Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Reductive Electropolymerization of a Vinyl-containing Poly-pyridyl Complex on Glassy Carbon and Fluorine-doped Tin Oxide Electrodes
Published on: January 30, 2015
Hyperconjugation Controls One-Bond Carbon-Tin Coupling Constants in Anomeric Tin Compounds: A Theoretical Study
Kyle Fisch1, Maciej A Walczak1
1Department of Chemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, United States.
Abstract:
One-bond 119Sn-13C couplings in organostannanes are sensitive to local stereoelectronic effects, yet quantitative rules linking hyperconjugation to 1J(Sn-C) remain limited, especially at anomeric centers. We combine DFT studies with NBO analysis across 77 cyclic scaffolds, including matched axial/equatorial (α/β) anomeric pairs, to relate antiperiplanar donor → σ*(C-Sn) delocalization to 1J(Sn-C). Validation against 1J(C-H) benchmarks reproduces Perlin-type axial/equatorial differences and the classical reversal in 1,3-dithianes. 1J(Sn-C) scales with the magnitude of donation. Pairwise comparisons are equally diagnostic: across 27 α/β (axial/equatorial) pairs, equatorial isomers show larger couplings in 92% of cases, and ΔJ correlates with Δdonation, rationalizing the β > α hierarchy. Ring-size controls reveal a geometric signature consistent with known ring size relationships with coupling constants: as the size of the ring increases, 1J(C-H) decreases. Incorporation of sulfur in the ring can cause the β > α 1J(Sn-C) behavior observed in most other cyclic scaffolds to invert with axial 1J(Sn-C) being greater than equatorial 1J(Sn-C). A single-parameter empirical scaling (J(corr) = -1.419·J(calc)) improves absolute agreement with experiment without perturbing trends and brings negative calculated 1J(Sn-C) to the experimentally derived positive 1J(Sn-C). Collectively, these results deliver a practical, mechanistic framework for predicting tin-carbon coupling constants and assigning the anomeric configuration in anomeric organotin compounds.
Related Concept Videos
Spin–Spin Coupling: One-Bond Coupling
Spin–Spin Coupling: Two-Bond Coupling (Geminal Coupling)
The central atom need not be NMR-active because its electrons are affected by the electron polarization of the spin-active atoms. However, spin information is transmitted less effectively than in one-bond coupling, and 2J values are usually weaker than 1J values. The energy of...
Spin–Spin Coupling: Three-Bond Coupling (Vicinal Coupling)
The extent of coupling depends on the C‑C bond length, the two H‑C‑C angles, any electron-withdrawing substituents, and the dihedral angle between the involved orbitals. The...
Bond Energies and Bond Lengths
Spin–Spin Coupling Constant: Overview
Qualitatively, any spin plus-half nucleus polarizes the spins of its electrons to the minus-half state. Consequently, the paired electron in the hydrogen–carbon bond must...
Carbon Skeletons

