Premium
Is the Conventional Interpretation of the Anisotropic Effects of CC Double Bonds and Aromatic Rings in NMR Spectra in Terms of the π‐Electron Shielding/Deshielding Contributions Correct?
Author(s) -
BaranacStojanović Marija,
Koch Andreas,
Kleinpeter Erich
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
chemistry – a european journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.687
H-Index - 242
eISSN - 1521-3765
pISSN - 0947-6539
DOI - 10.1002/chem.201101882
Subject(s) - interpretation (philosophy) , electromagnetic shielding , anisotropy , aromaticity , spectral line , electron , chemistry , computational chemistry , molecular physics , shielding effect , nuclear magnetic resonance , nmr spectra database , crystallography , materials science , physics , molecule , organic chemistry , nuclear physics , quantum mechanics , philosophy , linguistics
Based on the nucleus‐independent chemical shift (NICS) concept, isotropic magnetic shielding values have been computed along the three Cartesian axes for ethene, cyclobutadiene, benzene, naphthalene, and benzocyclobutadiene, starting from the molecular/ring center up to 10 Å away. These through‐space NMR spectroscopic shielding (TSNMRS) values, which reflect the anisotropic effects, have been broken down into contributions from localized‐ and canonical molecular orbitals (LMOs and CMOs); these contributions revealed that the proton NMR spectroscopic chemical shifts of nuclei that are spatially close to the CC double bond or the aromatic ring should not be explained in terms of the conventionally accepted π‐electron shielding/deshielding effects. In fact, these effects followed the predictions only for the antiaromatic cyclobutadiene ring.