Carbocation-nucleophile addition reactions

Fig. 4 Free energy reaction coordinate profiles that illustrate a change in the relative kinetic barriers for partitioning of carbocations between nucleophilic addition of solvent and deprotonation resulting from a change in the curvature of the potential energy surface for the nucleophile addition reaction. This would correspond to an increase in the intrinsic barrier for the thermoneutral carbocation-nucleophile addition reaction.

To what extent is the partitioning of simple aliphatic and benzylic a-CH-substituted carbocations in nucleophilic solvents controlled by the relative thermodynamic driving force for proton transfer and nucleophile addition reactions It is known that the partitioning of simple aliphatic carbocations favors the formation of nucleophile adducts (ksjkp > 1, Scheme 2) and there is good evidence that this reflects, at least in part, the larger thermodynamic driving force for the nucleophilic addition compared with the proton transfer reaction of solvent (A dd U Scheme 6).12 21,22,24... 

There is a 4kcalmol 1 smaller intrinsic barrier As for nucleophilic addition of water to the benzylic carbocations X-[6+] than for deprotonation of X-[6+] by solvent. This difference reflects the greater ease of direct addition of solvent to the charged benzylic carbon of X-[6+] than of proton transfer at the adjacent a-methyl carbon. This may result in some way from the greater number of bonds formed and cleaved in the proton transfer than in the nucleophile addition reaction. However, it is our impression that there is little or no theoretical justification for generalizations of this type. 

The results of ab initio calculations provide evidence that Me2NC(S)-[14+] is stabilized by resonance electron donation from the a-thioamide group (A, Scheme 12) and by covalent bridging of sulfur to the benzylic carbon (B, Scheme 12).96 Direct resonance stabilization of the carbocation will increase the barrier to the nucleophile addition reaction, because of the requirement for the relatively large fractional loss of the stabilizing resonance interaction (A, Scheme 12) at the transition state for nucleophile addition to a-substituted benzyl carbocations.8,13,28 91-93 If the solvent adds exclusively to an open carbocation that is the minor species in a mixture of open and closed ions, then... 

The intrinsic barrier for the addition of solvent to an a-alkoxy benzyl carbocation is several kcal mol-1 smaller than that for the corresponding reaction of ring-substituted 1-phenylethyl carbocations. This result is consistent with the conclusion that these nucleophile addition reactions become intrinsically easier as stabilizing resonance electron donation from an a-phenyl group to the cationic center is replaced by electron donation from an a-alkoxy group. 

Reactions of highly electron-rich organometalate salts (organocuprates, orga-noborates, Grignard reagents, etc.) and metal hydrides (trialkyltin hydride, triethylsilane, borohydrides, etc.) with cyano-substituted olefins, enones, ketones, carbocations, pyridinium cations, etc. are conventionally formulated as nucleophilic addition reactions. We illustrate the utility of donor/acceptor association and electron-transfer below. 

Interest within the physical organic community on the mechanism for the formation and reaction of ion-pair and ion-dipole intermediates of solvolysis peaked sometime in the 1970s and has declined in recent years. The concepts developed during the heyday of this work have stood the test of time, but these reactions have not been fuUy characterized, even for relatively simple systems. Richard and coworkers have prepared a short chapter that summarizes their recent determinations of absolute rate constants for the reactions of these weak association complexes in water. This work provides a quantitative basis for the formerly largely qualitative discussions of competing carbocation-nucleophile addition and rearrangement reactions of ion and dipole pairs. 

The Marcus equation was first formulated to model the dependence of rate constants for electron transfer on the reaction driving force [47-49]. Marcus assumed in his treatment that the energy of the transition state for electron transfer can be calculated from the position of the intersection of parabolas that describe the reactant and product states (Fig. 1.2A). This equation may be generalized to proton transfer (Fig. 1.2A) [46, 50, 51], carbocation-nucleophile addition [52], bimolecular nucleophilic substitution [53, 54] and other reactions [55-57] by assuming that their reaction coordinate profiles may also be constructed from the intersection of... 

Carbinolamines are formed by nucleophilic addition of an amine to a carbonyl group and are intermediates in the for mation of imines and enamines Carbocation (Section 4 8) Positive ion in which the charge re sides on carbon An example is tert butyl cation (CH3)3C Carbocations are unstable species that though they cannot normally be isolated are believed to be intermediates in certain reactions... 

Aikene chemistry is dominated by electrophilic addition reactions. When HX reacts with an unsymmetrically substituted aikene, Markovnikov s rule predicts that the H will add to the carbon having fewer alky) substituents and the X group will add to the carbon having more alkyl substituents. Electrophilic additions to alkenes take place through carbocation intermediates formed by reaction of the nucleophilic aikene tt bond with electrophilic H+. Carbocation stability follows the order... 

In summary, there now exists a body of data for the reactions of carbocations where the values of kjkp span a range of > 106-fold (Table 1). This requires that variations in the substituents at a cationic center result in a >8 kcal mol-1 differential stabilization of the transition states for nucleophile addition and proton transfer which have not yet been fully rationalized. We discuss in this review the explanations for the large changes in the rate constant ratio for partitioning of carbocations between reaction with Bronsted and Lewis bases that sometimes result from apparently small changes in carbocation structure. 

The values of ks/kp for partitioning of carbocations are most conveniently determined as the ratio of the yields of products from the competing nucleophile addition and proton transfer reactions (equation 1 derived for Scheme 2). The determination of these product yields has been simplified in recent years by the application of high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). Typically, the product peaks from an HPLC analysis are detected and quantified by UV-vis spectroscopy. In cases where the absorbance of reactants and products is small, substrates may be prepared with a chromophore placed at a sufficient distance so that its effects on the intrinsic reactivity of the carbocationic center are negligible. For example, the aliphatic substrates [1]-Y have proved to be very useful in studies of the reactions of the model tertiary carbocation [1+].21,23... 

Our analysis of literature data will focus on two closely related questions about the influence of changes in the relative thermodynamic driving force and Marcus intrinsic barrier for the reaction of simple carbocations with Bronsted bases (alkene formation) and Lewis bases (nucleophile addition) on the values of ks/kp determined by experiment. 

To what extent are the variations in the rate constant ratio /cs//cpobserved for changing structure of aliphatic and benzylic carbocations the result of changes in the Marcus intrinsic barriers Ap and As for the deprotonation and solvent addition reactions It is not generally known whether there are significant differences in the intrinsic barriers for the nucleophile addition and proton transfer reactions of carbocations. 

The more favorable partitioning of [1+ ] to form [l]-OH than to form [2] must be due, at least in part, to the 4.0 kcal mol-1 larger thermodynamic driving force for the former reaction (Kadd = 900 for conversion of [2] to [l]-OH, Table 1). However, thermodynamics alone cannot account for the relative values of ks and kp for reactions of [1+] that are limited by the rate of chemical bond formation, which may be as large as 600. A ratio of kjkp = 600 would correspond to a 3.8 kcal mol-1 difference in the activation barriers for ks and kp, which is almost as large as the 4.0 kcal mol 1 difference in the stability of [1]-OH and [2]. However, only a small fraction of this difference should be expressed at the relatively early transition states for the reactions of [1+], because these reactions are strongly favored thermodynamically. These results are consistent with the conclusion that nucleophile addition to [1+] is an inherently easier reaction than deprotonation of this carbocation, and therefore that nucleophile addition has a smaller Marcus intrinsic barrier. However, they do not allow for a rigorous estimate of the relative intrinsic barriers As — Ap for these reactions. 

Fig. 5 Logarithmic plots of rate-equilibrium data for the formation and reaction of ring-substituted 1-phenylethyl carbocations X-[6+] in 50/50 (v/v) trifluoroethanol/water at 25°C (data from Table 2). Correlation of first-order rate constants hoh for the addition of water to X-[6+] (Y) and second-order rate constants ( h)so1v for the microscopic reverse specific-acid-catalyzed cleavage of X-[6]-OH to form X-[6+] ( ) with the equilibrium constants KR for nucleophilic addition of water to X-[6+]. Correlation of first-order rate constants kp for deprotonation of X-[6+] ( ) and second-order rate constants ( hW for the microscopic reverse protonation of X-[7] by hydronium ion ( ) with the equilibrium constants Xaik for deprotonation of X-[6+]. The points at which equal rate constants are observed for reaction in the forward and reverse directions (log ATeq = 0) are indicated by arrows.

Fig. 6 Hypothetical free energy reaction coordinate profiles for the interconversion of X-[8]-OH and X-[9] (R = H) and X-[10]-OH and X-[ll] (R = CH3) through the corresponding carbocations. The arrows indicate the proposed eifects of the addition of a pair of ortAo-methyl groups to X-[8]-OH, X-[8+] and X-[9] to give X-[10]-OH, X-[10+] and X-[ll]. A Effect of a pair of or/Ao-methyl groups on the stability of cumyl alcohols. B Effect of a pair of or/Ao-methyl groups on the stability of cumyl carbocations. C Effect of a pair of ortho-methyl groups on the stability of the transition state for nucleophilic addition of water to cumyl carbocations. D Effect of a pair of orf/io-methyl groups on the stability of the transition state for deprotonation of cumyl carbocations.

There are at least two other studies of competitive reactions to form the products of solvolysis and elimination reactions that may provide insight into the relationships between carbocation structure and reactivity toward nucleophile addition and deprotonation. 

The partitioning of ferrocenyl-stabilized carbocations [30] between nucleophile addition and deprotonation (Scheme 18) has been studied by Bunton and coworkers. In some cases the rate constants for deprotonation and nucleophile addition are comparable, but in others they favor formation of the nucleophile adduct. However, the alkene product of deprotonation of [30] is always the thermodynamically favored product.120. In other words, the addition of water to [30] gives an alcohol that is thermodynamically less stable than the alkene that forms by deprotonation of [30], but the reaction passes over an activation barrier whose height is equal to, or smaller than, the barrier for deprotonation of [30], These data require that the intrinsic barrier for thermoneutral addition of water to [30] (As) be smaller than the intrinsic barrier for deprotonation of [30] (Ap). It is not known whether the magnitude of (Ap — As) for the reactions of [30] is similar to the values of (Ap - As) = 4-6 kcal mol 1 reported here for the partitioning of a-methyl benzyl carbocations. 

By contrast, [31]-(brosylate) was proposed to show a large amount of reaction through a secondary carbocation intermediate,122 which partitions between nucleophile addition and deprotonation. We are uncertain of how to relate the partitioning of the putative carbocation intermediate of the reaction of [31]-(brosylate) to the partitioning of other carbocations discussed in this review. 

Nuclear motion, the principle of least, and the theory of stereoelectronic control, 24, 113 Nucleophiles, partitioning of carbocations between addition and deprotonation. 35, 67 Nucleophilic aromatic photosubstitution, 11,225 Nucleophilic catalysis of ester hydrolysis and related reactions, 5,237 Nucleophilic displacement reactions, gas-phase, 21, 197... 

Partitioning of carbocations between addition of nucleophiles and deprotonation, 35, 67 Perchloro-organic chemistry structure, spectroscopy and reaction pathways, 25, 267 Permutational isomerization of pentavalent phosphorus compounds, 9, 25 Phase-transfer catalysis by quaternary ammonium salts, 15, 267 Phosphate esters, mechanism and catalysis of nucleophilic substitution in, 25, 99 Phosphorus compounds, pentavalent, turnstile rearrangement and pseudoration in permutational isomerization, 9, 25... 

Although this synthesis is extremely simple, its mechanism is not yet clearly understood. It has been proposed that such reactions can be rationalized348 in terms of 1,4-additions, where the initial attack by a proton occurs at the carbonyl oxygen, giving rise to a very stable carbocation that is not only allylic but also stabilized by the mesomeric donating oxygen. This step is followed by the nucleophilic addition of SnCl3( f and by a ketoenol tautomerism (Scheme 27). 

---