Hubbry Logo
HyperconjugationHyperconjugationMain
Open search
Hyperconjugation
Community hub
Hyperconjugation
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Hyperconjugation
Hyperconjugation
Hyperconjugation
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In organic chemistry, hyperconjugation (σ-conjugation or no-bond resonance) refers to the delocalization of electrons with the participation of bonds of primarily σ-character. Usually, hyperconjugation involves the interaction of the electrons in a sigma (σ) orbital (e.g. C–H or C–C) with an adjacent unpopulated non-bonding p or antibonding σ* or π* orbitals to give a pair of extended molecular orbitals. However, sometimes, low-lying antibonding σ* orbitals may also interact with filled orbitals of lone pair character (n) in what is termed negative hyperconjugation.[1] Increased electron delocalization associated with hyperconjugation increases the stability of the system.[2][3] In particular, the new orbital with bonding character is stabilized, resulting in an overall stabilization of the molecule.[4] Only electrons in bonds that are in the β position can have this sort of direct stabilizing effect — donating from a sigma bond on an atom to an orbital in another atom directly attached to it. However, extended versions of hyperconjugation (such as double hyperconjugation[5]) can be important as well. The Baker–Nathan effect, sometimes used synonymously for hyperconjugation,[6] is a specific application of it to certain chemical reactions or types of structures.[7]

Hyperconjugation: orbital overlap between a σ orbital and π* orbital stabilizes alkyl-substituted alkenes. The σ orbital (solid color) is filled, while the π* orbital (grayed) is an unpopulated antibonding orbital. Ref. Clayden, Greeves, Warren

Applications

[edit]

Hyperconjugation can be used to rationalize a variety of chemical phenomena, including the anomeric effect, the gauche effect, the rotational barrier of ethane, the beta-silicon effect, the vibrational frequency of exocyclic carbonyl groups, and the relative stability of substituted carbocations and substituted carbon centred radicals, and the thermodynamic Zaitsev's rule for alkene stability. More controversially, hyperconjugation is proposed by quantum mechanical modeling to be a better explanation for the preference of the staggered conformation rather than the old textbook notion of steric hindrance.[8][9]

Effect on chemical properties

[edit]

Hyperconjugation affects several properties.[6][10]

  1. Bond length: Hyperconjugation is suggested as a key factor in shortening of sigma bonds (σ bonds). For example, the single C–C bonds in 1,3-butadiene and propyne are approximately 1.46 Å in length, much less than the value of around 1.54 Å found in saturated hydrocarbons. For butadiene, this can be explained as normal conjugation of the two alkenyl parts. But for propyne, it is generally accepted that this is due to hyperconjugation between the alkyl and alkynyl parts.
  2. Dipole moments: The large increase in dipole moment of 1,1,1-trichloroethane as compared with chloroform can be attributed to hyperconjugated structures.
  3. The heat of formation of molecules with hyperconjugation are greater than sum of their bond energies and the heats of hydrogenation per double bond are less than the heat of hydrogenation of ethylene.
  4. Stability of carbocations:
    (CH3)3C+ > (CH3)2CH+ > (CH3)CH2+ > CH3+
    The three C–H σ bonds of the methyl group(s) attached to the carbocation can undergo the stabilization interaction but only one of them can be aligned perfectly with the empty p-orbital, depending on the conformation of the carbon–carbon bond. Donation from the two misaligned C–H bonds is weaker.[11] The more adjacent methyl groups there are, the larger hyperconjugation stabilization is because of the increased number of adjacent C–H bonds.

Hyperconjugation in unsaturated compounds

[edit]

Hyperconjugation was suggested as the reason for the increased stability of carbon-carbon double bonds as the degree of substitution increases. Early studies in hyperconjugation were performed by in the research group of George Kistiakowsky. Their work, first published in 1937, was intended as a preliminary progress report of thermochemical studies of energy changes during addition reactions of various unsaturated and cyclic compounds. The importance of hyperconjugation in accounting for this effect has received support from quantum chemical calculations.[12] The key interaction is believed to be the donation of electron density from the neighboring C–H σ bond into the π* antibonding orbital of the alkene (σC–H→π*). The effect is almost an order of magnitude weaker than the case of alkyl substitution on carbocations (σC–H→pC), since an unfilled p orbital is lower in energy, and, therefore, better energetically matched to a σ bond. When this effect manifests in the formation of the more substituted product in thermodynamically controlled E1 reactions, it is known as Zaitsev's rule, although in many cases the kinetic product also follows this rule. (See Hofmann's rule for cases where the kinetic product is the less substituted one.)

One set of experiments by Kistiakowsky involved collected heats of hydrogenation data during gas-phase reactions of a range of compounds that contained one alkene unit. When comparing a range of monoalkyl-substituted alkenes, they found any alkyl group noticeably increased the stability, but that the choice of different specific alkyl groups had little to no effect.[13]

A portion of Kistiakowsky's work involved a comparison of other unsaturated compounds in the form of CH2=CH(CH2)n-CH=CH2 (n=0,1,2). These experiments revealed an important result; when n=0, there is an effect of conjugation to the molecule where the ΔH value is lowered by 3.5 kcal. This is likened to the addition of two alkyl groups into ethylene. Kistiakowsky also investigated open chain systems, where the largest value of heat liberated was found to be during the addition to a molecule in the 1,4-position. Cyclic molecules proved to be the most problematic, as it was found that the strain of the molecule would have to be considered. The strain of five-membered rings increased with a decrease degree of unsaturation. This was a surprising result that was further investigated in later work with cyclic acid anhydrides and lactones. Cyclic molecules like benzene and its derivatives were also studied, as their behaviors were different from other unsaturated compounds.[13]

Despite the thoroughness of Kistiakowsky's work, it was not complete and needed further evidence to back up his findings. His work was a crucial first step to the beginnings of the ideas of hyperconjugation and conjugation effects.

Stabilization of 1,3-butadiyne and 1,3-butadiene

[edit]

The conjugation of 1,3-butadiene was first evaluated by Kistiakowsky, a conjugative contribution of 3.5 kcal/mol was found based on the energetic comparison of hydrogenation between conjugated species and unconjugated analogues.[13] Rogers who used the method first applied by Kistiakowsky, reported that the conjugation stabilization of 1,3-butadiyne was zero, as the difference of ΔhydH between first and second hydrogenation was zero. The heats of hydrogenation (ΔhydH) were obtained by computational G3(MP2) quantum chemistry method.[14]

Another group led by Houk[15] suggested the methods employed by Rogers and Kistiakowsky was inappropriate, because that comparisons of heats of hydrogenation evaluate not only conjugation effects but also other structural and electronic differences. They obtained -70.6 kcal/mol and -70.4 kcal/mol for the first and second hydrogenation respectively by ab initio calculation, which confirmed Rogers’ data. However, they interpreted the data differently by taking into account the hyperconjugation stabilization. To quantify hyperconjugation effect, they designed the following isodesmic reactions in 1-butyne and 1-butene.

Deleting the hyperconjugative interactions gives virtual states that have energies that are 4.9 and 2.4 kcal/mol higher than those of 1-butyne and 1-butene, respectively. Employment of these virtual states results in a 9.6 kcal/mol conjugative stabilization for 1,3-butadiyne and 8.5 kcal/mol for 1,3-butadiene.

[edit]

A relatively recent work by Fernández and Frenking (2006) summarized the trends in hyperconjugation among various groups of acyclic molecules, using energy decomposition analysis or EDA. Fernández and Frenking define this type of analysis as "...a method that uses only the pi orbitals of the interacting fragments in the geometry of the molecule for estimating pi interactions.[16]" For this type of analysis, the formation of bonds between various molecular moieties is a combination of three component terms. ΔEelstat represents what Fernández and Frenking call a molecule's “quasiclassical electrostatic attractions.[16]” The second term, ΔEPauli, represents the molecule's Pauli repulsion. ΔEorb, the third term, represents stabilizing interactions between orbitals, and is defined as the sum of ΔEpi and ΔEsigma. The total energy of interaction, ΔEint, is the result of the sum of the 3 terms.[16]

A group whose ΔEpi values were very thoroughly analyzed were a group of enones that varied in substituent.

Fernández and Frenking reported that the methyl, hydroxyl, and amino substituents resulted in a decrease in ΔEpi from the parent 2-propenal. Conversely, halide substituents of increasing atomic mass resulted in increasing ΔEpi. Because both the enone study and Hammett analysis study substituent effects (although in different species), Fernández and Frenking felt that comparing the two to investigate possible trends might yield significant insight into their own results. They observed a linear relationship between the ΔEpi values for the substituted enones and the corresponding Hammett constants. The slope of the graph was found to be -51.67, with a correlation coefficient of -0.97 and a standard deviation of 0.54.[16] Fernández and Frenking conclude from this data that ..."the electronic effects of the substituents R on pi conjugation in homo- and heteroconjugated systems is similar and thus appears to be rather independent of the nature of the conjugating system.".[16][17]

Rotational barrier of ethane

[edit]

An instance where hyperconjugation may be overlooked as a possible chemical explanation is in rationalizing the rotational barrier of ethane (C2H6). It had been accepted as early as the 1930s that the staggered conformations of ethane were more stable than the eclipsed conformation. Wilson had proven that the energy barrier between any pair of eclipsed and staggered conformations is approximately 3 kcal/mol, and the generally accepted rationale for this was the unfavorable steric interactions between hydrogen atoms.

Newman's Projections:Staggered (left) and eclipsed (right)

In their 2001 paper, however, Pophristic and Goodman[8] revealed that this explanation may be too simplistic.[18] Goodman focused on three principal physical factors: hyperconjugative interactions, exchange repulsion defined by the Pauli exclusion principle, and electrostatic interactions (Coulomb interactions). By comparing a traditional ethane molecule and a hypothetical ethane molecule with all exchange repulsions removed, potential curves were prepared by plotting torsional angle versus energy for each molecule. The analysis of the curves determined that the staggered conformation had no connection to the amount of electrostatic repulsions within the molecule. These results demonstrate that Coulombic forces do not explain the favored staggered conformations, despite the fact that central bond stretching decreases electrostatic interactions.[8]

Goodman also conducted studies to determine the contribution of vicinal (between two methyl groups) vs. geminal (between the atoms in a single methyl group) interactions to hyperconjugation. In separate experiments, the geminal and vicinal interactions were removed, and the most stable conformer for each interaction was deduced.[8]

Calculated torsional angle of ethane with deleted hyperconjugative effects
Deleted interaction Torsional angle Corresponding conformer
None 60° Staggered
All hyperconjugation 0° Eclipsed
Vicinal hyperconjugation 0° Eclipsed
Geminal hyperconjugation 60° Staggered

From these experiments, it can be concluded that hyperconjugative effects delocalize charge and stabilize the molecule. Further, it is the vicinal hyperconjugative effects that keep the molecule in the staggered conformation.[8] Thanks to this work, the following model of the stabilization of the staggered conformation of ethane is now more accepted:

Based on a figure in Schreiner (2002)
Based on a figure in Schreiner (2002)

Hyperconjugation can also explain several other phenomena whose explanations may also not be as intuitive as that for the rotational barrier of ethane.[18]

The matter of the rotational barrier of ethane is not settled within the scientific community. An analysis within quantitative molecular orbital theory shows that 2-orbital-4-electron (steric) repulsions are dominant over hyperconjugation.[19] A valence bond theory study also emphasizes the importance of steric effects.[20]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Hyperconjugation

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Hyperconjugation is a fundamental concept in describing the delocalization of electrons from filled σ orbitals, typically C–H or C–C bonds, into adjacent empty or partially filled p or π* orbitals, which stabilizes molecular structures such as carbocations, free radicals, and unsaturated systems through partial orbital overlap and charge redistribution. This interaction, often visualized as "no-bond" resonance structures in or as second-order orbital mixing in , enhances at electron-deficient centers and influences bond lengths, vibrational frequencies, and conformational preferences. The phenomenon was first observed experimentally in the Baker–Nathan effect of 1935, where alkyl substituents showed an unexpected order of stabilizing influence (methyl > ethyl > isopropyl > tert-butyl) in solvolysis rates of diphenylmethyl halides, attributed to varying degrees of σ-π hyperconjugation. Robert S. Mulliken formalized the term "hyperconjugation" in 1939, linking it to electron release from saturated bonds to adjacent unsaturated or deficient sites, a concept later validated by isotope effects (e.g., secondary k_H/k_D effects in relevant reactions) and spectroscopic data. By the 1960s, its role gained widespread recognition, including in work on reaction mechanisms, underscoring its ubiquity beyond simple alkenes to include applications in stereoelectronic effects and stabilization. In modern understanding, hyperconjugation provides significant stabilization, often comparable in certain contexts to traditional π-conjugation, driving key structural features like the staggered conformation of (total stabilization ≈ 3–4 kcal/mol from hyperconjugation) and the in carbohydrates, where lone-pair-to-σ* donation favors axial substituents. It also governs reactivity patterns, such as enhanced stability of secondary over primary carbocations via multiple C–H σ donations and regioselectivity in electrophilic additions to alkenes, where hyperconjugative assistance lowers barriers. Computational tools like (NBO) analysis have quantified these effects, revealing hyperconjugation's contributions to bond weakening (e.g., allylic C–H bonds) and its extension to negative hyperconjugation in hypervalent species with electronegative atoms.

Fundamentals

Definition and Concept

Hyperconjugation is a fundamental concept in involving the delocalization of electrons from filled σ-orbitals, typically those of C-H or C-C bonds, into adjacent unoccupied orbitals such as empty p-orbitals or π* antibonding orbitals. This interaction stabilizes molecules by distributing and often imparts partial double-bond character to the participating σ-bonds, influencing and reactivity. Unlike traditional π-conjugation, hyperconjugation bridges saturated and unsaturated systems through σ-π or σ-p interactions. To understand hyperconjugation, it is essential to recall the basics of σ- and π-bonding. σ-bonds form from the end-on overlap of atomic orbitals along the internuclear axis, creating a symmetric distribution, while π-bonds arise from lateral overlap perpendicular to this axis, resulting in nodal planes. These bonding types provide the orbital framework for hyperconjugation, where the higher-energy filled σ-orbitals donate density to lower-energy acceptor orbitals. Key characteristics of hyperconjugation include its permanent nature, as it occurs continuously in molecules possessing suitably aligned adjacent bonds, without requiring specific excitation or reaction conditions. It is commonly depicted using no-bond structures in , which illustrate the delocalization by showing formal "breaking" of a σ-bond to form a π-bond, though no actual bond cleavage occurs. Effective overlap demands geometric alignment, such as antiperiplanar orientation of the donating σ-bond relative to the acceptor orbital, often involving bonds in the α-position to unsaturated or electron-deficient centers. A simple illustration of hyperconjugation is found in the ethyl cation (CH₃CH₂⁺), where the vacant p-orbital on the positively charged carbon accepts from the σ C-H bonds of the adjacent . This leads to hybrids: the primary structure features the empty p-orbital perpendicular to the C-C bond, while contributing no-bond resonance forms show donation from a C-H σ-orbital, creating partial C=C double-bond character and distributing the positive charge toward the hydrogens. Such delocalization significantly stabilizes the .

Historical Development

The concept of hyperconjugation originated in the late as an extension of theory to explain electron delocalization involving σ bonds adjacent to π systems or empty p orbitals. Although G. N. Lewis's 1916 introduction of the shared bond laid groundwork for ideas of partial bond character, the term "hyperconjugation" was formally coined by Robert S. Mulliken in to describe the interaction of σ from C-H bonds with π in cyclic dienes, based on observed intensities in electronic spectra. Earlier observations, such as the anomalous ordering of alkyl effects in reaction rates (methyl > ethyl > isopropyl > tert-butyl), reported by J. W. and W. S. Nathan in 1935, were retrospectively attributed to hyperconjugative stabilization and became known as the Baker-Nathan effect. During the , hyperconjugation gained traction as an explanation for electron donation by alkyl groups. By 1944, George W. Wheland integrated hyperconjugation into in his seminal book The Theory of Resonance and a companion paper on paraffin hydrocarbons, treating it as a phenomenon akin to "no-bond doubles" that contributes to molecular stability. Mulliken further developed the orbital delocalization model between and 1942, emphasizing its role in UV and conjugation effects. The saw debates over hyperconjugation's relative importance versus inductive effects in alkyl influences, with some chemists questioning its magnitude in saturated systems and favoring or steric arguments. Mulliken's comprehensive 1949 review on conjugation and hyperconjugation helped solidify its , highlighting quantitative estimates from data. Experimental milestones in the included NMR studies revealing spin-density distributions consistent with hyperconjugative delocalization in conjugated ligands. By the 1970s, using methods confirmed hyperconjugative energies, while photoelectron provided direct validation of orbital mixing, countering early dismissals of "no-bond resonance" as artifactual. These advances led to widespread acceptance of hyperconjugation as a in .

Mechanism and Types

Orbital Interactions

Hyperconjugation arises from the delocalization of s through the partial overlap of a filled σ bonding orbital, typically a C-H or C-C bond, with an adjacent empty or low-lying acceptor orbital such as a p orbital on a center or the antibonding π* orbital of a . This interaction requires proper geometric alignment, where the donor σ orbital is oriented parallel to the acceptor orbital to enable (lateral) overlap, maximizing the interaction efficiency. Additionally, effective hyperconjugation demands close matching of the orbital energies between the donor and acceptor to facilitate significant electron delocalization without excessive energetic penalty. In molecular orbital theory, the interaction between the filled σ donor and empty acceptor orbital results in the formation of new delocalized molecular orbitals: a bonding combination that is stabilized by lowering the overall energy of the system and an antibonding counterpart that is raised in energy. The stabilization energy can be quantified using natural bond orbital (NBO) analysis, which decomposes the interaction into second-order perturbation terms. The hyperconjugative stabilization is given by the expression E(2)=qiFji2ϵj−ϵiE^{(2)} = \frac{q_i F_{ji}^2}{\epsilon_j - \epsilon_i} where qiq_i is the occupancy of the donor orbital, FjiF_{ji} is the Fock matrix element between the donor (i) and acceptor (j) orbitals, and ϵj−ϵi\epsilon_j - \epsilon_i is the energy difference between the acceptor and donor orbitals; larger E(2)E^{(2)} values indicate stronger interactions. A representative visualization of this σ-π* overlap occurs in propene (CH₃-CH=CH₂), where the in-plane C-H σ orbitals of the methyl group align with the π* antibonding orbital of the C=C double bond, leading to delocalization that mixes the σ bonding character into the π system and stabilizes the molecule. This can be depicted schematically as the sideways overlap between a filled σ_{C-H} orbital and the empty π* orbital, forming a four-center delocalized system; accompanying energy diagrams show the lowering of the bonding MO energy relative to the isolated orbitals, with the extent of mixing dependent on the overlap integral. The strength of hyperconjugative interactions is modulated by several factors, including bond angle and torsional conformation, where eclipsed or bisected arrangements position the σ donor orbital for optimal parallel overlap with the acceptor, enhancing delocalization compared to staggered geometries. Electronegativity differences also play a role, as evidenced by the isotope effect: C-H bonds exhibit stronger hyperconjugation than C-D bonds due to the slightly higher σ orbital energy and better donor ability of C-H, arising from differences in zero-point vibrational energies that affect orbital overlap and . Furthermore, the vicinal (adjacent) positioning of the donor and acceptor orbitals is essential, as hyperconjugation primarily involves interactions between bonds separated by one intervening atom, limiting its range to neighboring functional groups.

Positive and Negative Hyperconjugation

Hyperconjugation manifests in two primary modes—positive and negative—distinguished by the direction of electron delocalization and the nature of donor-acceptor interactions. Positive hyperconjugation involves the of from a filled σ orbital, typically a C-H or C-C bond, to an adjacent empty acceptor orbital, such as an unfilled p orbital in carbocations or a π* orbital in alkenes. This process stabilizes electron-deficient systems by dispersing positive charge or reducing the energy of the lowest unoccupied (LUMO). A classic example is the isopropyl cation ((CH₃)₂CH⁺), where the empty p orbital on the central carbon accepts density from the six equivalent C-H σ bonds of the methyl groups, leading to structures that depict partial double-bond character in the C-C linkages and hydrogen migration. This delocalization contributes significantly to the relative stability of secondary carbocations over primary ones. In contrast, negative hyperconjugation entails the donation of electron density from a filled π or lone-pair (n) orbital to an adjacent σ* antibonding orbital, often resulting in the weakening or elongation of the donor bond while stabilizing the acceptor. This mode is prominent in anions or molecules with electronegative substituents, where the interaction transfers density away from a high-electron-density region. For instance, in the fluoromethyl anion (F-CH₂⁻), fluorine's lone pairs donate into the σ* orbital of the adjacent C-F bond, enhancing stability without net charge buildup on carbon. Similarly, in difluoromethane (F-CH₂-F), mutual n_F → σ_C-F interactions lead to elongation of the C-F bonds compared to monofluoromethane, as the delocalization populates the antibonding orbital. This effect underlies the anomeric effect in carbohydrates and related systems, where axial electronegative substituents are preferred due to enhanced lone-pair donation to σ orbitals. Positive hyperconjugation predominates in carbocations and radicals, where it disperses positive charge through σ → p or σ → π* interactions, whereas negative hyperconjugation is more relevant in anions and hypervalent molecules, facilitating charge accommodation via n → σ* or π → σ* pathways. Both modes are quantified through delocalization energies derived from (NBO) analysis or block-localized wavefunction (BLW) methods, typically ranging from 5–15 kcal/mol per interaction, though they produce opposing charge effects: positive hyperconjugation increases electron density at the acceptor site, while negative hyperconjugation depletes it from the donor. These energies highlight hyperconjugation's role as a pervasive stabilizing force, comparable in magnitude to traditional conjugation in many cases. Rare variants include homo-hyperconjugation, where σ orbitals interact with adjacent σ* orbitals in saturated alkanes, contributing to conformational preferences like the staggered structure through bidirectional delocalization.

Structural and Energetic Effects

Influence on Bond Lengths and Geometry

Hyperconjugation imparts partial double-bond character to adjacent σ bonds, resulting in shortened bond lengths compared to non-hyperconjugated systems. In propene, the C-C bond between the sp²-hybridized carbon and the measures approximately 1.50 , significantly shorter than the 1.54 C-C bond in , where no such delocalization occurs. This contraction arises from the overlap of the π* orbital of the C=C bond with the σ orbitals of the methyl C-H bonds, effectively increasing the of the C-C linkage. The donating σ C-H bonds in hyperconjugating methyl groups experience slight elongation due to partial depopulation of the σ orbital, weakening the bond. In the α-methyl group of propene, these C-H bonds are marginally longer than those in isolated methyl groups, as evidenced by (NBO) analyses that quantify the donor-acceptor interaction energies. This effect is more pronounced in systems with multiple α-hydrogens, correlating with the degree of delocalization. Hyperconjugation also induces geometric distortions by altering hybridization and torsional preferences. In carbocations, the interaction between adjacent C-H σ orbitals and the empty p orbital promotes pyramidal flattening at the cationic center, approaching planarity to maximize overlap and increase s-character in the affected bonds. Staggered conformations in alkanes and alkenes minimize torsional while optimizing hyperconjugative alignment, as the anti-periplanar orientation of C-H bonds to adjacent π systems or empty orbitals reduces overall molecular energy. Experimental observations confirm these structural changes. Microwave spectroscopy of propene reveals the contracted C-C bond length, while in conjugated hydrocarbons like 1,3-butadiene shows bond alternation patterns attributable to hyperconjugative contributions. detects shifts in C-H frequencies, with hyperconjugating bonds exhibiting lower wavenumbers due to elongation and reduced force constants. NBO calculations further link these geometries to hyperconjugative stabilization energies of 2-5 kcal/mol per interaction in systems.

Role in Molecular Stability

Hyperconjugation contributes to molecular stability by delocalizing from adjacent σ bonds into empty or antibonding orbitals, lowering the overall of the system. The stabilization per hyperconjugative interaction typically ranges from 5 to 15 kcal/mol, depending on the system and the quality of orbital overlap. This effect scales directly with the number of available alpha hydrogens; for instance, in alkyl , a tertiary benefits from approximately nine such hydrogens, providing up to three times the stabilization of a primary carbocation with three alpha hydrogens, as evidenced by affinity measurements and computational analyses. The magnitude of hyperconjugative stabilization exhibits notable trends across conditions. It is generally greater in the gas phase than in solution, where solvent molecules can solvate the charged center and reduce the relative importance of intramolecular delocalization. Temperature influences the effect through conformational dynamics, as rotational averaging at higher temperatures may misalign σ bonds, diminishing optimal hyperconjugation in flexible molecules. In comparison to stabilization, which often exceeds 20 kcal/mol in π-conjugated systems like allyl cations, hyperconjugation offers weaker individual contributions but operates pervasively in non-conjugated hydrocarbons, cumulatively enhancing thermodynamic stability. Isotopic substitution provides direct evidence for hyperconjugation's role in stability. Replacing alpha hydrogens with weakens the σ donation due to the higher vibrational of C-D bonds, resulting in reduced stabilization. This manifests as normal secondary kinetic isotope effects in reactions involving intermediates, such as solvolysis of alkyl tosylates, where rate ratios k_H/k_D exceed 1 (often 1.05-1.15 per ), reflecting greater reactivity for protio compounds. Computational studies using (DFT) methods, such as B3LYP with basis sets like 6-31G* or 6-311G(d), alongside approaches, confirm hyperconjugation as the primary driver of stability in these systems. These calculations decompose energies to show that hyperconjugative delocalization accounts for 70-80% of the total stabilization in simple alkyl s, with the remainder attributable to inductive effects from alkyl substituents. (NBO) analyses in such computations quantify individual σ → p* interactions at 10-20 kcal/mol each in carbocation systems, underscoring their dominance over polar contributions.

Specific Applications

In Carbocations and Radicals

Hyperconjugation plays a crucial role in stabilizing by delocalizing the positive charge through interactions between the empty p-orbital and adjacent C-H σ-bonds. The stability increases with the degree of alkyl substitution, following the order tertiary > secondary > primary, as more alpha hydrogens are available for hyperconjugative donation. For instance, the ethyl carbocation (CH₃CH₂⁺) has three alpha hydrogens, the isopropyl carbocation ((CH₃)₂CH⁺) has six, and the tert-butyl carbocation ((CH₃)₃C⁺) has nine equivalent alpha hydrogens, each contributing to structures that distribute the charge over the molecule. In the tert-butyl cation, these nine hyperconjugative structures form a hybrid, significantly lowering the energy compared to less substituted analogs. Computational studies quantify this stabilization, showing that the ethyl carbocation benefits from approximately 9 kcal/mol of hyperconjugative stabilization due to the three C-H bonds. This effect scales with substitution, making tertiary carbocations the most stable. The enhanced stability directly influences reactivity, as evidenced by SN1 solvolysis rates, where tertiary alkyl halides react orders of magnitude faster than secondary (relative rate ~30:1) and primary (~1000:1) counterparts, reflecting the lower for carbocation formation. In free radicals, hyperconjugation similarly stabilizes the species by delocalizing the into adjacent σ C-H bonds, though the effect is weaker than in carbocations due to the half-filled interacting less strongly with the filled σ-orbitals. The tert-butyl radical ((CH₃)₃C•), for example, benefits from nine alpha C-H bonds, following the same substitution trend as carbocations but with reduced overall stabilization energy. Electron spin resonance (ESR) confirms this delocalization, revealing large hyperfine splitting constants (typically 20-25 G) from alpha hydrogens in alkyl radicals like ethyl and isopropyl, indicating significant spin density transfer via hyperconjugation.

In Alkenes and Conjugated Systems

Hyperconjugation plays a key role in stabilizing alkenes by allowing delocalization of from adjacent σ bonds, primarily C-H or C-C, into the antibonding π* orbital of the C=C . This σ → π* donation increases with the degree of substitution at the carbons, as more alkyl groups provide additional donor σ bonds. Consequently, tetrasubstituted alkenes exhibit greater stability than monosubstituted ones, with each additional alkyl enhancing the number of hyperconjugative interactions by up to six for a tetrasubstituted case compared to zero in ethene. This trend is quantitatively supported by heats of hydrogenation, which measure the energy released upon addition of H₂ across the double bond and inversely reflect alkene stability. For instance, the heat of hydrogenation of ethene is -32.8 kcal/mol, while that of trans-2-butene (a 1,2-disubstituted ) is -27.6 kcal/mol, demonstrating the ~5.2 kcal/mol stabilization from two methyl groups via hyperconjugation. Similarly, trisubstituted and tetrasubstituted alkenes show progressively lower (less exothermic) values, confirming the cumulative effect of multiple σ → π* interactions. In conjugated systems like dienes and polyenes, hyperconjugation complements π-π conjugation by extending electron delocalization through σ bonds adjacent to the unsaturated framework. In 1,3-butadiene, hyperconjugative interactions contribute to the overall stabilization energy of approximately 3.5 kcal/mol, as evidenced by its heat of of -57.1 kcal/mol compared to -60.6 kcal/mol expected for two isolated double bonds. The s-cis conformer benefits particularly from vicinal σ → π* donations that reinforce the conjugated array, leading to bond length alternation where the central C2-C3 bond shortens to ~1.48 due to partial double-bond character. Analogous effects occur in 1,3-butadiyne, where hyperconjugation contributes to delocalization across the cumulated triple bonds. Vicinal hyperconjugation is especially relevant in allenes and cumulenes, where the orthogonal π bonds of the cumulated double bonds interact with adjacent σ orbitals to favor linear geometries. In (H₂C=C=CH₂), hyperconjugative interactions help maintain the structure's rigidity. This effect extends to longer cumulenes like 1,2,3-butatriene, where hyperconjugation reinforces the cumulative linear chain, contributing to their characteristic rigidity and planarity in unsubstituted cases. Evidence for these hyperconjugative effects in alkenes comes from both spectroscopic and computational methods. UV spectroscopy reveals bathochromic shifts in absorption maxima (λ_max) for more substituted alkenes; for example, propene absorbs at ~188 nm compared to ethene's ~175 nm, reflecting a reduced -LUMO gap due to σ → π* donation raising the π energy. (NBO) analyses of propene confirm three primary C-H σ → π* interactions that weaken the adjacent C-H bonds and strengthen the C=C bond by delocalizing into the π* acceptor. These findings underscore hyperconjugation's role in modulating electronic properties without altering the basic π framework.

Rotational Barriers in Alkanes

In , the torsional barrier to rotation about the C–C bond is approximately 2.9 kcal/mol, as determined by of isotopic variants, with the staggered conformation preferred over the eclipsed one. This energetic preference arises primarily from hyperconjugative stabilization through six antiperiplanar σ C–H / σ* C–H interactions in the staggered conformer, compared to zero such interactions in the eclipsed form. A longstanding debate regarding whether steric repulsion or hyperconjugation dominates the barrier was addressed through computational analysis, which demonstrated that disabling hyperconjugative interactions reverses the conformational preference, favoring hyperconjugation as the key factor over Pauli repulsion. This hyperconjugative mechanism extends to larger alkanes, where rotational barriers exhibit similar σ-donation influences. In , the torsional barrier is about 3.4 kcal/mol, reflecting contributions from both methyl-hydrogen and methyl-methyl interactions modulated by hyperconjugation. For n-butane, the barrier between the anti and eclipsed conformations is approximately 3.8 kcal/mol, with hyperconjugative effects accounting for roughly one-third of the total, as shown by energy decomposition in calculations that isolate delocalization from steric components. Experimental evidence for the role of hyperconjugation in these barriers comes from , which provides precise barrier heights for and its isotopologues. Computational studies at the MP2 level further confirm that hyperconjugative stabilization outweighs Pauli repulsion in determining staggered preferences across alkanes. Isotopic substitution supports this view: the rotational barrier in CH₃CD₃ (2.87 kcal/mol) is lower than in CH₃CH₃ (2.90 kcal/mol), attributable to the reduced hyperconjugative donor ability of C–D bonds compared to C–H bonds.

References

  1. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ed1011986
  2. https://www.eoquimica.com/file/68/hyperconjugation_review.pdf
  3. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article/7/5/339/214849/Intensities-of-Electronic-Transitions-in-Molecular
  4. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/JOHN-WILLIAM-BAKER-AND-THE-ORIGIN-OF-THE-EFFECT-Baker-Saltzman/b527fa8e0b9ba4cc3535d8bd31a45fe305539532
  5. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article/12/2/69/183872/Hyperconjugation-in-Paraffin-Hydrocarbons
  6. https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/mulliken-lecture.pdf
  7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0040402059801071
  8. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/9977/chapter/10
  9. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article-pdf/37/2/347/18826570/347_1_online.pdf
  10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022328X00850020
  11. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ja01846a008
  12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2210271X12004069
  13. https://macmillan.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/RRK-KIE.pdf
  14. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/cs/d1cs00564b
  15. https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcms.1389
  16. https://www.sarthaks.com/1995113/the-bond-length-propene-little-shorter-149-pm-than-the-bond-length-154-pm-in-ethane-this-due
  17. https://cccbdb.nist.gov/exp2x.asp?casno=115071&charge=0
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0040402059800375
  19. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166128004006268
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3982569/
  21. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article-pdf/105/3/1046/19107265/1046_1_online.pdf
  22. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022285216301205
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301010408005119
  24. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/om0600137
  25. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2017/cp/c6cp06839a
  26. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/chemistry/articles/10.3389/fchem.2013.00037/full
  27. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Organic_Chemistry/Organic_Chemistry_(Morsch_et_al.)/11:_Reactions_of_Alkyl_Halides-_Nucleophilic_Substitutions_and_Eliminations/11.05:_Characteristics_of_the_SN1_Reaction
  28. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jp051838h
  29. https://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/~gablek/CH335/Chapter11/bare_ene_stability.htm
  30. https://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/~gablek/CH335/Chapter14/bare_butadiene_MOs.htm
  31. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscentsci.8b00086
  32. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article/71/3/1183/459101/Barrier-to-internal-rotation-in-ethane-from-the
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166128002000581
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.