112
A.Y. Jordan, T.Y. Meyer / Journal of Organometallic Chemistry 591 (1999) 104–113
resonances could not be definitively assigned due to the
complexity of the spectrum in this region. Significant
resonances from unidentified species were also ob-
served: 1H-NMR (C6D6): l 4.47 (m), 4.30 (m), 3.96 (m),
1.46 (d), 1.37 (m) and 1.13 (m).
with the imide functional group, especially under condi-
tions of prolonged heating.
Acknowledgements
4.2.18. Reaction of (n-Pr)NꢁCHPh and
PhNꢁCH(t-Bu) with the non6olatile components from
the decomposition of Mo(ꢁNAr)2(O-t-Bu)2 (8)
Support for this work was generously provided by
the NSF CAREER (CHE-9624138) and Dupont ATE
programs. T.Y.M. is an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow. We
thank Gidget K. Cantrell for providing the molybde-
num experimental results and for helpful discussions.
A solution of 8 (33 mg, 0.059 mmol) in C6D6 (750 ml)
was prepared in an NMR tube equipped with a Teflon
stopcock. Hexamethylbenzene was added as an internal
standard and the sample was maintained at 100°C for
45 days at which time 8 decomposed. The progress of
References
1
the reaction was monitored by H-NMR spectroscopy.
Isobutylene and 2,6-diisopropylphenylamine were iden-
tified. H-NMR (C6D6) of 2,6-diisopropylphenylamine
[1] P.A. Bates, A.J. Nielson, J.M. Waters, Polyhedron 6 (1987) 163.
[2] Y.-W. Chao, P.M. Rodgers, D.E. Wigley, S.J. Alexander, A.L.
Rheingold, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 113 (1991) 6326.
[3] R.R. Schrock, R.T. DePue, J. Feldman, K.B. Yap, D.C. Yang,
W.M. Davis, L. Park, M. DiMare, M. Schofield, J. Anhaus, E.
Walborsky, E. Evitt, C. Krger, P. Betz, Organometallics 9 (1990)
2262.
[4] G.K. Cantrell, T.Y. Meyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120 (1998) 8035.
[5] G.K. Cantrell, T.Y. Meyer, Chem. Commun. (Cambridge)
(1997) 1551.
[6] G.K. Cantrell, T.Y. Meyer, Organometallics 16 (1997) 5381.
[7] K.E. Meyer, P.J. Walsh, R.G. Bergman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117
(1995) 974.
[8] K.E. Meyer, P.J. Walsh, R.G. Bergman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 116
(1994) 2669.
[9] S.W. Krska, R.L. Zuckerman, R.G. Bergman, J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 120 (1998) 11 828.
[10] The complexity of the NMR and the potential for facile inter-
conversion prevents unambiguous assignment of 2,6-diisopropyl-
phenylamine or its ammonium salt.
[11] T.V. Lubben, P.T. Wolczanski, G.D. Van Duyne, Organometal-
lics 3 (1984) 977.
1
(unisolated):
l 3.19 (s, 2, NH2), 2.63 (sept, 2
((CH3)2CH)2) and 1.13 (d, 12, ((CH3)2CH)2). Aromatic
resonances could not be definitively assigned due to the
complexity of the spectrum in this region. Significant
resonances from unidentified species were also ob-
served: 1H-NMR (C6D6): l 4.47 (m), 4.30 (m), 3.96 (m),
1.46 (d), 1.37 (m) and 1.13 (m).
The volatile compounds of the sample were vacuum
transferred to another NMR tube. The nonvolatile
components showed resonances for 2,6-diisopropy-
lphenylamine and the unidentified species listed above.
Imines (n-Pr)NꢁCHPh and PhNꢁCH(t-Bu) were added
to the nonvolatile compounds and the reaction was
maintained at 25°C for 24 h. The progress of the
reaction was monitored by 1H-NMR spectroscopy.
1H-NMR (C6D6) PhNꢁCHPh (unisolated): l 8.12 (s, 1,
CHPh). 1H-NMR (C6D6) (n-Pr)NꢁCH(t-Bu) (uniso-
lated): 7.33 (s, 1, CH(t-Bu)), 3.26 (t, 2, CH3CH2CH2N),
1.59 (m, 2, CH3CH2CH2N), 1.03 (s, 9, CH(t-Bu), and
0.86 (t, 3, CH3CH2CH2N). 1H-NMR (C6D6) (2,6-
((CH3)2CH)2C6H3)NꢁCHPh (unisolated): l 8.0 (s, 1,
CHPh), 3.12 (sept, 2, ((CH3)2CH)2), and 1.16 (d, 12,
((CH3)2CH)2).
[12] There was no net conversion of t-butyl chloride to isobutylene
under the reaction conditions.
[13] T.J. Crevier, J.M. Mayer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 119 (1997) 8485.
[14] D.C. Bradley, M.B. Hursthouse, K.M. Abdul Makik, A.J. Niel-
son, R.L. Short, J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans. (1983) 2651.
[15] P.A. van der Schaaf, A. Hafner, A. Mhlebach, Angew. Chem.
Int. Ed. Engl. 35 (1996) 1845.
[16] J.M. Mayer, Polyhedron 14 (1995) 3273.
[17] J.C. Peters, A.R. Johnson, A.L. Odom, P.W. Wanandi, W.M.
Davis, C.C. Cummins, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118 (1996) 10 175.
[18] T.A. Budzichowski, M.H. Chisholm, K. Folting, J.C. Huffman,
W.E. Streib, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117 (1995) 7428.
[19] M. Nandi, D. Rhubright, A. Sen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 29 (1990)
3066.
[20] The term CꢀH activation is commonly used to describe a variety
of CꢀH cleavages that occur near metal centers. We have
adopted this usage. However, it is clear that, especially when a
basic ligand is involved, the reactions also fall into the general
category of deprotonation.
[21] Although intermolecular CꢀH activation cannot be ruled out
entirely (the spectra were sufficiently complex to mask minor
products), it is unlikely to be a significant process since it is
inherently reversible, in contrast to the intramolecular process
that we have described. Neither did we observe any obvious H/D
scrambling.
5. Conclusions
The reactions of the t-butoxide-supported imide
complexes 1, 3, and 8 with imines do not proceed via a
Chauvin-type [2+2] metathesis pathway. Experimental
data establish that these complexes are unstable to the
reaction conditions and that the products from the
decomposition are the agents of ꢁNR exchange. Al-
though it is impossible to completely eliminate the
intermediacy of cationic or radical species, no evidence
for their presence was observed. We conclude that the
imide-mediated CꢀH activation is the most probable
first step in the decomposition reaction and that, gener-
ally, t-butoxide ligands are not inherently compatible
[22] For examples see: (a) J. de With, A.D. Horton, Angew. Chem.
Int. Ed. Engl. 32 (1993) 903. (b) P.J. Walsh, F.J. Hollander,