Electron transfer formalism

Kuznetsov, A.M. and Ulstrup, J. (1999) Simple schemes in chemical electron transfer formalism beyond single-mode quadratic forms environmental vibrational dispersion and anharmonic nuclear motion. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 1, 5587-5592. 

The reactivities of the substrate and the nucleophilic reagent change vyhen fluorine atoms are introduced into their structures This perturbation becomes more impor tant when the number of atoms of this element increases A striking example is the reactivity of alkyl halides S l and mechanisms operate when few fluorine atoms are incorporated in the aliphatic chain, but perfluoroalkyl halides are usually resistant to these classical processes However, formal substitution at carbon can arise from other mecharasms For example nucleophilic attack at chlorine, bromine, or iodine (halogenophilic reaction, occurring either by a direct electron-pair transfer or by two successive one-electron transfers) gives carbanions These intermediates can then decompose to carbenes or olefins, which react further (see equations 15 and 47) Single-electron transfer (SET) from the nucleophile to the halide can produce intermediate radicals that react by an SrnI process (see equation 57) When these chain mechanisms can occur, they allow reactions that were previously unknown Perfluoroalkylation, which used to be very rare, can now be accomplished by new methods (see for example equations 48-56, 65-70, 79, 107-108, 110, 113-135, 138-141, and 145-146)... 

Example 2-2 The following cyclic voltammogram was recorded for a reversible couple Calculate the number of electrons transferred and the formal potential for the couple. 

In a simple electron transfer reaction, the reactant is situated in front of the electrode, and the electron is transferred when there is a favorable solvent fluctuation. In contrast, during ion transfer, the reactant itself moves from the bulk of the solution to the double layer, and then becomes adsorbed on, or incorporated into, the electrode. Despite these differences, ion transfer can be described by essentially the same formalism [Schmickler, 1995], but the interactions both with the solvent and with the metal depend on the position of the ion. In addition, the electronic level on the reactant depends on the local electric potential in the double layer, which also varies with the distance. These complications make it difficult to perform quantitative calculations. 

Heterogeneous ET reactions at polarizable liquid-liquid interfaces have been mainly approached from current potential relationships. In this respect, a rather important issue is to minimize the contribution of ion-transfer reactions to the current responses associated with the ET step. This requirement has been recognized by several authors [43,62,67-72]. Firstly, reactants and products should remain in their respective phases within the potential range where the ET process takes place. In addition to redox stability, the supporting electrolytes should also provide an appropriate potential window for the redox reaction. According to Eqs. (2) and (3), the redox potentials of the species involved in the ET should match in a way that the formal electron-transfer potential occurs within the potential window established by the transfer of the ionic species present at the liquid-liquid junction. The results shown in Figs. 1 and 2 provide an example of voltammetric ET responses when the above conditions are fulfilled. A difference of approximately 150 mV is observed between Ao et A" (.+. ... 

Early studies of ET dynamics at externally biased interfaces were based on conventional cyclic voltammetry employing four-electrode potentiostats [62,67 70,79]. The formal pseudo-first-order electron-transfer rate constants [ket(cms )] were measured on the basis of the Nicholson method [99] and convolution potential sweep voltammetry [79,100] in the presence of an excess of one of the reactant species. The constant composition approximation allows expression of the ET rate constant with the same units as in heterogeneous reaction on solid electrodes. However, any comparison with the expression described in Section II.B requires the transformation to bimolecular units, i.e., M cms . Values of of the order of 1-2 x lO cms (0.05 to O.IM cms ) were reported for Fe(CN)g in the aqueous phase and the redox species Lu(PC)2, Sn(PC)2, TCNQ, and RuTPP(Py)2 in DCE [62,70]. Despite the fact that large potential perturbations across the interface introduce interferences in kinetic analysis [101], these early estimations allowed some preliminary comparisons to established ET models in heterogeneous media. 

Table 6.2 Apparent formal redox potentials of systems present in the electron-transfer chain (pH = 7). It should be noted that the potential values were obtained in the homogeneous phase. Due to stabilization in a membrane, the oxidation-reduction properties vary so that the data listed below are of orientation character...

In an anionic/radical domino process an interim single-electron transfer (SET) from the intermediate of the first anionic reaction must occur. Thus, a radical is generated which can enter into subsequent reactions. Although a SET corresponds to a formal change of the oxidation state, the transformations will be treated as typical radical reactions. To date, only a few true anionic/radical domino transformations have been reported in the literature. However, some interesting examples of related one-pot procedures have been established where formation of the radical occurs after the anionic step by addition of TEMPO or Bu3SnH. A reason for the latter approach are the problems associated with the switch between anionic and radical reaction patterns, which often do not permit the presence of a radical generator until the initial anionic reaction step is finished. 

A prerequisite for CO activation in 6 is an O-attack of the silane at the coordinated carbonyl ligand. This activation step induces the reduction of CO by formal electron transfer Mn—>C and yields a highly reactive 17e intermediate siloxycarbyne complex which dimerizes to give 8. 

Formally, the immediate product of an electron transfer reaction may be envisaged as an electron adduct. Rarely, however, is the immediate product unre-active (Hart and Anbar, 1970, Table VI). Exceptions exist in the case of Cu2+, Mn04-, and others. 

---