Page 377 - Mechanism and Theory in Organic Chemistry
P. 377

The reacting bond rule, discussed in Section 2.5 (p. 103) and in Section 5.4
               (p. 246)  can be  used  to predict  the effect on the  E,  reaction  of changing the
               leaving        AS in Chapter 2, the concerted reaction is broken down into the
               two stepwise mechanisms of which it is  a composite. The E,  reaction described
               here is a composite of the El and E,cB  mechanisms. In Figure  7.2  the starting
               material is placed at the top left and the product at the bottom right of a two-
               dimensional projection of the energy surface for an E,  elimination. At each of the
               two remaining corners is placed one of the two intermediates that would obtain
              if  the reaction  were stepwise.  The two reaction pathways  along the edges from
               starting material to product describe the stepwise reactions. A diagonal pathway
               describes the concerted reaction. Reacting bond rule 1 (equivalent to Hammond's
               postulate)  tells  us  that  a  poorer  leaving group, which  makes motion  over  the
               transition state more difficult, will cduse the transition state to come later on the
               reaction path-that   is, will shift it in the direction  indicated by  arrow R,.  But
               leaving  group motion is  also involved in  the vibration  designated  by  1, and
               1,; reacting bond rule 2 states that a change in structure that tends to shift the
               equilibrium  point  of a vibration  will do so.  The poorer the leaving group, the
               more the equilibrium point of the vibration of the reaction path will be shifted
               along  1, (toward the  ElcB  mechanism). The composite  result  of the  poorer
               leaving group on the transition state, then, will be to move it to point *'. The
               extent of C-X   bond breaking is not much affected, but the C-H   bond is more
               broken and the carbanion character of the transition state increased.
                   The predictions of the reacting bond rules are borne out by the p values of
               Table 7.1 1. More negative charge is localized on Cg when the leaving group is
               the less reactive  +N(CH,),  than when it is  the more reactive  I-. The isotope
              effects mentioned above fit this explanation if it is assumed that when Br-  is the
              leaving group the proton is approximately half transferred at the transition state.
              The smaller  value  of k,/k,  when  +N(CH,),  departs  is  a  result  of  an unsym-
              metrical transition state in which the proton is more than half transferred.

                   The Winstein-Parker elimination spectrum  More recently, Winstein
              and Parker  have proposed  that the spectrum of  E,  transition  states is  actually
              wider  than  had  been  previously  supposed.86 They  observed  that  not  only
              strong  proton  bases  (i.e.,  hard  bases)  such  as  hydroxide  and  alkoxide,
              which  have  traditionally  been  used  as  catalysts  for  the  E,  reaction,  but
              also  bases  weak  toward  hydrogen  but  strong  toward  carbon  (soft bases)  are
              very effective in catalyzing E,  reactions. For example, t-butyl bromide, which had
              been  thought to undergo only El  elimination, actually eliminates  by  a bimole-
              cular mechanism in which C1-  is a more effective catalyst thanp-nitrophenoxide
              although the latter is  1010 times stronger as a  hydrogen  base.87 The Winstein-
              Parker  spectrum  extends  from  the  ElcB-like  transition  state  (39)-called   by
              them E,H-to   one in which  the  base is  pushing out  the  leaving group rather
              than attacking the proton  (43). The latter is designated E,C.  In the center of the



              "5  See R. A. More O'Ferrall, J. Chem. Soc., B, 274  (1970) for a slightly different treatment.
                P. Beltrame, G. Biale, D. J. Lloyd, A. J. Parker, M. Ruane, and S. Winstein, J. Amer. Chem. SOG., 94,
              2240 (1972) and references therein.
              87 A. J. Parker, M. Ruane, D. A. Palmer, and S. Winstein, J. Amer. Chem. SOG., 94, 2228 (1972).
   372   373   374   375   376   377   378   379   380   381   382