12
$\begingroup$

During my study of aromaticity, I came through this topic of quasi-aromaticity. Can you please elaborate what Quasi aromatic compounds are and how are they designated?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Consider using google for such terminology. It has might show good results and is recommended before asking a question. If it is not, then the question is welcome. $\endgroup$ – user79161 May 24 at 20:32
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This appears to be the original paper: Lloyd, D.; Marshall, D. R. Quasi-aromatic compounds: a definition, Chem. Ind. (London) 1964, 1760. Also, there is a modern review by Krygowski et al. (PDF). Feel free to improve and narrow-down your question in the meantime. $\endgroup$ – andselisk May 24 at 21:15
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @user79161 I completely disagree. We definitely welcome many questions that could "just be Googled." Many of these questions may bring users to less reputable sites like Yahoo answers. If we build up a repository of easily-Googled questions, we start showing up in Google which really grows our site. And it helps people get an authoritative answer. $\endgroup$ – Melanie Shebel May 25 at 7:10
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @MelanieShebel This site "shows on Google" more then sci. papers, so that point is moot. While the fact that something can be googled isn't a reason to close a question, because like everything here can be, users should still provide some context and introduction into the topic in the body of question, otherwise downvotes are are proper reaction. $\endgroup$ – Mithoron May 25 at 22:15
14
$\begingroup$

In general, we can describe a quasi aromatic compound as a compound, which is ionic in nature with a counter ion, and the $\pi$ electrons in such compounds follow Huckel's rule ($4n+2$).

In other words, quasi aromatic compounds are those in which the charges present on the molecule are a part of aromaticity of the compound. A few examples of such compounds are depicted in the diagram:

QuasiAromatic

However, it has a deeper and broader meaning. For a more in-depth explanation, please read the given references.


References:

  1. T. M. Krygowski, B. Bankiewicz, Z. Czarnocki, M. Palusiak, “Quasi-aromaticity—what does it mean?” Tetrahedron 2015, 71(30), 4895–4908 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tet.2015.05.074).
  2. E. Kleinpeter, A. Koch, “Characterization and quantification of quasi-aromaticity by spatial magnetic properties (TSNMRS),” Tetrahedron 2015, 71(33), 5275–5284 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tet.2015.06.019).
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The references do not seem to match the answer, as the former tend to emphasize secondary bonding as part of the quasi-aromatic structure and the species do not seem to be charged. What am I missing? $\endgroup$ – Oscar Lanzi May 27 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ @ Oscar Lanzi: I don't think you are missing anything. I think chemists are giving broader picture to existing simple definition. All are still a theory. $\endgroup$ – Mathew Mahindaratne May 27 at 20:55
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Melanie Shebel: Thank you for careful (and ruthless! :-)) editing. I'll also take an advantage to congratulate you for your new moderator ship! $\endgroup$ – Mathew Mahindaratne May 27 at 20:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Even though the gold book calls it Hückel (4n + 2) rule, there are more components to aromaticity than a simple number. Yet it appears that all that ever is taught about aromatic compounds is that number, without any limitations of the generalisation and approximation of these rules. I think it is more important to understand that all compounds that follow Hückel's rules have aromatic character, but not all compounds where aromaticity is observed follow Hückel's rules. $\endgroup$ – Martin - マーチン May 27 at 21:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.