
20.4 Cycloaddition Reactions 1047
overlaps. In contrast to the thermal reaction, the photochemical dimerization of two
ethylenes is allowed.For example, the photochemical dimerization of trans-2-butene
gives the two cyclobutanes shown in Figure 20.26b.
Again, it’s time for generalization. The first two rows of Table 20.2 show what
we have so far.
TABLE 20.2 Rules for Cycloaddition Reactions
Number of
Reaction Electrons Thermal Photochemical
Alkene alkene cyclobutane 4 (4n)No Yes
Alkene diene cyclohexene 6 (4n 2) Yes No
(Diels–Alder)
All 4n reactions 4n No Yes
All 4n 2 reactions 4n 2Yes No
Z
U
Z
U
Table 20.2 summarizes all 4n and 4n 2 reactions. Other 4n processes will fol-
low the rules for the 2 2 dimerization of a pair of alkenes, and 4n 2 processes
will resemble the 4 2 cycloaddition we know as the Diels–Alder reaction. Perhaps
you can see the relationship to aromaticity (4n 2) that plays a role in this analysis.
The transition state for these cycloaddition reactions is cyclic and will be allowed only
in the cases where the number of electrons makes the transition state aromatic,
4n 2 electrons for thermal processes and 4n for photochemical reactions.
Now compare Table 20.1 and Table 20.2. This comparison should be a bit dis-
quieting to you. Notice how much more information is available for electrocyclic
reactions than for cycloadditions.For the electrocyclic reactions,we have a clear stereo-
chemical prediction of how things must happen. For example, the 4n processes
undergo conrotatory thermal ring-closing reactions and disrotatory photochemical
ring-closing reactions. On the other hand, for cycloadditions, all we get is a crude
“thermal no,” “photochemical yes” message; a much less detailed picture.
Electrocyclic reactions are not really different from cycloadditions.Figure 20.27 com-
pares the equilibration of 1,3-butadiene and cyclobutene with the 2 2 dimerization
of a pair of ethylenes.The only difference is the extra σ bond in butadiene,and this bond
is surely not one of the important ones in the reaction—it seems to be just going along
for the ride. Why should its presence or absence change the level of detail available to
us through an orbital symmetry analysis? It shouldn’t, and in fact, it doesn’t.
Look again at Figure 20.24, from which we derived the information that the ther-
mal 2 2 dimerization of a pair of ethylenes was forbidden. It’s only forbidden if
we insist on smushing the two ethylenes together head to head exactly as shown in
the figure. If we are more flexible, and allow one ethylene to rotate about its
carbon–carbon σ bond as the reaction takes place, the offending antibonding over-
lap vanishes. What orbital symmetry really says is that for the concerted thermal
dimerization of two alkenes to take place, there must be this rotation (Fig. 20.28).
π*
π
(HOMO)
(LUMO)
Bonding
“2 + 2” Product
a cyclobutane
Bonding
rotate
=
continue to rotate
Also bonding!
90⬚
FIGURE 20.28 The thermal 2 2 dimerization is allowed if one end of one ethylene can rotate as the reaction occurs.
σ Bond
(single bond)
σ Bond of
double bond
FIGURE 20.27 The equilibration
of cyclobutene and 1,3-butadiene
and the 2 2 dimerization of a pair
of ethylenes are very closely related
reactions.