2
$\begingroup$

I know +M effect of $\ce{OCH3}$ is more than $\ce{OH}$, but in my book (ALLEN General organic chemistry), it is given that $\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$ of para-substituted benzoic acid containing $\ce{OCH3}$ is less than that of para-substituted benzoic acid containing $\ce{OH}$:

$\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$/Benzoic acid → $4.20$

$$ \begin{array}{lcccc} \hline \text{Substituent} & \mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a} & \textit{o-} & \textit{m-} & \textit{p-} \\ \hline \cdots \\ \ce{OMe} & - & 4.09 & 4.09 & 4.47 \\ \ce{OH} & - & 2.98 & 4.08 & 4.58 \\ \cdots \\ \hline \end{array} $$

I am in doubt whether these data wrong or correct. If correct, what can be an explanation?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Both -$\ce{OCH3}$ and -$\ce{OH}$ groups have exhibited two effects on the aromatic ring: (1) Electron donating resonance or mesomeric effect (+M) and (2) Electron withdrawing inductive effect (-I). For both acids in hand, the electron withdrawing inductive effect (-I) is almost same since both -$\ce{OCH3}$ and -$\ce{OH}$ groups are 4 carbons away from the acid center. However, when -$\ce{OH}$ group is attached to either the para- or ortho-position, it has a more tendency to delocalize its lone pair electrons towards the aromatic ring than that of -$\ce{OCH3}$ group (Order of activating: -$\ce{O-} \gt$ -$\ce{OH} \gt$ -$\ce{OCH3}$; for additional learning, read articles on Hammett plots).

As a result, the electron density on the carbon para to -$\ce{OH}$ substitution group increases more than that on the carbon para to -$\ce{OCH3}$ substitution group. Thus, the electron density on carbonyl carbon of carboxylic group attached to those para-carbons also increases accordingly, and consequently, the polarity of $\ce{O-H}$ of carboxylic group decreases as a result. That polarity decrease causes the reduced acidity ($\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$s are $4.58$ and $4.47$, when para-substitutions are $\ce{OH}$ and $\ce{OCH3}$, respectively) compared to benzoic acid ($\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$ is $4.20$ when para-substitution is $\ce{H}$). The $\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$s of p-hydroxybenzoic acid is higher than that of p-methoxybenzoic acid here, because as explained above, p-$\ce{OH}$ group caused reduced polarity on $\ce{O-H}$ of carboxylic group than that caused by p-$\ce{OCH3}$ group.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I am directly going to address the source of your confusion: $\text{+M}$ of -$\ce{OCH3}$ is more than -$\ce{OH}$. You see, you are basically saying that the $\text{+I}$ effect of $\ce{CH3}$ in -$\ce{OCH3}$ is going to push more electron density towards the ring, hence, -$\ce{OCH3}$ is more activating than -$\ce{OH}$.

But look at the bigger picture, and let's evoke Bent's rule here.

You see, due to steric reasons,the $\ce{C_{(\text{benzene})}-O-C_{(\text{alkyl group})}}$ bond angle of $\ce{OCH3}$ is going to be more than the $\ce{C_{(\text{benzene})}-O-H}$ bond angle of the -$\ce{OH}$. Hence, the percent $\mathrm{s}$-character is going to go up for the central oxygen atom in $\ce{OCH3}$ relatively (to rationalize this, think of the bond angles associated with $\mathrm{sp^3, sp^2,}$ and $\mathrm{sp}$ hybridization and their respective $\mathrm{s}$-characters)

So now, due to increased $\mathrm{s}$-character on both sides of the $\ce{OCH3}$ oxygen, you get an overall more electronegative substituent for the ring as compared to $\ce{OH}$, as the electrons displaced towards the oxygen from the methyl in $\ce{OCH3}$ would still experience a lowering in the energy of the $\sigma_\ce{(O-CH3)}$ bond. Hence, as compared to $\ce{OH}$, the ring will be activated less by $\ce{OCH3}$. I feel that you can now complete the reasoning, by checking the stability of the conjugate bases.

Note: A better qualitative reasoning could have been provided via frontier MO theory, but I chose not to evoke it here. If the OP requests, I can supply the same as well.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Give me your point of the above explanation throught frontier molecular orbital theory also. $\endgroup$ – anik bhowmick Sep 19 at 11:12

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.