14
M.-L. Kwan et al. / Tetrahedron Letters 54 (2013) 12–14
Table 1
Interestingly, the data in Table 1 point up another important
relationship as well—the synergistic impact upon Tm of the cation
Relationships between structure and Tm in ILs 1–6 (see Scheme 1 for IL structures)
side-chain and head-group structures. Note that the
DTm of the
IL
Substituent at imidazolium
ring C(2) position
Specialized lipid
side-chain feature
IL Melting
point (°C)
saturated benchmark ILs 5 and 6 is 16.5 °C—the C(2)–Me species
having the higher Tm of the two. However, when the Tm values of
the two cyclopropanated ILs (1 and 2) are compared, the head-
group effect jumps to 26.6 °C. Then, when the arguably ‘best’
Tm-depressing structural element—unsaturation—is introduced
into the side chains, the head group effect increases yet again, to
36.9 °C, more than double its magnitude in the case of saturated
side-chain ILs 5 and 6. Taken together with similar observations
we recently made with an entirely different category of lipidic
ILs, a strong case is emerging for an argument that it may become
possible in the relatively near term to design lipidic ILs to manifest
Tm values in relatively narrow ranges.4a
In sum, the present data show a clear capacity on the part of
side-chain included cyclopropyl groups to bring about depressions
in the Tm values of lipidic ILs. Furthermore, the magnitude of these
changes is substantial even when compared to those wrought by
chain-included olefins, and they are achieved with (presumably)
less sensitivity toward oxidative degradation.7 However, the over-
all utility of side-chain cyclopropanation as a strategy for Tm
depression in lipidic ILs must take into account the need (at pres-
ent) for the multi-step synthesis of these side chains, a sequence
that employs some relatively expensive and hazardous reagents
(Et2Zn, LiAlH4). Accordingly, until naturally-derived cyclopropa-
nated lipid starting materials become commercially available, it
seems prudent to seek more readily accessed compliments to ole-
fin groups as IL Tm depressors, an endeavor in which we are already
engaged.
1
2
3
4
5
6
H
Me
H
Me
H
Me
Cyclopropyl
Cyclopropyl
cis-Alkenyl
cis-Alkenyl
None
ꢁ8.6( 0.5)
18.0( 1.0)
ꢁ20.9( 1.0)4b
16.0( 1.0)
53.5( 1.0)4b
70.0( 1.0)
None
C(2)-H
C(2)-Me
headgroup
headgroup
80
-16.5 o
C
6
60
5
o
o
-54.0
C
-52.0 C
cyclopropanate
side chain
unsaturate
side chain
40
20
0
o
o
-74.4
C
-62.1 C
cyclopropanate
side chain
unsaturate
side chain
Tm oC
2
4
-26.6 o
C
1
-36.9 o
C
3
-20
-40
Figure 1. Relationships between IL head group and side chain structures and Tm
Italicized values indicate Tm relationships between ILs with like side chains but
having C(2)–H versus C(2)–Me head groups.
.
Acknowledgments
D
J.H.D. and K.N.W. thank the National Science Foundation (CBET
Award 1133101 and REU Award 1156596) for support of this work.
exhibited by the materials, the products of which are in a liquid
state).
References and notes
Significantly, the overall depressions in Tm brought about by the
inclusion of a cyclopropyl moiety in the IL cation side chain
(62.1 °C in 1 vs. 5, and 52.0 °C in 2 vs. 6) are substantial regardless
of whether the latter is H- or CH3-bearing at the imidazolium C(2)
position (see Fig. 1). However, in the ILs with C(2)–H imidazolium
head groups, the absolute decrease in Tm (62.1 °C) is about 83% of
that brought about by unsaturation. In contrast, in the IL series
with C(2)-Me imidazolium head groups, the absolute magnitude
1. (a) Canongia Lopes, J. N. A.; Padua, A. A. H. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 3330; (b)
Padua, A. A. H.; Lopes, J. N. A. C. In ACS Symp. Ser.; Rogers, R. D., Seddon, K. R.,
Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, 2007; Vol. 975, pp 86–101.
2. Lopez-Martin, I.; Burello, E.; Davey, P. N.; Seddon, K. R.; Rothenberg, G.
ChemPhysChem 2007, 8, 690.
3. Sinensky, M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1974, 71, 522.
4. (a) Mirjafari, A.; Murray, S. M.; O’Brien, R. A.; Stenson, A. C.; West, K. N.; Davis, J.
H., Jr. Chem. Commun. 2012, 48, 7522; (b) Murray, S. M.; O’Brien, R. A.; Mattson,
K. M.; Ceccarelli, C.; Sykora, R. E.; West, K. N.; Davis, J. H., Jr. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2010, 49, 2755.
6. (a) Taber, D. F.; Nakajima, K.; Xu, M.; Rheingold, A. L. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67,
4501; (b) Furukawa, J.; Kawabata, N.; Nishimura, J. Tetrahedron Lett. 1968, 31,
3495; (c) Hajos, Z. G.; Wachter, M. P.; Werblood, H. M.; Adam, R. E. J. Org. Chem.
1984, 49, 2600.
of the
DTm induced by cyclopropanation (52.0 °C) is only about
66% of that which it delivers in the C(2)–H case. Even so, the com-
parative efficiency of cyclopropanation versus unsaturation within
the C(2)–Me IL series is 96% [(Tm depression by cyclopropanation
vs saturated benchmark IL/Tm depression by olefination vs satu-
rated benchmark IL) ꢀ 100] of that brought about by unsaturation.
7. It should be borne in mind that cyclopropyl groups bring with them their own
chemical sensitivities, such as ring-opening by Lewis acids.