine
molecules[5]—but it is inert to reaction
with carbon dioxide.[6] Very recently, Okuda
has published the first examples of carbene zinc dihydride adducts,
which exhibit dimeric structures containing both terminal and bridging
hydride moieties.[7] These dimeric structures
are maintained in the solid state (X-ray diffraction experiments)
and in solution (C6D6). The complexes are labile
in solution, undergoing ligand exchange reactions, and react quantitatively
with carbon dioxide, at 298 K and 0.5 bar of pressure, to produce
trinuclear zinc formateclusters. However, some of the carbene ligands
also react with carbon dioxide, leading to partial adduct decomposition.Various zinc hydridecomplexes, of the formulation LZnH, have been
reported where L, a monoanionic ancillary ligand, is selected from
amino/pyridyl amides,[1c,8] tris(pyrazoyl)hydroborates,[2,9] 3,5-disubstituted pyrazoles,[10] phosphorane
iminates,[11] β-diketiminates,[12] alkoxides,[6,13] 2,6-dialkylphenyls,[14] pyridyl-substituted tris(trimethylsilyl)methanides,[15] tris(4,4-dimethyl-2-oxazolinyl)phenylborate,[1b,16] acetimidinato,[17] and tris(2-pyridylthio)methyl.[1a,18] These complexes exhibit a range of structures, including clusters,[15] cubanes,[6,11,13] dimers,[1c,12a,14,17,19] and mononuclear
structures.[2b,9b,12d,16,18] The carbon
dioxide insertion chemistry of only a few of these hydridecomplexes
has been studied. The tetranuclear cubane hydrido zinc alkoxide complexes
insert carbon dioxide slowly, but the reaction is accelerated by substituting
one zinc vertex of the cube with a lithium ion.[6] However, the cubane decomposes completely during carbon
dioxide insertion, presumably due to reactions with both the alkoxide
and hydride ligands, to yield hydrated zinc formate polymers.[6] Harder and co-workers reported 2,6-diisopropylphenyl-substituted
β-diketiminate zinc hydridecomplexes which are dimeric in the
solid state but mononuclear in solution (d8-THF, 298 K).[12c] These complexes react
with carbon dioxide, over 30 min at 298 K, to yield dimericdiformatocomplexes, which are proposed to exhibit mononuclear structures in
solution (d6-benzene, 298 K).[12e] Zinc hydridecomplexes stabilized by tris(pyrazolyl)hydroborate,[9b,3a] tris(pyridylthio)methane,[17] and tris(4,4-dimethyl-2-oxazolinyl)phenylborate[20] are all reported to be mononuclear zinc hydrides
in both the solid state and solution. They react cleanly with carbon
dioxide to yield mononuclear zinc formatecomplexes.[9b,18]Here, zinc hydridecomplexes have been prepared using phenolatediamine ligands (Scheme 1), selected because
they have excellent precedent for the efficient coordination of zinc.[21] Furthermore, the use of a chelating phenolate
ligand is desirable, as it is expected to be significantly more resistant
to protonolysis side reactions than β-diketiminate or tris(pyrazolyl)hydroborate
ligands. Finally, the ligand is not expected to undergo any competitive
carbon dioxide insertion chemistry. This ligand class has proved effective
for the isolation of zinc, gallium, and indium alkoxidecomplexes,
which show high activities as catalysts for lactidepolymerization.[21,22] Herein, we report the synthesis of a series of phenol diamine ligands,
differing according to the p-phenolate substituent,
and their use as ancillary ligands to synthesize a series of new zincalkoxide and hydridecomplexes. The reaction of the zinc hydride with
CO2 affords new zinc formatecomplexes, and the rate at
which this takes place is also investigated. An improved understanding
of the reduction of carbon dioxide by these complexes may be relevant
to better understand the role of various catalysts and enzymes.
Scheme 1
Syntheses of Zinc
Hydride Complexes 10–12 and Zinc
Formate Complexes 13–15, Coordinated
by Diaminophenolate Ancillary Ligands
General reagents and conditions:
(i) 1 equiv of ZnEt2, 298 K, 16 h; (ii) 1 equiv of HOSiPh3, 298 K, 16 h; (iii) 1 equiv of PhSiH3, 298 K,
16 h; (iv) 1 atm of CO2, 298 K, 1 h.
Results and Discussion
Zinc Complex Syntheses
The diamino phenol proligands 1–3 were selected as suitable coordinating
groups for a series of new zinc hydridecomplexes (Scheme 1); only 1 has been reported previously.[21] The proligands 1–3 were prepared by refluxing ,N′-trimethylenediamine, paraformaldehyde,
and the relevant 4-subsitituted 2-tert-butylphenol
(R = tBu (1), OMe (2), NO2 (3)). The resulting products were isolated as
dark oils (1, 2) or as a yellow powder (3). Subsequent reaction of these proligands with 1 equiv of
ZnEt2, in pentane (or THF, for R = NO2) enabled
isolation of the ethylzinccomplexes 4–6 (51–63%), where 4 and 5 are white
powders and the nitro-containing 6 is a yellow powder.
Analysis of the complexes by 1HNMR spectroscopy revealed
that the nature of the substituent on the phenyl ring affected the
resonances of the zinc-bound ethyl group. Thus, the ethyl resonances
are observed at higher chemical shifts for 4 and 5, (5 (R = OMe), δ 0.44, 1.62 ppm; 4 (R = tBu), δ 0.44, 1.63), in comparison
to complex 6 (6 (R = NO2), δ
0.37, 1.45 ppm). Treatment of complexes 4–6 with 1 equiv of triphenylsilanol enabled clean transformation
to the zinc siloxidecomplexes 7–9 (51–98%). For these complexes, the 1HNMR spectra
revealed that the nature of the substituents on the phenolate ring
resulted in negligible changes in the siloxide phenyl multiplets (8 (R = OMe), δ 8.00, 7.31; 7 (R = tBu), δ 7.98, 7.26; 9 (R = NO2), δ 7.95, 7.28). Subsequent reaction of complexes 7–9 with 1 equiv of phenylsilane each yielded
the corresponding air-sensitive zinc hydridecomplexes 10–12 (46–60%).
Syntheses of Zinc
Hydride Complexes 10–12 and Zinc
Formate Complexes 13–15, Coordinated
by Diaminophenolate Ancillary Ligands
General reagents and conditions:
(i) 1 equiv of ZnEt2, 298 K, 16 h; (ii) 1 equiv of HOSiPh3, 298 K, 16 h; (iii) 1 equiv of PhSiH3, 298 K,
16 h; (iv) 1 atm of CO2, 298 K, 1 h.The infrared (IR) spectra for complexes 10–12 each showed an intense zinc hydride stretch at approximately
1720 cm–1 (Nujol mull; Figure S4, Supporting Information). The single intense IR resonance suggests
that the complexes exist, at 298 K, as mononuclear zinc hydride species
with a terminal zinc–hydride bond. There are only a few other
examples of such terminal zinc hydrides, and these have all shown
Zn–H resonances in a similar region of the IR spectrum (tris(2-pyridylthio)methane)zinchydride,[18] 1729 cm–1;
(tris(4,4-dimethyl-2-oxazolinyl)phenylborate)zinc hydride,[16] 1770 cm–1). In contrast, di-/multinuclear
zinccomplexes[12c] with bridging zinc hydride
moieties show Zn–H resonances at significantly lower frequencies,
generally ∼1500 cm–1.The zinc hydridecomplexes 10–12 were also characterized
using 1HNMR spectroscopy, where
a sharp singlet at approximately 4.10 ppm (d6-benzene) is observed for all complexes, regardless of the
nature of the ancillary ligand (4.10 (10), 4.09 (11), and 3.99 ppm (12)). The lack of significant
influence of the ancillary ligand on the Zn–H bond is in clear
contrast to trends observed for the zinc ethyl complexes. Nevertheless,
these phenolate-ligated mononuclear zinc hydridecomplexes show resonances
at chemical shifts somewhat lower than those for the other three known
mononuclear zinc hydridecomplexes (ZnH (298 K, C6D6): (tris(2-pyridylthio)methane)zinc hydride,[17] δ 5.60 ppm; 2-[(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)amino]-4-[(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)imino]pent-2-enyl}zinchydride,[12d] δ 5.02 ppm; (tris(4,4-dimethyl-2-oxazolinyl)phenylborate)zinchydride,[15] δ 4.27 ppm).In order to study
the solution structure of these complexes, variable-temperature 1HNMR studies were undertaken using complex 10 (d8-toluene, 303–203 K, Figure 1). These experiments suggest that a temperature-dependent
monomer–dimer equilibrium exists, with the mononuclear hydride
species being present at 298 K and the equilibrium shifting toward
a dinuclear (dimeric) μ-hydridecomplex, at reduced temperatures
(Scheme 2). The equilibrium is expected to
be entropically driven. Thus, decreasing the temperature from 303
to 203 K leads to a gradual increase in the hydridechemical shift,
with concomitant broadening, from a sharp signal at 3.91 ppm (303
K) to a broadened signal at 4.12 ppm (203 K). Even at 203 K, coalescence
was not achieved. At 203 K, the methylene resonances due to the ancillary
ligand also broaden, indicative of changes in the coordination geometry
of the ligand at reduced temperatures. The dimer is proposed to form
via hydride bridging ligands, supported by the significant changes
in spectroscopic features of the hydride ligands (chemical shift)
on reduction of the temperature and also by analogy to previously
prepared dimericzinc alkoxide complexes featuring the same ancillary
ligand.[21] The formation of dimericcomplexes
via bridging of the phenolateoxygen atom is unlikely, due to steric
repulsions between the tert-butyl substituents.
Figure 1
Region
of the VT 1H NMR (d8-toluene)
spectra where zinc hydride resonances are observed, for 10, collected at temperatures from 303 to 203 K (for the full
spectra see Figure S1, Supporting Information).
Scheme 2
Proposed Equilibrium between Monomeric
and Dimeric Structures for
Complex 10
Region
of the VT 1HNMR (d8-toluene)
spectra where zinc hydride resonances are observed, for 10, collected at temperatures from 303 to 203 K (for the full
spectra see Figure S1, Supporting Information).At 298 K, changes in the solution concentration from 0.1
to 0.01
M did not result in any change to the chemical shifts or peak line
widths in the observed spectrum, thus ruling out concentration-dependent
equilibria. The addition of 1 equiv of a strong donor molecule (pyridine)
also did not result in any changes to the spectra, providing further
evidence for the mononuclear zinc hydride structure at room temperature.
It is relevant that related β-diiminate zinc hydridecomplexes,
which were proposed to be mononuclear in solution (d8-toluene or d8-THF), at 298
K were also shown to undergo an entropically driven equilibrium which
lies toward the dimeric species at lower temperatures.[12d]Solution DOSY NMR experiments were used
to compare the hydrodynamic
radius of 10, in d8-toluene,
with that estimated from the X-ray crystal structure (see the Supporting Information for details and spectra).
The solution hydrodynamic radius was determined as 4.75 Å (toluene,
298 K), and the radius determined from the crystal structure is 5.11
Å; these results are in reasonable agreement and indicate the
presence of a monomer at 298 K. When the solution was cooled to 233
K, the solution hydrodynamic radius increased to 12.09 Å, in
line with the proposed temperature-dependent monomer–dimer
equilibrium (see the Supporting Information for full details and spectra). DFT calculations (computed at B3LYP,
3-21g*; see the Supporting Information for
further details) of the optimized geometry, for complex 10 as a dimer, showed a radius of 9.68 Å. For these lower temperature
DOSY experiments, there is a greater disparity between the experimental
and calculated values, although there are also more limitations to
using DFT data vs. that obtained by X-ray diffraction experiments
to predict the radius. Thus, the evidence currently supports the formation
of a dimer at lower temperature; a higher nuclearity cluster (such
as a trimer) cannot be ruled out, but we do note that this ancillary
ligand exerts significant steric hindrance, which might disfavor the
formation of such species.
X-ray Crystal Structure of 10
The molecular
structure of 10 (Figure 2) was
also resolved by a single-crystal X-ray diffraction study, which shows
a mononuclear structure with a single terminal hydride bound to a
zinccenter with a distorted-tetrahedral geometry. Only a few crystal
structures of similar monozinc hydridecomplexes have previously been
reported. The Zn–H distances are as follows: (tris(2-pyridylthio)methane)zinchydride, 1.51(3) Å;[17] (tris(4,4-dimethyl-2-oxazolinyl)phenylborate)zinchydride,[15] 1.525(16) Å; 2-[(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)amino]-4-[(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)imino]pent-2-enyl}zinchydride,[12d] 1.46(2) Å; 2-[(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)amino]-4-[(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)imino]pent-2-enyl}(4-(dimethylamino)pyridyl)zinchydride[12f,21], 1.49(2) Å. The distance of 1.75(3)
Å seen in 10 is significantly longer than all of
these.[22]
Figure 2
Crystal
structure of 10 (50% probability ellipsoids
except for H(1), which has been drawn as an arbitrarily sized sphere).
Selected bond lengths (Å) and angles (deg); Zn–H(1) 1.75(3),
Zn–O(1) 1.9462(12), Zn–N(8) 2.1272(15), Zn–N(11)
2.1447(14); O(1)–Zn–N(8) 93.88(5), O(1)–Zn–N(11)
99.78(5), N(8)–Zn–N(11) 86.15(6).
Crystal
structure of 10 (50% probability ellipsoids
except for H(1), which has been drawn as an arbitrarily sized sphere).
Selected bond lengths (Å) and angles (deg); Zn–H(1) 1.75(3),
Zn–O(1) 1.9462(12), Zn–N(8) 2.1272(15), Zn–N(11)
2.1447(14); O(1)–Zn–N(8) 93.88(5), O(1)–Zn–N(11)
99.78(5), N(8)–Zn–N(11) 86.15(6).However, all of these structures were derived from single-crystal
X-ray diffraction studies, a technique which has a fundamental problem
with locating hydrogen atoms. The structure of the simple dizinccomplex
bis(μ2-(2-dimethylamino-N-methylethylamido)-N′,μ-N)bis(hydridozinc)[8b,8c] had the positions of the two terminal hydride atoms determined using
neutron diffraction, showing the Zn–H distance to be 1.62(6)
Å (the complex has crystallographicC symmetry), which is not significantly different
from that seen in 10. Still, it is not clear whether
the apparently long nature of the Zn–H bond in 10 in comparison to those in other X-ray crystal structures represents
a real chemical difference or is just an artifact of the inherent
problems X-ray crystallography has with hydrogen atoms.
Reactivity
of 10–12 with CO2
The reactions between zinc hydridecomplexes 10–12 (d8-toluene)
and CO2 (1 bar) proceeded smoothly, at 298 K over 20 min,
and resulted in quantitative (by 1HNMR spectroscopy) formation
of the corresponding zinc formatecomplexes 13–15. Although NMR and IR spectroscopic data were consistent
with the clean formation of the formatecomplexes, and in the case
of 14 an analytically pure material was prepared, the
elemental analyses for 13 and 15 were not
in agreement with the expected values, nor were they consistent, despite
being prepared multiple times. It is proposed that residual water/protic
impurities, most likely in the carbon dioxide, led to partial decomposition
of the hydride precursors, thereby interfering with the elemental
analyses. The 1HNMR spectra show the complete disappearance
of the signals at ∼4 ppm, assigned to the Zn–H groups,
and the appearance of signals at ∼8.50 ppm, assigned to zincformate resonances. The 13C{1H} NMR spectra
also show the appearance of a resonance at ∼170 ppm, assigned
to the carbonyl carbon of the formate. In common with complexes 10–12, changing the electronic nature
of the phenolate ligand does not significantly influence the chemical
shift of the formate group in complexes 13–15 (ZnO2CH: 13, δ (d8-toluene) 8.51; 14, δ (C6D6), 8.64 ppm). Again, these new phenolate-coordinated
zinc formatecomplexes show chemical shifts lower than that for a
previously reported zinc formatecomplex (LZnO2CH (where
L = tris(2-pyridylthio)methane):[17] δ
9.53 ppm). The formate moiety is likely bound in a κ2 fashion to a single zinccenter (in the solid state at 298 K), as
evidenced by infrared spectroscopy, where the difference between the
symmetric and asymmetricformate stretches (Δν) was ≤31
cm–1 (Δν: 13, 21 cm–1; 14, 26 cm–1; 15, 31 cm–1).[23] However, solution VT 1HNMR spectra of 13 also indicate that there is likely to be an entropically driven
monomer–dimer equilibrium (Figure S2, Supporting
Information), with the formate resonance shifting from 8.48
ppm (298 K) to 8.93 ppm (203 K). By analogy to the previous investigation
of the zinc hydridecomplex 10, it is proposed that these
formatecomplexes exist as monomers at 298 K, with the formate group
chelating to a single zinccenter. At reduced temperatures, it is
likely that a dimericcomplex forms with bridging formate ligands.In order to establish that the formate was formed from the carbon
dioxide insertion into the zinc–hydride bond, isotopically
labeled 13CO2 was used to synthesize 13C-13. This complex showed a single signal due to the 13C of the formate at 170 ppm. The VT-13C{1H} NMR spectra (Figure 3) of 13C-13 also supported the proposed temperature-dependent
monomer–dimer equilibrium. A single signal was observed in
the carbonyl region at 313 K, assigned to the mononuclear species
(170 ppm); when the temperature was lowered to 273 K, two signals
were observed that were assigned to the mononuclear (170 ppm) and
dinuclear (173.5 ppm) complexes. Further cooling to 203 K led to a
single signal being observed (173.5 ppm) due to the dinuclear complex.
Figure 3
VT 13C NMR spectra of 13c−13,
in d8-THF. Spectra were collected
at the temperatures 313 K (top), 273 K (middle), and 203 K (bottom).
For the full spectra, see Figure S3 (Supporting
Information).
VT 13CNMR spectra of 13c−13,
in d8-THF. Spectra were collected
at the temperatures 313 K (top), 273 K (middle), and 203 K (bottom).
For the full spectra, see Figure S3 (Supporting
Information).The reactions of 10–13 with
CO2 were examined, using a Specac Reaction Cell Golden
Gate ATR
(see the Supporting Information), so as
to quantify the rates of CO2 insertion (Figure 4 illustrates the IR spectra resulting from the reaction
of 11 and CO2 (in toluene), at 2 bar of pressure
and 298 K). The reaction proceeded cleanly over 30 min, with the ZnH
stretch (1740 cm–1) disappearing at the same rate
as new zinc formate resonances evolved, in the region of 1600 cm–1. These new resonances are assigned to the symmetric
and asymmetric vibrational modes of the zinc formate moiety. From
the IR spectra, the changes in concentration of zinc hydride and zincformate against time were determined (Figure S6, Supporting Information). Using an initial rates method (5–15%
conversion), the rate of formation of zinc formate (or consumption
of zinc hydride) was determined: kobs =
0.033 M min–1 (Figure S7, Supporting
Information). However, a control experiment to determine the
rate of dissolution of carbon dioxide, in toluene under identical
conditions, revealed that the initial rate (5–15%) was almost
identical, kobs = 0.034 M min–1 (Figure S9, Supporting Information).
Thus, the rate of carbon dioxide insertion into these zinc hydridecomplexes is limited by the solubility of carbon dioxide in toluene.
Thus far, it has not proved feasible to modify the experimental procedure
so as to overcome this limitation. The use of a solvent with significantly
higher CO2 transport rates, through increased CO2 solubility or diffusion, is limited by the high reactivity of the
zinc hydride group; for example, the hydrides are incompatible with
functional groups including carbonates, carboxylates, amides, etc.
Figure 4
Stack
plot of the ATR-IR spectra showing CO2 insertion
into 11 to form 14, where negative peaks
show loses and positive peaks show gains. All spectra are referenced
to the original spectrum of 11, when t = 0 min. Reaction conditions: [11] = 0.1 M, toluene,
298 K, 2 bar of CO2.
Stack
plot of the ATR-IR spectra showing CO2 insertion
into 11 to form 14, where negative peaks
show loses and positive peaks show gains. All spectra are referenced
to the original spectrum of 11, when t = 0 min. Reaction conditions: [11] = 0.1 M, toluene,
298 K, 2 bar of CO2.
Conclusions
A new series of mononuclear zinc hydridecomplexes, ligated by
phenolate diamine ancillary ligands, has been prepared. The complexes
are mononuclear in both the solid and liquid (d8-toluene) states at 298 K, but they demonstrate an entropically
driven equilibrium between mono- and dinuclear species at lower temperatures.
This work adds to the few other examples of mononuclear zinc hydrides,
and the complexes are useful precursors for further reactions with
CO2, and other insertion reactions, relevant to catalysis.
The kinetic measurements show that CO2 insertion (298 K,
2 bar) is fast (<30 min, kobs ≥
0.033 M min–1) but is limited by gas transport under
these conditions. Future work is warranted using compatible solvents
with a higher CO2 solubility and further improvements to
the experimental design. Nevertheless, the current kinetic findings
are significant for others studying CO2 insertion, under
related conditions, and provide further insight into the high reactivity
of zinc hydride in various catalyticcycles.
Experimental
Section
Materials
4-Nitro-2-tert-butylphenol,[24] compound 1,[21] and 4(21) were synthesized
according to literature procedures. All other reagents were purchased
directly from Sigma-Aldrich. Unless otherwise stated, all reactions
were conducted under a nitrogen atmosphere, either using standard
Schlenk techniques or in a nitrogen-filled glovebox. All solvents
were dried by distillation from sodium and were degassed prior to
use by performing three freeze–pump–thaw cycles. Deuterated
solvents were dried over calcium hydride, followed by three freeze–thaw
cycles before use.
Spectroscopic Methods
In general,
NMR spectra were
collected on a Bruker AV-400 instrument. 1H DOSY experiments
were kindly conducted by Mr. Peter Haycock at Imperial College London
and were measured on a Bruker Av500 spectrometer running TopSpin3
and equipped with a z-gradient bbo/5 mm tunable probe and a BSMS GAB
10 A gradient amplifier providing a maximum gradient output of 5.35
G/cmA. The spectra were collected at a frequency of 500.13 MHz with
a spectral width of 5500 Hz (centered on 4.5 ppm) and 32768 data points.
A relaxation delay of 12 s was employed along with a diffusion time
(large delta) of 50 ms and a longitudinal eddy current delay (LED)
of 5 ms. Bipolar gradient pulses (little delta) of 4 ms and homospoil
gradient pulses of 1.1 ms were used. The gradient strengths of the
two homospoil pulses were −17.13% and −13.17%. Sixteen
experiments were collected with the bipolar gradient strength, initially
at 2% (first experiment) and linearly increased to 95% (16th experiment).
All gradient pulses were smoothed-square shaped (SMSQ10.100), and
after each application a recovery delay of 200 us was used. The data
were processed using an exponential function with a line broadening
of 1 Hz. Further processing was achieved with dosym (NMRtec) software
using the gifa-maxent processing method and the parameter preset 5.
Transmission infrared (IR) spectroscopy was measured on a PerkinElmer
Spectrum 100 FTIR spectrometer, using Nujol (dried over sodium) as
a mull and NaBr plates. ATR-IR spectra were recorded using a “Reaction
Cell Golden Gate ATR” accessory supplied by Specac and attached
to a custom-made gas handling manifold. The accessory uses a diamond
reflection element with single-bounce geometry built into the base
of a reactor that allows heating and pressurization. Measurements
were carried out a Bruker Tensor 27 FTIR spectrometer using a liquid
nitrogencooled MCT detector. CO2 was industrial grade
from BOC and was used without further purification. Elemental analyses
were carried out using a Carlo Erba CE1108 elemental analyzer, and
samples were manipulated under an inert atmosphere (helium glovebag),
by Mr. S. Boyer at London Metropolitan University, North Campus, Holloway
Road, London N7, U.K.
A solution of ,N′-trimethylethylenediamine
(2.00 g, 19.6 mmol), paraformaldehyde (0.76 g, 25.5 mmol), and 3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (3.53 g, 19.6 mmol) in ethanol
(100 mL) was heated at reflux under nitrogen for 14 h. The solution
was cooled and the volume reduced by 50 mL. HBr (1.6 mL, 29.4 mmol)
was added, and the solution was neutralized (NaHCO3). The
solution was washed with CHCl3 (3 × 70 mL) and dried
with MgSO4, the solvent was removed under vacuum, and the
resulting material was washed with pentane (25 mL) to yield the product
as a white powder (3.56 g, 12.7 mmol, 65%). 1HNMR (400
MHz, CDCl3): δ (ppm) 6.79 (d, 1H, ArH), 6.41 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.74 (s, 3H, OCH3), 3.64 (s, 2H, CH2), 2.54
(m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 2.48 (m,
2H, NCH2CH2N), 2.31 (s, 6H,
N(CH3)2), 2.21 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.40 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ (ppm) 151.7, 150.8, 137.9, 122.8, 112.7, 111.3
(s, Ar), 62.1 (s, CH2), 57.2 (s, C(CH3)3), 55.8 (s, OCH3), 54.4 (s, NCH3), 45.8
(s, NCH2CH2N), 41.9 (s, NCH3), 35.0 (s, NCH3), 29.5 (s, C(CH3)3). MS (ESI+): m/z 295
[M+]. Anal. Found (calcd) for C17H30N2O2: C, 69.27 (69.35); H, 10.18 (10.27); N,
9.45 (9.51).
A solution of ,N′-trimethylethylenediamine
(0.87 g, 8.55 mmol), paraformaldehyde (0.33 g, 11.1 mmol), and 2-tert-butyl-4-nitrophenol (1.51 g, 7.69 mmol) in ethanol
(50 mL) was heated, under reflux and nitrogen, for 14 h. The solution
was cooled, HBr (1.6 mL, 29.4 mmol) was added, and the solution was
neutralized with NaHCO3 and extracted with CHCl3 (3 × 50 mL). The organic layer was dried, and the solvent was
removed to give a brown oil. The crude product was purified by column
chromatography (silica gel, 3/7 CH2Cl2/Et2O) to afford a yellow solid (0.82 g, 2.91 mmol, 34%). 1HNMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ (ppm) 8.12 (d,
1H, ArH), 7.82 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.70
(s, 2H, CH2), 2.62 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 2.53 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N,), 2.33 (s, 3H, NCH3), 2.25 (s, 6H, N(CH3)2), 1.42 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, CDCl3): δ
(ppm) 164.4, 139.1, 137.7, 123.3, 122.8, 122.6 (s, Ar), 59.9 (s, CH2), 56.4 (s, C(CH3)3), 53.8 (s, NCH3), 45.4
(s, NCH2CH2N), 41.9 (s, NCH3), 35.2 (s, NCH3), 29.2 (s, C(CH3)3). MS (ESI+): m/z 309
[M+]. Anal. Found (calcd) for C16H27N3O3: C, 61.78 (62.11); H, 8.74 (8.80); N,
13.35 (13.58).
[OMeLZnEt] (5)
To a solution
of 2 (1.13 g, 3.84 mmol) in pentane (10 mL) was slowly
added ZnEt2 (0.52 g, 4.22 mmol), and the mixture was stirred
at 298 K for 16 h. The white precipitate was filtered and dried under
vacuum (0.75 g, 1.96 mmol, 51%). 1HNMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 7.27 (d, 1H, ArH), 6.55 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.64 (s, 3H, OCH3), 3.29 (d, 1H, CH2), 3.04
(d, 1H, CH2), 2.11 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.89 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.80 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.77 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.73 (s, 6H, N(CH3)2), 1.62 (t, 3H, CH3), 1.55 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 0.44 (q, 2H, CH2). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 161.9, 148.6, 139.6, 122.5, 114.7, 114.6 (s, Ar),
62.0 (s, CH2), 57.1 (s, C(CH3)3), 55.9 (s, OCH3), 52.3 (s, NCH3), 46.6, 45.6
(s, NCH2CH2N), 44.9 (s, NCH3), 35.9 (s, NCH3), 30.1 (s, C(CH3)3), 14.0 (s, CH3), −3.9
(s, CH2). Anal. Found (calcd) for C19H34N2O2Zn: C, 58.92 (58.84);
H, 8.91 (8.84); N, 7.17 (7.22).
[NO2LZnEt] (6)
To a solution
of 3 (300 mg, 0.97 mmol) in toluene (10 mL) was slowly
added ZnEt2 (119 mg, 0.97 mmol), and the mixture was stirred
at 298 K for 16 h. The yellow precipitate was filtered and dried under
vacuum (214 mg, 0.56 mmol, 57%). 1HNMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 8.62 (d, 1H, ArH), 7.99 (d, 1H, ArH), 2.98 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.69 (d, 1H, CH2), 1.83
(m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 1.70 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.60 (s, 3H,
NCH3), 1.58 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.56 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.54 (t, 3H, CH3), 1.45 (m,
1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.33 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 0.37 (q, 2H, CH2). 13CNMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm)
175.3, 139.7, 135.4, 126.9, 124.8, 122.7 (s, Ar), 61.0 (s, CH2), 56.9 (s, C(CH3)3), 52.1 (s, NCH3), 47.0,
45.6 (s, NCH2CH2N), 45.0 (s, NCH3), 35.8 (s, NCH3), 29.8 (s, C(CH3)3), 13.9 (s, CH3), −3.9
(s, CH2). Anal. Found (calcd) for C18H31N3O3Zn: C, 53.48 (53.67);
H, 7.67 (7.76); N, 10.36 (10.43).
[tBuLZnSiOPh3] (7)
A solution of 4 (1.00
g, 2.43 mmol) and HOSiPh3 (0.67 g, 2.43 mmol), dissolved
in toluene (20 mL), was stirred at
298 K for 16 h. The solvent was removed, and the white precipitate
was washed with pentane (20 mL) and filtered to yield the product
as a white powder (1.57 g, 2.38 mmol, 98%). 1HNMR (400
MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 7.98 (m, 5H, SiPh3), 7.60 (d, 1H, ArH), 7.26 (m, 10H, SiPh3), 6.80 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.55 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.82 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.24 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.81 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.78
(s, 4H, NCH3), 1.77 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.71 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.49 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.46 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.33 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100
MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 164.9, 141.3, 138.7
(s, Ar), 135.9, 135.7 (s, SiPh3), 129.0, 127.8 (s, SiPh3), 126.2, 124.7, 121.5 (s, Ar), 63.2 (s, CH2), 57.1 (s, C(CH3)3), 51.0 (s, NCH3), 47.6, 45.1 (s, NCH2CH2N), 44.2 (s.
NCH3), 35.9 (s, NCH3), 34.2 (s, C(CH3)3), 32.3, 30.2 (s, C(CH3)3).
Anal. Found (calcd) for C38H50N2O2SiZn: C, 68.97 (69.12); H, 7.64 (7.63); N, 4.15 (4.24).
[OMeLZnSiOPh3] (8)
To
a solution of 5 (358 mg, 1.29 mmol) in benzene (10
mL) was added HOSiPh3 (500 mg, 1.29 mmol), and the mixture
was stirred at 298 K for 16 h. The solvent was removed to yield the
product as a white crystalline powder which required no further purification
(410 mg, 0.65 mmol, 51%). 1HNMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 8.01 (d, 5H, SiPh3), 8.00
(d, 1H, ArH), 7.31 (m, 10H, SiPh3), 6.41
(d, 1H, ArH), 3.60 (s, 3H, OCH3), 3.53 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.75 (d,
1H, CH2), 2.17 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.80 (s, 6H, N(CH3)2), 1.72 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.56 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.49 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.34 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H}
NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 161.7, 149.5
142.3 (s, Ar), 140.4, 136.0 (s, SiPh3), 129.2, 128.8 (s,
SiPh3), 122.1, 115.2, 115.0 (s, Ar), 63.0 (s, CH3), 57.5 (s, C(CH3)3), 56.1 (s, OCH3), 51.2 (s, NCH3), 47.8, 45.3 (s, NCH2CH2N), 44.5 (s, NCH3), 36.1 (s, NCH3), 30.3
(s, C(CH3)3). Anal. Found (calcd)
for C35H44N2O3SiZn: C,
66.15 (66.28); H, 7.07 (6.99); N, 4.37 (4.42).
[NO2LZnSiOPh3] (9)
To a solution of 6 (174 mg, 0.45 mmol) in benzene (10
mL) was added HOSiPh3 (142 mg, 0.45 mmol), and the mixture
was stirred at 298 K for 16 h. The solvent was then removed to yield
the product as a yellow crystalline powder which required no further
purification (174 mg, 0.27 mmol, 60%). 1HNMR (400 MHz,
C6D6): δ (ppm) 8.57 (d, 1H, ArH), 7.95 (m, 5H, SiPh3), 7.85 (d, 1H, ArH), 7.28 (m, 10H, SiPh3), 3.16 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.46 (d, 1H, CH2), 1.89 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.71 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.66
(s, 3H, NCH3), 1.59 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.51 (s,
9H, C(CH3)3), 1.33 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.22 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.16 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H}
NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 174.5, 141.5,
140.1 (s, Ar), 136.0, 135.6 (s, SiPh3), 129.2, 127.9 (s,
SiPh3), 126.9, 124.5, 121.7 (s, Ar), 61.6 (s, CH2), 56.8 (s, C(CH3)3), 50.7 (s, NCH3), 47.6, 44.8 (s, NCH2CH2N), 44.1 (s,
NCH3), 35.6 (s, NCH3), 29.4 (s, C(CH3)3). Anal. Found (calcd) for C34H41N3O4SiZn: C, 62.79 (62.91); H, 6.32 (6.37); N, 6.38 (6.47).
[tBuLZnH] (10)
To a solution
of 7 (300 mg, 0.46 mmol) in toluene (10 mL) was added
phenylsilane (49 mg, 0.46 mmol). The solution was stirred at 298 K
for 16 h. The solvent was removed and pentane added (10 mL). The white
precipitate was isolated by centrifugation (3900 rpm, 20 min) and
dried under vacuum (68 mg, 0.27 mmol, 60%). 1HNMR (400
MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 7.64 (d, 1H, ArH), 6.89 (d, 1H, ArH), 4.10 (s, 1H, ZnH), 3.47 (d, 1H, CH2), 3.01
(d, 1H, CH2), 2.32 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.94 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.87 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.72 (s, 6H, NCH3), 1.62
(m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 1.48 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3),
1.25 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 164.8, 138.3, 134.8, 128.2, 124.4,
121.9 (s, Ar), 62.3 (s, CH2), 56.8 (s, C(CH3)3), 51.9 (s, NCH3) 47.2, 45.1 (s, NCH2CH2N), 35.8 (s, NCH3), 34.1 (s, NCH3), 32.3 (s, C(CH3)3), 30.3 (s, C(CH3)3). IR (Nujol) ν (cm–1) 1723 (ZnH). Anal. Found (calcd) for C20H30N2OZn: C, 62.14 (62.25); H, 9.32 (9.40); N, 7.14 (7.26).
[OMeLZnH] (11)
To a solution
of 8 (300 mg, 0.48 mmol) in toluene (10 mL) was added
PhSiH3 (51 mg, 0.48 mmol), and the solution was stirred
at 298 K for 16 h. The solvent was removed and pentane added (10 mL).
The solution was stirred for 30 min, followed by centrifugation (3900
rpm, 20 min) to separate the fine precipitate, which was then dried
under vacuum (76 mg, 0.22 mmol, 46%). 1HNMR (400 MHz,
C6D6): δ (ppm) 7.29 (d, 1H, ArH), 6.54 (d, 1H, ArH), 4.09 (s, 1H, ZnH), 3.64 (s, 3H, OCH3), 3.34
(d, 1H, CH2), 2.98 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.13 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.91 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.82 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3),
1.77 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.72 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.63 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 1.48 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm)
161.2, 148.7, 139.7, 122.3, 114.5, 110.0 (s, Ar), 61.6 (s, CH2), 56.7 (s, C(CH3)3), 55.7 (s, OCH3), 51.9
(s, NCH3), 47.1, 47.0 (s, NCH2CH2N), 45.0 (s, NCH3) 35.6 (s, NCH3), 29.9 (s, C(CH3)3). IR (Nujol):
ν (cm–1) 1749, 1732 (ZnH). Anal. Found (calcd)
for C17H30N2O3Zn: C, 56.70
(56.75); H, 8.29 (8.40); N, 7.66 (7.79).
[NO2LZnH] (12)
To a solution
of 9 (260 mg, 0.40 mmol) in toluene (10 mL) was added
phenylsilane (47 mg, 0.44 mmol), and the mixture was stirred at 298
K for 16 h. The solvent was removed, pentane was added (10 mL), and
the yellow precipitate was then isolated by centrifugation (3900 rpm,
20 min) and dried under vacuum (87 mg, 0.23 mmol, 58%). 1HNMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 8.61 (d,
1H, ArH), 7.97 (s, 1H, ArH), 3.99
(s, 1H, ZnH), 3.03 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.71 (d, 1H, CH2), 1.90 (m,
1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.78 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.69 (s, 3H,
NCH3), 1.59 (m, 12H, NCH3 and C(CNCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 139.4, 135.5, 135.1, 126.3,
124.2, 121.1 (s, Ar), 60.2 (s, CH2), 56.3
(s, C(CH3)3), 51.5 (s, NCH3), 44.7 (m, NCH2CH2N), 44.6 (s, NCH3), 35.1 (s, NCH3), 29.2 (s, C(CH3)3). IR (Nujol): ν (cm–1) 1755 (ZnH). Anal. Found (calcd) for C16H27N3O3Zn: C, 51.15 (51.28); H,
7.16 (7.26); N, 11.02 (11.21).
[tBuLZnCO2H] (13)
In an evacuated Young’s
tap NMR tube containing a frozen solution
of 10 (30 mg, 0.08 mmol), in d8-toluene (0.6 mL), CO2 (1 atm) was introduced to 1 bar
of pressure and the solution was warmed to 298 K. After 30 min at
298 K, without any stirring or shaking, the reaction was complete
and the product was identified by NMR and IR spectroscopy. 1HNMR (400 MHz, d8-toluene): δ
(ppm) 8.51 (s, 1H, O2CH), 7.52 (d, 1H,
ArH), 6.81 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.43 (d,
1H, CH2), 3.07 (d, 1H, CH2),, 2.12 (s, 3H, NCH3), 2.08
(m, 1H, NCH2CH2N), 1.87 (s, 6H, N(CH3)2),
1.74 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3), 1.61
(m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 1.40 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3),
1.24 (m, 1H, NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, d8-THF): δ (ppm) 170.0 (s, O2CH), 156.7, 136.3, 135.8, 126.5, 124.6, 122.6 (s, Ar), 63.1 (s, CH2), 57.2 (s, C(CH3)3), 52.2 (s, NCH3), 46.6,
45.0 (m, NCH2CH2N), 36.2 (s, NCH3), 34.5 (s, NCH3), 32.5 (s, C(CH3)3), 30.5 (s, C(CH3)3). IR (ATR): ν (cm–1) 1608, 1587 (ZnO2CH). Satisfactory elemental analyses could not be obtained
for this compound.
[OMeLZnCO2H] (14)
In an evacuated NMR tube containing a frozen
solution of 11 (30 mg, 0.083 mmol) in d8-toluene (0.6
mL), CO2 (1 atm) was introduced and the solution was warmed
to 298 K. After 30 min at 298 K, with no stirring or shaking, the
reaction was complete. 1HNMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 8.64 (s, 1H, O2CH), 7.27 (d, 1H, ArH), 6.51 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.62 (s, 3H, OCH3), 3.34 (d, 1H, CH2), 3.05 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.09 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.83–1.62
(m, 10H, N(CH3)2 and NCH2CH2N), 1.78, (s,
9H, C(CH3)3), 1.62 (m, 4H,
NCH2CH2N). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, C6D6): δ (ppm) 170.0 (s, O2CH), 161.2,
149.2, 140.3, 136.0, 122.1, 114.8 (s, Ar), 62.4 (s, CH2), 56.7 (s, C(CH3)3), 55.9 (s, OCH3), 51.7 (s, NCH3), 46.1 (NCH2CH2N), 44.7 (NCH3), 35.8 (NCH3), 30.2 (C(CH3)3). IR (ATR): ν (cm–1) 1612, 1586 (ZnO2CH). Anal. Found (calcd) for C18H30N2O4Zn: C, 53.41 (53.54); H,
7.56 (7.49); N, 6.85 (6.94).
[NO2LZnCO2H] (15)
In an evacuated NMR tube containing
a frozen solution of 12 (30 mg, 0.080 mmol) in d2-tetrachloroethane
(0.6 mL), CO2 (1 atm) was introduced and the solution was
warmed to 298 K. After 30 min at 298 K, with no stirring or shaking,
the reaction was complete and the product identified by NMR and IR
spectroscopy. 1HNMR (400 MHz, d2-TCE): δ (ppm) 8.31 (s, 1H, O2CH), 8.14 (d, 1H, ArH), 7.88 (d, 1H, ArH), 3.79 (d, 1H, CH2), 3.70 (d, 1H, CH2), 2.83 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 2.70 (m, 2H, NCH2CH2N), 2.61 (s, 3H, NCH3), 2.52 (s, 3H, NCH3), 2.35 (s, 3H, NCH3), 1.41 (s, 9H, C(CH3)3). 13C{1H} NMR (100 MHz, d2-TCE): δ (ppm)
174.2 (s, Ar), 170.7 (s, O2CH), 140.2,
134.9, 126.4, 124.2, 121.7 (s, Ar), 61.1 (s, CH2), 56.8 (s, C(CH3)3), 52.2 (s, NCH3), 46.8, 46.2 (s, NCH2CH2N), 45.0 (NCH3), 35.1 (NCH3),
29.1 (C(CH3)3). IR (ATR): ν
(cm–1) 1614, 1583 (ZnO2CH). Satisfactory
elemental analyses could not be obtained for this compound.
Authors: Charlotte K Williams; Laurie E Breyfogle; Sun Kyung Choi; Wonwoo Nam; Victor G Young; Marc A Hillmyer; William B Tolman Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2003-09-17 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Charles Romain; Jennifer A Garden; Gemma Trott; Antoine Buchard; Andrew J P White; Charlotte K Williams Journal: Chemistry Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 5.236