DiValent Iodine (9-I-2) Radical Intermediates
J. Am. Chem. Soc., Vol. 119, No. 11, 1997 2631
Scheme 3
Therefore, the difference in reactivity is not caused by the
difference in the electron donor ability of these two radicals
but is most likely due to the difference in bond dissociation
energies (BDE) of the carbon-iodine bonds in the respective
iodoalkanes (∆BDE (cy-C6H11I - PhCH2I) ) 11.5 ( 1.0 kcal/
mol).17
Preliminary results show that cyclohexyl radicals are also
capable of debromination of o-bromohexafluorocumyl alcohol
(see Table 3).
Further work on these interesting reactions (also involving
still some other alkyl radicals) is in progress, and the results of
these studies will be reported in due course.
Experimental Section
General Methods. NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker Avance
300 DPX spectrometer. Chemical shifts are reported relative to internal
standards Me4Si or CCl3F. IR spectra were measured on a Perkin-
Elmer FTIR 2000 instrument. Melting points are uncorrected. Mi-
croanalyses were performed on a Perkin-Elmer 2400 CHN Analyzer.
GC analyses were carried out on a Hewlett-Packard 6890 gas
chromatograph or GC-MS combination, using 30 m capillary HP5 or
Innowax columns. Mass spectra and high resolution mass measure-
ments were performed on a VG-Analytical Autospec EQ instrument.
Materials. Solvents for the decomposition and iodine atom abstrac-
tion studies were column distilled before use. THF was freshly distilled
from LiAlH4 in an argon atmosphere. In kinetic measurements,
deuterated NMR solvents (Fluka), benzene-d6 (>99.95%D), acetonitrile-
d3 (>99.8%D) and cyclohexane-d12 (∼99.5%D), were used as received.
tert-Butyl hydroperoxyde was purified by the literature method,18 di-
tert-butyl peroxyoxalate (DBPO),19 dioctanoyl peroxide,20 1-chloro-
3,3-dimethyl-1H-1,2-benziodoxole (1a), and 1-chloro-5-methyl-3,3-
bis(trifluoromethyl)-1H-1,2-benziodoxole (2c)4d,15 as well as alcohols
3a and 3c4d were prepared according to the literature procedures.
1-tert-Butylperoxy-1H-1,2-benziodoxoles (2). A Typical Pro-
cedure: 1-tert-Butylperoxy-3,3-dimethyl-1H-1,2-benziodoxole (2a).
A mixture of t-BuOK (5.0 mmol) and t-BuOOH (6.0 mmol) in 10 mL
of THF was slowly added to a stirred THF solution of 1a in an ice
bath. The reaction mixture was diluted with diethyl ether-pentane
(1:1), washed three times with water, and dried over Na2SO4, the solvent
evaporated, and 1.51 g of the crude product was obtained. Recrystal-
lization from hexane yielded 0.88 g (50%) of 2a, mp 92-95 °C. 1H
NMR (CDCl3) δ: 1.29 (s, 9H, t-Bu); 1.48 (s, 6H, Me3); 7.18 (dd, J )
1.5, 7.4 Hz, 1H, H4); 7.44 (dt, J ) 1.3, 7.3 Hz, 1H, H5); 7.50 (dt, J )
1.6, 7.6 Hz, 1H, H6); 7.94 (dd, J ) 1.2, 8.0 Hz, 1H, H7).
1-tert-Butylperoxy-5-methoxy-3,3-dimethyl-1H-1,2-benziodox-
ole (2b). Mp 65-68 °C. 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ: 1.26 (s, 9H, t-Bu);
1.46 (s, 6H, Me3); 3.85 (s, 3H, OMe); 6.72 (d, J ) 2.7 Hz, 1H, H4);
7.05 (dd, J ) 8.9, 2.7 Hz, 1H, H6); 7.77 (d, J ) 9.0 Hz, 1H, H7).
1-tert-Butylperoxy-5-methyl-3,3-bistrifluoromethyl-1H-1,2-ben-
ziodoxole (2c). Yield (57%) mp 131-132.5 °C. 1H NMR (CDCl3)
δ: 1.29 (s, 9H, t-Bu); 2.51 (s, 3H, Me5); 7.50 (bs, 1H, H4); 7.58 (d,
J ) 8.5 Hz, 1H, H6); 7.92 (d, J ) 8.4 Hz, 1H, H7).
Thermal Decomposition of (tert-Butylperoxy)iodanes. A Typical
Procedure. 2a or 2c (0.05 mmol) was dissolved in 1 mL of the
appropriate solvent, and the solution was placed in an ampoule, purged
with argon, and sealed. The ampoules were heated in a boiling hexane
(69 °C, for 2a) or cyclohexane (81 °C, for 2c) bath for 3 and 30 h,
respectively. The ampoules were opened, and a weighted amount of
bromobenzene as the internal standard was added to the reaction
bonding.12 It perhaps renders these systems more susceptible
to acceptance of an incoming electron into an antibonding σ*
MO of the C-I bond13 and/or stabilizes the proposed iodine
centered radical intermediate, i.e., ArI•- (or Ar-I-R), since
considerably lower yields of deiodinated products were obtained
when other electronegatively 2-substituted iodobenzenes were
employed. A further observation that the deiodination reactions
proceed much less efficiently in cyclohexane with added “basic”
hydrogen bond donors (B) (B ) tert-butyl methyl ether (â =
0.47), pyridine (0.642), N,N-dimethylacetamide (0.756);14 cy-
clohexane:B ) 4:1, v/v), capable of interrupting intramolecular
hydrogen bonding by forming o-iodocumyl alcohol-B adducts,
seems to support this presumption. With increasing hydrogen
bond donor ability (â) of the added B, the efficiency of
deiodination was decreasing. The fact that the gem-bis-
(trifluoromethyl) derivative 3c is more reactive (more “acidic”)15
than the dimethyl analogue 3a, is also indicative in this respect.
The dramatic difference in reactivity of cyclohexyl and benzyl
radicals also deserves comment. Both radicals must have
comparable adiabatic ionization potentials (cyclopentyl, 7.21 eV
(IP for cyclohexyl is not available); benzyl, 7.20 eV).16
(12) The strength of the intramolecular hydrogen bonding in o-iodophenol
was estimated by IR (CCl4) to be 1.55 ( 0.15 kcal/mol (Bourassa-Bataille,
H.; Sauvageau, P.; Sandorfy, C. Can. J. Chem. 1963, 41, 2240. Carlson,
G. L.; Fateley, W. G.; Manocha, A. S.; Bentley, F. F. J. Phys. Chem. 1972,
76, 1553). Theoretical studies have indicated that the intramolecular
interactions in the cis conformer of o-halophenols are due to a competition
between the attractive and repulsive H‚‚‚halogen interactions, as well as
the O‚‚‚halogen repulsions. An important factor is also the O-H‚‚‚X angle
(Dietrich, S. W.; Jorgensen, E. C.; Kollman, P. A.; Rothenberg, S. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1976, 98, 8310). Since this angle is near to 180° in the six-
membered hydrogen-bonded ring in o-iodocumyl alcohols, i.e., the optimal
value for such interactions (it is around 141° in o-iodophenol), it seems
safe to predict that the strength of the intramolecular hydrogen bonding in
these compounds must be g2 kcal/mol.
(13) Fukui, K.; Morokuma, K.; Kato, H.; Yonezava, T. Bull. Chem. Soc.
Jpn. 1963, 36, 217. Nagai, S.; Gillbro, T. J. Phys. Chem. 1977, 81, 1793.
Mishra, S. P.; Symons, M. C. R. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1981, 185.
(14) Kamlet, M. J.; Jones, M. E.; Taft, R. W.; Abboud, J.-L. J. Chem.
Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1979, 342.
(15) Moss, R. A.; Wilk, B.; Krogh-Jespersen, K.; Blair, J. T.; Westbrook,
J. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 250.
(17) (a) Wentrup, C. ReactiVe Molecules; Wiley: New York, 1984; pp.
28-29. (b) Handbook of Chemistry and Physics; Lide, D. R., Ed.; CRC
Press: Boca Raton, 1995. (c) Denisov, E. T. Zh. Fiz. Khim. 1995, 69, 436.
(d) Prof. S. W. Benson, personal communication.
(18) Hill, J. G.; Rossiter, B. E.; Sharpless, K. B. J. Org. Chem. 1983,
48, 3607.
(19) Bartlett, P. D.; Benzing, E. P.; Pincock, R. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1960, 82, 1762.
(20) Cooper, W. J. Chem. Soc. 1951, 3106.
(16) (a) Hayashibara, K.; Kruppa, G. H.; Beauchamp, J. L. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1986, 108, 5441, and references cited therein. (b) Wayner, D. D. M.;
McPhee, D. J.; Griller, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 132.
(21) Moss, R. A.; Alwis, K. W.; Shin, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984, 106,
2651.
(22) Johnstone, R. A. W.; Rose, M. E. Tetrahedron 1979, 35, 2169.