variety of standpoints such as structures, stereochemistry,
reactivities, and applications to organic synthesis.8 However,
the synthetic study of a partially saturated version, 2,3-
dihydroselenophene derivatives of selenophenes, has been
surprisingly limited.9 In the context of heterocycles, the
transition-metal catalyzed cyclization reaction of simple
acyclic precursors is one of the most attractive ways to
directly construct complicated molecules under mild condi-
tions.10 In this way, palladium is one of the most common
transition metals used,11 although it sometimes displays
intolerance to some functionalities or proceeds with a lack
of regioselectivity. On the other hand, the electrophilic
cyclization appears as an alternative route to generate highly
functionalized heterocycles. This methodology takes advan-
tage, in the most of cases, by the presence of an halogen
atom suitable to suffer further transformations. This cycliza-
tion has been used as an efficient tool in the synthesis of
highly substituted indoles,12 furans,13 thiophenes,14 sele-
nophenes,15 benzo[b]furans,16 benzo[b]thiophenes,17 ben-
zo[b]selenophenes,18 lactones,19 and pyrroles,20 employing
electrophiles, like I2, ICl or chalcogen derivatives. Among
the known protocols for the synthesis of dihydrothiophenes,
Flynn and co-workers have reported that the reaction of
homopropargyl sulfides with iodine gave the title compounds
in almost quantitative yields.14 The superiority of this method
was proved by the high yields of the desired products, the
tolerance for various substituents, and successful applications
to synthesis of analogues of combretastatin A-4, a prodrug,
which exhibits potent pharmacological activities. Inspired by
Flynn’s reaction, we extended this method to access new
2,3-dihydroselenophenes 3a-r and to examine their ability
as precursors of 3-iodoselenophenes.
We initially focused on experiments to find a route which
gave the required starting materials, the homopropargylic
selenides, in good yields. We envisioned that this route could
start with the introduction of a chalcogen group in the
homopropargyl tosylates and subsequent functionalization of
the terminal alkyne. For the introduction of the chalcogen
group, we chose the substitution reaction in the homoprop-
argyl alcohol protected as tosylate, using selenolate anion
as nucleophile.21 Thus, the addition of butylselenolate (easily
prepared by reaction of n-BuLi with elemental selenium, in
THF at 0 °C) to a solution of tosylate 1 in THF at room
temperature for 6 h, gave the selenide 2f in high yield. With
the subunit 2f in hand to the functionalization of terminal
alkynes, we first generated the lithium acetylide intermediate
by reaction of terminal alkyne 2f with 1 equiv of n-BuLi, in
THF at -78 °C for 1 h, followed by the addition of an
electrophile (Scheme 1). By this method, we prepared a
number of novel homopropargylic selenides 2g-r and
applied these new compounds as starting materials in the
electrophilic cyclization reactions (Table 1).22
Scheme 1. Synthesis of Homopropargyl Selenides
(7) (a) Srivastava, P. C.; Robins, R. K. J. Med. Chem. 1983, 26, 445.
(b) Streeter, D. G.; Robins, R. K. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1983,
115, 544. (c) Kirsi, J. J.; North, J.; McKernan, P. A.; Murray, B. K.;
Canonico, P. G.; Huggins, J. W.; Srivastava, P. C.; Robins, R. K. Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother. 1983, 24, 353.
The conditions for the cyclization were optimized by
varying parameters such as solvent, reaction temperature,
amount and identity of electrophile sources. For these studies,
the reaction of homopropargyl selenide 2a with iodine was
chosen as a model system. To identify the solvent potentially
suitable for the cyclization, we first chose MeOH, hexane,
MeCN, THF, and CH2Cl2. For this process, CH2Cl2 was the
most effective solvent giving the cyclized product in 93%
yield. The study to screen the electrophile source showed
that ICl (3a) and PhSeBr (3a′) (1.1 equiv) gave the target
products in 70 and 62% yields, respectively. It is important
to note that when the amount of electrophile was increased
from 1.1 to 2.0 equiv a decrease in the yield was observed.
After optimizing the reaction parameters, the functional group
tolerance was explored. The results are presented in Table
1. Many functional groups were compatible with the reaction
conditions. In general, all the reactions proceeded smoothly
with good results. Most importantly, the cyclization turned
out to be general with respect of a diverse array of
functionalities. The experiments showed that the electrophilic
cyclization of substrate having an aromatic ring directly
bonded to the terminal alkyne was not sensitive to the
electronic effects of the substituents. For example, the
(8) (a) Stein, A. L.; Alves, D.; da Rocha, J. T.; Nogueira, C. W.; Zeni,
G. Org. Lett. 2008, 10, 4983. (b) Alves, D.; Prigol, M.; Nogueira, C. W.;
Zeni, G. Synlett 2008, 6, 914. (c) Bui, C. T.; Flynn, B. L. J. Comb. Chem.
2006, 8, 163.
(9) (a) Sommen, G. L.; Linden, A.; Heimgartner, H. Lett. Org. Chem.
2007, 4, 7. (b) Sasaki, S.; Adachi, K.; Yoshifuji, M. Org. Lett. 2007, 9,
1729.
(10) For a special issue in Chemical Reviews, see Chem. ReV. 2004,
104, Issue 5.
(11) (a) Zeni, G.; Larock, R. C. Chem. ReV. 2004, 104, 2285. (b) Zeni,
G.; Larock, R. C. Chem. ReV. 2006, 106, 4644. (c) Gill, G. S.; Grobelny,
D. W.; Chaplin, J. H.; Flynn, B. L. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 1131.
(12) (a) Halim, R.; Scammells, P. J.; Flynn, B. L. Org. Lett. 2008, 10,
1967. (b) Hessian, K. O.; Flynn, B. L. Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 243.
(13) Sniady, A.; Wheeler, K. A.; Dembinski, R. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 1769.
(14) Flynn, B. L.; Flynn, G. P.; Hamel, E.; Jung, M. K. Bioorg. Med.
Chem. Lett. 2001, 11, 2341.
(15) Alves, D.; Luchese, C.; Nogueira, C. W.; Zeni, G. J. Org. Chem.
2007, 72, 6726.
(16) (a) Yue, D.; Yao, T.; Larock, R. C. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 10292.
(b) Arcadi, A.; Cacchi, S.; Fabrizi, G.; Marinelli, F.; Moro, L. Synlett 1999,
1432.
(17) (a) Hessian, K. O.; Flynn, B. L. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 4377. (b) Yue,
D.; Larock, R. C. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 1905. (c) Flynn, B. L.; Verdier-
Pinard, P.; Hamel, E. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 651.
(18) Kesharwani, T.; Worlikar, S. A.; Larock, R. C. J. Org. Chem. 2006,
71, 2307.
(19) (a) Bellina, F.; Colzi, F.; Mannina, L.; Rossi, R.; Viel, S. J. Org.
Chem. 2003, 68, 10175. (b) Biagetti, M.; Bellina, F.; Carpita, A.; Viel, S.;
Mannina, L.; Rossi, R. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 1063. (c) Bellina, F.;
Biagetti, M.; Carpita, A.; Rossi, R. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 2857.
(20) Knight, D. W.; Redfern, A. L.; Gilmore, J. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin
Trans. 1 2002, 622.
(21) Zeni, G.; Stracke, M. P.; Nogueira, C. W.; Braga, A. L.; Menezes,
P. H.; Stefani, H. A. Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 1135.
(22) For preparation of compounds 2a-e, see the Supporting Informa-
tion.
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 9, 2010
1953