experimental [R]25D of -106.5 (c 0.12, CH2Cl2), in agreement
with its 98.6% ee.
the H-bond directed either on the left or on the right, using the
starting geometry of the lowest energy MMFF94 conformer.
We end up with the two conformations a and b shown in Figure
3. The B3LYP/6-31G* relative energy of b with respect to a
was 1.12 kcal/mol, corresponding to a mixture of 87% of a
and 13% of b of Boltzmann populations at 298 K.14
The specific rotation of the optical isomer contained in
the first-eluted HPLC fraction (+)-3 was measured for a
number of wavelengths at room temperature (c 0.16, CH2Cl2)
to obtain a portion of its optical rotation dispersion (ORD)
curve (see Figure 4, black line). The OR’s of conformers a
In order to assign the absolute configuration of each eluted
sample we considered the cS configuration15 of 3 for the DFT
calculations.14 A MMFF94/Monte Carlo conformational search
was performed using Spartan 0216 with default parameters and
by fixing the propyloxy tails to a zigzag shape. The resulting
conformations were subjected to geometry optimization using
Gaussian 0317 at the B3LYP/6-31G* level. OR and ECD
calculations were performed at TDDFT/B3LYP level, as
implemented in Gaussian 03, using a number of basis sets of
different composition (see later for a description).
Owing to the rigid calix[4]arene structure and the fixed
propyloxy tails, only four conformations were detected by
MMFF94/Monte Carlo search, which differ mainly for the
different orientation of the three OH groups of the phloro-
glucinol moiety. The ring of the latter was found almost
perpendicular to the linked calixarene aryl ring.14
The orientation of the OH group at the para position of this
ring is of very low importance, conversely the two OH groups
at the meta positions show a markedly preferred orientation
pointing toward the center of the linked calixarene aryl ring,
most likely due to OH-π interactions.18 Considering the
noninfluential orientation of the phloroglucinol OH group in
the para position and discharging all MMFF94 conformations
with a relative energy exceeding 3.5 kcal/mol, that is with
vanishing populations, only one conformation remains (very
similar to conformer a in Figure 3) in which the OH group at
Figure 4. Portion of the ORD curve experimentally measured for
(+)-3 (black line) (c 0.16, CH2Cl2, 298 K) and theoretically
calculated for cS-3 at the TDDFT/B3LYP level using 6-31G* (red),
6-31G(2d,1p) (green), and cc-pVDZ(d) (blue).
and b of cS-3 were computed using the TDDFT/B3LYP
method.19 Solvent was not included.
The choice of the basis set(s) was based on the following
arguments. It is generally agreed that diffuse functions are
necessary for the calculation of chiroptical properties.20 How-
ever, according to some preliminary tests,14 diffuse functions
have to be included on a well balanced basis set. In the present
case, this implies a rather big basis set requiring prohibitively
large computational resources. On the other hand, the inclusion
of polarization functions improves the description of excited
states at higher energy, which could be important for the OR
predictions. Therefore, considering the large size of 3, we
decided to adopt the 6-31G* basis set to compute the OR for
all the wavelengths considered in the experimental measure and
two larger basis sets containing polarization functions, i.e.,
6-31G(2d,1p) and cc-pVDZ(d)21 to compute the OR at 589.3
and 405 nm. The predicted ORD obtained as weighted sum
over the conformations is compared with the experimental data
in Figure 4. As can be observed the agreement, in terms of OR
sign and ORD trend, is fairly good with all the three basis sets
and in particular with the smaller 6-31G* one.
Figure 3. Top view of conformers a and b of cS-3 optimized at
the B3LYP/6-31G* level, showing the different orientation of the
H-bond at the lower rim.
the lower rim establishes a single H-bond with the OPr group
on the left. Any attempt to reorient the H-bond at the lower
rim toward the other OPr group on the right was unsuccessful
after MMFF94 energy minimization. We interpreted this as a
failure of the MMFF94 force field, and we decided to perform
a B3LYP/6-31G* geometry optimization of both structures with
(12) Troisi, F.; Pierro, T.; Gaeta, C.; Neri, P. Org. Lett. 2009, 11, 697.
(13) Troisi, F.; Pierro, T.; Gaeta, C.; Carratu`, M.; Neri, P. Tetrahedron
Lett. 2009, 50, 4416.
(14) See the Supporting Information for further details.
(15) Dalla Cort, A.; Mandolini, L.; Pasquini, C.; Schiaffino, L. New
J. Chem. 2004, 28, 1198.
(19) Stephens, P. J.; Devlin, F. J.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Frisch, M. J. J.
Phys. Chem. A 2001, 105, 5356.
(20) Autcshbach, J. Chirality 2009, 21, E116.
(16) Spartan 02; Wavefunction, Inc., Irvine, CA.
(17) Frisch et al. Gaussian 03, Gaussian, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
(18) Atwood, J. L.; Hamada, F.; Robinson, K. D.; Orr, G. W.; Vincent,
R. L. Nature 1991, 349, 683.
(21) The cc-PVDZ(d) basis set has been obtained from the smaller cc-
PVDZ basis set by adding a single set of d functions to heavy atoms. The
exponents of these diffuse functions are those of the most diffuse d functions
of the standard aug-cc-PVDZ basis set.
2914
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 13, 2010