(4a). However, we failed to obtain any product using
triethylamine as the base. Luckily, DBU in acetonitrile at
60 °C gave the desired product 4a in a yield of 72%, and
a series of polysubstituted naphthalenes were prepared in
satisfactory yields (Table 3).
Scheme 3
Table 3. Synthesis of Polysubstituted Naphthalenesa
deuterium on the new benzene ring was observed, probably
because the propargyl-allene isomerization is so fast that
the protonated triethylamine does not have enough time to
leave (Scheme 4).
Scheme 4
Notably, the electron-withdrawing groups (ester or amide
group) of 1 or 3, which could increase the acidity of the
methylene group adjacent to the sulfur atom, are essential
to the propargyl-allenyl isomerization promoted by the mild
bases and may improve the consequential 6 π-electrocy-
clization process.2c Importantly, the ester or amide group,
which would be playing a role as a reactivity controlling
element during the process, could also be used as a
convenient chemical handle for preparing other useful
compounds. We treated 2a and 4b with LiAlH4 and NaBH4/
BF3·Et2O to access alcohol (5) and amine (6), respectively,
in good yields (Figure 1).
a Substrate 3 (0.5 mmol) and DBU (1.0 mmol) in acetonitrile (3 mL) at
60 °C under a N2 atmosphere.
Although we did not detect the allene intermediate, we
conducted control experiments which might be helpful for
supporting the pathway proposed in Scheme 1. We treated
(E)-ethyl 3-(2-(3-(butylthio)prop-1-ynyl)cyclohex-1-enyl)-
acrylate (1f) with 20 equiv of methanol-d4 in acetonitrile
and obtained deuterated 2f. We observed 60% deuterium
on one of the protons of the methylene group adjacent to
the sulfur atom, which might come from the base-assisted
isomerization of the intermediate isotoluene (Scheme 3).
We had expected more deuterium on the new benzene ring
before conducting this control experiment, but only 25%
On the other hand, the sulfane group, which triggered the
propargyl-allenyl isomerization, might be used as a “key” for
Gottlieb, H. E.; Sprecher, M.; Braverman, S. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 10166.
(d) Kim, J. T.; Kel’in, A. V.; Gevorgyan, V. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2003,
42, 98. (e) Zafrani, Y.; Cherkinsky, M.; Gottlieb, H. E.; Braverman, S.
Tetrahedron 2003, 59, 2641. (f) Braverman, S.; Cherkinsky, M.; Birsa,
M. L.; Zafrani, Y. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 18, 3198. (g) Braverman, S.;
Zafrani, Y.; Gottlieb, H. E. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 9177. (h) Garratt, P. J.;
Neoh, S. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975, 97, 3255.
(4) For the detailed processes, see the Supporting Information.
(5) (a) Barry, N.; Brondel, N.; Lawrence, S. E.; Maguire, A. R.
Tetrahedron 2009, 65, 10660. (b) Yusubov, M. S.; Yusubova, R. Y.; Funk,
T. V.; Chi, K. W.; Zhdankin, V. V. Synthesis 2009, 15, 2505.
(6) (a) Nakamura, S.; Nakagawa, R.; Watanabe, Y.; Toru, T. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 11340. (b) Screttas, C. G.; Micha-Screttas, M. J.
Org. Chem. 1979, 44, 713.
(2) (a) Zhou, H.; Xie, Y.; Ren, L.; Wang, K. AdV. Synth. Catal. 2009,
351, 1289. (b) Zhou, H.; Xie, Y.; Ren, L.; Su, R. Org. Lett. 2010, 12, 356.
(c) Zhou, H.; Zhu, D.; Xie, Y.; Huang, H.; Wang, K. J. Org. Chem. 2010,
75, 2706.
(3) (a) Dudnik, A. S.; Sromek, A. W.; Rubina, M.; Kim, J. T.; Kel’in,
A. V.; Gevorgyan, V. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 1440. (b) Sromek,
A. W.; Gevorgyan, V. Top. Curr. Chem. 2007, 274, 77. (c) Zafrani, Y.;
(7) (a) Yu, Z.; Verkade, J. G. Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 2671. (b)
Gutierrez, C. G.; Summerhays, L. R. J. Org. Chem. 1984, 49, 5206.
3676
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 16, 2010