Jump to main content
Jump to site search

Issue 7, 2012
Previous Article Next Article

Rethinking the term “pi-stacking”

Author affiliations

Abstract

It has become common to reference “pi-stacking” forces or “pi–pi interactions” when describing the interactions between neighbouring aromatic rings. Here, we review experimental and theoretical literature across several fields and conclude that the terms “pi-stacking” and “pi–pi interactions” do not accurately describe the forces that drive association between aromatic molecules of the types most commonly studied in chemistry or biology laboratories. We therefore propose that these terms are misleading and should no longer be used. Even without these terms, electrostatic considerations relating to polarized pi systems, as described by Hunter and Sanders, have provided a good qualitative starting place for predicting and understanding the interactions between aromatics for almost two decades. More recent work, however, is revealing that direct electrostatic interactions between polarized atoms of substituents as well as solvation/desolvation effects in strongly interacting solvents must also be considered and even dominate in many circumstances.

Graphical abstract: Rethinking the term “pi-stacking”

Back to tab navigation
Please wait while Download options loads

Publication details

The article was received on 11 Jan 2012, accepted on 23 Apr 2012 and first published on 24 Apr 2012


Article type: Perspective
DOI: 10.1039/C2SC20045G
Citation: Chem. Sci., 2012,3, 2191-2201
  •   Request permissions

    Rethinking the term “pi-stacking”

    C. R. Martinez and B. L. Iverson, Chem. Sci., 2012, 3, 2191
    DOI: 10.1039/C2SC20045G

Search articles by author