Hubbry Logo
Anomeric effectAnomeric effectMain
Open search
Anomeric effect
Community hub
Anomeric effect
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Anomeric effect
Anomeric effect
from Wikipedia
The α- and β-anomers of D-glucopyranose.

In organic chemistry, the anomeric effect or Edward-Lemieux effect (after J. T. Edward and Raymond Lemieux) is a stereoelectronic effect that describes the tendency of heteroatomic substituents adjacent to the heteroatom in the ring in, e.g., tetrahydropyran to prefer the axial orientation instead of the less-hindered equatorial orientation that would be expected from steric considerations.[1] This effect was originally observed in pyranose rings by J. T. Edward in 1955 when studying carbohydrate chemistry.

The term anomeric effect was introduced in 1958.[2] The name comes from the term used to designate the lowest-numbered ring carbon of a pyranose, the anomeric carbon. Isomers that differ only in the configuration at the anomeric carbon are called anomers. The anomers of D-glucopyranose are diastereomers, with the beta anomer having a hydroxyl (−OH) group pointing up equatorially, and the alpha anomer having that (−OH) group pointing down axially.

The anomeric effect can also be generalized to any cyclohexyl or linear system with the general formula C−Y−C−X, where Y is a heteroatom with one or more lone pairs, and X is an electronegative atom or group.[3] The magnitude of the anomeric effect is estimated at 4-8 kJ/mol in the case of sugars, but is different for every molecule.

In the above case, the methoxy group (−O−CH3) on the cyclohexane ring (top) prefers the equatorial position. However, in the tetrahydropyran ring (bottom), the methoxy group prefers the axial position. This is because in the cyclohexane ring, Y = carbon, which is not a heteroatom, so the anomeric effect is not observed and sterics dominates the observed substituent position. In the tetrahydropyran ring, Y = oxygen, which is a heteroatom, so the anomeric effect contributes and stabilizes the observed substituent position. In both cases, X = methoxy group.

The anomeric effect is most often observed when Y = oxygen, but can also be seen with other lone pair bearing heteroatoms in the ring, such as nitrogen, sulfur, and phosphorus.[4] The exact method by which the anomeric effect causes stabilization is a point of controversy, and several hypotheses have been proposed to explain it.

Physical explanation and controversy

[edit]

The physical reason for the anomeric effect is not completely understood. Several, in part conflicting, explanations have been offered and the topic is still not settled.[5]

Hyperconjugation

[edit]

Cyclic molecules

[edit]

A widely accepted explanation is that there is a stabilizing interaction (hyperconjugation) between the unshared electron pair on the endocyclic heteroatom (within the sugar ring) and the σ* orbital of the axial (exocyclic) C–X bond.[6] This causes the molecule to align the donating lone pair of electrons antiperiplanar (180°) to the exocyclic C-X σ bond, lowering the overall energy of the system and causing more stability.[7]

Some authors also question the validity of this hyperconjugation model based on results from the quantum theory of atoms in molecules.[8] While most studies on the anomeric effects have been theoretical in nature, the n–σ* (hyperconjugation) hypothesis has also been extensively criticized on the basis that the electron density redistribution in acetals proposed by this hypothesis is not congruent with the known experimental chemistry of acetals and, in particular, the chemistry of monosaccharides.[9][10]

Acyclic molecules

[edit]

Hyperconjugation is also found in acyclic molecules containing heteroatoms, another form of the anomeric effect. If a molecule has an atom with a lone pair of electrons and the adjacent atom is able to accept electrons into the σ* orbital, hyperconjugation occurs, stabilizing the molecule. This forms a "no bond" resonance form. For this orbital overlap to occur, the trans, trans conformation is preferred for most heteroatoms, however for the stabilization to occur in dimethoxymethane, the gauche, gauche conformation is about 3–5 kcal/mol lower in energy (more stable) than the trans,trans conformation—this is about two times as big as the effect in sugars because there are two rotatable bonds (hence it is trans around both bonds or gauche around both) that are affected.[11]

Dipole minimization

[edit]

Another accepted explanation for the anomeric effect is the equatorial configuration has the dipoles involving both heteroatoms partially aligned, and therefore repelling each other.[12] By contrast the axial configuration has these dipoles roughly opposing, thus representing a more stable and lower energy state.

Both the hyperconjugation and the dipole minimization contribute to the preferred (Z)-conformation of esters over the (E)-conformation. In the (Z) conformation the lone pair of electrons in the alpha oxygen can donate into the neighboring σ* C-O orbital. In addition, the dipole is minimized in the (Z)-conformation and maximized in the (E)-conformation.[7]

n-n repulsions and C-H hydrogen bonding

[edit]

If the lone pairs of electrons on the oxygens at the anomeric center of 2-methoxypyran are shown, then a brief examination of the conformations of the anomers reveal that the β-anomer always has at least one pair of eclipsing (coplanar 1,3-interacting) lone pairs, this n-n repulsion is a high energy situation. On the other hand, the α-anomer has conformations in which there are no n-n repulsions, and that is true in the exo-anomeric conformation. The energetically unfavourable n-n repulsion present in the β-anomer, coupled with the energetically favourable hydrogen bond between the axial H-5 and a lone pair of electrons on the axial α-anomeric substituent (C-H/n hydrogen bond), have been suggested [references 7 and 8] to account for most of the energetic difference between the anomers, the anomeric effect. The molecular mechanics program StruMM3D, which is not specially parameterized for the anomeric effect, estimates that the dipolar contributions to the anomeric effect (primarily the n-n repulsion, and C-H hydrogen bonding discussed above) are about 1.5 kcal/mol.

Influences

[edit]

While the anomeric effect is a general explanation for this type of stabilization for a molecule, the type and amount of stabilization can be affected by the substituents being examined as well as the solvent being studied.

Substituent effect

[edit]

In a closed system, there is a difference observed in the anomeric effect for different substituents on a cyclohexane or tetrahydropyran ring (Y=Oxygen). When X=OH, the generic anomeric effect can be seen, as previously explained. When X=CN, the same results are seen, where the equitorial position is preferred on the cyclohexane ring, but the axial position is preferred on the tetrahydropyran ring. This is consistent with the anomeric effect stabilization. When X=F, the anomeric effect is in fact observed for both rings. However, when X=NH2, no anomeric effect stabilization is observed and both systems prefer the equatorial position. This is attributed to both sterics and an effect called the reverse anomeric effect (see below).[3]

Solvent effect

[edit]

One common criticism of the hyperconjugation theory is that it fails to explain why the anomeric effect is not observed when substituted tetrahydropyran molecules are placed in polar solvents, and the equatorial position is once again preferred. It has been shown, however, that hyperconjugation does depend on the solvent in the system. Each of the substituted systems described above were tested in the gas phase (i.e. with no solvent) and in aqueous solution (i.e. polar solvent). When X=F, the anomeric effect was observed in both media, and the axial position was always preferred. This is attributed to hyperconjugation. When X=OH, the anomeric effect was seen in the gas phase, when the axial position was preferred. However, in aqueous solutions, the substituent preferred the equatorial position. This is attributed to the fact that there are more electrostatic repulsions with the axial positioned substituent and the polar solvent, causing the equatorial position to be preferred. When X=NH2, again, no anomeric effect was observed and the equatorial position was always preferred.[13]

Overcoming the anomeric effect

[edit]

While the anomeric effect can cause stabilization of molecules, it does have a magnitude to its stabilization, and this value can be overcome by other, more destabilizing effects in some cases.

In the example of spiroketals, the orientation on the upper left shows stabilization by the hyperconjugative anomeric effect twice, thus greatly stabilizing the orientation of the molecule. The orientation on the upper right only shows this hyperconjugative anomeric stabilization once, causing it to be the lesser preferred structure. However, when substituent are added onto the spiroketal backbone, the more preferred structure can be changed. When a large substituent is added to the spiroketal backbone, as seen in the lower left, the strain from having this large substituent, R, in the axial position is greatly destabilizing to the molecule. In the molecule on the lower right, R is now in the equatorial position, which no longer causes destabilization on the molecule. Therefore, without substituents, the upper equilibrium reaction is favored on the left hand side, while the lower equilibrium is favored on the right hand side, simply from the addition of a large, destabilizing substituent.[14]

Exo anomeric effect

[edit]

An extension of the anomeric effect, the exo anomeric effect is the preference of substituents coming off a ring to adopt the gauche conformation, while sterics would suggest an antiperiplanar conformation would be preferred.

An example of this is 2-methoxytetrahydropyran. As the anomeric effect predicts, the methoxy substituent shows an increased preference for the axial conformation. However, there is actually more than one possible axial conformation due to rotation about the C-O bond between the methoxy substituent and the ring. When one applies the principles of the reverse anomeric effect, it can be predicted that the gauche conformer is preferred, suggesting the top left conformation is best in the figure above. This prediction is supported by experimental evidence. Furthermore, this preference for the gauche position is still seen in the equatorial conformation.[15]

Reverse anomeric effect

[edit]

This term refers to the apparent preference of electropositive substituents for the equatorial conformation beyond what normal steric interactions would predict in rings containing an electronegative atom, such as oxygen. Substituents containing carbons with partial positive charges are not seen to exhibit the same effect.[16] Theoretical explanations for the reverse anomeric effect include an electrostatic explanation and the delocalization of the sp3 electrons of the anomeric carbon and oxygen lone pair.[17] There is some debate as to whether or not this is a real phenomenon. The nitrogen containing substituents it has been reported with are quite bulky, making it hard to separate the normal effects of steric bulk and the reverse anomeric effect, if it does exist.[18] For example, in the molecule shown below, the pyridinium substituent strongly prefers the equatorial position, as steric factors would predict, but actually shows a stronger preference for this conformation than predicted, suggesting the reverse anomeric effect is contributing.

Metallo-anomeric effect

[edit]

Late transition metals from groups 10, 11, and 12 when placed at the anomeric carbon show strong axial preferences.[19] This phenomenon termed as the metallo-anomeric effect originates from stabilizing hyperconjugative interactions between oxygen or other heteroatoms with lone pairs and C-M anti-bonding orbitals that act as good acceptors. The generalized metallo-anomeric effect refers to thermodynamic stabilization of synclinal conformers of compounds with the general formula M-CH2-OR. Axial/equatorial preferences can be influenced by ligands attached to the metal and electronic configuration. In general terms, moving from a lighter to a heavier element in the group, the magnitude of the metallo-anomeric effect increases. Furthermore, higher oxidation states favor axial/synclinal conformers.

Synthetic applications

[edit]

The anomeric effect is taken into consideration synthetically. Due to its discovery in sugars, sugar and carbohydrate chemistry is one of the more common synthetic uses of the anomeric effect. For instance, the Koenigs-Knorr glycosidation installs an α-OR or β-OR group in high diastereoselectivity which is effected by the anomeric effect. Sophorolipid lactone, (+)-Lepicidin A, and (−)-Lithospermoside are a few of the products synthesized via the Koenigs-Knorr Glycosidation overcoming the anomeric effect.[20]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
The anomeric effect is a stereoelectronic that governs the conformational preferences at an anomeric carbon, typically in cyclic acetals or hemiacetals such as those found in carbohydrates, where an electronegative (like oxygen or ) adjacent to a ring exhibits a marked preference for the axial position in conformations, defying expectations from classical steric (A^{1,3}) interactions that favor equatorial orientations. This effect, first identified in sugars, arises primarily from negative involving donation from the ring oxygen's into the antibonding orbital of the axial C-X bond (n_O → σ^*_{C-X}), which stabilizes the axial conformer, though electrostatic interactions—such as dipole-dipole repulsions in the equatorial form—also contribute, particularly in low-polarity solvents. The magnitude of the effect varies with the of the and the , typically ranging from 0.5 to 2.5 kcal/mol in six-membered rings, and it extends beyond carbohydrates to aminals, thioacetals, and other heteroatomic systems. Discovered in 1955 by J. T. during studies of conformations, the anomeric effect—initially termed the "Edward-Lemieux effect"—highlighted the unexpected axial stabilization of electronegative groups at the anomeric center (C1 in aldoses), as evidenced by the higher stability of α-anomers in non-hydroxylating solvents compared to β-anomers. proposed an early electrostatic model, attributing the preference to reduced repulsion between the ring oxygen and the anomeric in the axial , a view later refined by Raymond U. Lemieux in through experimental NMR and equilibration studies on pyranosides. Over decades, quantum mechanical analyses have shifted emphasis toward as the dominant factor, especially in scenarios of high electronic demand like cations, where orbital overlap delocalizes to lower energy. A 2018 computational and experimental study further revealed that CH···X nonbonded attractions (where X is the electronegative group) play a key role, correlating with C-X bond elongation in axial forms to optimize Coulombic stabilization. The anomeric effect profoundly influences chemistry, dictating equilibria, stability, and enzyme-substrate interactions in biological systems, while also enabling synthetic control in analogs and glycoconjugates. Generalized forms, such as the exo-anomeric effect in glycosides (stabilizing gauche conformations around the exocyclic C-O bond), extend its scope to acyclic and five-membered ring systems like furanoses. Recent reviews underscore its interplay with and effects, affirming hyperconjugation's primacy in modern interpretations while cautioning against oversimplification, as multiple factors—including steric relief and solvent polarity—modulate its expression in complex molecules.

Definition and Historical Context

Core Definition and Scope

In carbohydrate chemistry, anomers are defined as a pair of diastereomers that differ solely in their configuration at the anomeric carbon, which is the carbonyl carbon (C1) of the open-chain form that becomes the ring-forming carbon in cyclic structures such as or rings. These cyclic forms typically adopt a chair conformation for six-membered rings, where substituents attached to the ring carbons can occupy either axial or equatorial positions; equatorial orientations are generally preferred due to minimized steric repulsion, including avoidance of 1,3-diaxial interactions and gauche-butane-like penalties between adjacent substituents. The anomeric effect refers to a stereoelectronic in which an electronegative substituent, such as alkoxy (OR), amino (NR₂), or groups, attached to the anomeric carbon exhibits a thermodynamic for the axial orientation in the conformation of cyclic systems, defying the steric predictions that favor equatorial placement. This arises despite the increased steric hindrance from 1,3-diaxial interactions, as first noted in studies of stability. The scope of the anomeric effect extends beyond carbohydrates to include glycosides and analogous heterocyclic systems, such as substituted rings, where the effect influences conformational equilibria and reactivity at the anomeric center. It also manifests in acyclic molecules through the generalized anomeric effect, which describes the preference for a gauche arrangement over the sterically favored anti conformation in fragments like X-C-Y, where X and Y are heteroatoms bearing lone pairs or electronegative substituents. A representative example is observed in α-D-glucopyranose, where the anomeric hydroxyl group adopts an axial position, stabilized by the effect despite unfavorable 1,3-diaxial interactions with axial hydrogens at C3 and C5, resulting in a higher population of the α-anomer (approximately 36%) than predicted by steric considerations alone (around 10%).

Discovery and Early Observations

The anomeric effect was first proposed by J. T. Edward in 1955 through analysis of dipole moments in glycosides and related compounds, where he observed an unexpected stabilization of the axial orientation for electronegative substituents at the anomeric carbon of rings, contrary to expectations based on steric interactions. This proposal highlighted a stereoelectronic influence that favored the axial position despite increased 1,3-diaxial repulsions. The phenomenon gained wider recognition through R. U. Lemieux's investigations in the late 1950s and 1960s, earning the name Edward-Lemieux effect after his use of NMR spectroscopy to assign configurations in glycosides and equilibration studies to quantify axial preferences in solution. Lemieux's work on acetylated pyranoses confirmed the axial bias in non-hydroxylic solvents, establishing the effect as a general feature in chemistry. Early experimental evidence came from equilibration studies of 2-alkoxytetrahydropyrans, which revealed that the axial often predominates (>50%) in non-polar solvents, underscoring the effect's ability to override steric destabilization. By the 1970s, crystallographic analyses of derivatives provided confirmatory solid-state data, showing consistent axial orientations for OR groups at the anomeric center across various structures. Lemieux's 1972 studies on fluorinated sugars further illuminated the effect's dependence on substituent , demonstrating a clear trend where the axial preference strengthens in the order F > OR > SR, with exhibiting the most pronounced stabilization. Initially termed the "anomeric anomaly," the effect sparked controversy because it conflicted with prevailing steric models, such as those developed by Norman L. Allinger, which accurately predicted equatorial preferences for substituents in systems but failed to account for the observed axial bias in heterosubstituted rings.

Mechanistic Explanations

Hyperconjugation-Based Models

The hyperconjugation-based model represents the dominant modern explanation for the anomeric effect, attributing the axial preference of electronegative substituents at the anomeric carbon to interactions rather than purely steric or electrostatic factors. In this framework, first proposed through early theoretical calculations, the on the ring (endocyclic) oxygen donates electrons into the antibonding σ* orbital of the C1-X bond (where X is a like oxygen or ), stabilizing the axial conformation by facilitating negative . (NBO) analysis quantifies this stabilization at 5-10 kcal/mol, highlighting the significant energetic contribution from these n → σ* interactions. In cyclic molecules such as rings, the axial position allows for optimal antiperiplanar alignment between the donor and the acceptor σ* orbital, efficient n → σ* overlap that is diminished in the equatorial conformer due to poorer . This stereoelectronic preference is captured by second-order in NBO, where the stabilization energy is approximated as ΔE=Hii2Δϵ\Delta E = \frac{H_{ii}^2}{\Delta \epsilon} with HiiH_{ii} as the matrix element between the interacting orbitals and Δϵ\Delta \epsilon as their gap, underscoring how smaller gaps and stronger couplings favor the axial form. For acyclic molecules, drives a preference for the gauche torsion angle in X-C-C-Y systems (e.g., acetals with X and Y as oxygen substituents), favoring approximately 60° over the anti conformation (~180°) through analogous n → σ* donations that lower the barrier for . Computational evidence supports this model, with density functional theory studies at the B3LYP/6-31G* level demonstrating that deleting hyperconjugative interactions via NBO analysis reduces the axial conformational preference by up to 70% in model systems like 2-methoxytetrahydropyran, confirming the dominant role of these delocalizations. Such findings resolve earlier controversies by better accounting for the anomeric effect's persistence in both gas-phase and solution environments, outperforming purely steric explanations that fail to capture the effect's magnitude across varying substituents. While electrostatic models invoke dipole minimization as a complementary factor, hyperconjugation provides the primary orbital-based rationale for the observed stereochemistry.

Electrostatic and Steric Models

One prominent electrostatic explanation for the anomeric effect involves dipole minimization, where the axial orientation of the electronegative (such as an oxygen atom, OR) at the anomeric carbon aligns the 's C-O bond in opposition to the arising from the ring oxygen's , thereby reducing the overall molecular dipole moment. This stabilization is quantified through vector of the , with the total dipole moment given by μtotal=μring2+μsub22μringμsubcosθ\mu_{\text{total}} = \sqrt{\mu_{\text{ring}}^2 + \mu_{\text{sub}}^2 - 2\mu_{\text{ring}} \mu_{\text{sub}} \cos\theta}
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.