| Literature DB >> 33113920 |
Juncheng Lei1, Silvia Alessandrini2,3, Junhua Chen1, Yang Zheng1, Lorenzo Spada2, Qian Gou1, Cristina Puzzarini3, Vincenzo Barone2.
Abstract
The most stable isomer of the 1:1 complex formed by 2,2,2-trifluoroacetophenone and water has been characterized by combining rotational spectroscopy in supersonic expansion and state-of-the-art quantum-chemical computations. In the observed isomer, water plays the double role of proton donor and acceptor, thus forming a seven-membered ring with 2,2,2-trifluoroacetophenone. Accurate intermolecular parameters featuring one classical O-H···O hydrogen bond and one weak C-H···O hydrogen bond have been determined by means of a semi-experimental approach for equilibrium structure. Furthermore, insights on the nature of the established non-covalent interactions have been unveiled by means of different bond analyses. The comparison with the analogous complex formed by acetophenone with water points out the remarkable role played by fluorine atoms in tuning non-covalent interactions.Entities:
Keywords: hydrogen bond; noncovalent interactions; quantum chemistry; rotational spectroscopy; structure; substituent effects
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33113920 PMCID: PMC7660205 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25214899
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Molecular structures of the low-energy isomers (numbered according to the relative stability) of the TFAP-W complex issuing from rDSDjun computations.
Equilibrium rotational constants (MHz) 1, electric dipole moment components (debye) 2, relative equilibrium 3 and zero-point corrected 4 energies (kJ·mol−1), equilibrium dissociation and interaction energies (kJ·mol−1) 5 of the TFAP-H2O isomers.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 891.23 | 1277.58 | 1027.75 | 1193.21 |
|
| 611.55 | 472.14 | 603.12 | 520.70 |
|
| 387.60 | 367.15 | 408.87 | 483.30 |
| | | 1.8 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 2.6 |
| | | 1.7 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 0.7 |
| | | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.5 |
| Δ | 0.0 | 5.0 | 9.3 | 12.6 |
| Δ | 0.0 | 4.5 | 6.9 | 9.4 |
|
| −22.36 | −17.29 | −13.11 | −9.96 |
|
| −23.24 | −17.56 | −13.62 | −10.65 |
1A, B and C: at the rDSDjun level. 2 μa, μb and μc: absolute equilibrium rDSDjun values. 3 CP-jChS relative equilibrium energies (ΔE). 4 CP-jChS relative equilibrium energies zero-point corrected at the rDSDjun level (ΔE0). 5 CP-jChS equilibrium dissociation (De) and interaction energies (); for their definition, see Section 3.2.
Experimental spectroscopic parameters of different isotopic species of the TFAP-W isomer I (S-reduction, III l representation).
| Theory 1,2 | TFAP-H2O | TFAP-H218O | TFAP-D2O | TFAP-HOD | TFAP-DOH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 879.36 | 878.0858(1) 3 | 833.9848(2) | 830.3953(1) | 845.3957(1) | 861.6862(1) | |
| 605.16 | 609.4679(1) | 607.227(1) | 608.7236(6) | 608.6732(9) | 609.5202(9) | |
| 383.35 | 384.50355(4) | 374.9407(1) | 374.82029(6) | 377.82212(9) | 381.3495(1) | |
| 0.09 | 0.121(1) | 0.117(2) | 0.1115(9) | 0.115(1) | 0.115(1) | |
| −0.11 | −0.147(3) | −0.143(3) | −0.138(1) | −0.140(2) | −0.141(1) | |
| 0.03 | 0.035(2) | [0.035] 4 | [0.035] | [0.035] | [0.035] | |
| 0.04 | 0.0557(5) | [0.0557] | [0.0557] | [0.0557] | [0.0557] | |
| −6.6 | −6.3(3) | [−6.3] | [−6.3] | [−6.3] | [−6.3] | |
| 2.4 | 2.7 | 2.1 | 2.4 | 2.8 | ||
|
| 152 | 62 | 110 | 80 | 87 | |
| 45.75 | 45.1961(1) | 45.1821(7) | 45.2522(4) | 45.2435(6) | 45.2020(6) |
1 Ground-state rotational constants (A0, B0, C0) obtained by correcting the rDSDjun equilibrium values (see Table 1) with vibrational corrections at the B3 level. 2 Quartic centrifugal distortion constants (DJ, DJK, DK, d1, d2) calculated at the B3 level. 3 Standard error in parenthesis in unit of the last digit. 4 Values in square brackets are fixed at those of the parent species. 5 Number of fitted transitions.
Figure 2Four rotational transitions (labels: J, J being the rotational quantum number and K, K the values of the quantum number K in the prolate and oblate limiting case, respectively) of the main isotopologue of the isomer I of TFAP-W.
Figure 3Comparison between the semi-experimental intermolecular parameters (in red) with the rDSDjun counterparts (in black). Distances and angles are given in Å and degrees, respectively.
Figure 4(a) Noncovalent interactions stabilizing the isomer I of TFAP-W. (b) QTAIM analysis of isomer I. The bond critical points (i.e., the saddle points of electron density between two atoms) are identified by orange dots and the bond paths are represented by orange lines.
Figure 5rDSDjun structures of the isomer II (a) and isomer I (b) of TFAP-W and of the isomer I (c) and isomer II (d) of AP-W. The parameters involved in the corresponding HBs are also reported (bonds are expressed in Å and angles in degrees).