Implications of Protonation and Substituent Effects for C−O and O−P Bond Cleavage in Phosphate Monoesters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent study of phosphate monoesters that broke down exclusively through C-O bond cleavage and whose reactivity was unaffected by protonation of the nonbridging oxygens (Byczynski et al. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 12541) raised several questions about the reactivity of phosphate monoesters, R-O-P(i). Potential catalytic strategies, particularly with regard to selectively promoting C-O or O-P bond cleavage, were investigated computationally through simple alkyl and aryl phosphate monoesters. Both C-O and O-P bonds lengthened upon protonating the bridging oxygen, R-O(H(+))-P(i), and heterolytic bond dissociation energies, DeltaH(C)(-)(O) and DeltaH(O)(-)(P), decreased. Which bond will break depends on the protonation state of the phosphoryl moiety, P(i), and the identity of the organosubstituent, R. Protonating the bridging oxygen when the nonbridging oxygens were already protonated favored C-O cleavage, while protonating the bridging oxygen of the dianion form, R-O-PO(3)(2)(-), favored O-P cleavage. Alkyl R groups capable of forming stable cations were more prone to C-O bond cleavage, with tBu > iPr > F(2)iPr > Me. The lack of effect on the C-O cleavage rate from protonating nonbridging oxygens could arise from two precisely offsetting effects: Protonating nonbridging oxygens lengthens the C-O bond, making it more reactive, but also decreases the bridging oxygen proton affinity, making it less likely to be protonated and, therefore, less reactive. The lack of effect could also arise without bridging oxygen protonation if the ratio of rate constants with different protonation states precisely matched the ratio of acidity constants, K(a). Calculations used hybrid density functional theory (B3PW91/6-31++G) methods with a conductor-like polarizable continuum model (CPCM) of solvation. Calculations on Me-phosphate using MP2/aug-cc-pVDZ and PBE0/aug-cc-pVDZ levels of theory, and variations on the solvation model, confirmed the reproducibility with different computational models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".