Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Rates of cation–pseudobase equilibration have been measured for a series of C-9 substituted (CH 3 , CH 3 CH 2 , C 6 H 5 CH 2 , (CH 3 ) 2 CH, C 6 H 5 , 4-(CH 3 ) 2 NC 6 H 4 ) 10-methylacridinium cations in aqueous solution at 25 °C over the pH range of approximately 9–13. Separation of the rate constants for formation (k OH ) and decomposition (k 2 ) of each of these pseudobases allowed the calculation of the [Formula: see text] value for each cation. The presence of a C-9 isopropyl substituent enhances the stability of the pseudobase relative to the cation, whereas all other C-9 substituted cations have [Formula: see text] values greater than the 10-methylacridinium cation. There is no simple quantitative relationship between [Formula: see text] and the size of the C-9 substituent. Rate constants (k OH ) for hydroxide ion attack on these C-9 substituted cations are in the order: H > primary alkyl > secondary alkyl > aryl, while rate constants (k 2 ) for pseudobase decomposition are less predictable but generally follow the order: H > primary alkyl > aryl > secondary alkyl. These phenomena are shown to be consistent with a competition between destabilization of the cation by peri interactions between the C-9 substituent and H(1) and H(8) and reduced pseudobase solvation for large C-9 substituents. Resonance interactions of 9-aryl substituents with the acridine moiety of these cations are shown to be quite small. 9-Aryl-10-methylacridinium cations are approximately 30-fold more reactive towards hydroxide ion attack than are their triphenylmethyl carbocation analogues.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bunting et al. (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: