Optimized Synthesis of Vinyl Ether Sugars and Vinyl Glycosides
105
the constant relative concentrations of the n-butanol generated by the reac-
tions. The presence of the auxiliary base triethyl amine prevents the
formation of mixed ethyl butyl acetals catalyzed by free trifluoro-acetic acid
formed in the catalytic cycle.[14,17]
Table 1 summarizes the results obtained with this reaction protocol for the
monohydroxyl substrates 2,3,4,6-tetra-O-benzyl-D-glucopyranose (1a), 2,3,4,6-
tetra-O-acetyl-D-glucopyranose (2a), 2,3,5-tri-O-benzyl-D-arabinofuranose
(3a), 1,2:5,6-di-O-isopropylidene-a-D-glucofuranoside (4a), 1,2:3,4-di-O-isopro-
pylidene-a-D-galactopyranoside (5a), methyl 2,3,6-tri-O-benzoyl-a-D-galacto-
pyranoside (6a), methyl 2,3,6-tri-O-benzoyl-a-D-mannopyranoside (7a),
1,2:4,5-di-O-isopropylidene-b-D-fructopyranoside (8a), and 2,3:4,5-di-O-isopro-
pylidene-b-D-fructopyranoside (9a). Table 2 lists the results for the dihydroxyl
substrates 1,2-O-isopropylidene-a-D-xylofuranoside (10a), 1,2:5,6-di-O-isopro-
pylidene-D-mannitol (11a), methyl 4,6-O-isopropylidene-a-D-mannopyranoside
(12a), methyl 4,6-O-isopropylidene-a-D-glucopyranoside (13a), phenyl 4,6-O-
isopropylidene-b-D-glucopyranoside (14a), methyl 4,6-O-benzylidene-a-D-glu-
copyranoside (15a), phenyl 4,6-O-benzylidene-b-D-glucopyranoside (16a), and
the trihydroxyl substrate levoglucosan (17a).
The first five entries in Table 1 also compare the reaction times and yields
to those achieved earlier with the nonoptimized catalyst.[14] Slightly higher
yields were realized with the optimized protocol described above that
employs a 200:1 rather than the 100:1 BVE-to-sugar ratio used earlier.[14]
With the exception of entry 8, 1,2:4,5-di-O-isopropylidene-b-D-fructopyra-
noside (8a), good to excellent yields (68%–95%) of mono vinyl ethers or vinyl
glycosides are achieved with sugar substrates protected by acetals or benzyl
ethers, while ester protection groups (acetate, benzoyl) result in moderate
yields of 45% (2b, entry 2, Table 1) and 42% or 43% (6b and 7b, entries 6
and 7, Table 1). As noted previously,[14] the presence of ester functionalities
(2a, 6a, 7a, entries 2, 6, and 7) leads to a darkening of the reaction mixture
to a more intense yellow, pointing to a coordinative interaction between
either the carbonyl oxygen or possibly an ester enolate and the metal center.
This can, however, not account for the lower yields with these substrates, as
addition of more catalyst at equilibrium did not result in additional product for-
mation excluding irreversible catalyst poisoning as a possible explanation.
As the vinyl exchange Eq. (1) is an isodesmic reaction, the main factors
governing the overall yields obtained with any of the substrates should be
steric interactions within the vinylated products. However, the conformational
variability and subtle structural complexity of the sugar substrates renders
a general and predictive model for these interactions and quantitative ration-
alization of the resulting observed yields elusive. For the monohydroxyl
substrates, the observed yields qualitatively scale with the steric accessi-
bility of the free hydroxyl functions, which also correlates with the confor-
mational flexibility of an attached vinyl group in the corresponding