formed, and with the observation that the reactivity is
reversed, we believe that the oxaziridine is not an important
intermediate in the electron-transfer reactions of cyclic
ketoximes.
Photolysis of 2-heptanone oxime (8) and 4-heptanone
oxime (9) under the typical conditions results in the formation
of the corresponding ketones (8a and 9a) in 44% and 38%
yield, respectively. Comparing the reactivity of the acyclic
oximes (8, 9) to that of a similar cyclic oxime (6), it can be
seen that both have a similar reactivity, suggesting that steric
factors may not be very important in the PET reactions of
oximes; however, more detailed studies are necessary to
confirm this observation.
approximately the same when using benzene, DCM, or
MeCN as the solvents. These results can be explained on
the basis of the proposed deprotonation step. Under the
conditions of these reactions, the radical anion, a strong base,
reacts with the oxime radical cation to yield the iminoxyl
radical (Scheme 2). This reaction will be favored in nonpolar
Scheme 2
Photolysis of a solution of acetophenone oxime (10) and
chloranil in acetonitrile results in the formation of acetophe-
none (10a) and acetamide (10c). The presence of 10c in the
product mixture is once again an example of a PET-induced
Beckmann rearrangement. Other aromatic oximes did not
yield amides upon photolysis in the presence of chloranil.
The only product observed for 11 is fluorenone (11a), and
the reaction was completed within 1 h.
The exact mechanism of the photosensitized regeneration
of carbonyl compounds from oximes is unclear. Previous
work by Rhodes on benzophenone oxime using ESR has
shown that the oxime radical cation undergoes rapid depro-
tonation to form an iminoxyl radical.13a This is consistent
with other reports on oximes and iminoxyl radicals.13 We
currently favor this mechanistic pathway rather than the
formation of an oxaziridine radical cation. Support for the
deprotonation mechanism comes from solvent-dependence
studies. The PET reactions of 10 with CA in both polar and
nonpolar solvents (Table 2) show that there is a significant
solvent effect.
solvents where the radical ion pair is close together and the
deprotonation can take place rapidly. In contrast, in a more
polar solvent the radical ions can diffuse apart and result in
lower yields. Furthermore, polar protic solvents such as
MeOH and TFE could potentially associate with the oxime
or the sensitizer radical anion (e.g., hydrogen bonding) and
thus prevent the deprotonation from taking place, which
would also result in lower yields.14
At this point, the exact mechanism for the formation of
the parent ketones remains uncertain. Two potential pathways
Scheme 3
Table 2. Solvent Effects on the Photolysis of CA and
Acetophenone Oxime (10)a
solventb
conversionc (%)
yieldc (%)
benzene
DCM
MeOH
MeCN
TFE
75
79
13
71
37
45
49
4
45
5
starting from the iminoxyl radical are shown in Scheme 3.15
The first pathway involves oxidation of the iminoxyl radical
followed by hydrolysis. Although the oxidation potential of
this radical is unknown, it has been shown that certain
radicals with heteroatoms in the â-position can have very
low oxidation potentials, and as a result, oxidation of this
radical could occur via reaction with CA* or possibly even
a [CA] ) 0.025 M; [10] ) 0.025 M; all solutions were irradiated for 2
h. b Dichloromethane (DCM), methanol (MeOH), acetonitrile (MeCN),
2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (TFE). c Product yields and conversions calculated
using calibrated GC/FID.
The conversions and the yields are much lower when using
the polar protic solvents (MeOH and TFE), but they are
(13) The formation of iminoxyl radicals from oxime radical cations
generated by chemical and other methods is well documented: (a) Rhodes,
C. J. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 1990, 86, 3303. (b) Bird, J. W.; Diaper,
D. G. M. Can. J. Chem. 1969, 47, 145. (c) Brokenshire, J. L.; Roberts, J.
R.; Ingold, K. U. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94, 7040. (d) Eisenhauer, B. M.;
Wang, M.; Brown, R. E.; Labaziewics, H.; Ngo, M.; Kettinger, K. W.;
Mendenhall, G. D. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1997, 10, 737. (e) Eisenhauer, B.
M.; Wang, M.; Labaziewics, H.; Ngo, M.; Mendenhall, G. D. J. Org. Chem.
1997, 62, 2050. (f) Everett, S. A.; Naylor, M. A.; Stratford, M. R. L.; Patel,
K. B.; Ford, E.; Mortenson, A.; Ferguson, C.; Vojnovic, B.; Wardman, P.
J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 2001, 1989. (g) Benchariff, L.; Tallec, A.;
Tardivel, R. Electrochim. Acta 1997, 42, 3509.
(8) Rehm, D.; Weller, A. Isr. J. Chem. 1970, 8, 59.
(9) Shine, H. J.; Chiou, S.; Hoque, A. K. M. M. J. Org. Chem. 1990,
55, 3227.
(10) Hoque, A. K. M. M.; Lee, W. K.; Shine, H. J. J. Org. Chem. 1991,
56, 1332.
(11) Houmam, A.; Shukla, D.; Kraatz, H. B.; Wayner, D. D. M. J. Org.
Chem. 1999, 64, 3342.
(12) Grundman, Ch. In The Chemistry of the Cyano Group; Rappoport,
Z., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1970; Chapter 14.
Org. Lett., Vol. 4, No. 14, 2002
2327