Posts Tagged ‘Centroid’

Ammonium tetraphenylborate and the mystery of its π-facial hydrogen bonding.

Friday, March 10th, 2017

A few years back, I did a post about the Pirkle reagent[1] and the unusual π-facial hydrogen bonding structure[2] it exhibits. For the Pirkle reagent, this bonding manifests as a close contact between the acidic OH hydrogen and the edge of a phenyl ring; the hydrogen bond is off-centre from the middle of the aryl ring. Here I update the topic, with a new search of the CSD (Cambridge structure database), but this time looking at the positional preference of that bond and whether it is on or off-centre. 

The search (February 2017 database, DOI:10.14469/hpc/2233) is shown above, QA = N, O, F, Cl and other constraints are R < 0.01, no errors, no disorder. Two distances are plotted, one (DIST1) is from the H to the ring centroid and the second (DIST2) from the H to an edge carbon atom. The colour code relates to ANG1, the angle subtended at the centroid. A value of 90° would indicate the H is orthogonal to the plane of the aromatic ring.

You can see from the above that the yellow dots correspond to ~90° and that by and large the H…centroid distances are shorter than the H…C distances. 

The above is another representation of this search, again showing that the preferred angle is 90°, although there is a fair bit of scatter. The extreme outliers may be crystallographic errors, but one point caught my eye and is circled in red above; ammonium tetrafluoroborate (3D model DOI: 10.5517/CC4V6TZ). This has a very short distance from the H to the centroid (2.07Å), shorter than the Pirkle reagent that we looked at all those years back. The authors[3] note that “The N-H…Ph distances, H…M 2.067Å … are exceptionally short (M = aromatic midpoint)” but also that “even at 20 K the ammonium ion performs large amplitude motions which allow the N-H vectors to sample the entire face of the aromatic system.” This implies that such bonds are largely agnostic about whether they bind to the centroid of the ring or to its edge and that the most probable position might arise simply because of crystal packing. An interesting variation on this molecule is a crystal that includes a further 5NH3 in addition to ammonium tetraphenylborate (3D model DOI: 10.5517/cc7bly2). Here an ammonia intervenes between the ammonium cation and a phenyl ring, resulting in a binding of the ammonia with two NHs closer to the edge of the ring and one NH interacting in parallel mode.

Time therefore for a calculation, using B3LYP+GD3BJ/Def2-TZVPP, the functional being chosen because the dispersion contribution is not built in, but uses what is currently thought to be the best representation of these attractions. The issue now is what molecular unit to use? This is an ionic structure and so a periodic boundary model is most appropriate, but given its size I reduced this to two models comprising smaller discrete fragments.

  1. A unit just comprising the simple ion pair. This leaves two of the four N-H bonds devoid of hydrogen bonding (DOI:10.14469/hpc/2234). The optimisation adopts a pose where two NH groups are directed towards a carbon atom rather than the ring centroid. How much of this is due to the smallness of this model?
  2. A unit comprising a double ion pair, which allows one ammonium group to participate with all four NH groups across four phenyl rings and exhibiting six NH interactions in total with six rings (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2235). The NH hydrogen vectors all interact with ring carbons rather than the ring centroid.

This brief computational exploration has covered only one method (the B3LYP DFT procedure), albeit with what is thought to be a good dispersion attraction term added and a reasonable basis set. It does seem to show that hydrogen bonds interacting with the centroid of a phenyl ring are not the preferred mode, which is instead an interaction with the edge of the ring. The quote above, “even at 20 K the ammonium ion performs large amplitude motions which allow the N-H vectors to sample the entire face of the aromatic system” suggests that whilst the average position might be the centroid, a true hydrogen bond to the centroid might be rarer than thought. Although most of the crystallographic examples located in the searches above deem to show a preference for the ring centroid, this might be more apparent than real. 

References

  1. H.S. Rzepa, M.L. Webb, A.M.Z. Slawin, and D.J. Williams, "? Facial hydrogen bonding in the chiral resolving agent (S)-2,2,2-trifluoro-1-(9-anthryl)ethanol and its racemic modification", Journal of the Chemical Society, Chemical Communications, pp. 765, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1039/c39910000765
  2. H.S. Rzepa, M.H. Smith, and M.L. Webb, "A crystallographic AM1 and PM3 SCF-MO investigation of strong OH ⋯π-alkene and alkyne hydrogen bonding interactions", J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, pp. 703-707, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1039/p29940000703
  3. T. Steiner, and S.A. Mason, "Short N<sup>+</sup>—H...Ph hydrogen bonds in ammonium tetraphenylborate characterized by neutron diffraction", Acta Crystallographica Section B Structural Science, vol. 56, pp. 254-260, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1107/s0108768199012318

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in crystal_structure_mining | No Comments »

How does an OH or NH group approach an aromatic ring to hydrogen bond with its π-face?

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

I previously used data mining of crystal structures to explore the directing influence of substituents on aromatic and heteroatomatic rings. Here I explore, quite literally, a different angle to the hydrogen bonding interactions between a benzene ring and OH or NH groups.

aromatic-pi-query

I start by defining a benzene ring with a centroid. The distance is from that centroid to the H atom of an OH or NH group and the angle is C-centroid-H. To limit the search to approach of the OH or NH group more or less orthogonal to the ring, the absolute value of the torsion between the centroid-H vector and the ring C-C vector is constrained to lie between 70-100° (the other constraints being no disorder, no errors, T < 140K and R < 0.05).[1]

aromatic-pi-HN-140

The above shows the results for NH groups interacting with the aromatic ring. The maximum distance 2.8Å is more or less the van der Waals contact distance between a hydrogen and a carbon and as you can see the contacts "funnel down" to the centroid at < 2.1Å. The shortest distance[2] is for ammonium tetraphenylborate, which you can view in e.g. spacefill mode here[3]

390

The other interesting close contact derives from a protonated pyridine[4], which can in turn be viewed here.[5] The main message from the distribution shown above is that as the distances between the HN and the centroid get shorter, the "trajectory" of approach remains orthogonal to the ring (the angle defined above remains ~90°) and heads towards the centroid of the π-cloud. The hotspot itself (red, ~2.6Å) also lies along this trajectory.

Recollect that when I used such hydrogen bonding to see if crystal structures discriminate between the ortho or meta positions of a ring carrying an electron donating substituent, it was the distance from a HO to the carbon that was measured as the discriminator. So it's a faint surprise to find that with HN, and without the necessary perturbation of an electron donating substituent, the intrinsic preference seems to be for the ring centroid and not any specific carbon atom of the ring.

So how about the OH group? There are in fact rather fewer examples, and so the statistics are a bit less clear-cut. But there is a tantalising suggestion that this time, the trajectory is not ~90° but rather less, implying that the destination is no longer the centroid of the π-cloud but one of the carbon atoms of the ring itself. For those who like to "read between the lines" and spot things that are absent rather than present, you may have asked yourself why I did not use NH probes in my earlier post. Well, it appears that the NH group is less effective at e.g. o/p discrimination than is an OH group.

aromatic-pi-OH-140

I can only speculate as to the origins (real or not) of the difference in behaviour between OH and NH groups towards a phenyl π-face. Perhaps it is simply bias in the CSD database? Or might there be electronic origins? Time to end with that phrase "watch this space".

 

References

  1. H. Rzepa, "How does an OH or NH group approach an aromatic ring to hydrogen bond with its π-face?", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/673
  2. T. Steiner, and S.A. Mason, "Short N<sup>+</sup>—H...Ph hydrogen bonds in ammonium tetraphenylborate characterized by neutron diffraction", Acta Crystallographica Section B Structural Science, vol. 56, pp. 254-260, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1107/s0108768199012318
  3. Steiner, T.., and Mason, S.A.., "CCDC 144361: Experimental Crystal Structure Determination", 2000. https://doi.org/10.5517/cc4v6tz
  4. O. Danylyuk, B. Leśniewska, K. Suwinska, N. Matoussi, and A.W. Coleman, "Structural Diversity in the Crystalline Complexes of <i>para</i>-Sulfonato-calix[4]arene with Bipyridinium Derivatives", Crystal Growth & Design, vol. 10, pp. 4542-4549, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1021/cg100831c
  5. Danylyuk, O.., Lesniewska, B.., Suwinska, K.., Matoussi, N.., and Coleman, A.W.., "CCDC 819118: Experimental Crystal Structure Determination", 2011. https://doi.org/10.5517/ccwhc5w

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Chemical IT, crystal_structure_mining | 3 Comments »

Celebrating Paul Schleyer: searching for hidden treasures in the structures of metallocene complexes.

Saturday, April 2nd, 2016

A celebration of the life and work of the great chemist Paul von R. Schleyer was held this week in Erlangen, Germany. There were many fantastic talks given by some great chemists describing fascinating chemistry. Here I highlight the presentation given by Andy Streitwieser on the topic of organolithium chemistry, also a great interest of Schleyer's over the years. I single this talk out since I hope it illustrates why people still get together in person to talk about science.

NH3-8

The presentation focused on the structure of the simplest possible metallocene, lithium cyclopentadienyl and why the calculated structure showed that the hydrogen atoms attached to the cyclopentadienyl ring pointed slightly away from the metal rather than towards it (by ~1-2°).† Various explanations had been put forward, some had waxed and then waned. It was still basically an open problem. Now, the title of the symposium was Theory and Experiment: A Meeting at the Interface; Streitwieser had given the theory and whilst listening, I realised I might be able to help relate this to known experiments, i.e. crystal structure data. I could do so by analysing the known crystal structures of metallocenes.[1] So here is the basic search query, and I will go through it thus:

  1. A general ring is defined (sizes 4,5,6,7,8) and the ring and metal-C bonds are all specified as of type "any" (it is difficult to know how such bonds might be classified, ie delocalised, aromatic, etc, so best not to constrain things) and a metal is attached.
  2. 4M is basically any metal; again the search is unconstrained, but one could focus on certain columns of the periodic table if one wished.
  3. A ring centroid is computed.
  4. ANG1 is defined as the angle H-C-centroid, the angle of interest in Andy's talk. The limits were constrained to lie between 140° and 179°. I did this because when the angle becomes 180°, the torsion becomes mathematically undefined and I did not want to risk this happening.
  5. TOR1 is defined as the torsion H-C-centroid-metal. Values of 180° would indicate that the hydrogen was pointing away from the metal; values of 0° would indicate it was pointing towards the metal. The absolute value of the torsion is taken to avoid confusion induced by its sign.
  6. ANG2 is one test whether the ring is planar. For an even membered ring, it is the angle subtended at the centroid to opposing carbon atoms. For odd membered rings it is the angle at the centroid involving one carbon and a centroid defined by an opposing pair of atoms (see below).
  7. The quality of the crystal structure determination is controlled by specifying that the R value be < 5%, no errors, no disorder. Also, the terminal H-positions are normalised (to correct known errors in H distances deriving from x-ray diffraction). I would point out that in the early days, the actual positions of the hydrogen were often not actually determined, but "idealised". In this case this would mean that the H-C-centroid angle would probably be set to 180°. For perhaps the last 20 years or so however, the positions of hydrogen atoms have been routinely refined. Unfortunately, I know of no search query that can separate the two cases, and so we will have to live with the mixture and see what we get.
  8. We define another constraint separately, which is that the temperature of the data collection sample is <140K. This ensures that the data will be free of more vibrational/thermal noise and so should be rather more accurate.
  9. Finally, a note on the topic of "research data management" or RDM. I have deposited the files defining the search query in a repository and have assigned DOIs both to the overall search collection[2] and to each individual search definition, the DOIs for which are shown below.

NH3-8

NH3-8

The 4-ring case.[3] Here the temperature constraint was relaxed, since there are few entries. The two red "hot-spots" occur at torsion angles of ~180° (hydrogen pointing away from metal) at bond angle values of between 173-176°. 

NH3-8

The 5-ring case.[4] This includes the classic ferrocene example, the first metallocene for which the structure was correctly identified. There are many more examples, and this search is now constrained to <140K. The two hot spots occur at bond angles of very close to 180°, at which values the torsion itself becomes undetermined. That the hot spots actually occur at 0° and 180° and are not spread evenly across the right hand side axis is remarkable given this. There is a significant tail for the 180° torsion (H pointing away from metal) down to H-C-centroid angles of about 170°, but there is no evidence of this tail for torsions of 0°.

NH3-8

One more test must be applied to see if the 5-ring is planar or not. The deviation from planarity is only 2-3°, and there seems to be no correlation between lower values of the H-C-centroid bond angle and non-planarity.

NH3-8

The 6-ring case.[5] There are again numerous examples of data <140K for such rings. There is now a very distinct hotspot at angles of ~170° for the case/torsion where the hydrogen is pointing towards the metal.

NH3-8

This feature persists when the ring planarity is tested, and it occurs specifically for rings where the angle subtended at the centroid is ~180° and H-C-centroid angles of ~170°. So this is clear-cut effect which demands explanation #1.

NH3-8

The 7-ring case[6] again shows a strong hot spot at ~172° for a torsion corresponding to the hydrogens pointing towards the metal. This hot spot is matched by angles subtended at the ring centroid that are close to 180° (i.e. planar). This is clear-cut effect which demands explanation #2.

NH3-8

NH3-8

The 8-ring case[7] also shows a hot spot for hydrogens pointing towards the metal by the strikingly large degree of ~157°, and this feature is associated with a linear C-centroid-C angle. This is clear-cut effect which demands explanation #3.

NH3-8

NH3-8

The 9- and 10-ring cases.  There are no examples!  Time to make some?

To summarise. 

  1. The above was done during a conference in response to a point made by one of the speakers. In fact, it proved possible to show the speaker the diagrams above <18 hours after he gave the talk.‡
  2. An immediate question that arose from this discussion was whether the hot-spots were artefacts of non-planar rings. So the ANG2 test was added to the plots the next day (today) as part of this dissemination.
  3. Also discussed (yesterday) was how these conference insights might be shared. I suggested the forum here and Professor Streitwieser heartily agreed. Another alternative was to write it up as a regular journal article. But we both agreed that ..
  4. what you see here is just a statistical analysis. The next stage would be to individually inspect all the molecules which make up these statistics. You see it might just be that every molecule contributing to a "hot-spot" cluster might have special circumstances which conspire to make it look as if there is an interesting chemical effect going on. It is unlikely that such coincidences could accrue in such a manner, but the possibility does have to be considered.
  5. I think we both felt that a better way was to expose the basic effects here, as a sort of open science research project, and anyone interested could then (a) try to replicate these plots, which is why you will find the DOIs of datasets containing the definition files to assist in any such replication and (b) tunnel down to any specific hot spot to identify the precise chemical characteristics that might give rise to the geometrical effect.
  6. This could then be followed up by computational analysis of the electronic properties which might give rise to the effect. This would in effect complete the cycle, since this was the starting point for Streitwieser's original talk. Remember, the theme of the celebration was the interplay between theory and experiment, a particular favourite of  Schleyer's.
  7. Regarding the chemical insights, a distinct trend over the ring sizes 4-8 can be seen. The 4-ring shows the hydrogens pointing away from the metal, the 5-ring could be said to be largely agnostic (remember the error in crystallographic angles is probably in the region 1-3°) whilst there is an indication that for the 6-8 rings the ring hydrogens tend to point towards the metal. I have summarised three key points illustrating this as #1-3 above.
  8. It is tempting to conclude that a fairly general chemical effect is operating here over #1-3, although of course it could be a number of effects specific to each ring which merely look like a general trend.

So the chemical interpretation of this project is unfinished, a general feature of much of science of course. But my aim here was to give a flavour of how a scientific meeting at its best can bring together like (or often unlike) minds which can tease out new connections and lead perchance to new discoveries.

‡These hours were productively employed by sharing a Franconian banquet together, and a modicum of sleep, as well as the searches described above. And in case you see no citations at the bottom of this post, they too take about 48 hours to propagate through the CrossRef and DataCite systems. Be patient and they will appear. †In my original representation, I showed the Hs pointing towards the metal. In fact Prof Streitwieser has just contacted me reversing this orientation and correcting my recollection of his lecture.

References

  1. H.S. Rzepa, "Discovering More Chemical Concepts from 3D Chemical Information Searches of Crystal Structure Databases", Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 93, pp. 550-554, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00346
  2. H. Rzepa, "Crystallographic searches of metallocene type complexes.", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/346
  3. H. Rzepa, "4-Ring metallocene search query", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/347
  4. H. Rzepa, "The 5-ring case.", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/348
  5. H. Rzepa, "6-ring metallocene search queries", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/349
  6. H. Rzepa, "7-ring metallocene search queries", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/350
  7. H. Rzepa, "8-ring metallocene search queries", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/351

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Chemical IT, crystal_structure_mining, Interesting chemistry | 6 Comments »