N. Mizuno et al. / Catalysis Today 157 (2010) 359–363
363
singlet potential energy surfaces would proceed during the trans-
formation from I-a to I-b. The activation energy from di-copper(II)
intermediate I-a to di-copper(I) species (I-d) via the transition state
I-c was calculated to be 38 kJ mol−1. The re-oxidation of I-d with
O2 (step 3, Eq. (5) in Fig. 5) was a downhill reaction and calcu-
lated to be exothermic by 56 kJ mol−1. These results are consistent
with the experimental ones that the formation of a diyne from the
di-copper(II)-alkynyl species is the rate-determining step.
4. Conclusions
The di-copper(II)-substituted silicotungstate I exhibited high
catalytic activity for the aerobic oxidative homocoupling. In addi-
tion, the 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition reactions efficiently proceeded
with I. The catalyst effect, spectroscopic analyses, kinetics, and DFT
calculations show that the di-copper(II) core on I is the active site
for the present oxidative homocoupling.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported in part by the Core Research for Evo-
lutional Science and Technology (CREST) program of the Japan
Science and Technology Agency (JST), the Global COE Program
(Chemistry Innovation through Cooperation of Science and Engi-
neering), and Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Researches from Ministry
of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.
Fig. 5. (a) The calculated energy changes for each step and (b) detailed energy dia-
References
6−
phase. Polyoxotungstate frameworks of [␥-H2SiW10O36
]
are omitted for clarity.
[1] P. Siemsen, R.C. Livingston, F. Diederich, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 39 (2000) 2632.
[2] C. Glaser, Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 2 (1869) 422.
[3] A.S. Hay, J. Org. Chem. 27 (1962) 3320.
[4] I.D. Campbell, G. Eglinton, Org. Synth. 45 (1965) 39.
[5] L. Wanga, J. Yana, P. Lia, M. Wanga, C. Su, J. Chem. Res. (2005) 112.
[6] J.S. Yadav, B.V.S. Reddy, K.B. Reddy, K.U. Gayathri, A.R. Prasad, Tetrahedron Lett.
44 (2003) 6493.
[7] J. Li, H. Jiang, Chem. Commun. (1999) 2369.
[8] S.M. Auer, M. Schneider, A. Baiker, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. (1995)
2057.
[9] J.-H. Li, Y. Liang, Y.-X. Xie, J. Org. Chem. 70 (2005) 4393.
[10] J. Li, Y. Liang, X.-D. Zhang, Tetrahedron 61 (2005) 1903.
[11] F. Bohlmann, H. Schönowsky, E. Inhoffen, G. Grau, Chem. Ber. 97 (1964) 794.
[12] K. Kamata, S. Yamaguchi, M. Kotani, K. Yamaguchi, N. Mizuno, Angew. Chem.
Int. Ed. 47 (2008) 2407.
and 1:2 (O2 consumed:diyne formed) stoichiometries support the
overall catalytic cycle in Fig. 4.
The reaction rate for the homocoupling of 1a showed the
first-order dependence on the concentration of I and was almost
sure of O2. The kinetic isotope effect was not observed for the
oxidative homocoupling of 1a and 2a (kH/kD = 1.0). All these results
show that the formation of a diyne from the alkynyl species (elec-
tron transfer from the alkynyl species to copper species, step 2 in
Fig. 4) is the rate-determining step in the catalytic cycle.
The DFT calculations were carried out to confirm the possible
present alkyne homocoupling. Methylacetylene (30a) was used as
a model substrate for the DFT calculations. The energies of the
reaction steps were calculated according to the proposed reaction
mechanism (Fig. 4) and the results are summarized in Fig. 5. First,
the di-copper(II) intermediate with two ,-bridging acetylide
units (I-a) was formed by the reaction of I with 30a (step 1, Eq. (1) in
Fig. 5). This step corresponds to the induction period for the present
homocoupling. The triplet state of I-a was calculated to be more
stable by 62 kJ mol−1 than the singlet state. Next, the di-copper(II)
intermediate with two -bridging acetylide units (I-b) was formed
and the energies of I-b in the triplet and singlet states referenced
[13] K. Yamaguchi, K. Kamata, S. Yamaguchi, M. Kotani, N. Mizuno, J. Catal. 258
(2008) 121.
[14] D.D. Perrin, W.L.F. Armarego (Eds.), Purification of Laboratory Chemicals, 3rd
ed., Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1988, pp. 80–388.
[15] K. Kamata, K. Yonehara, Y. Sumida, K. Yamaguchi, S. Hikichi, N. Mizuno, Science
300 (2003) 964.
[16] A.D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 98 (1993) 1372.
[17] P.J. Hay, W.R. Wadt, J. Chem. Phys. 82 (1985) 270.
[18] M.J. Frisch, G.W. Trucks, H.B. Schlegel, G.E. Scuseria, M.A. Robb, et al., Gaussian
03, Revision D.02, Gaussian Inc., Wallingford, CT, 2004.
[19] R. Shintani, G.C. Fu, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125 (2003) 10778.
[20] V.D. Bock, H. Hiemstra, J.H. van Maarseveen, Eur. J. Org. Chem. (2006) 51.
[21] K. Kamata, Y. Nakagawa, K. Yamaguchi, N. Mizuno, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130 (2008)
15304.
[22] M. Allevi, M. Bonizzoni, L. Fabbrizzi, Chem. Eur. J. 13 (2007) 3787.
[23] S. Sen, S. Mitra, D.L. Hughes, G. Rosair, C. Desplenches, Polyhedron 26 (2007)
1740.
to the triplet state of I-a were calculated to be 53 and 21 kJ mol−1
respectively. Thus, the spin interconversion between the triplet and
,
[24] B.J. Hathaway, D.E. Billing, Coord. Chem. Rev. 5 (1970) 143.