in which both rings and three new carbon-carbon bonds
are formed in one synthetic operation.
We have recently reported the first example of a domino
reaction5 making use of the enolate intermediate formed in
a Stetter reaction (Scheme 1a).6,7 In that case, the initial
conditions (see Supporting Information), the desired spiro
bis-indane 6a was obtained in good yield and excellent
diastereoselectivity (Table 1, entry 1). Prolonged exposure
Table 1. Domino Stetter-Aldol-Michael (SAM) Reaction
Scheme 1. Domino Stetter Reactions
t
yield
entry
R1
R2
(min) producta (%)b
drc
1
2
3
4
5d
6
7
8
9
H
H
H
4-F
4-F
Ph
15
5
45
5
15
9
5
6a
6b
6c
6d
6e
6f
6g
6h
6i
79
86
68
64
80
85
81
75
31e
17:1
12:1
>20:1
11:1
16:1
>20:1
10:1
7:1
4-Cl(C6H5)
4-MeO(C6H5)
Ph
4-Cl(C6H5)
3-MeO Ph
3-MeO 4-Cl(C6H5)
H
H
Me
SEt
195
120
13:1
a The relative configuration was determined by X-ray crystallography
(see Supporting Information). b Combined yield of pure isolated product
diastereomers. Determined from H NMR analysis of the crude reaction
mixture. d Concentration of the reaction ) 0.1 M. e The corresponding
alcohol intermediate (see 7, Scheme 3) was also isolated in 14% yield.
c
1
Stetter reaction was followed by an intramolecular conjugate
addition step leading to indane frameworks. Subsequently,
Ye and co-workers disclosed a cascade Stetter-aldol reaction
providing access to 4-hydroxytetralones from vinyl ketones
and phthaldialdehyde (Scheme 1b).8,9 We now document
remarkable domino Stetter-aldol-Michael (SAM) and
Stetter-aldol-aldol (SAA) reactions giving access to spiro
bis-indanes from readily available o-formyl chalcone deriva-
tives (Scheme 1c). The usefulness of this methodology is
demonstrated by the preparation of analogs of the spiro bis-
indane dione core of fredericamycin A.
to the reaction conditions or use of larger amounts of base
led to reduced diastereomeric ratios (not shown). The
presence of electron-withdrawing or -donating groups on the
ketone portion of the o-formyl chalcone derivatives 5b and
5c allowed the fine-tuning of their reactivity. Thus, the
4-chlorophenyl substituent in 5b resulted in an increase in
the rate of the reaction at the expense of the diastereoselec-
tivity (entry 2), whereas the reactivity of 4-methoxyphenyl-
substituted 5c was reduced while higher diastereocontrol was
achieved (entry 3).
Consistent with earlier observations that electron-poor
aldehydes provide faster rates in the Stetter reaction,6 p-fluoro
or m-methoxy groups relative to the aldehyde resulted in
enhanced reactivity (entries 4-7). Interestingly, the presence
of the methoxy group in substrates 5f and 5g did not prevent
the Stetter or the Michael addition steps (Scheme 3). Methyl
ketone 5h showed a slower reaction rate compared to
aromatic ketones (entry 8). The reduced diastereomeric ratio
in this case likely reflects the thermodynamic equilibrium
(Vide infra). Although unsaturated esters did not provide the
SAM product, thioesters could be employed to generate the
desired product 6i in moderate yield and high diastereose-
lectivity (entry 9).
The modulating effect of the various substituents on the
aromatic ring also allows the selective formation of cross-
SAM products in moderate yield (i.e., a nonstatistical
distribution of products). Indeed, spiro bis-indane 6j was
obtained as the major spiro bis-indane product (out of a
possible four) in the SAM reaction of 5f and 5j (Scheme 2).
The methoxy group at C3 of 5f increases the electrophilicity
of the formyl group making it more prone to react with the
catalyst, while it lowers the reactivity of the Stetter acceptor
moiety. On the other hand, the methoxy group at C4 of 5j
At the outset of our studies, we investigated the domino
SAM process employing 5a as a model substrate and
catalytic amounts of various N-heterocyclic carbene (NHC)
catalysts.10 Following a brief optimization of the reaction
(5) For reviews on domino reactions, see: (a) Tietze, L. F. Chem. ReV.
1996, 96, 115. (b) Fogg, D. E.; dos Santos, E. N. Coord. Chem. ReV. 2004,
248, 2365. (c) Tietze, L. F.; Brasche, G.; Gericke, K. Domino Reactions in
Organic Synthesis; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2006. (d) Chapman,
C. J.; Frost, C. G. Synthesis 2007, 1. (e) Enders, D.; Grondal, C.; Hu¨ttl,
M. R. M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 1570.
(6) Sa´nchez-Larios, E.; Gravel, M. J. Org. Chem. 2009, 74, 7536
(7) (a) Stetter, H.; Schreckenberg, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1973,
12, 81. (b) Stetter, H. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1976, 15, 639. (c) Stetter,
.
H.; Kuhlmann, H. Org. React. 1991, 40, 407
.
(8) Sun, F.-G.; Huang, X.-L.; Ye, S. J. Org. Chem. 2010, 75, 273
.
(9) For other domino or one-pot sequences involving a Stetter reaction,
see: (a) Nemoto, T.; Fukuda, T.; Hamada, Y. Tetrahedron Lett. 2006, 47,
4365. (b) Mattson, A. E.; Bharadwaj, A. R.; Zuhl, A. M.; Scheidt, K. A. J.
Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 5715–5724. (c) He, J.; Tang, S.; Liu, J.; Su, Y.; Pan,
X.; She, X. Tetrahedron 2008, 64, 8797. (d) Li, Y.; Shi, F.-Q.; He, Q.-L.;
You, S.-L. Org, Lett. 2009, 11, 3182. (e) Biju, A. T.; Wurz, N. E.; Glorius,
F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 5970. (f) Filloux, C. M.; Lathrop, S. P.;
Rovis, T. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, early edition July 16, 2010,
(doi:10.1073/pnas.1002830107).
(10) For reviews on NHC catalysis, see: (a) Enders, A.; Balensiefer, T.
Acc. Chem. Res. 2004, 37, 534. (b) Berkessel, A.; Gro¨ger, H. Asymmetric
Organocatalysis; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2005. (c) Zeitler, K. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 7506. (d) Enders, D.; Niemeier, O.; Henseler, A.
Chem. ReV. 2007, 107, 5606. (e) Marion, N.; Diez-Gonzalez, S.; Nolan,
I. P. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 2988. (f) Moore, J. L.; Rovis, T.
Top. Curr. Chem. 2010, 291, 77.
Org. Lett., Vol. 12, No. 24, 2010
5773