Letter | Published:

Hydrogen bonding in the benzene–ammonia dimer

Nature volume 362, pages 735737 (22 April 1993) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

AMINES have long been characterized as amphoteric (acting as both donor and acceptor) in terms of their hydrogen-bond interactions in the condensed phase. With the possible exception of (NH3)2, however, no gas-phase complexes exhibiting hydrogen-bond donation by ammonia, the ‘simplest amine’, have been observed1,2. Here we present high-resolution optical and microwave spectra of the benzene–ammonia dimer in the gas phase, which show that the ammonia molecule resides above the benzene plane and undergoes free or nearly free internal rotation. In the vibrationally averaged structure, the C3 symmetry axis of NH3 is tilted by about 58° relative to the benzene C6 axis, such that the ammonia protons interact with the benzene π-cloud. Our ab initio calcula-tions predict a ‘monodentate’ minimum-energy structure, with very low barriers to rotation of ammonia. The larger separation of the two molecular components, and the smaller dissociation energy, relative to the benzene–water dimer3 reflect the weak hydrogen-bond donor capability of ammonia, but the observed geometry greatly resembles the amino–aromatic interaction found naturally in proteins4.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , & Science 238, 1670–1674 (1987).

  2. 2.

    et al. J. chem. Phys. 97, 4727–4749 (1992).

  3. 3.

    et al. Science 257, 942–945 (1992).

  4. 4.

    & FEBS Lett. 203, 139–143 (1986).

  5. 5.

    & The Hydrogen Bond, 202–203 (Freeman, San Francisco, 1960).

  6. 6.

    & Science 250, 1558–1560 (1990).

  7. 7.

    et al. Nature 358, 646–653 (1992).

  8. 8.

    in The Chemical Bond (ed. Zewail, A.) 17–30 (Academic, New York, 1992).

  9. 9.

    , & J. chem. Phys. 85, 1795–1805 (1986).

  10. 10.

    & J. chem. Phys. 96, 3388–3401 (1992).

  11. 11.

    , & , J. chem. Phys. 78, 3501–3508.

  12. 12.

    , & J. phys. Chem. 87, 2079–2084 (1983).

  13. 13.

    & J. phys. Chem. 96, 1024–1040 (1992).

  14. 14.

    et al. Gaussian 92 (Gaussian, Pittsburgh, PA, 1992).

  15. 15.

    , , & J. Am. chem. Soc. 110, 4195–4198 (1988).

  16. 16.

    & J. chem. Phys. 90, 7291–7299 (1989).

  17. 17.

    & Chem. Phys. Lett. 161, 308–314 (1989).

  18. 18.

    et al. J. molec. Spectrosc. 137, 127–137 (1989).

  19. 19.

    , , , & J. chem. Phys. 84, 5983–5988 (1986).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, 127–72, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA

    • David A. Rodham
    •  & Sakae Suzuki
  2. Molecular Physics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, USA

    • Richard D. Suenram
    •  & Frank J. Lovas
  3. Materials and Molecular Simulation Center, Beckman Institute, 139–74, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA

    • Siddharth Dasgupta
    •  & William A. Goddard III
  4. Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, 170–25, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA

    • Geoffrey A. Blake

Authors

  1. Search for David A. Rodham in:

  2. Search for Sakae Suzuki in:

  3. Search for Richard D. Suenram in:

  4. Search for Frank J. Lovas in:

  5. Search for Siddharth Dasgupta in:

  6. Search for William A. Goddard in:

  7. Search for Geoffrey A. Blake in:

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/362735a0

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.