Chen et al.
2-
2-
TABLE 1. Cn Sn (n ) 3-6) B3LYP /6-311+G* Zer o-P oin t
aromaticity decreases with increasing CnSn ring size
of n ) 3-5, the same as for the CnOn2- series.3b The NICS
results above correlate well with the thiolate dianion
structures.
En er gies (ZP E, k ca l/m ol), Nu m ber of Im a gin a r y
F r equ en cies (NIm a g), Tota l En er gies (a u ), a n d Rela tive
En er gies (k ca l/m ol)
E
rel (Etot +
ZPE)
Total NICS(1) values indicate the strong diatropic ring
molecule symmetry ZPE NImag
Etot
current for C3S32- but weak diatropic currents for C4S4
2-
2-
and C5S52-. Generally, the degree decreases with increas-
ing ring size. Dissection shows that NICS(1)σ is negative
C3S3
C4S4
C5S5
C6S6
C6S6
C6S6
C6S6
D3h
D4h
D5h
D6h
D3d
D2h
11.5
16.6
21.4
25.7
25.4
26.1
25.3
0
0
-1308.96902
-1745.34100
-2181.69003
a
-2617.98951
-2617.99496
-2617.99606
2-
2-
2-
2-
2-
2-
0
(-7.0 ppm) for C3S32-, confirming its σ aromaticity,
3a
0
2- 3b
analogous to C3O3
.
The σ contributions in C4S42- and
2.7
0.0
-1.5
C5S52- are very small, even negligible, but the π contribu-
0
0
b
2-
C2v
tions are of a similar magnitude for CnSn (n ) 3-5).
Th ioca r bon Dia n ion s C6S62-. The lowest-energy
a
Geometry optimization at B3LYP/6-311+G* failed to converge,
ZPE given at B3LYP/6-31G(d). Bicyclic structure, see Figure 1.
b
2-
isomer of cyclic C6S6 has D2h symmetry, the same as
2-
its C6S6 neutral analogue.15 In D6h symmetry, C6S6 is
a third-order saddle point (NImag ) 3); following the first
imaginary mode led to a D3d minimum, 2.7 kcal/mol less
criterion, has proven to be a simple and efficient aroma-
ticity probe.13 Thus, it was found that “Oxocarbon acids
and their anions are examples where the criteria of
aromaticity that use reference systems are unsuccessful,
only the NICS criterion gives satisfactory results.”3d
Hence, NICS both at the ring centers, NICS(0), and at 1
Å above ring centers, NICS(1), were computed to analyze
the degree of aromaticity (Table 2). Here “dissected
NICS”, based on Kutzelnigg’s individual gauge for local-
ized orbitals (IGLO) method, which reveals the individual
contributions to the total shielding of localized orbitals
associated with bonds, lone pairs, and core electrons, is
employed.
stable than the D2h C6S62-. A C2 C6S62- isomer, which is
2- 3b
the most favorable structure for C6O6
function instability.
,
has wave-
As for C6S6,15,16 the stability of C6S6 is determined
by the balance between aromatic stabilization, ring
strain, and C-S and S-S bond strength affects. The most
stable cyclic C6S62- isomer, like C6S6, has D2h symmetry
and a strongly delocalized hexagonal carbon ring with
C-C bond lengths of approximately the benzene value,
1.40 Å. Hence, the aromatic stabilization adds into the
already favorable stability balance of the neutral ana-
logue. In contrast with the nonplanar D3d symmetric
2-
2-
CnSn (n ) 3-5) dissected NICS and 13C shifts are
2-
minima, the D2h C6S6 isomer has approximately equi-
summarized in Table 2. The computed CnSn2- carbon-13
chemical shift values agree well with the available
distant C-C bond lengths and meets the geometric
criteria of aromaticity (also see below).
2- 11
2- 4a
NICS(0)π analysis shows that the D2h hexathiolate
diaanion, the lowest energy cyclic isomer of C6S62-, is
much more aromatic than its D3d isomer, with a signifi-
cant shielding π-contribution (-22.4 ppm) , similar to
experimental values for C3S3
and C4S4
.
The σ
bonds contribute paramagnetically to NICS(0) for all
thiocarbon dianions. The C3S32- dianion C-C(σ) deshield-
ing contribution (6.0 ppm) is exceptionally small com-
2-
+
those in C3S3 (-24.9 ppm), while NICS(0)σ values are
pared to the corresponding value in C3H3 (10.2 ppm),
similar, 7.8 and 9.5 ppm, respectively, for D3d and D2h
isomers.
in both species carbon atoms are negatively charged,
while the C-C(σ) contribution in its oxygen analogue
2-
+
The σ contributions to NICS(1) are negligible for both
D2h and D3d isomers. However, π contributions are still
significant. For C6S62-(D3d), the NICS(1)π value is sim-
C3O3 and C3F3 are shielding (-11.7 and -9.3 ppm,
respectively). This may indicate a hidden σ aromaticity
2-
in C3S3 (see below). The relatively small deltathiolate
2-
ilar to those of CnSn (n ) 3-5) (-5.9 vs -5.6 to -6.6
dianion NICS(0)σ may be related to the negative charges
ppm), while C6S62-(D2h) exhibits the largest π contribu-
tions (-11.0 ppm) in the thiocarbon dianions investi-
gated.
2-
2-
+
on the C3S3 carbon atoms, since, in C3O3 and C3F3
,
the carbon atoms are positively charged.3b The four-
membered ring in C4S4 is σ antiaromatic, with abnor-
2-
2-
In general, substantial ring currents exist for CnSn
mally pronounced C-C(σ) contribution (30.4 ppm) com-
pared with its analogues, and much more so than in C4H8
(15.2 ppm).14
NICS(0)π values decrease with increasing CnSn2- (n )
3-5) ring size but are sufficiently diamagnetic that the
dianions are classified as π aromatic. For example, the
most pronounced C-C(π) shielding in C3S32- (-24.9 ppm)
is even stronger than that of benzene (-20.7 ppm)13c and
just a little less than that of C3O32- (-27.9 ppm).3b Thus,
(n ) 3-6), all thiocarbon dianions investigated, due to
the significant π contribution to both NICS(0)π and
NICS(1)π.
Neu tr a l Th ioca r bon s CnSn (n ) 3-6). For compari-
son, Dnh symmetric CnSn (n ) 3-6) thiocarbons, the
2-
neutral analogues of CnSn dianions, have been com-
puted. However, the wave functions of all the singlet
states are not stable at B3LYP/6-311+G*. While the wave
functions of the triplet states are stable for CnSn (n )
3-5), both singlet and triplet D6h C6S6 states have wave-
function instabilities. Moreover, the triplet states of C3S3
(D3h) and C4S4 (D4h) are local minimum while the C5S5
(13) (a) Schleyer, P. v. R.; Maerker, C.; Dransfeld, A.; J iao, H.;
Hommes, N. J . R. v. E. J . Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 6317. (b) Schleyer,
P. v. R.; J iao, H.; Hommes, N. J . R. v. E.; Malkin, V. G.; Malkina, O.
L. J . Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 12669-12670. (c) Schleyer, P. v. R.;
Manoharan, M.; Wang, Z.-X.; Kiran, B.; J iao, H.; Puchta, R.; Hommes,
N. J . R. v. E. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 2465. (d) Cyran˜ski, M. K.; Krygowski,
T. M.; Katritzky, A. R.; Schleyer, P. v. R. J . Org.Chem. 2002, 67, 1333.
(e) Patchkovskii, S.; Thiel, W. J . Mol. Model. 2000, 6, 67.
(14) Moran, D.; Manoharan, M.; Heine, T.; Schleyer, P. v. R. Org.
Lett. 2003, 5, 23.
(15) (a) Frenking, G. Angew. Chem. 1990, 102, 1516; Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. Engl. 1990, 29, 1410. (b) Maier, G.; Schrot, J .; Reisenauer, H.
P.; Frenking, G.; J onas, V. Chem. Ber. 1992, 125, 265.
(16) Su¨lzle, D.; Beye, N.; Fanghaenel, E.; Schwarz, H. Chem. Ber.
1989, 122, 2411.
8810 J . Org. Chem., Vol. 68, No. 23, 2003