Dombrowski et al.
SCHEME 2. The Angle θ Is the Dihedral Angle
between the Plane Containing the Benzene Ring
and That Containing the Nitrogen and the
Carbons of the r-Methyl Groups
SCHEME 1. Schematic Illustration of the
Two-Electron-Sensitization Scheme, Showing
Injection of Two Electrons into the Conduction
Band of Silver Halide, Ag+X- a
a The trapped electrons are indicated as Ag0.
ing power of the R-amino radical is two-electron sensi-
tization.5 Here, light absorption to form the excited state
of a photographic sensitizing dye, D*, which is adsorbed
on the surface of microcrystalline silver halide, Ag+X-,
results in transfer of an electron into the conduction band
and formation of the dye radical cation, D•+, Scheme 1.
In the presence of an appropriate amine additive, A-H,
donation of an electron to D•+ can occur to form the amine
radical cation, A-H•+. Fragmentation (in this case depro-
tonation) of A-H•+ forms an R-amino radical, A•, that
injects a second electron into the conduction band,
Scheme 1. Thus, two electrons can be transferred per
absorbed photon, thereby doubling the photographic
response.5
Decarboxylation and desilylation fragmentation reac-
tions of amine radical cations have been successfully
implemented in two-electron sensitization schemes;6
however, the corresponding deprotonation reaction ini-
tially posed a challenge. Alkylamines, whose radical
cations have been shown to undergo relatively facile
deprotonation,7 cannot be used in aqueous photographic
emulsions because they would be protonated and thus
not function as electron donors. In addition, Mariano et
al. have clearly shown that deprotonation of aromatic
amine radical cations tends to be much slower than other
possible fragmentation reactions, and is thus often less
useful.8 The kinetics of deprotonation, as well as other
fragmentation reactions of the radical cations, are ex-
pected to increase with increasing oxidation potential of
the amine.9 This is not a generally useful solution to the
problem of low kinetic reactivity, especially in the two-
electron sensitization application, since increasing the
oxidation potential reduces the ability of the amine to
act as an electron donor. Thus, an alternate method was
required for controlling the reactivity of amine radical
cations. We have found a stereoelectronic effect that can
significantly increase the rate constants for deprotonation
of aniline radical cations.10 Based upon this effect, aniline
derivatives have been designed with a covalently at-
tached base that undergo efficient unimolecular (in-
tramolecular) deprotonation upon one-electron oxidation.
Here we describe anilines that have relatively low
oxidation potentials, and whose radical cations deproto-
nate with controllable rate constants over 4 orders of
magnitude. Reactions with rate constants approaching
108 s-1 have been obtained, even in unfavorable protic
media.
The first part of this paper describes kinetic and
thermodynamic studies of the rate constants for bimo-
lecular deprotonation of aromatic amine radical cations
that delineate the stereoelectronic effect. The second part
describes structures that undergo unimolecular fragmen-
tation. The paper concludes with a discussion of other
factors that control the deprotonation reactions of amine
radical cations.
II. Results and Discussion
II. A. Bimolecular Deprotonation. Anilines in which
ortho substituents (R, Scheme 2) twist the nitrogen out
of conjugation with the benzene ring are known to be
more basic than simple anilines.11 This is understood as
a consequence of localization of the nonbonding electrons
on nitrogen, which increases their basicity. It seemed
reasonable that similar twisting might also help to
localize the spin and positive charge close to the nitrogen
in the corresponding radical cations, thus enhancing the
electrophilicity of hydrogen atoms on carbons R to the
nitrogen. The kinetics of amine radical cation deproto-
nation have been studied previously with a variety of
techniques.8,12 Rate constants are expected to depend on
the thermodynamics of the reaction, i.e., on the strength
of the base and the pKa of the radical cation, and this
has been shown to be the case for several amines, and
other radical cations.8a,13,14 Indeed, two previous studies
have specifically addressed the relationship between
kinetics and thermodynamics for deprotonation of sub-
(10) Deprotonation would also be expected to be faster with increas-
ing stability of the radical product, and this has also been confirmed
experimentally.8a
(5) (a) Gould, I. R.; Lenhard, J. R.; Muenter, A. A.; Godleski, S. A.;
Farid, S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 11934. (b) Gould, I. R.; Lenhard,
J. R.; Muenter, A. A.; Godleski, S. A.; Farid. S. Pure Appl. Chem. 2001,
73, 455.
(6) (a) Gould, I. R.; Godleski, S. A.; Zielinski, P. A.; Farid, S. Can.
J. Chem. 2003, 81, 777. (b) Gould, I. R.; Farid, S. J. Phys. Chem. A
2004, 108, 10949.
(7) See, for example: Davidson, R. S. Adv. Phys. Org. Chem. 1983,
19, 1.
(8) (a) Zhang, X.; Yeh, S.-R.; Hong, S.; Freccero, M.; Albini, A.;
Falvey, D. E.; Mariano, P. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 4211. (b)
Su, Z.; Falvey, D. E.; Yoon, U. C.; Mariano, P. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1997, 119, 5261. (c) Su, Z.; Mariano, P. S.; Falvey, D. E.; Yoon, U. C.;
Oh, S. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 10676. (d) Yoon, U. C.; Kwon,
H. C.; Hyung, T. G.; Choi, K. H.; Oh, S. W.; Yang, S.; Zhao, Z.; Mariano,
P. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 1110.
(9) (a) Nicholas, A. M. P.; Arnold, D. R. Can. J. Chem. 1982, 60,
2165. (b) Arnold, D. R.; Snow, M. S. Can. J. Chem. 1985, 66, 3012. (c)
Gaillard, E. R.; Whitten, D. G. Acc. Chem. Res. 1996, 29, 292.
(11) Ingold, C. K. Structure and Mechanism in Organic Chemistry;
Cornell University Press: Ithica, NY, 1953; Chapter XIII.
(12) (a) Powell, M. F.; Wu, J. C.; Briuce, T. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1984, 106, 3850. (b) Sinha, A.; Bruice, T. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984,
106, 7291. (c) Fukuzumi, S.; Kondo, Y.; Tanaka, T. J. Chem. Soc.,
Perkin Trans. 2 1984, 673. (c) Das, S.; Von Sonntag, C. Z. Naturforsch.
1986, 416, 505. (d) Hapiot, P.; Moiroux, J.; Saveant, J.-M. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1990, 112, 1337. (e) Anne, A.; Hapiot, P.; Moiroux, J.; Neta, P.;
Saveant, J.-M. J. Phys. Chem. 1991, 95, 2370. (f) Fukuzumi, S.;
Tokuda, Y.; Kitano, T.; Okamoto, T.; Otera, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993,
115, 8960. (g) Anne, A.; Fraoua, S.; Hapiot, P.; Moiroux, J.; Saveant,
J.-M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 7412. (h) Goez, M.; Sartorius, I. J.
Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 8539.
(13) (a) Dinnocenzo, J. P.; Banach, T. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989,
111, 8646. (b) Parker, V. D.; Tilset, M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113,
8778. (c) Agnes, A.; Hapiot, P.; Moiroux, J.; Neta, P.; Saveant, J.-M. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 4694.
3792 J. Org. Chem., Vol. 70, No. 10, 2005