Roschek et al.
SCHEME 2. Concept of the Peroxyl Radical Clock
peroxyl radical fragmentations have values that are complimen-
tary to the fragmentations associated with methyl linoleate.7
Therefore, we envisioned that these two substrates would
provide a range of values for peroxyl radical fragmentations
useful for the development of a series of clocks.
kinetic analysis reveals that the product ratio [1]/[2] is directly
proportional to kH/kR. Once kR for the unimolecular reaction
has been established, an experiment to determine the product
ratio for a given concentration of AH can be performed and
the unknown rate constant kH can be derived.
The radical clock method is ideally suited to applications
involving carbon-centered radicals due to the vast literature
documenting the kinetics of skeletal rearrangements of alkyl
radicals. As a result, dozens of clocks have been used for
determining reaction rate constants ranging from 10-1 to 1012
M-1 s-1.4 There is of course a requirement that radical clocks
must be “standardized” to an absolute rate constant. In the case
of radical cyclization, a number of methods have been used to
calibrate various clocks.
Given the relative ease with which conventional radical clock
experiments are conducted, it may prove useful to have radical
clock methods for the determination of rate constants for
reactions of peroxyl radicals. In fact, we have previously
reported studies that provide the basis for the development of
peroxyl radical clocks5 based on the autoxidation of lipids such
as methyl linoleate, and herein, we provide a detailed discussion
of the methodology and describe extended studies of these
clocks with a variety of H-atom donors.
The autoxidation of 5 is known to proceed by a series of
free-radical reactions, with the product distribution highly
dependent on the hydrogen atom donor (H-donor) present
(Scheme 3). When autoxidations of 5 were carried out in the
presence of R-tocopherol (>0.01 M) or other good H-donors,
only the kinetically controlled oxidation products (11-13) were
observed. Oxygen partitions itself across the three positions of
the pentadienyl radical (7) to form the nonconjugated (9) and
conjugated (8 and 10) peroxyl radicals with partitioning
coefficients of R and 1-R, respectively. Since â-fragmentation
of the conjugated peroxyl radicals (8 and 10) does not compete
with trapping by R-tocopherol (R-TOH), only the cis,trans-
conjugated hydroperoxides (11 and 12) are observed.8 In contrast
to the conjugated peroxyl radicals, the nonconjugated peroxyl
radical (9) undergoes a rapid â-fragmentation (kâΙ), reforming
the original pentadienyl radical (7).9 Competing with this
â-fragmentation is H-atom transfer (kH) to the peroxyl radical
to form the nonconjugated hydroperoxide 13. This competition
between â-fragmentation and H-atom transfer establishes the
basis for what we call the fast peroxyl radical clock (MLfast
)
derived from 5.
As is true with any clock, it is desirable to cover a broad
time domain to maximize possible applications. We describe
the development of a series of peroxyl radical clocks based on
the competition (Scheme 2) between a unimolecular peroxyl
radical rearrangement (kR) and a bimolecular H-atom transfer
(kH), where kH collectively refers to compounds that may
propagate (kp) or inhibit (kinh) radical chain reactions. By
modifying the structure of the clock (R1-H), we have been able
to vary the rate constant for the rearrangement reaction (kR),
providing a range of clocks amenable to studying peroxyl radical
When autoxidations of 5 are carried out in the presence of
H-donors that do not compete with kâI, only the thermodynamic
conjugated hydroperoxides (11, 12, 18, and 19) are observed
(Scheme 3). Although it is assumed that upon initial H-atom
abstraction the nonconjugated peroxyl radical (9) is formed, kâI
is the predominant pathway (relative to kH) under these reaction
conditions and there is a negligible amount of 9 present in
product mixtures. Only the conjugated peroxyl radicals (8 and
10) and their subsequent reactions are relevant in the thermo-
dynamically controlled autoxidation of 5. Upon formation of 8
and 10, one possible pathway is bond rotation followed by
â-fragmentation to form the new pentadienyl radical (14 and
15) with the trans,cis-conformation. Oxygen partitions itself at
the transoid or cisoid ends of 14 and 15 to form either the trans,-
cis- (8 and 10) or trans,trans-conjugated peroxyl radicals (16
reactions having rate constants between 100 and 107 M-1 s-1
.
Results and Discussion
Design of Peroxyl Radical Clocks. Methyl linoleate (5) and
allylbenzene (6) were chosen as substrates for the development
of a series of peroxyl radical clocks. The autoxidation mecha-
nism of methyl linoleate has been studied in great detail, and it
is known to involve â-fragmentations of several intermediate
peroxyl radicals.6 In addition, theoretical calculations have been
carried out on peroxyl radicals derived from linoleate as well
as those formed from allylbenzenes. The calculations suggest
that the rate constants associated with allylbenzene-derived
(6) (a) For the identification of the kinetic products, see: Tallman, K.
A.; Roschek, B., Jr.; Porter, N. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 9240 and
ref 5a. For the thermodynamic products, see: (b) Chan, H. W.-S.; Levett,
G. Lipids 1977, 12, 99. (c) Porter, N. A. Acc. Chem. Res. 1986, 19, 262.
(d) Porter, N. A.; Caldwell, S. E.; Mills, K. A. Lipids 1995, 30, 277.
(7) Pratt, D. A. Ph.D. Dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN,
December 2003.
(8) A value of 430 s-1 has been reported (see ref 5b), but we have
reevaluated the rate constants for fragmentation of the conjugated peroxyl
radicals.
(2) Ingold, K. U. Acc. Chem. Res. 1969, 2, 1.
(9) The mechanism for this â-fragmentation is under investigation. There
may be a contribution from a bis-allylic rearrangement through a radical-
dioxygen complex. Regardless of the mechanism, the kinetics remain
unchanged and does not influence the concept of the clock. For more
information regarding this radical-dioxygen complex, see: (a) Olivella,
S.; Sole´, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 10641. (b) Mills, K. A.; Caldwell,
S. E.; Dubay, G. R.; Porter, N. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 9689. (c)
Porter, N. A.; Mills, K. A.; Carter, R. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116,
6690. (d) Porter, N. A.; Mills, K. A.; Caldwell, S. E.; Dubay, G. R. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 6697. (e) Lowe, J. R.; Porter, N. A. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1997, 119, 11534.
(3) (a) Cipollone, M.; Di Palma, C.; Pedulli, G. F. Appl. Magn. Reson.
1992, 3, 99. (b) Pedulli, G. F.; Lucarini, M.; Pedrielli, P.; Sagrini, M.;
Cipollone, M. Res. Chem. Intermed. 1996, 22, 1. (c) Lucarini, M.; Pedulli,
G. F., Valgimigli, L. J. Org. Chem. 1998, 63, 4497.
(4) (a) Griller, D.; Ingold, K. U. Acc. Chem. Res. 1980, 13, 317. (b)
Newcomb, M. Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 1151. (c) Newcomb, M.; Toy, P. H.
Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33, 449.
(5) (a) Tallman, K. A.; Pratt, D. A.; Porter, N. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2001, 123, 11827. (b) Porter, N. A.; Wujek, D. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984,
106, 2626.
3528 J. Org. Chem., Vol. 71, No. 9, 2006