| Literature DB >> 35530614 |
Zuzana Hloušková1, Milan Klikar1, Oldřich Pytela1, Numan Almonasy1, Aleš Růžička2, Veronika Jandová1, Filip Bureš1.
Abstract
As an extension of the successful dicyanopyrazine photoredox catalysts, a series of X-shaped push-pull molecules with a systematically altered structure were designed and facilely synthesized; their structure-property relationship was elucidated in detail via experimental as well as theoretical calculations. Dicyanopyrazines are proven to be powerful photoredox catalysts with a push-pull arrangement that allows facile property tuning by interchanging a particular part of the D-π-A system. Changing the mutual position of the cyano acceptors and the methoxy, methylthio and thienyl donors as well as modifying the linker allowed wide tuning of the fundamental properties of the catalysts. Contrary to the currently available organic photoredox catalysts, we provided a series of catalysts based on a pyrazine heterocyclic scaffold with easy synthesis and further modification, diverse photoredox characteristics and wide application potential across modern photoredox transformations. The photoredox catalytic activities of the target catalysts were examined in a benchmark cross-dehydrogenative coupling and novel and challenging annulation reactions. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 35530614 PMCID: PMC9069489 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra04731j
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Structural tuning of the DPZ push–pull molecules.
Scheme 1General reaction scheme leading to the target push–pull pyrazines 1–14.
Scheme 2Synthesis of 3,5-dichloropyrazine-2,6-dicarbonitrile 16.
Fig. 2ORTEP representations of the DPZ derivatives (a) 1 (CCDC 1553203), (b) 2 (CCDC 1553204), (c) 7 (CCDC 1897538) and (d) 12 (CCDC 1897539). Vibrational ellipsoids obtained at 150 K are shown at the 50% probability level, R = 0.04–0.05. Top and side views are provided.
Experimentally obtained photophysical and electrochemical parameters of DPZ derivatives 1–14
| Comp. | Photophysical data | Electrochemical data | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ground state | Excited state | |||||||||||
|
|
|
| Stokes shift [cm−1 eV−1] |
|
|
| Δ |
|
|
|
| |
| 1 | 440/2.82 | 571/2.17 | <0.02 | 5200/0.65 | 2.50 | 1.32 | −1.14 | 2.46 | −5.79 | −3.33 | −1.18 | 1.36 |
| 2 | 379/3.27 | 488/2.54 | <0.02 | 5900/0.73 | 2.91 | 1.75 | −1.12 | 2.87 | −6.22 | −3.35 | −1.16 | 1.79 |
| 3 | 443/2.79 | 552/2.25 | <0.02 | 4100/0.51 | 2.22 | 1.32 | −1.01 | 2.33 | −5.79 | −3.46 | −0.90 | 1.21 |
| 4 | 315/3.94 | — | — | — | — | 1.82 | −0.97 | 2.79 | −6.29 | −3.50 | — | — |
| 5 | 279/4.44 | — | — | — | — | 1.31 | −1.00 | 2.31 | −5.78 | −3.47 | — | — |
| 6 | 307/4.04 | — | — | — | — | 1.25 | −0.95 | 2.20 | −5.72 | −3.52 | — | — |
| 7 | 278/4.46 | 349/3.55 | 0.024 | 7300/0.91 | 4.00 | — | −1.53 | — | — | −2.94 | — | 2.47 |
| 8 | 323/3.84 | 409/3.03 | — | 6300/0.78 | 2.97 | — | −1.23 | — | — | −3.24 | — | 1.74 |
| 9 | 343/3.62 | 462/2.68 | <0.02 | 7600/0.93 | 3.15 | — | −1.04 | — | — | −3.43 | — | 2.11 |
| 10 | 389/3.19 | 562/2.21 | <0.02 | 4500/0.98 | 2.70 | 1.57 | −1.15 | 2.72 | −6.04 | −3.32 | −1.13 | 1.55 |
| 11 | 363/3.42 | — | — | — | — | 1.79 | −0.97 | 2.76 | −6.26 | −3.50 | — | — |
| 12 | 351/3.53 | — | — | — | — | 1.34 | −1.00 | 2.34 | −5.81 | −3.47 | — | — |
| 13 | 322/3.85 | 363/3.42 | 0.18 | 3600/0.43 | 3.64 | — | −1.41 | — | — | −3.06 | — | 2.23 |
| 14 | 371/3.34 | 417/3.00 | <0.02 | 3000/0.37 | 3.17 | — | −1.16 | — | — | −3.31 | — | 2.01 |
Measured in acetonitrile.
Excited state energy; calculated as the midpoint between the absorption and emission maxima (ref. 23).
E p(ox1) and Ep(red1) are the peak potentials of the first oxidation and reduction, respectively; all potentials are given vs. SSCE.
ΔE = Ep(ox1) − Ep(red1) (electrochemical gap).
E el(HOMO/LUMO) = Ep(ox1/red1) + 4.429 (in AcCN vs. SCE) + 0.036 (difference between SCE (0.241 vs. SHE) and SSCE (0.205 vs. SHE)).
Excited-state redox potentials in acetonitrile calculated as follows: Eox* = Ep(ox1) − E0,0 and Ered* = Ered + E0,0 (ref. 23).
Measured/calculated using emission maxima obtained in DCM.
Fig. 3UV/Vis absorption spectra of selected DPZ derivatives.
DFT-calculated parameters of DPZ derivatives 1–14a
| Comp. | Radical cation | Ground state | Triplet state | Radical anion | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| Δ |
|
|
| |
| 1 | −6.55 | 454/2.73 | −5.86 | −2.94 | 2.92 | −6.45 | −4.22 | −3.47 |
| 2 | −7.24 | 402/3.08 | −6.44 | −3.13 | 3.33 | −7.18 | −4.55 | −3.60 |
| 3 | −6.45 | 472/2.63 | −5.81 | −2.99 | 2.81 | −6.11 | −4.16 | −3.55 |
| 4 | −6.94 | 337/3.68 | −6.96 | −2.90 | 4.05 | −6.49 | −4.40 | −3.56 |
| 5 | −6.50 | 335/3.70 | −6.31 | −2.88 | 3.44 | −5.86 | −4.21 | −3.53 |
| 6 | −6.42 | 363/3.42 | −6.70 | −2.93 | 3.77 | −5.65 | −4.18 | −3.59 |
| 7 | −8.51 | 279/4.44 | −7.21 | −2.65 | 4.56 | −8.35 | −4.77 | −3.28 |
| 8 | −7.91 | 340/3.65 | −6.75 | −2.79 | 3.95 | −7.40 | −4.61 | −3.42 |
| 9 | −7.77 | 380/3.26 | −6.76 | −3.06 | 3.70 | −6.62 | −4.41 | −3.64 |
| 10 | −7.07 | 420/2.95 | −6.19 | −2.84 | 3.36 | −5.97 | −4.15 | −3.50 |
| 11 | −7.13 | 345/3.60 | −6.98 | −2.92 | 4.07 | −6.04 | −4.40 | −3.79 |
| 12 | −7.09 | 342/3.63 | −6.23 | −2.88 | 3.36 | −5.51 | −4.20 | −3.71 |
| 13 | −8.84 | 297/4.18 | −7.22 | −2.65 | 4.57 | −8.15 | −4.57 | −3.38 |
| 14 | −8.18 | 350/3.55 | −6.79 | −2.78 | 4.01 | −7.18 | −4.46 | −3.52 |
Calculated using the DFT B3LYP/6-311++g(3df,2p) method.
Fig. 4Energy level diagram of the frontier molecular orbitals and spin orbitals of DPZ 1.
Benchmark photoredox CDC reaction catalysed by DPZ catalysts 1–14
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] | Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] |
| 1 | 96 | 8 | 88 |
| 2 | 86 | 9 | 93 |
| 3 | 90 | 11 | 83 |
| 4 | 85 | 12 | 95 |
| 5 | 75 | 13 | 85 |
| 6 | 93 | 14 | 89 |
| 7 | 88 | ||
Optimization of the annulation reaction
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solvent | DPZ loading [mol%] | Time [h] | Irradiation with blue LED | Isolated yield [%] |
| AcCN | 2 | 24 | Yes | 66 |
| Acetone | 2 | 24 | Yes | 80 |
| DCM | 2 | 24 | Yes | 59 |
| 1,4-Dioxane | 2 | 24 | Yes | 55 |
| Acetone | 2 | 24 | No | 0 |
| Acetone | 0 | 24 | Yes | 0 |
| Acetone | 3 | 2.2 | Yes | 80 |
| Acetone | 1 | 2.2 | Yes | 83 |
| Acetone | 0.5 | 2.2 | Yes | 95 |
Visible light-induced annulation reaction catalysed by DPZ catalysts 1–14
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] | Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] |
| 1 | 95 | 8 | 10 |
| 2 | 73 | 9 | 36 |
| 3 | 94 | 11 | 32 |
| 4 | 7 | 12 | 13 |
| 5 | 14 | 13 | 11 |
| 6 | 7 | 14 | 7 |
| 7 | 14 | ||
Optimization of the annulation reaction with pyridazine-3,6-dione
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catalyst | Catalyst loading [mol%] | Solvent | Additive | Yield [%] |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | Acetone | — | — |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | AcCN | — | — |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | 1,4-Dioxane | — | 20 |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | 40 |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | ZnCl2 | 34 |
| DPZ 1 | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | SmOTf | 35 |
| DPZ 1 | 2 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | 36 |
| DPZ 1 | 5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | 38 |
| DPZ 1 | 10 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | 39 |
| Rose Bengal | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | — |
| Eosin Y | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | 20 |
| Ru(bpy)3Cl2 | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | Traces |
| Acridinium perchlorate | 0.5 | Dioxane : H2O | LiPF6 | Traces |
0.1 eq.
According to GC/MS, accompanied by noncyclic intermediate.
Irradiated by the green LED (530 nm).
9-Mesityl-10-methylacridinium perchlorate.
Visible light-induced annulation reaction catalysed by DPZ catalysts 1–14
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] | Catalyst | Isolated yield [%] |
| 1 | 40/93 | 8 | 20 |
| 2 | 5 | 9 | 25 |
| 3 | 37/90 | 11 | 28 |
| 4 | 5 | 12 | 35 |
| 5 | 5 | 13 | 10 |
| 6 | 5 | 14 | 5 |
| 7 | 5 | ||
Reaction times of 72/240 h.