Main content
Organic chemistry
Course: Organic chemistry > Unit 5
Lesson 3: Elimination reactionsZaitsev's rule
Zaitsev's Rule for E2 and E1 reactions. Created by Sal Khan.
Want to join the conversation?
- Markovnikov - the rich get richer
Zaitsev - the poor get poorer(505 votes)- I always remember this sentence, which is actually very true if you take a look at the hydrogens. :) very good, thank you!(8 votes)
- I noticed that in this E2 reaction you took the hydrogen off the beta carbon. This is not what i was questioning. My real question is concerning the sterochemistry of the reaction. In the E2 reaction above shouldn't the hydrogen that is preferentially selected be the one that is anti coplanar (180 degrees) to the the leaving group?? I thought this allows for easier departing of the leaving group and easier orbital overlap between the base and proton that is removed.(13 votes)
- I think this is true as well. Probably wasn't the point of this video, it was pretty general.(2 votes)
- What happens when there are two -CH2 groups? Which one gets preference to lose a hydrogen according to the saytzeff's rule?(8 votes)
- what is hyperconjugation?(6 votes)
- Conjugation is formed by the overlap of adjacent p orbitals.
Hyperconjugation is the overlap of a p orbital with an adjacent sp³ orbital, usually a C-H bond.
The overlap is poor, because the sp³ orbital is pointing away from the p orbital, but it is still there.(9 votes)
- When the alkene is formed, is there a way of telling whether it will be an E or Z alkene? I've been told that E1 reacitons generally favour an E alkene, but what about E2 reactions?(6 votes)
- Whether an E alkene or a Z alkene product is favored depends on how large the base is in the E2 reaction. Large bases (LDA, tert-butoxide) favor the least substituted product (Z) because there is too much steric hindrance to form the more thermodynamically favored E product. Smaller bases (-OH, -OCH3) will favor the E product.(1 vote)
- It's not really mentioned in this video, but in my textbook it says that the product of an E1 reaction cannot really be controlled in terms of regioselectivity. You can't use a sterically hindered base to produce the Hoffman product, but with E2 you can. Can anyone explain this difference?(5 votes)
- The product of an E1 reaction cannot be controlled in terms of regioselectivity because the first step of the mechanism that occurs is the leaving group leaving by itself and leaving a carbocation. There is no way to control this since it is an independent event and the rate determining step.
For an E2 reaction, a sterically hindered base will produce the Hoffman product (least substituted) because the base will abstract the most accessible proton (H). Ideally, the most thermodynamically favored product would form, but because the base is sterically hindered, it is unable to abstract the proton that would form this product. A smaller base will be able to abstract the proton that forms the most thermodynamically favored product.(3 votes)
- Does a E1 and E2 reaction always result in a double bond being formed?(4 votes)
- Yes, an elimination reaction involves the loss of a leaving group and an H on an adjacent atom.(4 votes)
- AtSal mentions R'? Derivatives? o_O 10:45(1 vote)
- As you know,we designate alkyl groups by the symbol R. If there are different alkyl groups, we distinguish (differentiate?) among them by using primes as superscripts. Thus, R, R' and R'' refer to three different alkyl groups. The primes have an infinitesimally small relationship to calculus. Warning: Don't drink and derive.(8 votes)
- What happens if the beta carbons are all equally substituted?(2 votes)
- If both β carbons are equally substituted, you will get an approximatelymixture of both possible products. 50:50(4 votes)
- Second, due to statistical factor, it has more chances to remove the hydrogen attached to the carbon with more hydrogens.Third,after the first elimination in order to make the former product, the product at first stage would be CH3CH2CH=CBrCH3 / CH3CH2CBr=CHCH3 but it's difficult to remove the bromine atom as it has a partial double bond character. Are these three factors still weaker than the Zaitsev's rule (Hyper conjugation) ?(3 votes)
Video transcript
In the video on E2 reactions,
I showed you how a strong base-- and all of this happened
simultaneously-- a strong base can nab a hydrogen
off of this carbon right here. And it's just nabbing
the proton itself. It's not grabbing the hydrogen
and the electron. And then that electron goes to
this carbon right over there, and then that allows that
carbon to give away the electron that was forming a bond
with the chlorine to go with the chlorine. This all happened at once. The chloride got eliminated. Now, one thing that might pop
out in your brain is why did I pick this hydrogen? Why did I pick the hydrogen
right over here? Why couldn't I have picked
that hydrogen over there? And I'm going to introduce you
to a little bit of terminology and then I'll introduce
you to a rule. And then I'll tell you a little
bit about why people think this rule works. So in general, the carbon that
has the functional group on it, that's the alpha carbon. So let me label it. This carbon right here
is the alpha carbon. And in order to have an E2
reaction in this case, when we did the video on E2 reactions,
but actually, the rule will hold as well for E1 reactions. But in order to have the E2
reaction, the hydrogen has to get swiped off of
a beta carbon. And a beta carbon is just a
carbon that's one away from the alpha carbon. So this is a beta carbon and
this is also a beta carbon. And so it's completely
reasonable one would think that, well, I could swipe it
from there or I could swipe it from there. And let's think about
this reaction. Let's just draw it out, so
you can visualize it a little bit better. So here we swiped it from
this beta carbon. Let me redraw the reaction where
we're swiping it from the other beta carbons. I want both reactions on the
screen at the same time. Let me draw our methoxide. So we have our oxygen bonded
to a CH3 to a methyl group. The oxygen has seven valence
electrons: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. I'll do the seventh one. The one that will bond
with the hydrogen, I'll do it in green. Instead of attacking that
hydrogen or taking that proton, I should say, because
it's not taking the electron with it, it does
it to this one. So what it does is it takes this
proton or it bonds with that hydrogen proton, and then
the hydrogen protons or that hydrogen's electron can then be
taken by this molecule, so then it goes to the alpha carbon
to form a double bond between this beta carbon
and the alpha carbon. And so now, this alpha carbon
got that electron. It doesn't need the electron
that's bonded with the chloro group anymore, and so
that goes to the chlorine to form chloride. Chlorine was already way
more electronegative. It was already hogging it. Now it gets to go there. And now, when all is
said and done, our products look like this. So we still have the methanol
just like we had in the original reaction because this
grabbed this hydrogen. Let me draw it. So you have your OCH3. Let me draw all of this in. You have that pair
right over there. You have this pair
right over here. And then you have this purple
electron and now it's bonded with this green electron, which
is now on the hydrogen. So it is now bonded with this
green electron that has been given to the hydrogen. Oh, and make sure
we don't forget. This oxygen over here had seven
valence electrons, so it had a negative charge. Neutral oxygen would have six. So this had a negative charge. But now that it gave its
electron to this hydrogen, it now has a neutral charge. It is now methanol. Exactly what we saw
when we first learned about E1 reactions. We also know the chloro group,
it took that electron. It's now a chloride anion. So let me draw that. And that's exactly the
same as in the first video on E1 reactions. So it's now a chloride anion. It has grabbed this
orange electron. Let me do it in orange. It has grabbed this orange
electron, so it now has a negative charge. You can imagine that the
negative charge has been transferred from the methoxide
to the chloride anion. And now what's different this
time is that the double bond is now between the one and the
two carbon and not between the two and the three carbon. So now it's going to
look like this. So now, the result of this
product, if the reaction went this way would look like this. We have this carbon
right here. It is bonded to two hydrogens. Now, it has a double bond
with this carbon. It has a double bond, and
I'll do the second bond. I'll do the pi bond of the
double bond in purple right over there. I'll assume that that's
the pi bond. That's the new double
bond form. And now this carbon, which
was the alpha carbon, is right over here. This was the alpha carbon. It's bonded to one hydrogen. And then let me draw
everything else. So then you have a
carbon, a carbon. This guy is bonded to
three hydrogens. I could have just written
it as CH3 if I wanted. This guy's bonded to
two hydrogens. And we're done. So instead of, as we saw on
the first video on E2 reactions, instead of forming
but-2-ene, we now have-- it's still one, two, three four
carbons, so it's still but-, but the double bond is
on the one carbon. We'd start one, two, three,
four, So we could call this but-1-ene or 1-butene,
either way. So let's call this but-1-ene. So the question is, which is
more likely to happen? Do both happen? Does one happen
disproportionately? And the answer is, is that,
yes, one happens disproportionately. This one, this is the
dominant product. If you were to perform this
reaction and you were to analyze in your beaker or
wherever you're performing the reaction what you see most of,
the majority product, the great majority, is
going to be the but-2-ene, not the but-1-ene. Maybe you see very, very
little of this. And the question is why? Or how would you even be
able to determine that? Or how could you have
predicted that? And to predict it,
there's something called Zaitsev's rule. And I'm sure I mispronouncing
it, but let me write it down. So Zaitsev's rule. And it's kind of analogous to
Markovnikov's rule, but for elimination reactions. If you think about it, the
addition reactions that we did many videos ago are
the opposite of the elimination reactions. In the addition reactions, we're
adding the chloro group, and in the elimination,
we're taking it off. And so Zaitsev's rule is
kind of analogous to Markovnikov's rule. Now first, I'll just tell you
the rule, then we can think a little bit about why it works. The jury's not out on this. They think they know
why it works, but they're not 100% sure. So Zaitsev's rules says the
carbon that is going to lose the hydrogen is the one that
has fewer hydrogens. So let me write it
down over here. Carbon more likely to lose
hydrogen is-- I should say the hydrogen proton because it keeps
the electron still-- is the one with fewer hydrogens. So if you were to look at this
reaction right here, we have our alpha carbon. Either this beta carbon or this
beta carbon could lose its hydrogen. This one has three
hydrogens on it. This one only has two. So Zaitsev's rule tells us that
this is the hydrogen, or actually the proton, that
is more likely to be reacted with the base. You could almost view it as it
is the more acidic proton. It is a lower-hanging
fruit for this strong base to capture. Now, a more interesting
question-- and that's a pretty easy rule to follow. And if they both have the same
number, then you'd see equal products depending on
which side it gets. Now the question is why
is this happening? And here, something called hyperconjugation comes into effect. I'm not going to go into details
in it and to the quantum mechanics of it. And hyperconjugation is the
notion that the fact-- so we said that the one with the fewer
hydrogens is the one that's less likely to lose. Or the one with fewer hydrogens
is the one more likely to lose the
hydrogen proton. But the one with fewer hydrogens
is also bonded to more carbons. This guy's bonded to
one carbon outside of the alpha carbon. He's actually bonded to two:
the alpha and this carbon. This guy right here is only
bonded to the alpha carbon. And hyperconjugation is the
notion that not the beta carbon, but the carbons one over
from that help stabilize the double bond that eventually
forms. I almost think of it you have more
electrons over here because carbons have more electrons
to offer than hydrogens. At the end of the day, this
guy is more likely able to donate electrons to form from
the right-hand side to make a double bond than from
the left-hand side. I won't go into the detail of
hyperconjugation, but it's all based on the notion that the
more stable double bond will be formed if we have other
carbons near the double bond. Now, another way to
think about is to look at the products. So we saw or Zaitsev's rule
tells us that but-2-ene is a more likely product
than but-1-ene. And if you look at but-1-ene, we
could rewrite it like this. We could draw the double
bond like this. This carbon is what was
the alpha carbon. We could draw a carbon
right here. And then it is bonded
to a hydrogen. It's bonded to this hydrogen. And then it's bonded to just
a chain of carbons. We'll just write R on that. And then this guy is just
bonded to two hydrogens. Well, this isn't necessarily
but-1-ene. I just put an R here, but
this is how it could be represented. Now, the but-2-ene, if we wanted
to draw it like this would look like this. We could call this right
here R prime. It's just a chain of carbons. And then we could call
this R prime prime. It's not even a chain. It's just one carbon. But if we call it that, then the
but-2-ene-- let me draw it down here where I have
more real estate. The but-2-ene would
look like this. You have your carbon-carbon
double bond. Now, the left-hand carbon is
bonded to a hydrogen, that hydrogen right there,
and to R prime. And the right-hand carbon
is bonded to hydrogen and R prime prime. So it's bonded to a hydrogen
and R prime prime. All I did here-- let me see if
I can fit it all on the same screen-- is I just redrew this
and I just abstracted away the chain as it goes away from
the double bond. And I did that so that we
can look at it this way. We can just have the double bond
kind of as our focus of attention and think about what's
going on around it. Over here, for the but-1-ene,
and we already said this is the lesser product, so this
is the greater product. This is the greater, or
the dominant product. In the lesser product, if we go
off of the double bond, we only have one alkyl
group right there. That R right here. Over here, we have two. And we say that this is
more substituted. And when w say substituted,
you're imagining that you're substituting hydrogens
with carbon chains, with alkyl groups. So this one right here
is more substituted. And hyperconjugation, so the
idea would have it, is that these carbon chains that are
near the double bond help stabilize it. Some of their sigma electrons
and sigma orbitals are there to somehow help stabilize
the pi orbitals. And now this is getting into
quantum mechanics and all of that, so it's a little bit-- you
know, the world isn't 100% clear whether that's definitely
the mechanism, although people have run the
experiment, and they know that the more substituted product
is what you're going to see more of as opposed to the less
substituted, and that all comes from Zaitsev's rule. So, hopefully, you at least
get Zaitsev's rule. The hyperconjugation, that's
kind of a deeper concept. You know, the jury's
not even out on it. That's a belief of why
Zaitsev's rule works. But the rule itself is pretty
straightforward. If you're trying to pick between
two beta carbons, the one that's going to lose the
hydrogen is the one that already has pure hydrogens
or the one that's bonded to more carbons. And this is true. I drew it. Everything we focused on right
now was in an E2 reaction. But it's just as true
in an E1 reaction.