Peroxides Containing Coumarin Chromophore
J. Phys. Chem. A, Vol. 109, No. 12, 2005 2799
The magnitude of the rate of O-O dissociation provides
insight into the nature of the potential energy surface. It is known
that dissociative surfaces are barrierless and the promotion of a
molecule directly into a dissociative state leads to a very rapid
(≈ hundreds of femtoseconds) dissociation.36-39 In the case of
1, the rate of the O-O bond rupture is 250 ps, which is about
103 times longer than for dissociative states. Even though we
were not able to measure triplet state decay directly, the
sensitivity of the photodecomposition quantum yield to oxygen
indicates that at least a part of the triplet state is quenched in a
bimolecular process. Assuming triplet quenching to be diffusion
limited, the rate of O-O bond cleavage should be on the order
of nanoseconds which also argues against the repulsive nature
of the triplet state. Ruling out the dissociative nature of the
excited states, we propose peroxide decomposition proceeds
according to an electronic predissociation process.38,40 In this
case, molecules are promoted into bound excited states that do
not themselves dissociate but can cross into dissociative surfaces.
There is a certain barrier for this chemical process that depends
on coupling between two states, and this barrier determines the
rate of the dissociation (Figure 10).
The monoexponential character of the decay of R1 and the
formation of CO2 indicates that decarboxylation of R1 proceeds
from vibrationally excited ground state only. This is in contrast
to the situation reported with a series of aroyloxyl radicals,
which have been shown to undergo decarboxylation from both
vibronically excited and ground states.11,26 We believe that in
our case the excess of vibrational energy dissipates before
radicals are formed due to slower O-O bond scission.
The decarboxylation rate of R1 was about an order of
magnitude lower than the rate of decarboxylation of either the
benzoyloxyl radical or the 2-naphthyloxyl radical. DFT calcula-
tions of the transition states agree with this experimental
observation. The decarboxylation barrier for radical R1 is 5.6
kcal/mol higher than for R4, implying slower decarboxylation
rates of R1 compared to R4. We attribute this to the stabilization
of R1 by an electron-reach coumarin aromatic system and to
the geometrical specifics of the transition state. As proposed
by Ingold et al.22 stabilization of various aroyloxyl radicals via
substitution on the aromatic ring is due to conjugative electron
delocalization or hyperconjugation between the substituent and
the radical site.
Supporting Information Available: Synthesis and charac-
terization of compounds 1 and 2. The Cartesian coordinates of
optimized geometries of R1 and R4 and corresponding transition
states together with their energies and vibrational frequencies.
This material is available free of charge via the Internet at
References and Notes
(1) Center for Photochemical Sciences Contribution #548.
(2) Neckers, D. C.; Abu-Abdoun, I. Macromolecules 1984, 17, 2468-
2473.
(3) Neckers, D. C. Photopolymerizable Composition Containing Per-
ester Photoinitiator and Photopolymerization Process. U.S. Patent 4,498,-
963, 1985.
(4) Neckers, D. C. Method for Polymerizing a Bis(Allyl Carbonate).
U.S. Patent 4,561,951, 1985.
(5) Najiwara, T.; Hashimoto, J.; Segawa, K.; Sakuragi, H. Bull. Chem.
Soc. Jpn. 2003, 76, 575-585.
(6) Rapaport, E.; Cass, M. W.; White, E. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972,
94, 3160-3167.
(7) Humphreys, R. W. R. Visible Light Absorbing Peroxy-Esters. U.S.
Patent 4,604,295, 1986.
(8) Falvey, D. E.; Schuster, G. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986, 108, 7419-
7420.
(9) Wang, J.; Itoh, H.; Tsuchiga, M.; Tokumaru, K.; Sakuragi, H.
Tetrahedron 1995, 51, 11967-11977.
(10) Bartlett, P. D.; Hiatt, R. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1958, 80, 1398-
1405.
(11) Abel, B.; Buback, M.; Kling, M.; Schmatz, S.; Schroeder, J. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 13274-13278.
(12) The time-resolved IR spectroscopy in the region from 3 to 5.1 µm
was used to observe aroyloxy radicals indirectly by monitoring the CO2
release. For example, see: Buback, M.; Kling, M.; Schmatz, S.; Schroeder,
J. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2004, 6, 5441-5455.
(13) Perrin, D. D.; Armarego, W. L. F. Purification of Laboratory
Chemicals; Butterworth Heinemann: Oxford, U.K., 1994.
(14) Fedorov, A. V.; Danilov, E. O.; Merzlikine, A. G.; Rodgers, M.
A. J.; Neckers, D. C. J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 3208-3214.
(15) Merzlikine, A. G.; Voskresensky, S. V.; Danilov, E. O.; Fedorov,
A. V.; Rodgers, M. A. J.; Neckers, D. C. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2004,
3, 892-997.
(16) Gentili, P. L.; Danilov, E.; Ortica, F.; Rodgers, M. A. J.; Favaro,
G. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2004, 3, 886-891.
(17) Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb,
M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Montgomery, J. A., Jr.;
Stratmann, R. E.; Burant, J. C.; Dapprich, S.; Millam, J. M.; Daniels, A.
D.; Kudin, K. N.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.; Cossi,
M.; Cammi, R.; Mennucci, B.; Pomelli, C.; Adamo, C.; Clifford, S.;
Ochterski, J.; Petersson, G. A.; Ayala, P. Y.; Cui, Q.; Morokuma, K.; Malick,
D. K.; Rabuck, A. D.; Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Cioslowski, J.;
Ortiz, J. V.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.; Liashenko, A.; Piskorz, P.; Komaromi,
I.; Gomperts, R.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith, T.; Al-Laham, M. A.;
Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Gonzalez, C.; Challacombe, M.; Gill, P. M.
W.; Johnson, B. G.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Andres, J. L.; Head-Gordon,
M.; Replogle, E. S.; Pople, J. A. Gaussian 98, revision A.7; Gaussian,
Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 1998.
Conclusions
The decomposition of coumarin perester proceeds from both
triplet and singlet excited states (Figure 11). The nature of this
state is predissociative rather than dissociative as demonstrated
by the relatively slow rates of oxygen-oxygen bond rupture.
The decomposition of 1 and 2 is clearly a stepwise process since
the cleavage of O-O bond and the decarboxylation of R1 can
be observed separately on different time scales. R1 is consumed
in two competitive processes - unimolecular decarboxylation
and bimolecular hydrogen atom transfer. The rates of these
reactions are 4.3 × 105 s-1 and 1 × 106 M-1 s-1 respectively.
The decarboxylation of R1 proceeds from vibronically relaxed
ground state as can be seen from relatively slow monoexpo-
nential kinetics of R1 decay and CO2 formation.
(18) MOLEKEL 4.0; Flu¨kiger, P.; Lu¨thi, H. P., Portmann, S.; Weber,
J.; Swiss Center for Scientific Computing: Manno, Switzerland, 2000.
(19) Foresman, J. B.; Frisch, A. Exploring Chemistry with Electronic
Structure Methods; Gaussian: Pittsburgh, PA, 1996.
(20) Melhuish, W. H. J. Phys. Chem. 1961, 65, 229-235.
(21) Chateauneuf, J.; Lusztyk, J.; Ingold K. U. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988,
110, 2877-2885.
(22) Chateauneuf, J.; Lusztyk, J.; Ingold K. U. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988,
110, 2886-2893.
(23) Avila, D. V.; Ingold, K. U.; Dinardo, A. A.; Zerbetto, F.; Zgierski,
M. Z.; Lusztyk, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 2711-2718.
(24) We should note that the rate of the triplet excited state formation
is a good estimate rather than exact value due to multicomponent nature of
the 370-500 nm region. The absorption band of the triplet state is partially
overlapped with ground-state absorption in its blue part and some of the
singlet state absorption in the red part assuming symmetric shape of 550
nm band.
Acknowledgment. Authors thank Dr. Evgeny Danilov for
assistance with transient spectroscopy and continuous fruitful
discussions. The Ohio Laboratory for Kinetic Spectrometry (M.
A. J. Rodgers, Dir.) is gratefully acknowledged for providing
equipment for transient spectroscopy measurements. One of the
authors (D.E.P.) is grateful to the McMaster Endowment for
support in the form of a Fellowship.
(25) Kawata, H.; Ichikawa, S.; Kumagai, T.; Niizuma, S. Tetrahedron
Lett. 2002, 43, 5161-5163.
(26) Abel, B.; Assmann, J.; Botschwina, P.; Buback, M.; Kling, M.;
Oswald, R.; Schmatz, S.; Schroeder, J.; Witte, T. J. Phys. Chem. A 2003,
107, 5157-5167.
(27) Seixas de Melo, J. S.; Becker, R. S.; Macanita, A. L. J. Phys. Chem.
1984, 98, 6054-6058.