Cu-Catalyzed Conjugate Addition of Grignard Reagents
TABLE 1. The 6-Cu(OTf)2-Mediated Asymmetric Conjugate
Ethylation
FIGURE 2. Successful NHC precursors 7 and 8.
conformational fixation of N-substituent, an asymmetric space
would be created around the carbene moiety of 5, and thus the
asymmetric space of 4 appears to be more rigid than that of 3
due to lack of a substituent on the carbene. Consequently 4
should afford a more efficient asymmetric induction than 3. We
have also investigated the design and application of C2 sym-
metric carbene 49 as an organocatalyst for asymmetric Stetter
reaction.10
Recent brilliant successes in chiral NHC-copper(I)-
catalyzed conjugate addition reactions,11 especially asym-
metric construction of a quaternary carbon,12 stimulated us
to explore the reaction by using C2 symmetric carbene 4. In
this report, we describe the chiral NHC-copper(I)-catalyzed
asymmetric quaternary carbon constructing conjugate addition
reaction of Grignard reagents with 3-methyl- and 3-ethyl-
cyclohexenones giving enantioenriched 3,3-disubstituted
cyclohexanones.
Cu(OTf)2,
mol %
M,a
mol/L 10a:12b 10a, % ee, %
yield of
entry
6
X
1
2
3
4
5
6
none
6a
6a
6b
6b
0
0
6
6
6
6
1:99
1:99
trace
trace
34
nd
nd
21
20
19
21
BF4
BF4
Cl
Cl
PF6
0.012
0.012
0.008
0.024
0.012
42:58
45:55
55:45
41:59
45
52
34
6c
a Molar concentration of 6. b The molar ratio determined by 1H NMR
(the triplet Me of 10a:singlet Ha of 12).
was determined by a chiral gas chromatography (Gamma Dex
225, 90 °C, helium gas flow of 4 mL/min, rt: 17.7 min (R),
20.2 min (S)). The production of 12 was ascribable to almost
complete dehydration of 11 by 10% hydrochloric acid
treatment of the reaction mixture. The catalysis by an NHC-
copper complex was apparent from the reactions that gave
no conjugate addition product 10a in the absence of both or
a copper source (entries 1 and 2). The counteranion species,
tetrafluoroborate (6a), chloride (6b), and hexafluorophosphate
(6c), were not a critical factor in determining 1,4- versus
1,2-addition ratio and also percent ee (entries 3-6). Molar
concentration of 6 was not decisive (entries 4 vs 5).
Asymmetric Reaction by Using Variously Modified NHC.
A range of N-variant precursors of NHC 6 and 27-38 were
readily prepared starting from chiral 1,2-diamino-1,2-diphe-
nylethane (13) by standard imidazolium forming procedure of
N-alkylation 14-19 and N-arylation products 20-26 as shown
in Scheme 1.14
Results and Discussion
Asymmetric Conjugate Addition of Ethylmagnesium Bro-
mide in the Presence of 6. We followed the reaction
procedure reported by Alexakis and Mauduit where an
efficient quaternary carbon constructing conjugate addition
reaction of Grignard reagents has been realized by using
chiral NHC precursors 7 and 8 (Figure 2).12b The reaction
of 2 equiv of ethylmagnesium bromide with 3-methylcyclo-
hexenone (9a) in the presence of 8 mol % of 6a (X ) BF4)
and 6 mol % of copper(II) triflate in diethyl ether at 0 °C for
0.5 h gave a 42:58 mixture of desired 10a and diene 12
derived from 1,2-adduct 11 (Table 1, entry 3). The absolute
configuration of 10a was assigned to be S based on the
specific rotation.13 The enantioselectivity (21% ee) of 10a
It became apparent from our investigation that NHCs
bearing RCH2 or R2CH N-substituents 6 and 29-31 gave
poor yields of 10a (20-51%) (Table 2, entries 1 and 4-6).
Exceptions are NHCs 27 and 28 bearing a coordinatable
heteroatom group, F and MeO, at the ortho position of a
phenyl ring that gave good yields (81% and 70%) (entries 2
and 3), while ee was not satisfactory (24% and 35% ee).
On the contrary, the NHCs bearing an aryl group directly
attached to the amino nitrogen, 32-38, exerted relatively
satisfactorily higher efficiency in chemical yield and ee
(entries 7-13). It is surprising to find that even unsubstituted
phenyl group 32 exerted a better activation behavior to give
10a with 64% ee in 60% yield. The ratio of 1,4-addition
versus 1,2-addition was improved up to 80:20 (entry 7). Both
ortho 2,6-dimethyl and diethyl substitutions on a phenyl ring,
33 and 34, exerted profound effect on yield to give 10a in
93% and 62% yields, respectively, although ee values, 64%
and 59%, were not affected much (entries 8 and 9).
(8) For reviews on carbene ligands, see: (a) Ce´sar, V.; Bellemin-Laponnaz,
S.; Gade, L. H. Chem. Soc. ReV. 2004, 33, 619–636. (b) Perry, M. C.; Burgess,
K. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2003, 14, 951–961. (c) Herrmann, W. A. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 1290–1309.
(9) Matsumoto, Y.; Tomioka, K. Tetrahedron Lett. 2006, 47, 5843–5846.
(10) For reviews on carbene organocatalysts, see: (a) Enders, D.; Niemeier,
O.; Henseler, A. Chem. ReV. 2007, 107, 5606–5655. (b) Marion, N.; Die´z-
Gonza´les, S.; Nolan, S. P. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 2988–3000. (c)
Enders, D.; Balensiefer, T. Acc. Chem. Res. 2004, 37, 534–541.
(11) (a) Clavier, H.; Guillemin, J. H.; Mauduit, M. Chirality 2007, 19, 471–
476. (b) Clavier, H.; Coutable, L.; Guillemin, J. C.; Mauduit, M. Tetrahedron:
Asymmetry 2005, 16, 921–924. (c) Winn, C. L.; Guillen, F.; Pytkowicz, J.;
Roland, S.; Mangeney, P.; Alexakis, A. J. Organomet. Chem. 2005, 690, 5672–
5695. (d) Clavier, H.; Coutable, L.; Toupet, L.; Guillemin, J. C.; Mauduit, M. J.
Organomet. Chem. 2005, 690, 5237–5254. (e) Arnold, P. L.; Rodden, M.; Davis,
K. M.; Scarisbrick, A. C.; Blake, A. J.; Wilson, C. Chem. Commun. 2004, 1612–
1613. (f) Alexakis, A.; Winn, C. L.; Guillen, F.; Pytkowicz, J.; Roland, S.;
Mangeney, P. AdV. Synth. Catal. 2003, 345, 345–348. (g) Fraser, P. K.;
Woodward, S. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 2747–2749. (h) Pytkowicz, J.; Roland,
S.; Mangeney, P. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2001, 12, 2087–2089. (i) Guillen,
F.; Winn, C. L.; Alexakis, A. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2001, 12, 2083–2086.
(12) (a) Brown, M. K.; May, T. L.; Baxter, C. A.; Hoveyda, A. H. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 1097–1100. (b) Martin, D.; Kehrli, S.; d’Augustin,
M.; Clavier, H.; Mauduit, M.; Alexakis, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 8416–
8417. (c) Lee, K. S.; Brown, M. K.; Hird, A. W.; Hoveyda, A. H. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2006, 128, 7182–7184.
(14) (a) Saba, S.; Brescia, A.; Kaloustian, M. K. Tetrahedron Lett. 1991,
32, 5031–5034. (b) Arduengo, A. J., III; Krafczyk, R.; Schmutzler, R.
Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 14523–14534.
(13) D’Augustin, M.; Palais, L.; Alexakis, A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005,
44, 1376–1378.
J. Org. Chem. Vol. 73, No. 12, 2008 4579