Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/1015894570805186560
edited tags; edited tags
Link
orthocresol
  • 71.9k
  • 12
  • 249
  • 423
names added in order to improve search results
Source Link
user7951
user7951

enter image description here

This is an example of Claisen rearrangement, property of allyl vinyl/phenyl ethers.

I believe that the allylic migration should take place to the position ortho to both $\ce{-CH3}$ and $-\ce{OR}$ because:

  • There's more electron density there due to the presence of electron donating group $\ce{-CH3}$

and I read this in March under Claissen rearrangement:

Since the Claisen rearrangement doen't involve ions, it shouldn't greatly depend on the presence or absence of substituent groups on the ring. This is the case. Electron donating groups increase the rate and electron withdrawing groups decrease it, but the effect is small.

So I expect the product to be 2-[(2​E)-but-2-en-1-yl]-3-methylphenol:

enter image description here2-[(2E)-but-2-en-1-yl]-3-methylphenol

However my teacher made us write the product to be 2-[(2​Z)-but-2-en-1-yl]-5-methylphenol:

enter image description here2-[(2Z)-but-2-en-1-yl]-5-methylphenol

His rationalisation was that the carbanion like species attacking the allyl group is more stable at the place away from methyl group.

But my question is that if this reaction is single step, followed by tautomerism why should it even depend on the carbanion like species which isn't even formed.

enter image description here

This is an example of Claisen rearrangement, property of allyl vinyl/phenyl ethers.

I believe that the allylic migration should take place to the position ortho to both $\ce{-CH3}$ and $-\ce{OR}$ because:

  • There's more electron density there due to the presence of electron donating group $\ce{-CH3}$

and I read this in March under Claissen rearrangement:

Since the Claisen rearrangement doen't involve ions, it shouldn't greatly depend on the presence or absence of substituent groups on the ring. This is the case. Electron donating groups increase the rate and electron withdrawing groups decrease it, but the effect is small.

So I expect the product to be:

enter image description here

However my teacher made us write the product to be:

enter image description here

His rationalisation was that the carbanion like species attacking the allyl group is more stable at the place away from methyl group.

But my question is that if this reaction is single step, followed by tautomerism why should it even depend on the carbanion like species which isn't even formed.

enter image description here

This is an example of Claisen rearrangement, property of allyl vinyl/phenyl ethers.

I believe that the allylic migration should take place to the position ortho to both $\ce{-CH3}$ and $-\ce{OR}$ because:

  • There's more electron density there due to the presence of electron donating group $\ce{-CH3}$

and I read this in March under Claissen rearrangement:

Since the Claisen rearrangement doen't involve ions, it shouldn't greatly depend on the presence or absence of substituent groups on the ring. This is the case. Electron donating groups increase the rate and electron withdrawing groups decrease it, but the effect is small.

So I expect the product to be 2-[(2​E)-but-2-en-1-yl]-3-methylphenol:

2-[(2E)-but-2-en-1-yl]-3-methylphenol

However my teacher made us write the product to be 2-[(2​Z)-but-2-en-1-yl]-5-methylphenol:

2-[(2Z)-but-2-en-1-yl]-5-methylphenol

His rationalisation was that the carbanion like species attacking the allyl group is more stable at the place away from methyl group.

But my question is that if this reaction is single step, followed by tautomerism why should it even depend on the carbanion like species which isn't even formed.

edited tags
Link
Mithoron
  • 4.6k
  • 14
  • 41
  • 62
Spelling
Link
Avyansh Katiyar
  • 5.5k
  • 6
  • 30
  • 64
Loading
Source Link
Archer
  • 5.5k
  • 9
  • 46
  • 89
Loading