Miranda et al.
Consideration on the Reaction Mechanism. In
accordance with our experimental results we can con-
clude that FeX have two major roles when acetylenes
3
and carbonyl compounds are used: as Lewis acids
activating the carbonyl functionality and forming alkyne-
iron complexes that may be an initial step in further
chemical events. The relative importance of both behav-
iors strongly depends on the nature of the components
used in terms of, for instance, the presence or absence of
oxygen or other functional groups, internal or external
acetylenes, steric hindrance, etc.
3
To rationalize the action modes of FeX in acetylenic
FIGURE 1. Molecular graphs corresponding to π-complex (a)
coupling we performed some calculations at the ab initio
level. In the first instance, and following a path parallel
to that of the experimental work, we focused our atten-
tion on the interaction between terminal acetylenic and
iron(III) halides.
3
and σ-complex (b) between propyne and FeCl . Small dots into
bond paths are the bonds critical points.
In accordance with Bader’s methodology, and for an
equilibrium structure, the existence of a bond path is both
a necessary and a sufficient condition for the existence
The theoretical study for the reaction between FeCl
and an alkyne compound is not trivial. One can reason-
ably assume that the FeCl , as an electrophilic species,
3
28
of a bond. The bond path between two atoms is the line
3
between two nuclei along which the electron density is
the local maximum and includes a saddle point, the bond
critical point, where the gradient of the electronic density
vanishes.
interacts with the nucleophilic triple bond to give a π-type
complex. This kind of interaction involves weak bonds
which require a relatively large basis set system with
diffuse functions to be described, and taking into account
the electron correlation also. Considering the above, we
performed some ab initio calculations for three alkyne
models (acetylene, propyne, and 2-butyne) using for
To start the Bader analysis we need to compute a good
electronic density but the pseudopotential basis sets
cannot be used to obtain it. We performed a single-point
energy calculation over previous optimized geometries,
using B3LYP/6-311+G*, for all of the atoms involved.
2
3
geometry optimizations the mixed functional B3LYP,
for alkyl substructure the 6-311+G*24 basis set, and for
iron and chlorine atoms the pseudopotential basis set
3
AIM analysis showed a propyne-FeCl complex as the
only stable structure (Figure 1a). The other two sym-
metric alkynes (acetylene and 2-butyne) gave conflicting
structures that were too unstable. This fact could justify
the absence of structures such as 3 or 4 when we use
nonterminal alkynes.
25
LANL2DZ. We found, for the three alkynes considered,
the three minima on the potential energy surface.
However this outcome is not by itself proof of the
existence of true structures: we need to evaluate the
correlation energy.26 A different and less expensive choice
is supplied if one uses the Atoms in Molecules (AIM)
method of Bader and co-workers.27 Such a method is
based on a careful analysis of electronic density topology
and permits drawing molecular graphs, representing a
network of bond paths linking together all pairs of atoms
that are believed to be bonded to one another. Such
graphs can be considered as the AIM definition of the
bond.
Figure 1a shows the most relevant structural features
of the π-complex. Metal is bonded only with the acetylenic
terminal carbon with an almost perpendicular approach
to the triple bond (CtC-Fe 87.3°). In addition, CtC and
tC-H bond lengths become longer.
Analysis of charge distribution can show the electro-
3
philic nature of FeCl in this association. However, it is
well-recognized that the concept of atomic charge in a
molecule is difficult to define because it is not related to
a true physical quantity and, therefore, is not rigorously
defined in quantum mechanics. The essence of the AIM
theory is the definition of an atom as it exists in the
molecule. We can then find atomic charges, without the
problems related to electronic distributions based on
orbital methods, by simple integration of electronic
density over the well-defined atomic basins. A charge
transfer corresponding to 0.3 electrons between propyne
and ferric chloride is in agreement with the electrophilic
character and rationalizes the π-complex by use of species
I and II.
(
20) For the synthesis of dihydropyrans using the Prins cyclization,
see: (a) Sun, Q.; Panek, J. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 2425-
430. (b) Dobbs, A. P.; Guesn e´ , S. J. J.; Martinovi c´ , S.; Coles, S. J.;
2
Hursthouse, M. B. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 7880-7883. (c) Aubele, D.
L.; Lee, C. A.; Floreancig, P. E. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 4521-4523. (d)
Dobbs, A. P.; Guesn e´ , S. J. J.; Hursthouse, M. B.; Coles, S. J. Synlett,
003, 1740-1742. (e) Dobbs, A. P.; Martinovi c´ , S. Tetrahedron Lett.
002, 43, 7055-7057. (f) Roush, W. R.; Dilley, G. J. Synlett 2001, 955-
59. (g) Viswanathan, G. S.; Yang, J.; Li, C.-J. Org. Lett. 1999, 1, 993-
95.
2
2
9
9
(
21) For precedents in the synthesis of halovinyl tetrahydropyrans,
see: (a) Melany, M. L.; Lock, G. A.; Thompson, D. W. J. Org. Chem.
1
3
985, 50, 3925-3927. (b) Chan, T. H.; Arya, P. Tetrahedron Lett. 1989,
0, 4065-4068. (c) Tsukayama, M.; Utsumi, H.; Kunugi, A.; Nozaki,
H. Heterocycles 1997, 45, 1131-1142.
Experimental evidence of methyl ketone 4 could be
explained by II, even though it must be pointed out that
(
22) For details about this process, see: Miranda, P. O.; D ´ı az, D.
D.; Padr o´ n, J. I.; Bermejo, J.; Mart ´ı n, V. S. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 1979-
1
7
8
982.
(
23) (a) Lee, C.; Yang, W.; Parr, R. G. Phys. Rev. B 1988, 37, 785-
(27) (a) Bader, R. F. W. In Atoms in Molecules: A Quantum Theory;
The International Series of Monographs of Chemistry; Halpen, J.,
Green, M. L. H., Eds.; Clarendon Press: Oxford, UK, 1990; pp 1-438.
(b) Bader, R. F. W. Chem. Rev. 1991, 91, 893-928. (c) Popelier, P. In
Atoms in Molecules: An Introduction; Prentice Hall: Harlow, New York,
2000; pp 1-164. (d) Gilespie, R. J.; Popelier, P. L. A. In Chemical
Bonding and Molecular Geometry: From Lewis to Electron Densities;
Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2001; pp 134-268.
89. (b) Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648-5652.
(
24) Frisch, M. J.; Pople, J. A.; Binkley, J. S. J. Chem. Phys. 1984,
0, 3265.
25) (a) Hay, P. J.; Wadt, W. R. J. Chem. Phys. 1985, 82, 270-283.
b) Hay, P. J.; Wadt, W. R. J. Chem. Phys. 1985, 82, 284-298. (c) Hay,
P. J.; Wadt, W. R. J. Chem. Phys. 1985, 82, 299-310.
26) Muguet, F. F.; Robinson, G. W. J. Chem. Phys, 1995, 102, 3648-
654.
(
(
(
3
(28) Bader R. F. W. Acc. Chem. Res. 1985, 18, 9-15.
60 J. Org. Chem., Vol. 70, No. 1, 2005