Journal of Chemical Engineering And Bioanalytical Chemistry

ISSN: 2575-5641

VOLUME: 2 ISSUE: 1

Page No: 70-76

Cybotactic Effect on Nitrogen and Phosphorus Hyperfine Coupling Constants in β-Phosphorylated Nitroxides.


Affiliation

Gerard Audran,*a Jean-Patrick Joly,a Sylvain R. A. Marque*a,b

a Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS, ICR, UMR 7273, case 551, Avenue Escadrille Normandie-Niemen, 13397 Marseille Cedex 20 France.

E-mail: g.audran@univ-amu.fr, sylvain.marque@univ-amu.fr

b N. N. Vorozhtsov Novosibirsk Institute of Organic Chemistry SB RAS, Pr. Lavrentjeva 9, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia.

Citation

Gerard A, Jean-Patrick J, Marque, Cybotactic Effect on Nitrogen and Phosphorus Hyperfine Coupling Constants in ?-Phosphorylated Nitroxides.(2017)Journal of Chemical Engineering And Bioanalytical Chemistry 2(1)

Abstract

Solvent effect is investigated on β-phophorylated nitroxides carrying electron widthdrawing groups exhibiting various steric hindrances. Solvent effect on nitrohen and phosphorus hyperfine coupling constants highlights the entanglement of polar and steric effects on the changes in hyperfine coupling constants.

Introduction

Nitroxide 3d• was prepared as already reported[[i]] and the corresponding nitrogen and phosphorous hyperfine coupling constant (hcc) an and aP, respectively, were measured as previously described.[6-11] Due to the presence of both N- and P-atoms at the positions □ and □ to the odd electron with nuclear spin IN = 1 and IP = ½, respectively, EPR signal of 2•, 3a-d• displays 6 lines (doublet of triplet) with a large doublet due to aP and a small triplet due to aN (Table 1).

a aN and aP given in G. b CHex: cyclohexane, t-BuPh: tert-butylbenzene, PhBr: bromobenzene, AcPh: acetophenone, DCE: 1,2-dichloroethane, DME: 1,2-dimethoxyethane, 14D: 1,4-dioxane, THF: tetrahydrofurane, AcOEt: ethyl acetate, ACN: acetonitrile, DMSO: dimethylsulfoxide, F: formamide, NMF: N-methylformamide, DMF: N,N-dimethylformamide, TFE: 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol, EG: ethylene glycol, TEG: triethylene glycol, AcOH: acetic acid, i-PenOH: iso-pentanol, Mecyc: methylcyclopentane, PhCl: chlorobenzene. c Given refs. [6,7]. d Given in ref. [8]. e Given ref. [11]. f Given in ref. [17,18]. g  Not available. h Phosphate buffer NaH2PO4/Na2HPO4, 0.05 M, pH = 7.3

Hcc at position  is directly related to the spin population localized on the nucleus,[[i]] and to the shape of the SOMO (Fermi contact term QN, eq. 1).[13] For □-radicals, the SOMO is of the p type and thus any increase in the s character leads to an increase in the spin population and, hence, to an increase in aN.

For nitroxides, a decrease in aN is observed for both a decrease in QN – because form A is favoured over zwiterionic form B[[ii],[iii],[iv]] (Figure 2) due to the presence of electron widthdrawing groups (EWG) – and a change in the hybridization (pyramidalization) at the nitrogen atom, varying from sp3 to sp2 (Figure 3), i.e., the higher the pyramidalization (form C), the higher the s character of the SOMO, and conversely.

The dramatic increase in polarity – electrical Hammet constant □L are -0.06, 0.27, 0.28, 0.48, 0.48, and 0.61 – of the substitutents in the nitroxides 1•, 2•, 3a-d• do not account for the decrease in aN as expected (see y-intercept in Figure 4) by disfavouring mesomeric form B over form A (Figure 2). Indeed, aN decrease from 1• to 3a• as expected but does not change significantly for 3a-d•. This means that the effect of strong EWG attached to the nitroxyl moiety is balanced by a stronger pyramidalization at the N-atom in 3d• than in 3b,c• and 3a• (Figure 3). Taking into account the large difference in □L, the very similar slope for the plot aN vs ETN[[v],[vi]] for 1• and 2• denotes a better accessibility of the nitroxyl moiety in 2• as in 1• as more polar the nitroxide is, less sensitive aN (slope in Figure 4) is to the effect of solvent. Taking into account the similar values of □L for 3a• and for 2•, the smaller slope for 3a• denotes a larger steric hindrance than in 2• and then a lesser accessibility to the nitroxyl moiety. The smaller slopes for 3b-d• than for 3a• is ascribed to the higher polarity in 3b-d• than in 3a• and, hence, a lower sensitivity to the solvent effect. The smaller slope for 3d• is ascribed to both higher polarity and likely higher steric hindrance around the nitroxyl moiety.

The Heller-Mconnel relationship (Scheme 1 and eq. (2))[[i]] shows that aP depends on the square of the cosine of the dihedral angle . The Heller-McConnel relationship (2) shows – provided that there are no or only minor changes in the hybridization or in the mode of solvation – an increase in aP as the spin population N increases when aN increases.[13] The smaller y-intercept for 2• than for 3a-d• (Figure 5) is ascribed to a larger angle meaning that the conformation are very different between 2• and 3a-d•. The very similar y-intercepts for 3a-d• and its decreasing trends form 3a• to 3d• agrees with very close conformation and an increase in polarity decreasing the spin density N on the N-atom. The very similar and negative slopes for 3a-d• denote same conformational changes which are much less important than in 2• (Figure 5). Hence, the bond rotations N—CP are strongly restricted in 3a-d•. The smaller changes in slope for 3a-d• are not discussed are they are due to entangled polar and steric effects.    

In recent articles,[6-11] we showed that the impact of conformational changes on aP is probed using the dihedral angle between the C—P bond and the SOMO□* on the N-atom of the nitroxyl moiety, as given in eq. (2). The value of NB1 is solvent dependent and is known in non polar solvents for nitroxides carrying a diethoxyphosphonyl group,[19] and commonly accepted as NB1 = 59 G in n-hexane or other similar non polar solvents. As N is proportional to aN, the ratio aP,n-hexane/aP,n (eq. 3) affords the value of for each solvent and, hence, an insight into the solvent dependence of the conformation.

All nitroxides display (Figure 6) a decrease of aP with increasing meaning that all nitroxides experience the same solvent effect except at different extents as highlighted by □ = 24° for 2• and □ = 6° for 3a-d•. Although steric hindrance and polarity are very different in 3a-d•, the relative mobility is the same but much lower than for 2•. Moreover, the quasi-linear and decreasing distribution of aP vs denote that the conformational changes are overmatch the changes in polarity of the nitroxyl moiety and that these changes are quasi-monotonic with the solvent.

Conclusion

As already observed and discussed for 2• and 3a-c•, changes in aN and aP with solvent polarity in 3d• are governed by the interaction N+•—O¯••••P+—O¯ between nitroxyl and phosphoryl moieties. Plots ETN vs aN ETN vs aP show that the changes in polarity and bulkiness of the substituents in 3d• compared to 3a-c• are baleanced by changes in hybridization at the N-atom and in conformations.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Aix-Marseille University and CNRS for financial support. ANR was granted for funding this project (ANR-14-CE16-0023-01) managed by the French National Research Agency (ANR). SRAM thanks the Russian Science Foundation (grant 15-13-20020) for supporting the correlation analysis of this work. The authors thank RENARD network for the EPR platform.

Images and Tables

entry

solvent[b]

1•c

2•d

3ae

3b•e

3c•e

3d•

 
   

aN

aN

aP

aN

aP

aN

aP

aN

aP

aN

aP

ETNf

1

pentane

15.15

14.06

41.35

13.54

46.19

13.61

45.67

13.43

55.07

13.59

43.19

0.009

2

n-hexane

15.22

14.30

41.68

-g

-g

13.49

45.55

13.43

54.97

13.76

43.02

0.009

3

CHex

15.19

14.23

40.68

13.54

46.10

13.49

45.42

13.43

55.17

13.76

42.84

0.006

4

octane

15.22

14.56

41.35

13.50

46.20

13.49

45.55

13.54

55.17

13.41

43.02

0.012

5

benzene

15.53

14.56

35.32

13.74

45.14

13.61

44.68

13.54

55.75

13.58

42.15

0.111

6

toluene

15.46

14.73

36.63

-g

-g

13.61

44.8

13.54

55.55

13.76

42.50

0.099

7

t-BuPh

15.47

14.56

38.33

13.70

45.70

13.49

45.05

13.54

55.55

13.59

42.84

0.099

8

PhBr

15.57

14.56

32.64

-g

-g

13.74

44.18

13.66

56.03

13.59

41.97

0.182

9

pyridine

15.66

14.90

31.00

13.86

44.49

13.61

43.69

13.89

56.32

13.76

41.45

0.302

10

AcPh

15.64

14.73

31.64

-g

-g

13.61

44.06

13.66

56.26

13.76

41.80

0.306

11

t-BuPH/CH2Cl2

15.61

14.73

37.50

13.90

44.70

13.74

43.94

13.68

56.32

13.76

41.80

-[g]

12

CH2Cl2

15.77

15.06

27.28

13.90

44.61

13.74

43.69

13.74

56.80

13.93

41.80

0.309

13

DCE

15.71

15.06

28.62

13.90

45.10

13.74

43.69

13.77

56.61

13.76

41.63

0.327

14

CHCl3

15.77

15.23

27.95

13.98

45.46

13.86

44.67

13.77

57.09

13.76

42.67

0.259

15

CCl4

15.40

14.56

37.50

-g

-g

13.61

45.55

13.54

55.75

13.58

43.19

0.052

16

DME

15.265

14.39

35.49

-g

-g

13.61

44.69

13.54

55.55

13.58

42.50

0.231

17

Et2O

15.241

14.23

37.83

-g

-g

13.49

45.17

13.54

55.26

13.58

42.85

0.117

18

i-Pr2O

15.23

14.23

39.50

13.62

45.82

13.61

45.30

13.54

54.97

13.76

43.02

0.105

19

n-Bu2O

15.36

14.39

37.66

13.50

46.00

13.49

45.30

13.54

55.36

13.58

42.85

0.071

20

Met-BuO

15.32

14.06

38.17

13.62

45.74

13.61

45.17

13.54

55.17

13.41

42.67

0.124

21

14D

15.45

15.06

31.64

13.78

45.31

13.61

44.55

13.66

56.13

13.58

42.32

0.164

22

THF

15.47

14.73

35.49

13.70

45.59

13.61

44.68

13.66

55.55

13.58

42.49

0.207

23

AcOEt

15.60

14.90

36.32

13.66

45.66

13.61

44.93

13.54

55.84

13.76

42.67

0.228

24

acetone

15.62

14.56

33.65

13.82

45.42

13.74

44.55

13.77

56.03

13.58

42.32

0.355

25

ACN

15.76

15.06

28.62

13.86

44.73

13.74

43.81

13.77

56.42

13.76

41.63

0.460

26

MeNO2

15.86

15.06

26.78

13.94

44.45

13.86

43.56

13.89

56.90

13.76

41.45

0.481

27

DMSO

15.77

15.06

30.80

13.8

45.40

14.73

43.69

13.77

56.32

13.76

41.80

0.444

28

F

16.20

15.56

20.59

14.4

43.70

14.11

42.2

14.24

58.44

14.11

40.76

0.775

29

NMF

15.77

15.40

20.50

14.1

44.20

13.99

42.7

14.00

57.29

13.93

40.76

0.722

30

DMF

15.67

14.90

32.31

13.9

45.50

13.74

44.31

13.77

56.23

13.76

41.97

0.386

31

MeOH

16.20

15.56

20.75

14.1

45.70

13.86

43.94

13.89

58.06

13.93

41.97

0.762

32

EtOH

16.08

15.23

22.76

14

45.80

13.74

44.31

13.86

57.48

13.76

42.32

0.654

33

TFE

16.78

15.90

20.42

14.7

46.30

14.36

44.43

14.24

59.78

14.11

42.50

0.898

34

i-PrOH

16.04

15.23

25.44

13.94

45.94

13.74

44.68

13.77

57.19

13.76

42.50

0.546

35

n-BuOH

16.04

15.22

23.42

-g

-g

13.74

44.43

13.77

57.29

13.76

42.32

0.586

36

t-BuOH

15.91

15.06

29.96

13.9

46.50

13.74

45.17

13.54

57.09

13.76

42.84

0.389

37

BnOH

16.29

15.40

23.60

-g

-g

13.86

44.06

13.89

58.15

13.76

41.97

0.608

38

EG

16.30

15.40

21.59

13.74

45.54

14.11

43.91

14.12

58.53

14.11

41.80

0.790

39

TEG

15.30

15.23

21.76

13.62

45.42

13.99

44.43

13.89

57.48

13.76

41.97

0.682

40

water/MeOH

16.72

15.90

22.60

14.5

45.70

14.23

43.81

14.35

59.5

14.11

41.97

0.710

41

water

16.99

16.90

22.15

14.9

45.60

14.73

43.69

14.7

60.85

14.28

42.15

1.000

42

bufferh

-[g]

16.23

22.09

-g

-g

-g

-g

-g

60.85

14.28

42.15

-[g]

43

AcOH

16.19

-[g]

-[g]

-g

-g

13.86

44.93

13.77

58.54

13.76

42.67

0.648

44

Et3N

15.32

15.06

39.5

13.58

46.10

13.61

45.42

13.54

55.35

13.41

42.84

0.043

45

i-Pr2NH

-[g]

14.73

39.17

13.62

45.91

13.49

45.3

13.66

55.36

-g

-g

0.145

References

  1. Likhtenshtein, G.; Yamauchi, J.; Nakatsuji, S.; Smirnov, A. I.; Tamura, R., Nitroxides: Applications in Chemistry, Biomedicine, and Materials Science, Wiley-VCH, 2008, and references therein.

    View Article           

  2. Le Breton, N.; Martinho, M.; Kabitaev, K.; Topin, J.; Mileo, E.; Blocquel, D.; Habchi, J.; Longhi, S.; Rockenbauer, A.; Golebiowski, J.; Guigliarelli, B.; Marque, S. R. A.; Belle, V. PhysChemChemPhys 2014, 16, 4202-4209. PMid:24452480

    View Article      PubMed/NCBI     

  3. Audran, G.; Bosco, L.; Br?mond, P.; Franconi, J.-M.; Koonjoo, N.; Marque, S. R. A.; Massot, P.; Mellet, P.; Parzy, E.; Thiaudi?re E., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2015, 54, 45, 13379-13384. PMid:26376730

    View Article      PubMed/NCBI     

  4. Audran, G.; Bosco, L.; Br?mond, P.; Butscher, T.; Marque, S. R. A. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2016, 14, 1228-1292.

  5. Stable Radicals: Fundamentals and Applied Aspects of Odd-Electron Compounds; Hicks, R., Ed., Wiley, Hoboken, 2010, 173?229, and references therein.

    View Article           

  6. Audran, G.; Bosco, L.; Br?mond, P.; Butscher, T.; Franconi, J.-M.; Kabitaev, K.; Marque, S. R. A.; Mellet, P.; Parzy, E.; Santelli, M.; Thiaudi?re, E.; Viel, S. RSC Advances 2016, 6, 5653-5670.

    View Article           

  7. Audran, G.; Bosco, L.; Br?mond, P.; Butscher, T.; Marque S. R. A. Appl. Magnet. Reson. 2015, 45, 12, 1333-1342.

    View Article           

  8. Audran, G.; Br?mond, P.; Marque, S. R. A.; Obame, G. ChemPhysChem 2012, 13, 15, 3542-3548. PMid:22887102

    View Article      PubMed/NCBI     

  9. Audran, G.; Bosco, L.; Nkolo, P.; Bikanga, R.; Br?mond, P.; Butscher, T.; Marque, S. R. A. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2016, 14, 3729-3743. PMid:26986555

    View Article      PubMed/NCBI     

  10. Bosco, L.; Butscher, T.; Marque, S. R. A. Appl. Magn. Reson. 2017, 48, 4, 379-406.

    View Article           

  11. Nkolo, P.; Audran, G.; Br?mond, P.; Bikanga, R.; Marque, S. R. A.; Roubaud, V. Tetrahedron 2017, 73, 3188-3201.

    View Article           

  12. Audran, G.; Br?mond, P.; Marque, S. R. A.; Yamasaki, T. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 1981-1988. PMid:26878593

    View Article      PubMed/NCBI     

  13. Gerson, F.; Huber, W. Electron Spin Resonance Spectroscopy of Organic Radicals; Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2003.

    View Article           

  14. Karoui, H.; Le Moigne, F.; Ouari, O.; Tordo, P. Stable Radicals: Fundamentals and Applied Aspects of Odd-Electron Compounds, Hicks, R., Ed., John Wiley & Sons, 2010, pp. 173?229.

    View Article           

  15. Knauer, B. R.; Napier, J. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1976, 98, 4395 ? 4400.

    View Article           

  16. Janzen, E. G. ; Coulter, G. A.; Oehler, U. M.; Bergsma, J. P. Can. J. Chem. 1982, 60, 2725?2733.

    View Article           

  17. Reichardt, C.; Welton, T. Solvent and Solvent Effect in Organic Chemistry, 4th ed., Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2011.

  18. Marcus, Y. The Properties of Solvents, Vol. 4, Wiley, Chichester, 1998. PMid:9557213