SCHEME 1. Interconversion of Open (1a) and Closed (1b)
Conformers by Rotation of the Diacetylenic Bond
Conformational Isomers from Rotation of
Diacetylenic Bond in an
Ethynylpyrene-Substituted Molecular Hinge
Sethuraman Sankararaman,*,†
Gandikota Venkataramana,† and Babu Varghese‡
Department of Chemistry, Sophisticated Analytical Instrument
Facility, Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai 600036, India
ReceiVed NoVember 18, 2007
the arrow should not have any barrier, and the open (1a) and
closed forms (1b) are two extreme conformers arising from such
a rotation. In the open form (1a), the two ethynylpyrene units
are far away from each other, whereas in the closed conforma-
tion (1b) they can come in contact within the van der Waals
distance (Scheme 1). Although entropic factor might favor the
open form, the more organized closed form could derive
stabilization from the π-stacking interaction between the two
pyrene units. Although a very weak interaction (<2 kcal mol-1),
π-π interaction could lead to the stabilization of certain
molecular conformations. From a different perspective, 1 is
useful for the understanding of the rotation of the triple bond.
Restricted rotation of acetylenic bonds is important from the
point of view of molecular chirality of exploded biphenyls.
Earlier examples of restricted rotation of acetylenic bond in
diphenylethyne derivatives deal with steric (repulsiVe) interac-
tions among the bulky silyl and aryl substituents placed in the
ortho positions of the phenyl groups. Vollhardt has reported
hindered rotation in a exploded biphenyl bearing bulky dim-
ethylthexylsilyl as the end groups.4 Toyota has demonstrated
hindered rotation of the acetylenic bond in the substituted
derivatives bis(9-anthryl)ethyne and bis(9-triptycyl)ethyne.5
Rotational barrier of 15-18 kcal mol-1 has been reported for
the C(sp3)-C(sp) bond. Moore has reported molecular turnstiles
with freely rotating and conformationally locked spindles
connected by acetylenic bonds.6 The question of whether or not
acetylenic bond rotation be restricted by weak attractiVe forces
such as π-π or hydrogen-bonding interactions remains to be
The first example of isolation and X-ray crystallographic
structural characterization of two conformers arising from
rotation along a diacetylenic bond is reported. In both the
conformers extensive π-π interactions are observed in the
solid state. VT-NMR and fluorescence spectroscopic studies
in solution suggest that the closed and open conformers are
in equilibrium and that the closed conformer is the predomi-
nant species at room temperature.
Construction of molecular assemblies in the solid state
through face-to-face π-stacking interaction of aromatic units is
important in the field of organic molecular electronics and
photonics.1 Among the aromatics pyrene is capable of undergo-
ing π-stacking interaction in the ground and excited states.2
Some of the derivatives of pyrene have been shown to be
potentially useful as molecular electronics and photonics materi-
als.3 Herein, we report the synthesis of a simple butadiynyl
bridged molecular hinge (1) bearing pendent ethynylpyrene
units. In 1, rotation along the diacetylenic axis as indicated by
(3) For recent sensor applications, see: (a) Suzuki, I.; Ui, M.; Yamauchi,
A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 4498-4499. (b) Schazmann, B.;
Alhashimy, N.; Diamond, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 8607-8614.
(c) Choi, J. K.; Kim, S. H.; Yoon, J.; Lee, K.-H.; Bartsch, R. A.; Kim, J.
S. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 8011-8015 and refs 11, 13, and 14 cited therein.
(d) Dale, T. J.; Rabek, J., Jr. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 4500-4501.
For electronics and photonics applications, see: (e) Zhang, H.; Wang, Y.;
Shao, K.; Lin, Y.; Chen, S.; Qiu, W.; Sun, X.; Qi, T.; Ma, Y.; Yu, G.; Su,
Z.; Zhu, D. Chem. Commun. 2006, 755-757. (f) Jia, W.-L.; McCormick,
T.; Lin, Q.-D.; Fukutani, H.; Motala, M.; Wang, R.-Y.; Tao, Y.; Wang, S.
J. Mater. Chem. 2004, 14, 3344-3350. (g) Ogino, K.; Iwashima, S.;
Inokuchi, H.; Harada, Y. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1965, 38, 473-477.
(4) (a) Miljanic, O. S.; Holmes, D.; Vollhardt, K. P. C. Org. Lett. 2005,
7, 4001-4004. (b) Miljanic, O. S.; Han, S.; Holmes, D.; Schaller, G. R.;
Vollhardt, K. P. C. Chem. Commun. 2005, 2606-2608.
† Department of Chemistry.
‡ Sophisticated Analytical Instrument Facility.
(1) (a) Bendikov, M.; Wudl, F.; Perepichka, D. F. Chem. ReV. 2004,
104, 4891-4945. (b) Hoeben, F. J. M.; Jonkheijm, P.; Meijer, E. W.;
Schenning, A. P. H. J. Chem. ReV. 2005, 105, 1491-1546. (c) Watson, M.
D.; Ja¨ckel, F.; Severin, N.; Rabe, J. P.; Mu¨llen, K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004,
126, 1402-1407. (d) Sokolov, A. N.; Friscic, T.; MacGillivray, R. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 2806-2807. (e) Dickey, K. C.; Anthony, J. E.; Loo,
Y.-L. AdV. Mater. 2006, 18, 1721-1726. (f) Payne, M. M.; Parkin, S. R.;
Anthony, J. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 8028-8029.
(2) Winnik, F. M. Chem. ReV. 1993, 93, 587.
(5) (a) Toyota, S.; Yamamori, T.; Makino, T. Tetrahedron 2001, 57,
3521-3528. (b) Toyota, S.; Makino, T. Tetrahedron Lett. 2003, 44, 7775-
7778.
(6) Bedard, T. C.; Moore, J. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 10662-
10671.
10.1021/jo7024724 CCC: $40.75 © 2008 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 02/16/2008
2404
J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 2404-2407