C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
Scheme 3
Scheme 5
be accomplished stereoselectively as ascertained by Clark,4b
spontaneous cyclization to vigulariol could not be avoided (efforts
to protect alcohol 10 were futile). Examination of the X-ray structure
of epoxy ketone r-9 (see Scheme 4), however, inspired a solution.
The structural feature of consequence is a near linear alignment
(160°) of the carbonyl oxygen, C6 of the epoxide (eunicellin
numbering), and the epoxide oxygen. While the carbonyl oxygen
and C6 are separated by 3.68 Å in r-9, it was reasoned that
proximity would be increased, perhaps facilitating intramolecular
oxirane rupture, upon conversion of the carbonyl to the tetrahedral
hydrate. This reactivity would be unique to stereoisomer r-9 and
would lead to oxygenation of the alkene in a manner that is
stereochemically appropriate to the target.
isolated in 88% yield as a single product stereoisomer. Finally,
subjection of 11 to MeMgCl delivered sclerophytin A in excellent yield
and in agreement with characterization data.7,9f
In conclusion, we have described an enantioselective synthesis
of (-)-sclerophytin A that occurs in 13 steps from geranial. The
versatility of radical reactions and the Oshima-Utimoto reaction
suggests that the synthesis strategy described herein may be
transferable to a number of other eunicellin-derived natural products,
and these will be reported in due course.
Acknowledgment. We thank Dr. Bo Li (Boston College) for
X-ray structures. We thank the NIGMS (GM-59417) and the NSF
(DBI-0619576; BC Mass Spectrometry Center) for support.
Scheme 4
Supporting Information Available: Characterization and proce-
dures. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://
pubs.acs.org.
References
(1) (a) Campbell, M. J.; Johnson, J. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 10370.
(b) Kim, H.; Lee, H.; Kim, J.; Kim, S.; Kim, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006,
128, 15851.
(2) Crimmins, M. T.; Ellis, J. M. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 1649.
(3) Corminboeuf, O.; Overman, L. E.; Pennington, L. D. J. Org. Chem. 2009,
74, 5458.
(4) (a) Becker, J.; Bergander, K.; Frohlich, R.; Hoppe, D. Angew. Chem., Int.
Ed. 2008, 47, 1654. (b) Clark, J. S.; Hayes, S. T.; Wilson, C.; Gobbi, L.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 437.
(5) Crimmins, M. T.; Brown, B. H.; Plake, H. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006,
128, 1371.
(6) For an excellent review of completed and partial syntheses of this target
class, see: Ellis, J. M.; Crimmins, M. T. Chem. ReV. 2008, 108, 5278.
(7) (a) Sharma, P.; Alam, M. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1988, 2537. (b)
Alam, M.; Sharma, P.; Zektzer, A. S.; Martin, G. E.; Ji, X.; van der Helm,
D. J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 1896.
(8) For the study of sclerophytin analogs, see: (a) Bateman, T. D.; Joshi, A. L.;
Moon, K.; Galitovskaya, E. N.; Upreti, M.; Chambers, T. C.; McIntosh,
M. C. Biorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2009, 19, 6898. (b) Davidson, J. E. P.;
Gilmour, R.; Ducki, S.; Davies, J. E.; Green, R.; Burton, J. W.; Holmes,
A. B. Synlett 2004, 1434. (c) Jung, M. E.; Pontillo, J. J. Org. Chem. 2002,
67, 6848.
(9) (a) Paquette, L. A.; Moradei, O. M.; Bernardelli, P.; Lange, T. Org. Lett.
2000, 2, 1875. (b) Friedrich, D.; Doskotch, R. W.; Paquette, L. A. Org.
Lett. 2000, 2, 1879. (c) Bernardelli, P.; Moradei, O. M.; Friedrich, D.; Yang,
J.; Gallou, F.; Dyck, B. P.; Doskotch, R. W.; Lange, T.; Paquette, L. A.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 9021. (d) Overman, L. E.; Pennington, L. D.
Org. Lett. 2000, 2, 2683. (e) MacMillan, D. W. C.; Overman, L. E.;
Pennington, L. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 9033. (f) Gallou, F.;
MacMillan, D. W. C.; Overman, L. E.; Paquette, L. A.; Pennington, L. D.;
Yang, J. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 135.
(10) (a) Evans, M. A.; Morken, J. P. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 3367. (b) Fugami, K.;
Oshima, K.; Utimoto, K. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1989, 62, 2050. (c) Fugami,
K.; Oshima, K.; Utimoto, K. Tetrahedron Lett. 1987, 28, 809. For related
processes, see: (d) Hafner, W.; Prigge, H.; Smidt, J. Liebigs Ann. Chem.
1966, 109. (e) Larock, R. C.; Lee, N. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113,
7815. (f) Larock, R. C.; Stinn, D. E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1989, 30, 2767. (g)
Kraus, G. A.; Thurston, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 9203. For prior
In the event, treatment of a 1.8:1 mixture of r-9 and ꢀ-9 with
aqueous LiOH at room temperature resulted in rapid hydrolysis of
r-9 to give 11 (Scheme 5). That an intramolecular advantage may
operate in this hydrolytic epoxide opening is supported by three
lines of evidence: first, NMR and X-ray analysis (Scheme 5) of
the product shows that it exists as the stable hemiketal 11; second,
analogous ring-opening of 1-methylcyclohexene oxide under the
same reaction conditions occurs in <5% conversion; third, ꢀ-9 is
unreactive under these conditions and could be recovered from the
reaction mixture. While resolution of r-9 and ꢀ-9 is an attractive
feature of the basic reaction conditions, it was considered that ꢀ-9 might
also be converted to the target under acidic conditions where the
regiochemical preference for epoxide opening would be opposite to
that observed with LiOH. Ultimately, it was found that this stereo-
convergent epoxide hydrolysis could be accomplished in a single-pot
process. First, the mixture of r-9 and ꢀ-9 was subjected to LiOH until
TLC analysis indicated complete consumption of r-9, then the mixture
was neutralized with KHSO4, diluted with CH3CN, and treated with
Sc(OTf)3. Under these conditions, the product hemiketal 11 was
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 132, NO. 46, 2010 16381