RAS PresidiumДоклады Российской академии наук. Химия, науки о материалах Doklady Chemistry

  • ISSN (Print) 2686-9535
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-5111

INFLUENCE OF INTRAMOLECULAR DONOR-ACCEPTOR INTERACTIONS ON RADIOLYSIS OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS: EFFECTS IN ACETYLACETONE

PII
10.31857/S2686953523600174-1
DOI
10.31857/S2686953523600174
Publication type
Status
Published
Authors
Volume/ Edition
Volume 510 / Issue number 1
Pages
69-73
Abstract
Using acetylacetone as an example, it was shown that the intramolecular hydrogen bond significantly affects the radiolytic transformations of organic compounds, suppressing the transfer of a proton from the primary radical cation to the molecule, and also contributing to the cleavage of the C–OH bond in the enol form. Due to these effects, the main heavy product of radiolysis at 295 K is 4-oxopent-2-en-2-yl acetate. Under boiling conditions (413 K), hydrogen bonds are eliminated, leading to the predominant formation of 4-hydroxy-2-pentanone, which is not detected at 295 K.
Keywords
ацетилацетон таутомеры водородная связь радиолиз перенос протона рекомбинация радикалов
Date of publication
18.09.2025
Year of publication
2025
Number of purchasers
0
Views
5

References

  1. 1. Belova N.V., Oberhammer H., Trang N.H., Girichev G. V. // J. Org. Chem. 2014. V. 79. P. 5412–5419. https://doi.org/10.1021/jo402814c
  2. 2. Antonov I., Voronova K., Chen M.-W., Sztáray B., Hemberger P., Bodi A., Osborn D.L., Sheps L. // J. Phys. Chem. A. 2019. V. 123. P. 5472–5490. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.9b04640
  3. 3. Imatdinova D.N., Vlasov S.I., Ponomarev A.V. // Mendeleev Commun. 2021. V 31. P. 558–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mencom.2021.07.041
  4. 4. Howard D.L., Kjaergaard H.G., Huang J., Meuwly M. // J. Phys. Chem. A. 2015. V. 119. P. 7980–7990. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.5b01863
  5. 5. Curran H.J. // Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 2006. V. 38. P. 250–275. https://doi.org/10.1002/kin.20153
  6. 6. Ponomarev A.V., Kholodkova E.M. // Mendeleev Commun. 2018. V. 28. P. 375–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mencom.2018.07.011
  7. 7. Wang H., Bozzelli J.W. // ChemPhysChem. 2016. V. 17. P. 1983–1992. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201600152
  8. 8. Yoon M.-C., Choi Y.S., Kim S.K. // J. Chem. Phys. 1999. V. 110. P. 11850–11855. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.479126
  9. 9. Messaadia L., El Dib G., Ferhati A., Chakir A. // Chem. Phys. Lett. 2015. V. 626. P. 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2015.02.032
  10. 10. Ji Y., Qin D., Zheng J., Shi Q., Wang J., Lin Q., Chen J., Gao Y., Li G., An T. // Sci. Total Environ. 2020. 720. 137610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137610
  11. 11. Ponomarev A.V., Ershov B.G. // Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020. V. 54. P. 5331–5344. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c00545
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library