Figure 2. Crystal-packing diagram of compound 1.
Although the formation of the Z configuration allowed
compound 1 to maintain maximum conjugation across the
1,3-butadiene unit and to gain the stabilizing resonance
energy, the experimental result indicated that the molecule
preferred to form the highly crowded E configuration.
Noncovalent π stacking interactions play an important role
in many areas of chemistry.10 In organic chemistry, the effects
of noncovalent π stacking interactions on photodimerization,
photopolymerization,11 and asymmetric synthesis12 have been
observed. Noncovalent π stacking interactions have been
known to assemble various types of biological supramol-
ecules, for example, DNA and RNA, and to provide the
stabilizing energy for them.13 Based on the stacking orienta-
tion and the distance of two phenyl groups (∼3.26 Å) in
compound 1, a noncovalent π stacking interaction between
the stacked phenyl groups is suggested as an important
stabilizing energy for the crowded structure. The observed
noncovalent interaction is an intramolecular force that occurs
between two phenyl groups.
A closer examination of 1H NMR of compound 1 revealed
that the signals of 10 aromatic protons were more upfield-
shifted than those of the five remaining protons. Because
the formation of a π-π complex caused electron shielding,14
the upfield chemical shifts were assigned to the aromatic
protons on the stacked phenyl rings. This method can also
be applied to determine the configurations of some related
anhydrides.
To examine the effects of different substituents on the
stereoselectivity of the Stobbe condensation, diester 5 was
condensed under the same reaction conditions with p-
methoxybenzaldehyde, p-methylbenzaldehyde, p-chloro-
benzaldehyde, and p-nitrobenzaldehyde, respectively, to
afford four dicarboxylic acids.15 The anhydride products
(8) Data for compound 1: C24H16O3, monoclinic space group: P21/c;
cell dimensions: a ) 8.1438(11) Å, b ) 11.5962(16) Å, c ) 18.591(3) Å,
â ) 95.066(2)°, V ) 1748.8(4) Å3, Z ) 4, Dcalc ) 1.338 Mg/m3, F(000) )
736, µ ) 0.088 mm-1. X-ray diffraction data were collected on an orange
block crystal (0.40 × 0.20 × 0.20 mm3) at 173(2) K using a Bruker SMART
area diffractometer, λ (Mo Ka) ) 0.71073 Å. Data integration was carried
out with SAINT V6.1 (Bruker Analytical X-ray Systems, Madison, WI),
corrections for absorption and decay were applied using SADABS. The
structure was solved, by direct methods, and refined using the SHELXTL-
Plus V5.10. All non-hydrogen atoms were refined with anisotropic thermal
parameters. Hydrogen atoms were placed with ideal positions and refined
with isotropic thermal parameters related to the parent carbon atom. R1 )
0.0367 for 2732 data [I>2_(I)] and ) 0.0418 for all 3093 data.
(9) Selected bond lengths: C(3)-C(4) ) 1.4671(17); C(3)-C(6) )
1.3519(18); C(4)-C(7) ) 1.3751(18); C(6)-C(8) ) 1.4586(18); C(7)-
C(14) ) 1.4803(17); C(7)-C(20) ) 1.4808(17) Å. Selected bond angles:
C(6)-C(3)-C(4) ) 137.02(12)°; C(7)-C(4)-C(3) ) 132.07(11)°; C(3)-
C(6)-C(8) ) 131.31(12)°; C(4)-C(7)-C(14) ) 122.78(11)°; C(4)-C(7)-
C(20) ) 121.37(11)°. Selected torsion angles: C(4)-C(3)-C(6)-C(8) )
-4.6(2)°; C(3)-C(4)-C(7)-C(14) ) -12.8(2)°; C(3)-C(4)-C(7)-C(20)
) 168.14(12)°; C(6)-C(3)-C(4)-C(7) ) -25.4(2)°.
(14) Viel, S.; Mannina, L.; Segre, A. Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 43, 2515-
2519.
(15) General Procedure. With nitrogen flowing, aromatic aldehyde (1.4
mmol), the diester 5 (1.23 mmol), benzene (3.0 mL), and 60% sodium
hydride in mineral oil (1.6 mmol) were added into a flame-dried flask (150
mL). The flow of nitrogen was stopped, and a drop of methanol was added
carefully into the stirred mixture at room temperature to initiate the
condensation. After the initial reaction had subsided, the reaction mixture
was stirred at room temperature for 30 min. The reaction was quenched by
slow addition of water (3.0 mL) and was acidified by addition of
concentrated HCl. The resulting mixture was extracted with ethyl ether three
times. The combined ethereal solutions were extracted with ammonia (1.0
N, 15 mL). The alkaline solution, cooled in an ice-water bath, was acidified
using concentrated HCl. The precipitated oil was collected by ether
extraction. The ethereal solution was washed with brine and dried over
MgSO4. Removal of ether in vacuo afforded the diacid as an oil. In dim
red light, the diacid was dissolved in acetyl chloride (1.5-2.0 mL) and left
at room temperature for 30 min. The extra acetyl chloride was removed in
vacuo to give a residue, which was dissolved into a small amount of ethyl
acetate (1.0-2.0 mL). The anhydride product was precipitated by addition
of hexane.
(10) Hunter, C. A.; Lawson, K. R.; Perkins, J.; Urch, C. J. J. Chem.
Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 2001, 651-669.
(11) Coates, G. W.; Dunn, A. R.; Henling, L. M.; Ziller, J. W.;
Lobkovsky, E. B.; Grubbs, R. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 3641-
3649.
(12) Jones, G. B.; Chapmam, B. J. Synthesis 1995, 475-497.
(13) Guckian, K. M.; Schweitzer, B. A.; Ren, R. X.-F.; Sheils, C. J.;
Tahmassebi, D. C.; Kool, E. T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 2213-2222.
Org. Lett., Vol. 4, No. 20, 2002
3523