was also photochemically unreactive in acetonitrile, indicating that
its failure to dimerize can be traced to the effectiveness of its phenyl
groups at inhibiting self-association rather than an effect relating
to solvent polarity.12 Similarly, compound 1 did not react under
these conditions, whereas anthracene was converted to dianthra-
cene in 78% yield.
Although compounds 1 and 2 failed to react in isolation,
irradiation of an equimolar mixture of them for 140 min under the
same conditions afforded a single product in 65% yield (Scheme 2).
This product showed a high degree of thermal stability and could
be isolated from the starting materials by either column
chromatography or recrystallization.
1
Both the H and 13C NMR spectra of this photoproduct are
consistent with cross-dimer 4. Of particular note is the presence of
two singlets in the 1H NMR spectrum at 4.1 and 2.2 ppm,
corresponding to the dimer’s bridgehead protons and methyl
groups respectively. These chemical shifts are almost identical to
those of the head-to-tail dimer of 9-methylanthracene,28 as one
would expect given their similar chemical environments (i.e. a
bridgehead proton adjacent to a methyl group). This assignment
was further confirmed by the observation of a strong nuclear
Overhauser effect between these two sets of protons, indicating
that they are in close proximity to each another. Characterization
of this compound by mass spectrometry posed a greater challenge,
since dianthracenes tend to fragment into their component
monomers when ionized.29 Thus, the MALDI–TOF spectrum of
4 exhibited only peaks corresponding to the two monomers, while
the FAB spectrum showed a weak molecular ion peak for the
dimer, in addition to a much more intense peak for compound 2.
Having demonstrated that 1 and 2 selectively form the cross-
dimer, we next examined the reversibility of this reaction—since
anthracene dimers are known to revert either thermally or
photochemically to their component monomers.29 As is typical
for dianthracenes, the UV–visible absorption spectrum of
compound 4 is blue-shifted relative to both monomers 1 and 2,
with a lmax of 259 nm. Exposing a sample of 4 to 252 nm light30
caused the characteristic anthracene peaks of 1 and 2 to appear in
the UV–visible spectrum. These peaks became progressively more
intense with longer exposure times (Fig. 1), and photoreversion
was 56% complete after 90 min.
Fig. 1 The UV–visible absorption spectra after 0, 5, 15, 40, 60 and 90 min
of a 0.04 mM solution of 4 in CH3CN irradiated with 252 nm light.
This suggests that it is the number of bridgehead methyl groups
that limits the thermal stability, and that the peripheral phenyl
groups do not appreciably destabilize the photodimer. The slow
decomposition of this compound at low temperatures indicates
that dimers of this type could be used to construct relatively robust
structures.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated the viability of a new
strategy for enforcing cross-dimer formation in [4 + 4] photo-
cycloaddition reactions by a judicious choice of substituents on the
two anthracene derivatives. The resulting photoproduct is
thermally stable at moderate temperatures and can be reconverted
to its constituent monomers either photochemically or at elevated
temperatures. We are currently investigating the scope and
limitations of this strategy for enforcing selective cross-dimeriza-
tion, as well as examining its potential for controlling the
reversible, light driven assembly of materials.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Council of Canada (NSERC) and Simon Fraser
University for funding, Mr. Mikki Yang for carrying out
microanalyses and Professor Neil Branda for helpful discussions.
David Bailey and Vance E. Williams*
Department of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University
Dr., Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6.
E-mail: vancew@sfu.ca; Fax: 1 604 291 3765; Tel: 1 604 415 3481
Compound 4 was found to possess considerable thermal
stability at room temperature; indeed, no decomposition of it
was observed at temperatures below 100 uC. The thermal reversion
of this compound was more thoroughly investigated by 1H NMR
(Fig. S2{). After heating a sample of 4 in DMSO-d6 at 135 uC for
15.5 h, only 15% of the dimer had been converted to monomers 1
and 2. At 150 uC, approximately 50% of 4 had been consumed
after 70 min. The reaction was approximately 93% complete after
150 min at the same temperature. This rate of fragmentation is
similar to that of the head-to-tail dimer of 9-methylanthracene,28
which also has two methyl groups at the bridgehead positions.
Notes and references
1 Molecular Switches, ed. B. L. Feringa, Wiley–VCH, New York, 2001.
2 R. van Delden, M. van Gelder, N. Huck and B. Feringa, Adv. Funct.
Mater., 2003, 13, 319–324.
3 M. Maesri, F. Pina and V. Balzani, in Molecular Switches, ed. B. L.
Feringa, Wiley–VCH, New York, 2001, pp. 309–337.
4 C. Dugave and L. Demange, Chem. Rev., 2003, 103, 2475–532.
5 I. Willner, Acc. Chem. Res., 1997, 30, 347–356.
6 H. Tian and S. Yang, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2004, 33, 85–97.
7 F. C. de Schryver, L. Anand, G. Smets and J. Switten, J. Polym. Sci.,
Part B: Polym. Lett., 1971, 9, 777–780.
8 J. R. Jones, C. L. Liotta, D. M. Collard and D. A. Schiraldi,
Macromolecules, 2000, 33, 1640–1645.
9 G. McSkimming, J. H. R. Tucker, H. Bouas-Laurent, J. P. Desvergne,
S. J. Coles, M. B. Hursthouse and M. E. Light, Chem.–Eur. J., 2002, 8,
3331–3342.
10 S. Nakatsuji, T. Ojima, H. Akutsu and J. Yamada, J. Org. Chem., 2002,
67, 916–921.
Scheme 2 The reversible formation of 4 from 1 and 2.
2570 | Chem. Commun., 2005, 2569–2571
This journal is ß The Royal Society of Chemistry 2005