1416
U.M. Rabie et al. / Spectrochimica Acta Part A 79 (2011) 1411–1417
Table 1
Spectral characteristics, formation constants (KCT), molar extinction coefficients (εCT), thermodynamic parameters, and (b2/a2) values for the CT T2T-2H·DDQH2 molecular
complex in a polar (MeOH) and a non-polar (CHCl3) solvents at different temperatures and, as well as, the ionization potential of the donor.
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
)
Solvent
ꢁmax (nm)
IP (eV)
KCT (dm3mol
)
εCT at 20 ◦C (dm3 mol-1 cm
)
−ꢂH0 (kJ mol
)
−ꢂS0 (J mol
)
−ꢂG0 (kJ mol
(b2/a2)
10 ◦
C
15 ◦
C
20 ◦
C
25 ◦
C
CHCl3
MeOH
350
350
10.1
10.1
25.41
–
–
45.61
24.78
56.13
36.27
5105.2
49541.5
37.55
86.11
159.67
319.44
9.98
8.89
0.11
0.24
10.87
the corresponding T2T-2H, whereas DDQ is reduced to the corre-
sponding hydroquinone (DDQH2). However, this redox reaction is
not the terminal outcome of the interacting system T2T–DDQ. A
second CT interaction has been occurred between the two species
resulting in situ; the oxidized form (T2T-2H) as a new donor and
the reduced form (DDQH2) as an unconventional new acceptor. The
product (T2T-2H·DDQH2) is a CT complex of the contact-type CT
complexes characterizing by the low formation constants and low
stability that readily breaks down in polar solvents to its interacting
species.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Dr. M.A. Hassan and Dr. R.F. Fandy (Chemistry
Department, Faculty of Science at Qena, South Valley University) for
help in assignment of 1H NMR and mass spectra.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
References
[1] A.R. Fakhari, S.S. Hosseiny Davarani, H. Ahmar, S. Makarem, J. Appl. Elec-
trochem. 38 (2008) 1743–1747.
Fig. 6. Electronic absorption spectra of (T2T–DDQ) mixture solutions in CHCl3
[2] D. Nematollahi, E. Tammari, J. Org. Chem. 70 (2005) 7769–7772.
[3] C. Laurence, M.J. El Ghmari, J.Y. Le Questel, M. Berthelot, R. Mokhlisse, J. Chem.
Soc.: Perkin Trans. 2 (1998) 1545–1551.
[4] J. Leclere, J. Orgiazzi, B. Rousser, J.L. Schlienger, J.L. Wemeau, La Thyroïde, Expan-
sion Scientifique Franaise, Paris, 1992.
at 25 ◦C. ([DDQ] = 2.0 × 10−4 mol dm−3 (constant), [T2T] = (a) 2.0 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
,
(b) 1.8 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
(c) 1.6 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
(d) 1.4 × 10−3 mol dm−3
(e) 1.2 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
(f) 1.0 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
(g) 0.8 × 10−3 mol dm−3
, (h)
0.6 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
(i) 0.4 × 10−3 mol dm−3
,
and (j) 0.2 × 10−3 mol dm−3). The
[5] J.C. Thomes, F. Comby, J.F. Lagorce, J. Buxeraud, C. Raby, Jpn. J. Pharmacol. 58
(1992) 201–207.
spectra have been measured after elapsing 60 min of mixing the reactants.
[6] H. Engler, A. Taurog, T. Nakashima, Biochem. Pharmacol. 31 (1982) 3801–3806.
[7] A. Taurog, Endocrinology 98 (1976) 1031–1046.
however, this interaction is characterized by two remarkable obser-
vations: it occurs in a period of 48 h [50], and, in addition, one of the
DDQ/MeOH reaction intermediates has a visible absorption spec-
tral band at 465 nm [50]. None of these observations has been seen,
herein in our case, for the interaction of T2T/DDQ in presence of
MeOH as a solvent.
[8] G.T. Zitouni, S. Sezgin, Acta Pharm. Turc. 40 (1998) 151–154.
[9] (a) D.A. Mc Ginty, W.G. Bywater, J. Pharmacol. 84 (1945) 342;
(b) D.A. Mc Ginty, W.G. Bywater, J. Pharmacol. 85 (1946) 129–139.
[10] O. Gawron, L. Keil, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 89 (1960) 293–295.
[11] G.R. Handrick, E.R. Atkinson, F.E. Granchelli, R.J. Bruni, J. Med. Chem. 8 (1965)
762–766.
[12] H.S. Mahal, T. Mukherjee, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 54 (1999) 29–37.
[13] C.L. Fang, General Concepts of Additives in the Electroplating Solution, Finishing
Science Publication, Taipei, Taiwan, 1996.
Thus, except the lapse of time required to reach the maximum
intensity of the CT band, the solvent polarity has no effect on the
T2T-2H/DDQH2 CT complex formation. This means that the formed
CT complex does not have a dative structure (i.e., the CT complex
does not exist in the dative D+·A− inner sphere). The CT complex
(T2T-2H·DDQH2) exists, then, in the neutral species (D and A) hav-
ing the structure of the nonbonding outer sphere (i.e., D·A outer
sphere) which gives a supporting evidence for the weak strength
of both the new donor (T2T-2H) and the new acceptor (DDQH2),
resulting in situ through the T2T/DDQ interaction.
[14] L.H. Little, R.H. Ottewill, Can. J. Chem. 40 (1962) 2110–2121.
[15] R. Solmaz, G. Kardas, M. Culha, B. Yazici, M. Erbil, Electrochim. Acta 53 (2008)
5941–5952.
[16] N.L.D. Filho, D.R. do Carmo, F. Gessner, A.H. Rosa, Anal. Sci. 21 (2005)
1309–1316.
[17] U.M. Rabie, M.H.M. Abou-El-Wafa, H. Nassar, Spectrochim. Acta Part A 78 (2011)
512–517.
[18] U.M. Rabie, M.H.M. Abou-El-Wafa, R.A. Mohamed, J. Mol. Struct. 871 (2007)
6–13.
[19] U.M. Rabie, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun. 71 (2006) 1359–1370.
[20] U.M. Rabie, H.M.A. Salman, M.H.M. Abou-El-Wafa, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 77
(2004) 681–686.
[21] H.M.A. Salman, M.R. Mahmoud, M.H.M. Abou-El-Wafa, U.M. Rabie, R.H. Crab-
tree, Inorg. Chem. Commun. 7 (2004) 1209–1212.
[22] H.M.A. Salman, U.M. Rabie, E.M. Abd-Alla, Can. J. Anal. Sci. Spectrosc. 49 (2004)
1–7.
4. Conclusions
[23] H.A. Benesi, J.H. Hildebrand, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 71 (1949) 2703–2704.
[24] R.L. Scott, Recl. Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas 75 (1956) 787–789.
[25] G.N. Lewis, M. Randall, in: K.S. Pitzed, L. Brewer (Eds.), Thermodynamics, 2nd
ed., McGraw-Hill, NY, 1961.
[26] R. Foster, Organic Charge-Transfer Complexes, Academic Press, London, 1969.
[27] S.N. Bhat, C.N.R. Rao, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 88 (1966) 3216–3217.
The T2T–DDQ system has performed multiple interactions: Two
charge transfer interactions and a redox reaction. A first CT inter-
action has been occurred between T2T and DDQ. This interaction
has led to a redox reaction resulting in dehydrogenation of T2T to