Identifying the mistake in this reaction scheme to form 2-hydroxyisobutyramide

  • Context: Chemistry 
  • Thread starter Thread starter etotheipi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Mistake Reaction
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around identifying potential mistakes in a reaction scheme intended to synthesize 2-hydroxyisobutyramide. Participants explore the validity of each step in the reaction sequence, considering both the chemical mechanisms involved and the conditions required for successful reactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines a series of reaction steps, suggesting that each step appears valid based on their understanding of nucleophilic addition, hydrolysis, substitution, and addition-elimination reactions.
  • Another participant advises checking reagents for potential unwanted side reactions, indicating a concern about the specificity of the reactions involved.
  • Concerns are raised about PCl5 potentially reacting with the hydroxyl group on the second carbon, which could lead to side reactions.
  • There is speculation that cyanide ions from the first step could react with the acyl chloride, possibly forming acetyl cyanide, although this is presented with uncertainty.
  • Participants emphasize the importance of sequential reaction conditions, noting that there should be no cyanide present by the time the PCl5 step is reached.
  • Discussion includes the notion that there is usually an implied workup between reaction steps, which could affect the outcome if not properly accounted for.
  • A participant highlights that hydrolysis of the cyanohydrin typically requires dilute aqueous acid rather than concentrated sulfuric acid, suggesting that improper conditions could lead to hydrolysis of PCl5 before product formation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the potential issues in the reaction scheme, with no consensus reached on the exact nature of the mistakes or the validity of the proposed steps.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reveals limitations in the provided reaction details, including assumptions about the removal of unreacted species and the specific conditions required for each step. The lack of clarity in the reaction scheme contributes to uncertainty about the intended methodology.

etotheipi
Homework Statement
Determine why this sequence of steps doesn't give the product as desired!
Relevant Equations
N/A
The steps are as follows (apologies for my awful formatting, I'm not sure which Chemistry latex package there is!), $$(CH_3)_2CO \xrightarrow{HCN} (CH_3)_2C(OH)CN \xrightarrow{H_2SO_4} (CH_3)_2C(OH)COOH \xrightarrow{PCl_5} (CH_3)_2C(OH)COCl \xrightarrow{NH_3} (CH_3)_2C(OH)CONH_2$$ As far as I can tell, all of the steps seem valid. That is,
  1. Nucleophilic addition of ##CN^-##, with a ##H^+## ion also joining to the ##O^-## to form the alcohol group
  2. Hydrolysis of the ##CN## group to a ##COOH## group
  3. ##Cl## substitutes for ##OH## to produce an acyl chloride, as well as ##POCl_3## and ##HCl##
  4. Addition-elimination reaction of the acyl chloride to produce an amide
I thought it might perhaps due conditions in the first steps. The pH of the first step I think has to be around 8 so that there are sufficient ##CN^-## as well as ##HCN## molecules in solution. Though I can't think of a reason as to why that would cause a problem in the above scheme.

Any hints would be appreciated! Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Look at your reagents and see if any might generate unwanted side reactions. I don’t know if I can give you a much better hint than that without giving too much away.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
TeethWhitener said:
Look at your reagents and see if any might generate unwanted side reactions. I don’t know if I can give you a much better hint than that without giving too much away.

Ah okay, I can think of maybe two things which might cause a problem. Firstly, the ##PCl_5## might also react with the hydroxyl group on the second carbon. And secondly, the cyanide ions from the first step could (I'm not sure) also undergo an addition elimination reaction with the acyl chloride to produce an acetyl cyanide.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chemisttree and TeethWhitener
The lack of detail in the reaction schemes means we kind of have to guess at the intention of the question-askers, but yes, my first thought was that PCl5 will undergo a side reaction with the hydroxyl.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chemisttree and etotheipi
etotheipi said:
And secondly, the cyanide ions from the first step could (I'm not sure) also undergo an addition elimination reaction with the acyl chloride to produce an acetyl cyanide.
Also, it’s important to point out that these reactions are going to be carried out sequentially, not all at once. One pot reactions are usually written using one arrow with numbered steps (sometimes no numbers if it’s truly all at once). Sequential reactions are written such that each reaction has its own arrow. What this means for your case is that there shouldn’t be any cyanide by the time you get to the PCl5 step.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
TeethWhitener said:
Also, it’s important to point out that these reactions are going to be carried out sequentially, not all at once. One pot reactions are usually written using one arrow with numbered steps. Sequential reactions are written such that each reaction has its own arrow. What this means for your case is that there shouldn’t be any cyanide by the time you get to the PCl5 step.

Right, so we essentially assume that the species written above the arrow in a sequential reaction is limiting. Or that we have some means of removing the unreacted reactants before the next step.

Also, I didn't know "one-pot" was an actual chemical term! It sounds a bit like something that would be written in a textbook for a potions class in Hogwarts...
 
etotheipi said:
Right, so we essentially assume that the species written above the arrow in a sequential reaction is limiting. Or that we have some means of removing the unreacted reactants before the next step.
Usually (but not always), there’s an implied workup between arrows. So for instance, if you were carrying out this reaction in practice, you’d isolate the carboxylic acid at the end of the second step before proceeding with the chlorination.

This is where a lack of detail can be frustrating or misleading. The hydrolysis of the cyanohydrin in step two is generally carried out using dilute aqueous acid (not concentrated H2SO4), and if you were to try to follow this step without workup, there’d be a ton of leftover water in your system and you’d hydrolyze all the PCl5 before you got any product whatsoever.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K