Gung et al.
Conclusions
This study has shown that the current system works
well in directly determining individual attractive interac-
tions between arenes in the offset-stacked orientation.
The current results can be used in conjunction with
computational studies to evaluate the magnitude of
arene-arene interactions in solution. With a better
knowledge of the magnitude of arene-arene interactions,
it is possible to achieve a better understanding of the
contributions from arene-arene interactions in molecular
recognition involving biological macromolecular systems.
The current results are consistent with several recent
studies that polar/π forces are responsible for aromatic
stacking interactions. However the current study does
not rule out the possibility of charge-transfer interactions
if the aromatic systems are strongly different in electron
density. Extension of this system to the study of π-π
interactions with strongly electron-deficient and -rich
arenes is currently under way in our laboratories.
FIGURE 4. Plot of free energy of attraction (-∆G°) vs σpara
for compounds 9a-g. Experiments were conducted in CDCl3.
aromatic interactions was observed as a function of arene
substitution. The current study documents a greater
attractive force in the parallel-displaced orientation and
a significant difference in strength of interactions as a
function of substitution (see Figure 4).
Polar/π (dipole-dipole, dipole-multipole, and van der
Waals) forces, not charge-transfer (CT), have been sug-
gested to be responsible for aromatic stacking
interactions.8,21-23 The current study supports these
conclusions. No forced contact exists in either the syn or
the anti isomers in the current study. Therefore, the
preference for the syn conformation is entirely due to
attractive interactions. The arenes that show the stron-
gest attractive interactions are X ) CF3 and Y ) NO2
(∆G ) -0.98 ( 0.05 kcal/mol, entry 22, Table 1).
Compounds 7a-g with X ) H (entries 1-7, Table 1)
should be a reasonable model for the amino acid side
chain of phenylalanine (Phe). Our results show attractive
interaction between the two arenes if the other arene is
substituted with an EWG and repulsive interaction with
EDG (entries 1-7, Table 1). This indicates that in the
parallel displaced orientation a favorable arene-arene
interaction should occur with the side chain of Phe if the
other arene is electron poor, such as a protonated arene.
The control compound 11 shows a small preference for
the syn conformation indicating there is a small attractive
interaction between the acetyl group and the benzene
ring (∆G ) -0.24 ( 0.05 kcal/mol, entry 26, Table 1).
This weak interaction is most likely due to a lone pair-
π* attraction between the phenolic oxygen and the benzyl
aromatic ring. For compounds 7-10, this lone pair-π*
interaction is prohibited by the parallel arrangement of
the two attached arenes. Another possibility involves a
CH-π interaction, which has not been ruled out. More
studies are being conducted to identify the origin of this
weak attraction.
Experimental Section
A. Preparation of the Triptycene Derivatives. The
triptycene derivatives were prepared as shown in Scheme 1
following previously published procedures for similar
compounds.24-28 For general preparations and NMR spectro-
scopic data, see the Supporting Information.
B. Variable-Temperature NMR Procedures. The 1H
NMR spectra were recorded on a 300-MHz instrument with a
variable-temperature probe. A 0.05 M solution of the sample
in deuterated chloroform was placed in a high quality NMR
tube. All samples were degassed by passing nitrogen through
the sample for ∼1 min. The NMR tube was then capped and
sealed with Parafilm. The temperature of the NMR probe was
calibrated using a 13C internal thermometer.29 The process
involves recording the 13C NMR spectrum of tris(trimethylsi-
lyl)methane ((TMS)3CH) immediately before or after a 1H NMR
spectrum was recorded.29 Actual sample temperature was
determined from the calibration equation for CDCl3: T (°C) )
84.711 (∆δ) - 36.5, in which ∆δ is the 13C chemical shift
difference in ppm between the methyl and the methine carbons
of (TMS)3CH.29
Acknowledgment is made to the donors of the
Petroleum Research Fund (PRF #36841-AC4) adminis-
tered by the American Chemical Society.
Supporting Information Available: Experimental pro-
cedures for the preparation of compounds 5a-10d and 11. This
material is available free of charge via the Internet at
JO050049T
(24) Effenberger, F.; Niesert, C. P. SynthesissStuttgart 1992, 1137-
1144.
(25) Ogata, F.; Takagi, M.; Nojima, M.; Kusabayashi, S. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1981, 103, 1145-1153.
(26) Oki, M.; Izumi, G.; Yamamoto, G.; Nakamura, N. Bull. Chem.
Soc. Jpn. 1982, 55, 159-166.
(21) Cozzi, F.; Cinquini, M.; Annunziata, R.; Dwyer, T.; Siegel, J.
S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 5729-5733.
(27) Smith, J. G.; Dibble, P. W.; Sandborn, R. E. J. Org. Chem. 1986,
51, 3762-3768.
(22) Cozzi, F.; Cinquini, M.; Annuziata, R.; Siegel, J. S. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1993, 115, 5330-5331.
(28) Cunningham, B. D. M.; Lowe, P. R.; Threadgill, M. D. J. Chem.
Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1989, 1275-1283.
(23) Cozzi, F.; Annunziata, R.; Benaglia, M.; Cinquini, M.; Raimondi,
L.; Baldridge, K. K.; Siegel, J. S. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2003, 1, 157-
162.
(29) Sikorski, W. H.; Sanders, A. W.; Reich, H. J. Magn. Reson.
Chem. 1998, 36, S118-S124.
3644 J. Org. Chem., Vol. 70, No. 9, 2005