Amarante et al.
SCHEME 1. General Scope and First Catalytic Cycle Proposed by Hoffmann/Hill and Isaacs for the Morita-Baylis-Hillman
Reaction
(normally with an electron-withdrawing group) alkene in the
presence of a Lewis base catalyst (most often DABCO). The
MBH reaction has been used to form building blocks for the
total synthesis of many heterocycles, natural products, and
drugs.4 Based on its atom economy and feasibility, the MBH
reaction is currently regarded as one of the most efficient
transformations in organic chemistry.5
focusing on the proton-transfer step. According to McQuade,
the MBH reaction is second order relative to the aldehyde and
shows significant kinetic isotopic effect (KIE: kH/kD ) 5.2 (
0.6 in DMSO). Interestingly, regardless of the solvents (DMF,
MeCN, THF, CHCl3), the KIE were found to be greater than 2,
indicating the relevance of proton abstraction on the rate-
determining step. Based on these new data, McQuade et al.
proposed a new mechanism view for the proton-transfer step
(Scheme 2), suggesting IV as the RDS. Soon after, Aggarwal,
also on the basis of kinetic studies, proposed that the reaction
kinetic is second order in relation to the aldehyde but only at
its beginning (e20% of conversion), then becoming autocata-
lytic. Apparently, the MBH adducts 7 may act as a proton donor
Hoffmann, in 1983, was the first to propose a mechanism
for the MBH reaction,6 which was refined from kinetic data by
Hill and Isaacs7a and others (Scheme 1).7b,c The first reaction
step I involves 1,4-addition of the catalytic tertiary amine 1 to
the activated alkene 2 (R,ꢀ-unsaturated carbonyl compounds,
nitriles, ect.) to generate the zwitterionic aza-enolate 3. In step
II, 3 forms intermediate 5 by adding to aldehyde 4 via an aldolic
addition reaction. Step III involves intramolecular proton shift
within 5 to form 6, which in step IV forms the final MBH adduct
7 via E2 or E1cb proton-transfer in the presence of a Lewis
base. The last step IV returns 1 to the catalytical cycle. Due to
the low kinetic isotopic effect (KIE ) 1.03 ( 0.1, using
acrylonitrile as nucleophile for the MBH reaction) measured
by Hill and Isaacs and the dipole increase by charge separation,
II was initially considered as the MBH rate-determining step
(RDS, Scheme 1).
(4) For some examples, see: (a) Amarante, G. W.; Rezende, P.; Cavallaro,
M.; Coelho, F. Tetrahedron Lett. 2008, 49, 3744–3748. (b) Coelho, F.; Veronese,
D.; Pavam, C. H.; de Paula, V. I.; Buffon, R. Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 4563–
4572. (c) Perez, R.; Veronese, D.; Coelho, F.; Antunes, O. A. C. Tetrahedron
Lett. 2006, 47, 1325–1328. (d) Silveira, G. P. D.; Coelho, F. Tetrahedron Lett.
2005, 46, 6477–6481. (e) Almeida, W. P.; Coelho, F. Tetrahedron Lett. 2003,
44, 937–940. (f) Feltrin, M. A.; Almeida, W. P. Synth. Commun. 2003, 33, 1141–
1146. (g) Rossi, R. C.; Coelho, F. Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 42, 2797–2800. (h)
Mateus, C. R.; Feltrin, M. P.; Costa, A. M.; Coelho, F.; Almeida, W. P.
Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 6901–6908. (i) Iwabuchi, Y.; Furukawa, M.; Esumi, T.;
Hatakeyama, S. Chem. Commun. 2001, 2030–2031. (j) Iwabuchi, Y.; Sugihara,
T.; Esumi, T.; Hatakeyama, S. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 7867–7871. (k)
Masunari, A.; Ishida, E.; Trazzi, G.; Almeida, W. P.; Coelho, F. Synth. Commun.
2001, 31, 2127–2136. (l) Ameer, F.; Drewes, S. E.; Houston-McMillan, M. S.;
Kaye, P. T. S. Afr. J. Chem. 1986, 39, 57–63. (m) Hoffmann, H. M. R.; Rabe,
J. HelV. Chim. Acta 1984, 67, 413–415. (n) Hoffmann, H. M. R.; Rabe, J. J.
Org. Chem. 1985, 50, 3849–3859. (o) Drewes, S. E.; Emslie, N. D. J. Chem.
Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1982, 2079–2083.
Recently, McQuade et al.8 and Aggarwal et al.9 re-evaluated
the MBH mechanism using kinetics and theoretical studies,
(2) Baylis, A. B.; Hillman, M. E. D. Chem. Abstr. 1972, 77, 34174q; German
Patent 2155113, 1972.
(5) Trost, B. M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1995, 34, 259–281, and references
cited therein.
(6) Hoffmann, H. M. R.; Rabe, J. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1983, 22, 796–
797.
(7) (a) Hill, J. S.; Isaacs, N. S. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1990, 3, 285–290. (b)
Kaye, P. T.; Bode, M. L. Tetrahedron Lett. 1991, 32, 5611–5614. (c) Fort, Y.;
Berthe, M.-C.; Caube`re, P. Tetrahedron 1992, 48, 6371–6384.
(3) For comprehensive reviews on the Morita-Baylis-Hillman reaction, see:
(a) Almeida, W. P.; Coelho, F. Quim. NoVa 2000, 23, 98–101; Chem. Abstr.
2000, 132, 236562e. (b) Basavaiah, D.; Rao, A. J.; Satyanarayama, T. Chem.
ReV. 2003, 103, 811–891. (c) Basavaiah, D.; Rao, K. V.; Reddy, R. J. Chem.
Soc. ReV. 2007, 36, 1581–1588. (d) Singh, V.; Batra, S. Tetrahedron 2008, 64,
4511–4574.
3032 J. Org. Chem. Vol. 74, No. 8, 2009