between catalyst I and catalysts III, IV and V fully highlight
the importance of this new skeleton for the success of this
reaction and also demonstrate that it is proline’s skeleton
and not the hydrogen bonding interaction which account for
its failure in this reaction. In line with the concept of the
self-assembly of organocatalysts proposed recently,8 more
than 99% ee was achieved when DMAP was added and The
catalyst loading could be decreased to as low as 2 mol % (Table
Table 2. Catalytic Asymmetric Michael Addition of Unmodified
Aldehydes to Nitroalkenesa
1
1, entries 5-6). H NMR revealed that the salt was formed
rapidly and quantitatively, with significant chemical shift of all
the protons. Both I and I/DMAP are soluble in water and are
1
stable as shown by H NMR (see Supporting Information).
More importantly, the I/DMAP catalyst could also catalyze this
reaction in water (Table 1, entry 7). Very low yield was obtained
when brine was used as solvent (Table 1, entry 8). However,
no reaction was observed when the reaction was carried out
using either III/DMAP, or IV/DMAP, or V/DMAP or I itself
in pure water (Table 1, entries 9-12).
Next, various substrates were examined and the reactions
were found to exhibit broad substrate scope with regard to
both the Michael acceptor and the donor (Table 2). The
adducts were obtained in excellent enantioselectivity (up to
>99% ee) and with good syn diastereoselectivity. The
stereochemistry was confirmed by X-ray crystal structure of
product 7b (see Supporting Information). Both aromatic and
aliphatic aldehydes, aryl- and alkyl-substituted nitroalkenes
gave the desired products in good yields and excellent enanti-
oselectivities (Table 2, entries 1-11). For the more bulky
isobutyraldehyde, which was found to be a poor nucleophile
giving only 68% ee using 20 mol % diarylprolinol ether catalyst
alone,7c our catalyst afforded the product in 94-95% ee with
various nitrostyrenes using 10 mol % of our catalyst (Table 2,
entries 12-14). Most of the earlier reports for this reaction were
carried out at 0 °C or even lower temperature with large excess
of aldehyde,7 while in our cases, only slight excess of aldehyde
(4) (a) List, B.; Pojarliev, P.; Martin, H. J. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 2423. (b)
Betancort, J. M.; Barbas, C. F., III. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 3737. (c) Enders,
D.; Seki, A. Synlett 2002, 26.
(5) For reviews, see: (a) Gruttadauria, M.; Giacalone, F.; Notoa, R. AdV.
Synth. Catal. 2009, 351, 33. (b) Raj, M.; Singh, V. K. Chem. Commun.
2009, 6687. For leading references, see: (c) Mase, N.; Nakai, Y.; Ohara,
N.; Yoda, H.; Takabe, K.; Tanaka, F.; Barbas, C. F., III. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2006, 128, 734. (d) Hayashi, Y.; Sumiya, T.; Takahashi, J.; Gotoh, H.;
Urushima, T.; Shoji, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 958.
(6) Paradowska, J.; Stodulski, M.; Mlynarski, J. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2009, 48, 4288.
a Reactions were conducted with 0.2 mmol nitroalkene, 0.4 mmol
aldehyde at room temperature or 0.2 mmol nitroalkene, 0.8 mmol aldehyde
at 60 °C (for bulky aldehydes, entries 12-14) in the presence of catalyst
with 1:1 catalyst I:DMAP. b Isolated yield. c Syn/anti was determined by
(7) For reviews, see: (a) Vicario, J. L.; Bada, D.; Carrillo, L. Synthesis
2007, 2065. (b) Tsogoeva, S. B. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2007, 1701. (c) Mossé,
S.; Alexakis, A. Chem. Commun. 2007, 3123. For some selected examples,
see: (d) Mase, N.; Watanabe, K.; Yoda, H.; Takabe, K.; Tanaka, F.; Barbas,
C. F., III. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 4966. (e) Hayashi, Y.; Gotoh, H.;
Hayashi, T.; Shoji, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 4212. (f) Wang,
W.; Wang, J.; Li, H. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 1369. (g) Palomo,
C.; Vera, S.; Mielgo, A.; Go´mez-Bengoa, E. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006,
45, 5984. (h) Zhu, S.; Yu, S.; Ma, D. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47,
545. (i) Uehara, H.; Barbas, C. F., III. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48,
9848. (j) Zheng, Z.; Perkins, B. L.; Ni, B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132,
50.
chiral HPLC analysis or by H NMR after purification. d Reported values
1
refer to the syn isomer and were determined by chiral HPLC on a chiral
stationary phase.
was employed and excellent enantioselectivity could be obtained
at room temperature.
Therefore, our catalytic system I/DMAP could be defined
as “artificial enzyme”, considering the high efficiency and high
catalytic activity observed in both organic solvents and water.
(8) For examples of self-assembly between amines and acids, see: (a)
Clarke, M. L.; Fuentes, J. A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 930. (b)
Mandal, T.; Zhao, C. G. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 7714. (c)
Schmuck, C.; Wienand, W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 452. (d) Gac,
S. L.; Luhmer, M.; Reinaud, O.; Jabin, I. Tetrahedron 2007, 63, 10721.
For addition of DMAP to improve the catalyst efficiency, see: (e) Sohtome,
Y.; Tanatani, A.; Hashimoto, Y.; Nagasawa, K. Tetrahedron Lett. 2004,
45, 5589. (f) Gu, L.; Zhao, G. AdV. Synth. Catal. 2007, 349, 1629. (g) Zhang,
X. J.; Liu, S. P.; Li, X. M.; Yan, M.; Chan, A. S. C. Chem. Commun.
2009, 833.
To probe the mechanism of this reaction, different possible
conformers of the enamine intermediate were subjected to
DFT calculation to determine the lowest energy conforma-
1222
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 6, 2010