7
arranged) 1,1,2-triphenyl-1-chloroethane. Attempts to pre-
ratio vs the concentration of methanol in CDCl
(Figure 1); above ∼0.4 M MeOH, the product ratio levels
3
is curVed
7
8
pare the latter chloride from 1,1,2-triphenylethanol and
SOCl gave only triphenylethene.
2
The triphenylethene formed upon photolysis of diazirine
in CDCl mostly arises by proton loss from triphenylethyl
2
3
cation 6, which derives from the fragmentation of carbene 5
coupled with 1,2-phenyl migration. This process parallels
the formation of the t-amyl cation by the fragmentation of
neopentyloxychlorocarbene, coupled with 1,2-methyl migra-
9
tion. However, we now find that the origin of cation 6 is
more complicated.
Figure 1. Product ratios of Ph
for the photolysis of diazirine 2 in MeOH/CDCl
3
CCH
2
OH/Ph
2
CdCHPh vs [MeOH]
. The product ratios
3
were determined by calibrated capillary GC.
Absolute rate constants for the fragmentations of alkoxy-
5
6
-1 9,10
halocarbenes are generally ∼10 -10 s
and can be
off at ∼7.5:1. This behavior, which parallels that of alkyl-
determined by ns laser flash photolysis (LFP) using the
1
chlorocarbenes photogenerated from diazirines, implies that
11
pyridine ylide method. However, no pyridine ylide formed
from carbene 5 when diazirine 2 was decomposed by ns LFP
at 351 nm in pentane containing 4 M pyridine, in 1,2-
dichloroethane (DCE) containing 0.8-4.0 M pyridine, or in
methanol with 0.8-4.0 M pyridine. Either the fragmentation
of carbene 5 is .10 s and/or the rate of ylide formation
is reduced relative to fragmentation, perhaps because of steric
hindrance originating at the 3 â-phenyl groups of 5. Can
the carbene be efficiently trapped?
there are 2 sources of alkene 4, only one of which (carbene
5
) can be intercepted by methanol.
We considered the possibility that the 15-25% of triph-
enylethene that persists even when carbene 4 is generated
in neat methanol arose directly by a phenyl shift rearrange-
ment-fragmentation of excited diazirine 2 to cation 6,
followed by proton loss. The cation is known to absorb at
6
-1
14
4
30 nm (in sulfuric acid), but ns LFP of 2 in DCE, MeCN,
or MeOH gave no UV evidence for 6. However, ps LFP of
Photolysis of diazirine 2 in neat methanol gives 15-25%
of triphenylethene 4 and 75-85% of 2,2,2-triphenylethanol.
1
5
2
in MeOH at 355 nm revealed a transient at 440 nm that
was quenched upon addition of pyridine, and which we
assign to cation 6; cf. Figure 2. Decay of the cation was
observed with a lifetime of ∼85 ps in methanol, representing
proton loss with the formation of triphenylethene. Cation 6
was not formed upon ps LFP of triphenylethene in MeOH,
although the alkene’s excited state (420 and 670 nm) and
radical cation (490 nm) did appear.
(Both products are stable to photolysis in methanol at 350
nm.) The triphenylethanol stems from methanolic trapping
1
2,13
of the carbene.
Although methanol efficiently captures
carbene 5, even neat methanol cannot prevent the formation
of a significant quantity of rearranged alkene 4. Moreover,
On the ultrafast time scale, fs LFP revealed an even
shorter-lived transient, formed instantaneously upon n to π*
excitation of the diazirine at 350 nm. The transient exhibited
an absorption maximum at 450 nm and decayed with
complex, multiexponential kinetics. Within the initial 5 ps
time window, the decay was biphasic: a fast component of
a correlation of the triphenylethanol/triphenylethene product
(7) Klages, A.; Heilmann, S. Chem. Ber. 1904, 37, 1447.
(8) Carter, P. R.; Hey, D. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1948, 150.
(9) Moss, R. A.; Ge, C.-S.; Maksimovic, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996,
1
1
10 fs (56% of the total decay) and a slower component of
.28 fs (27% of the decay); cf. Figure 3.
1
18, 9792.
We tentatively assign this very short-lived 450 nm transient
to zwitterionic species 7, formed by C-N bond cleavage
(10) Moss, R. A. Acc. Chem. Res. 1999, 32, 969.
11) Jackson, J. E.; Soundararajan, N.; Platz, M. S.; Liu, M. T. H. J.
(
Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 5595.
12) Smith, N. P.; Stevens, I. D. R. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1979,
298.
13) Moss, R. A.; Zheng, F.; Fed e´ , J.-M.; Ma, Y. Sauers, R. R.; Toscano,
J. P.; Showalter, B. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 5258.
(
(14) Toone, T. W.; Lee-Ruff, E.; Khazanie, P. G.; Hopkinson, A. C. J.
Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1975, 607.
(15) See the Supporting Information for details of the ps LFP instru-
mentation.
1
(
4808
Org. Lett., Vol. 8, No. 21, 2006