Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents
Today, the hydrogen bonding donation (HBD) ability parameter of new solvents, α, is generally determined either by the Kamlet-Taft solvatochromic comparison of two probes, Reichardt betaine dye B(30) and 4-nitroanisole, or by the measurement of a single probe (e.g., solvatochromism of an iron coordi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of organic chemistry 2022-05, Vol.87 (9), p.6273-6287 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 6287 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 6273 |
container_title | Journal of organic chemistry |
container_volume | 87 |
creator | Laurence, Christian Mansour, Sergui Vuluga, Daniela Sraïdi, Khadija Legros, Julien |
description | Today, the hydrogen bonding donation (HBD) ability parameter of new solvents, α, is generally determined either by the Kamlet-Taft solvatochromic comparison of two probes, Reichardt betaine dye B(30) and 4-nitroanisole, or by the measurement of a single probe (e.g., solvatochromism of an iron coordination complex). This work highlights the shortcomings of these probes and recommends three replacement methods: (a) the theoretical comparison of the experimental and PCM-TD-DFT calculated transition energies
(30) of B(30), (b) the semiempirical comparison of the experimental and McRae calculated
(30), and, (c) for ionic liquids, the experimental comparison of
(30) and
(33) lying on the lower basicity of the betaine dye B(33) compared to B(30). These methods yield a new HBD parameter, α
, for 101 molecular solvents and 30 ionic liquids. The novelty is emblematic for water, with α
= 1.54 instead of α (Kamlet-Taft) = 1.17. The solvent parameter α
is not equivalent to the solute hydrogen-bond acidity parameter α
, partly because of the self-association of HBD solvents. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1021/acs.joc.2c00526 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03838942v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>35467876</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1436-5ca30db805e4d0d8d490cff557da087d687c37306a8e3f541f5422e872b88e883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9UctOwzAQtBAIyuPMDfmKRMrajhP3COVRpCIOhXPk2hsSlMSRHSr4Fr6CH-GbcClgaWXt7MyOVkPIMYMxA87OtQnjF2fG3ABInm2REZMckmwC6TYZAXCeCJ6JPbIfwgvEJ6XcJXtCplmu8mxEPh4rdB6H2ujmjC6wrbHta79pdWfp9VuPvm6xG3RDF65Z6cGZyru2NnTq2l77OriO3uNQORto6TwdKoyjLgz-1Qx1HLryB_v6pIwu4mZcI7N3690zdsmlizZXrtN_3LVL9AuHZKfUTcCj3_-APN1cP05nyfzh9m56MU8MS0WWSKMF2KUCiakFq2w6AVOWUuZWg8ptpnIjcgGZVihKmbJYnKPK-VIpVEockNPN3ko3RR-P1f69cLouZhfzYo2BUEJNUr5ikXu-4RrvQvBY_gsYFOtIihhJESMpfiOJipONon9dtmj_-X8ZiG84xIr4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Chemical Society Journals</source><creator>Laurence, Christian ; Mansour, Sergui ; Vuluga, Daniela ; Sraïdi, Khadija ; Legros, Julien</creator><creatorcontrib>Laurence, Christian ; Mansour, Sergui ; Vuluga, Daniela ; Sraïdi, Khadija ; Legros, Julien</creatorcontrib><description>Today, the hydrogen bonding donation (HBD) ability parameter of new solvents, α, is generally determined either by the Kamlet-Taft solvatochromic comparison of two probes, Reichardt betaine dye B(30) and 4-nitroanisole, or by the measurement of a single probe (e.g., solvatochromism of an iron coordination complex). This work highlights the shortcomings of these probes and recommends three replacement methods: (a) the theoretical comparison of the experimental and PCM-TD-DFT calculated transition energies
(30) of B(30), (b) the semiempirical comparison of the experimental and McRae calculated
(30), and, (c) for ionic liquids, the experimental comparison of
(30) and
(33) lying on the lower basicity of the betaine dye B(33) compared to B(30). These methods yield a new HBD parameter, α
, for 101 molecular solvents and 30 ionic liquids. The novelty is emblematic for water, with α
= 1.54 instead of α (Kamlet-Taft) = 1.17. The solvent parameter α
is not equivalent to the solute hydrogen-bond acidity parameter α
, partly because of the self-association of HBD solvents.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-3263</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-6904</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/acs.joc.2c00526</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35467876</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Chemical Society</publisher><subject>Betaine - chemistry ; Chemical Sciences ; Hydrogen ; Hydrogen Bonding ; Ionic Liquids ; Solvents - chemistry</subject><ispartof>Journal of organic chemistry, 2022-05, Vol.87 (9), p.6273-6287</ispartof><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1436-5ca30db805e4d0d8d490cff557da087d687c37306a8e3f541f5422e872b88e883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1436-5ca30db805e4d0d8d490cff557da087d687c37306a8e3f541f5422e872b88e883</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9601-0411 ; 0000-0002-4807-7897</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,2765,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35467876$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03838942$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Laurence, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansour, Sergui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vuluga, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sraïdi, Khadija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Legros, Julien</creatorcontrib><title>Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents</title><title>Journal of organic chemistry</title><addtitle>J Org Chem</addtitle><description>Today, the hydrogen bonding donation (HBD) ability parameter of new solvents, α, is generally determined either by the Kamlet-Taft solvatochromic comparison of two probes, Reichardt betaine dye B(30) and 4-nitroanisole, or by the measurement of a single probe (e.g., solvatochromism of an iron coordination complex). This work highlights the shortcomings of these probes and recommends three replacement methods: (a) the theoretical comparison of the experimental and PCM-TD-DFT calculated transition energies
(30) of B(30), (b) the semiempirical comparison of the experimental and McRae calculated
(30), and, (c) for ionic liquids, the experimental comparison of
(30) and
(33) lying on the lower basicity of the betaine dye B(33) compared to B(30). These methods yield a new HBD parameter, α
, for 101 molecular solvents and 30 ionic liquids. The novelty is emblematic for water, with α
= 1.54 instead of α (Kamlet-Taft) = 1.17. The solvent parameter α
is not equivalent to the solute hydrogen-bond acidity parameter α
, partly because of the self-association of HBD solvents.</description><subject>Betaine - chemistry</subject><subject>Chemical Sciences</subject><subject>Hydrogen</subject><subject>Hydrogen Bonding</subject><subject>Ionic Liquids</subject><subject>Solvents - chemistry</subject><issn>0022-3263</issn><issn>1520-6904</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9UctOwzAQtBAIyuPMDfmKRMrajhP3COVRpCIOhXPk2hsSlMSRHSr4Fr6CH-GbcClgaWXt7MyOVkPIMYMxA87OtQnjF2fG3ABInm2REZMckmwC6TYZAXCeCJ6JPbIfwgvEJ6XcJXtCplmu8mxEPh4rdB6H2ujmjC6wrbHta79pdWfp9VuPvm6xG3RDF65Z6cGZyru2NnTq2l77OriO3uNQORto6TwdKoyjLgz-1Qx1HLryB_v6pIwu4mZcI7N3690zdsmlizZXrtN_3LVL9AuHZKfUTcCj3_-APN1cP05nyfzh9m56MU8MS0WWSKMF2KUCiakFq2w6AVOWUuZWg8ptpnIjcgGZVihKmbJYnKPK-VIpVEockNPN3ko3RR-P1f69cLouZhfzYo2BUEJNUr5ikXu-4RrvQvBY_gsYFOtIihhJESMpfiOJipONon9dtmj_-X8ZiG84xIr4</recordid><startdate>20220506</startdate><enddate>20220506</enddate><creator>Laurence, Christian</creator><creator>Mansour, Sergui</creator><creator>Vuluga, Daniela</creator><creator>Sraïdi, Khadija</creator><creator>Legros, Julien</creator><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9601-0411</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4807-7897</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220506</creationdate><title>Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents</title><author>Laurence, Christian ; Mansour, Sergui ; Vuluga, Daniela ; Sraïdi, Khadija ; Legros, Julien</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1436-5ca30db805e4d0d8d490cff557da087d687c37306a8e3f541f5422e872b88e883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Betaine - chemistry</topic><topic>Chemical Sciences</topic><topic>Hydrogen</topic><topic>Hydrogen Bonding</topic><topic>Ionic Liquids</topic><topic>Solvents - chemistry</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Laurence, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansour, Sergui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vuluga, Daniela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sraïdi, Khadija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Legros, Julien</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Journal of organic chemistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Laurence, Christian</au><au>Mansour, Sergui</au><au>Vuluga, Daniela</au><au>Sraïdi, Khadija</au><au>Legros, Julien</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents</atitle><jtitle>Journal of organic chemistry</jtitle><addtitle>J Org Chem</addtitle><date>2022-05-06</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>87</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>6273</spage><epage>6287</epage><pages>6273-6287</pages><issn>0022-3263</issn><eissn>1520-6904</eissn><abstract>Today, the hydrogen bonding donation (HBD) ability parameter of new solvents, α, is generally determined either by the Kamlet-Taft solvatochromic comparison of two probes, Reichardt betaine dye B(30) and 4-nitroanisole, or by the measurement of a single probe (e.g., solvatochromism of an iron coordination complex). This work highlights the shortcomings of these probes and recommends three replacement methods: (a) the theoretical comparison of the experimental and PCM-TD-DFT calculated transition energies
(30) of B(30), (b) the semiempirical comparison of the experimental and McRae calculated
(30), and, (c) for ionic liquids, the experimental comparison of
(30) and
(33) lying on the lower basicity of the betaine dye B(33) compared to B(30). These methods yield a new HBD parameter, α
, for 101 molecular solvents and 30 ionic liquids. The novelty is emblematic for water, with α
= 1.54 instead of α (Kamlet-Taft) = 1.17. The solvent parameter α
is not equivalent to the solute hydrogen-bond acidity parameter α
, partly because of the self-association of HBD solvents.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Chemical Society</pub><pmid>35467876</pmid><doi>10.1021/acs.joc.2c00526</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9601-0411</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4807-7897</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-3263 |
ispartof | Journal of organic chemistry, 2022-05, Vol.87 (9), p.6273-6287 |
issn | 0022-3263 1520-6904 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03838942v1 |
source | MEDLINE; American Chemical Society Journals |
subjects | Betaine - chemistry Chemical Sciences Hydrogen Hydrogen Bonding Ionic Liquids Solvents - chemistry |
title | Theoretical, Semiempirical, and Experimental Solvatochromic Comparison Methods for the Construction of the α 1 Scale of Hydrogen-Bond Donation of Solvents |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T21%3A00%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Theoretical,%20Semiempirical,%20and%20Experimental%20Solvatochromic%20Comparison%20Methods%20for%20the%20Construction%20of%20the%20%CE%B1%201%20Scale%20of%20Hydrogen-Bond%20Donation%20of%20Solvents&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20organic%20chemistry&rft.au=Laurence,%20Christian&rft.date=2022-05-06&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=6273&rft.epage=6287&rft.pages=6273-6287&rft.issn=0022-3263&rft.eissn=1520-6904&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/acs.joc.2c00526&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_hal_p%3E35467876%3C/pubmed_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/35467876&rfr_iscdi=true |