TABLE 3.
Properties of metal complexes with different steric hindrance effect.
| Complex | Substituent | E1/2 (V) | WS conditions | TON | TOF (s−1) | FE (%) | ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | H | — | 3.7 M H2O2, pH 3.9 | 830 | 86 | 74–81 | Lee et al. (2014) |
| Me | — | 3.7 M H2O2, pH 3.9 | 58,000 | 27 | 74–81 | ||
| tBu | — | 3.7 M H2O2, pH 3.9 | — | — | 74–81 | ||
| 25a | Me | — | 0.125 M CAN | 145 | 0.14 | — | Fillol et al. (2011) |
| iPr | — | 0.150 M CAN | 14 | 0.18 | — | Panchbhai et al. (2016) | |
| 25b | — | — | 0.125 M CAN | 63 | 0.0464 | — | Fillol et al. (2011) |
| 26a | H | — | 0.2 M CAN | 400 | 0.002 | — | Kaveevivitchai et al. (2012) |
| 26b | Me | — | 0.2 M CAN | 155 | 0.008 | — | |
| 26c | 2 d Me | — | 0.2 M CAN | — | — | — | |
| 27a | — | — | 0.2 M CAN | 9 | 50 | — | Kaveevivitchai et al. (2012) |
| 27b | — | — | 0.2 M CAN | 66 | 10 | — | |
| 27c | — | — | 0.2 M CAN | — | — | — | |
| 28 | Me | — | [(DMF)H]OTf | 10 | 6,700 | 94 | (Kilgore et al., 2011b; Wiese et al., 2012) |
| Benzyl | −0.83, −1.12 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | — | 130 | — | ||
| n-Bu | −0.93, −1.23 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | — | 1,820 | — | ||
| 2-phenylethyl | −0.90, −1.16 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | 9 | 1,080 | 95 | ||
| 2,4,4-trimethylpentyl | −0.89, −1.17 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | — | 69 | — | ||
| cyclohexyl | −0.60, −1.12 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | — | 69 | — | ||
| phenyl | −0.84, −1.02 c | [(DMF)H]OTf | — | 720 | — | ||
| 12 | H | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 723 | 0.2 | 58 | Corbucci et al. (2019) | |
| Me | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 1,010 | 0.2 | 81 | |||
| Et | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 905 | 1.1 | 71 | |||
| nPr | — | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 863 | 1.5 | 70 | ||
| iPr | — | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 1,017 | 1.05 | 80 | ||
| Bu | — | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 875 | 1.37 | 70 | ||
| Oct | — | 5 mM CAN, 0.1M HNO3, H2O | 945 | 1.5 | 76 | ||
| 14 | F | 1.38 a | 1.5 mM CAN | 9,822 | 790 | 90 | Xie et al. (2018) |
| Cl | 1.28 a | 1.5 mM CAN | 26,992 | 364 | 98 | ||
| Br | 1.28 a | 1.5 mM CAN | 7,371 | 88 | 67 | ||
| 29a | H | 0.80 a | 0.2 M CAN | 390 | 20 | — | Kaveevivitchai et al. (2012) |
| t-butyl | 0.71 a | 0.2 M CAN | 667 | 63 | — | ||
| 29b | t-butyl | 0.80 a | 0.2 M CAN | 218 | 33 | — | |
| 29c | t-butyl | 0.66 a | 0.2 M CAN | 94 | 3 | — | |
| 30 | H | 0.76 a | 0.2 M CAN | 1,170 | 13 | — | Kaveevivitchai et al. (2012) |
| t-butyl | 0.65 a | 0.2 M CAN | 274 | 20 | — | ||
| 31 | H | 0.75 a | 0.2 M CAN | 370 | 50 | — | Kaveevivitchai et al. (2012) |
| t-butyl | 0.68 a | 0.2 M CAN | 310 | 40 | — | ||
| 32 | R = R' = H | 0.77, 1.40 b | CPE d | 3.6 | — | 94 | (Wang et al., 2017; Hessels et al., 2020) |
| R = H, R' = Me | 0.87, 1.40 b | CPE d | 13.0 | — | 97 | ||
| R = R' = Me | 1.15, 1.38 b | CPE d | 15.2 | — | 93 |
Potential versus SCE.
Potential versus NHE.
Potential versus ferrocene.
CPE: controlled potential electrolysis.