Department of Chemistry and Institute for Nanotechnology & Advanced Materials, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel.
Acc Chem Res. 2020 Nov 17;53(11):2680-2691. doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.0c00497. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
SmI was introduced to organic chemistry as a single electron transfer agent in 1977. After ca. 15 years of latency, the scientific community has realized the high potential of this reagent, and its chemistry has started blooming. This versatile reagent has mediated a myriad of new bond formations, cyclizations, and other reactions. Its popularity stems largely from the fact that three different intermediates, radical anions, radicals, and anions, depending on the ligand or additive used, could be obtained. Each of these intermediates could in principle lead to a different product. While these options vastly enrich the repertoire of SmI, they necessitate a thorough mechanistic understanding, especially concerning how appropriate ligands direct the SmI to the desired intermediate. Our first paper on this subject dealt with the reduction of an activated double bond. The results were puzzling, especially the H/D isotope effect, which depended on the order of the reagents addition. This seminal paper was fundamental to an understanding of how the SmI works and enabled us to later explain various phenomena. For example, it was found that in a given reaction, when MeOH is used as a proton source, a spiro compound is obtained, while a bicyclic product is obtained when -BuOH is used. Our contribution culminated in formulating guidelines for the rational use of proton donors in SmI reactions.The need to understand the complexity of the effect of additives on various processes is nicely demonstrated in photoinduced reactions. For example, hexamethylphosphoramide (HMPA) enhances the reduction of anthracene while hampering the reaction of benzyl chloride. The mechanistic understanding gained enabled us also to broaden the scope of photostimulated reactions from substrates reacting by a dissociative electron transfer mechanism to normal reductions, which are difficult to accomplish at the ground state. Harnessing the classical knowledge of proton transfer mechanisms to our SmI research enabled us to decipher an old conundrum: why does the combination of water and amine have such an enhancing effect on the reactivity of SmI which is not typical of these two when used separately. In our studies on the affinity of ligands to SmI, we discovered that, in contradistinction to the accepted dogma, SmI is much more azaphilic than it is oxophilic. On the basis of the size difference between Sm and Sm, we developed a simple diagnostic tool for the nature of the steps following the electron transfer. The reduction of imines showed that substrate affinity to SmI plays also a crucial role. In these reactions, new features such as autocatalysis and catalysis by quantum dots were discovered. Several studies of the ligand effect lead to a clear formulation of when an inner sphere or outer sphere electron transfer should be expected. In addition, several reactions where proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET) is the dominant mechanism were identified. Finally, the surprisingly old tool of NMR "shift reagents" was rediscovered and used to directly derive essential information on the binding constants of ligands and substrates to SmI.
1977 年,SmI 作为单电子转移试剂被引入有机化学领域。大约 15 年之后,科学界才意识到这种试剂的巨大潜力,其化学性质开始被广泛研究。这种多功能试剂介导了无数新的键形成、环化和其他反应。它的流行在很大程度上源于这样一个事实,即根据所用配体或添加剂的不同,可以得到三种不同的中间体,即自由基阴离子、自由基和阴离子。这些中间体中的每一种都可以原则上导致不同的产物。虽然这些选择极大地丰富了 SmI 的应用范围,但它们需要彻底的机制理解,特别是关于适当的配体如何将 SmI 引导至所需的中间体。我们关于这个主题的第一篇论文涉及到活化双键的还原。结果令人困惑,特别是氢/氘同位素效应,它取决于试剂添加的顺序。这篇开创性的论文对于理解 SmI 的工作原理至关重要,并使我们能够后来解释各种现象。例如,人们发现,在给定的反应中,当甲醇用作质子源时,得到螺环化合物,而当使用叔丁醇时,则得到双环产物。我们的贡献最终形成了在 SmI 反应中合理使用质子供体的指导方针。添加剂对各种过程影响的复杂性的理解在光诱导反应中得到了很好的证明。例如,六甲基磷酰胺 (HMPA) 增强了蒽的还原,同时阻碍了苄基氯的反应。获得的机理理解还使我们能够将光激发反应的范围从通过解离电子转移机制反应的底物扩展到难以在基态下完成的正常还原。将质子转移机制的经典知识应用于我们的 SmI 研究,使我们能够解开一个古老的难题:为什么水和胺的组合对 SmI 的反应性有如此增强的效果,而这两种物质单独使用时却没有这种效果。在我们对配体与 SmI 亲和力的研究中,我们发现,与公认的教条相反,SmI 比氧化亲核性更具氮亲核性。基于 Sm 和 Sm 之间的大小差异,我们开发了一种简单的诊断工具,用于确定电子转移后步骤的性质。亚胺的还原表明,底物对 SmI 的亲和力也起着至关重要的作用。在这些反应中,发现了自动催化和量子点催化等新特征。对配体效应的几项研究导致了一个明确的表述,即何时应该预期内球或外球电子转移。此外,还确定了几个质子耦合电子转移 (PCET) 是主要机制的反应。最后,重新发现了令人惊讶的古老 NMR“位移试剂”工具,并将其用于直接推导出配体和底物与 SmI 结合常数的重要信息。