L-Proline catalysed multicomponent synthesis of 3-amino alkylated indoles via a Mannich-type reaction under solvent-free conditions

Article abstract of DOI:10.1039/c1gc16297g

An efficient l-proline catalyzed one-pot synthesis of 3-amino-alkylated indoles has been developed via a three-component Mannich-type reaction viz. secondary amines, aldehyde and indoles under solvent-free conditions at room temperature. Several amino acids (acidic, basic and neutral) have been screened for the reaction but the best results were obtained with l-proline.

Full text of DOI:10.1039/c1gc16297g

View Online / Journal Homepage / Table of Contents for this issue
Dynamic Article Links
Green Chemistry
Cite this: Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290
www.rsc.org/greenchem
COMMUNICATION
L-Proline catalysed multicomponent synthesis of 3-amino alkylated indoles
via a Mannich-type reaction under solvent-free conditions†
Atul Kumar,* Maneesh Kumar Gupta and Mukesh Kumar
Received 18th October 2011, Accepted 19th October 2011
DOI: 10.1039/c1gc16297g
An efficient L-proline catalyzed one-pot synthesis of 3-
amino-alkylated indoles has been developed via a three-
component Mannich-type reaction viz. secondary amines,
aldehyde and indoles under solvent-free conditions at room
temperature. Several amino acids (acidic, basic and neutral)
have been screened for the reaction but the best results were
obtained with L-proline.
integrase inhibitor 2,14 Ergine 3, Gramine 4, and Sumatriptan 5
(Fig. 1).
Multicomponent reactions1 (MCRs) have gained much atten-
tion in synthetic organic chemistry due to their advantages
of intrinsic atom-economy, simpler procedures, structural di-
versity, energy savings and reduced waste. Due to the poten-
tial importance of multicomponent reactions (MCRs), highly
functionalized organic molecules can be synthesized to serve as
pharmacologically important heterocyclic precursors.2
There are many MCRs, such as the Mannich reaction,3 Big-
inelli reaction,4 Passerini reaction,5 Ugi reaction,6 and Hantzsch
reaction.7 From this list, the Mannich reaction is a particularly
powerful synthetic method for the synthesis of various novel
nitrogen containing biologically active organic molecules.
Small organic molecules like amino acids and cinchona
alkaloids8 have shown promising and highly efficient catalytic
activities for multi-componentreactions. However, among all the
various organocatalysts, L-proline9 is one of the most versatile
organocatalysts for carbon–carbon bond formation.
Fig. 1 Some biologically active 3-substituted indoles.
In 1996, Nikolaus Risch et al. had synthesised 3-amino-
alkylated indoles15 using the iminium salt of the aromatic
aldehyde and indole. Kobayashi et al. reported the synthesis
of 3-substituted indole derivatives using AFC (aza-Friedel–
Crafts) reactions, using only o-anisidine, therefore showing that
it has a substrate limitation (Scheme 1).16 Our strategy for
Recently, there has been an increasing interest in the develop-
ment of clean technologies to replace hazardous organic solvents
with relatively environmental benign solvents. Nowadays “green
chemistry” emphasises the optimization of synthetic methodolo-
gies to reduce pollution, cost and tedious work-ups. This new
challenge has led to a growing interest in the field of organic
synthesis under solvent-free conditions10 as well as reactions
preformed in water.11
3-Substituted indole12 moieties are of much importance
because they exist in many natural products. It is also considered
as a venerable pharmacophore and has a wide range of biological
applications e.g. aromatase inhibitor for breast cancer 1,13 HIV-1
Medicinal and Process Chemistry Division, Central Drug Research
Institute, CSIR, Lucknow, India. E-mail: dratulsax@gmail.com;
Fax: 91-522-26234051; Tel: 91-522-2612411
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: See DOI:
10.1039/c1gc16297g
Scheme 1 Synthesis of the 3-amino-alkylated indole, (A) using iminium
salt, (B) catalysed by decanoic acid.
290 | Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©

View Online
Table 1 Effect of catalyst on synthesis of amino-alkylated indolea,19
the synthesis of 3-amino-alkylated indoles involves a three-
component Mannich-type reaction17 by using L-proline as an
organocatalyst under solvent-free conditions.
Yield of
Yield of
Entry
Catalystb
9 (%)c
10a (%)c
Our preliminary work was on the organocatalysis and
MCRs for the synthesis of various biologically impor-
tant heterocyclic compounds,18 following on from this we
wish to report the first organocatalysed solvent-free proce-
dure for the preparation of 3-amino-alkylated indole deriva-
tives via a one-pot three-component Mannich-type reaction
(Scheme 2).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TsOHd
60
62
56
68
69
65
70
55
90
60
60
65
85
87
—
—
25
40
—
—
30
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
12
13
12
10
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Trace
Trace
—
—
14
18
38
40
—
—
—
51
60
67
46
67
Acetic acidd
MSAd
TFAd
CuBrd
Copper(II) triflated
Zinc(II) triflated
Iron(III) chlorided
d
9
ZrCl4
NiCl4
d
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Zinc acetated
Copper(II) sulfated
SiO2–Cld
d
HClO4–SiO2
L-Lysinee
L-Histidinee
L-Glutamic acide
L-Asparatic acide
L-Thiaprolinee
trans-4-Hydroxy-L-prolinee
N-Methyl prolinee
N-Benzyl proline methyl estere
N-Methyl proline methyl estere
L-prolinee
Scheme 2 Synthesis of 3-amino-alkylated indole 10 catalyzed by L-
proline under solvent-free conditions.
L-prolineef
L-prolineeg
L-prolineeh
L-prolineei
Our initial efforts were focused on finding an efficient catalyst
for the three-component Mannich-type reaction of indoles with
secondary amines and aromatic aldehydes. In order to screen the
catalysts, the reaction of the indole, benzaldehyde, and pyrroli-
dine was taken as a model reaction with p-toluenesulfonic acid
(PTSA) as a Brønsted acid catalyst in acetonitrile. Unfortunately
we obtained bis-indole 9 in major yield. Thus we tested several
other Brønsted acids (acetic acid, methane sulfonic acid and
trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)) for this multi-component synthesis.
However, all these Brønsted acids gave only bis-indole 9 in major
amount. As Brønsted acids failed to give us the desired product
we used metal Lewis acids. Several metal Lewis acids (Table 1)
were screened to synthesize the Mannich product 10a. None of
the Lewis acids tested gave the 3-amino-alkylated indole. The
use of silica supported acids viz. SiO2-Cl, HClO4–SiO2 were
also found to be inefficient to yield the desired compound 10a
(Table 1).
We then turned our attention towards amino acid organocat-
alysts due to their inexpensiveness and recyclability for various
organic reactions. In order to elaborate our study, various amino
acids (acidic, basic and neutral) were screened for the Mannich-
type reaction using benzaldehyde, indole and pyrrolidine in
acetonitrile, the obtained results are summarized in Table 1.
Basic amino acids like L-lysine and L-histidine were found
ineffective to form either of the products (9, 10a). Whereas, acidic
amino acids (L-glutamic acid and L-aspartic acid) were found to
be a poor catalyst for the reaction. The desired product 10a was
obtained in a moderate yield when L-proline was used as the
organocatalyst with no formation of bisindole 9 (Table 1, entry
25). However, the available proline derivatives like L-thiaproline
(Table 1, entry 20) and trans-4-hydroxy-L-proline (Table 1, entry
21) were not found equally effective as proline and cause lower
yields.
a The reaction was conducted with benzaldehyde (1 mmol), indole
(1 mmol), and pyrrolidine (1 mmol). b 10 mol% catalyst in acetonitrile
(2 ml). c Isolated yield. d Reaction time of 1 h. e Reaction time of 38 h.
f 20 mol% catalyst in acetonitrile (2 ml). g 30 mol% catalyst in acetonitrile
(2 ml). h 5 mol% catalyst in acetonitrile (2 ml). i 40 mol% catalyst in
acetonitrile (2 ml).
The advantage of using amino acids as organocatalysts
is their amphoteric nature, possessing both amine and acid
functionalities. The amino group could catalyze the reaction
via electrophilic imine formation and the carboxylic group
might stabilize the charge generated on the nitrogen. When N-
methyl proline was used in the reaction ,the desired product
(10a) was not obtained, likewise N-benzyl proline methyl ester
and N-methyl proline methyl ester were both found to be
unable to catalyse the reaction in the way desired and yielded
none of the products. These results indicate that the reaction
may be involving the formation of an imine intermediate (13).
Therefore, L-proline was found to be the best organocatalyst for
the Mannich-type reaction between benzaldehyde, indole and
pyrrolidine to afford the desired product 10a with no traces of
the bis-indole 9 (Table 1).
In order to optimize the amount of L-proline used for the
catalysis of the reaction to form the desired Mannich product
10a, we analyzed the reaction by varying the loading amount to
5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 mol% of L-proline. The optimum loading
amount of L-proline turns out to be 30 mol% in order to
obtain the best result, as no such significant improvement in
the yield was observed on increasing the loading to 40 mol%.
Whereas, decreasing the amount of L-proline to 5 mol% resulted
in lowering of the yield. The results of this study are summarized
in Table 1.
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295 | 291
©

View Online
Table 2 Effect of solvents on the synthesis of 3-amino alkyl indole
derivativesa,19
Entry
Solvents
Time (h)b
Yield of 10a (%)c
1
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
MeOH
EtOH
iso-Propanol
DCM
48
48
48
48
48
48
62
62
38
38
38
5.5
28
28
23
Trace
Trace
Trace
Trace
Trace
67
THF
MeTHF
Benzene
Toluene
ACN
DMF
DMSO
Solvent free
Scheme 3 L-Proline catalyzed multicomponent synthesis of the 3-
amino-alkylated indole 10.
55
72
87
21G). The calculated LUMO (acceptor) and HOMO (donor)
energy gaps were found to be lower in the case of intermediate
13 than that of 12 which corroborates with the LUMO lowering
activation phenomenon22 (Fig. 2).
a The reaction was conducted with benzaldehyde(1 mmol), indole (1
mmol), and pyrrolidine (1 mmol) with 30 mol% L-proline catalyst.
b Reaction time. c Isolated yield.
In order to study the solvent effect on the reaction of
benzaldehyde, indole and pyrrolidine catalysed by L-proline, we
carried out the reaction in different solvents. When the reaction
was performed in MeOH, EtOH, iso-propanol and acetonitrile,
lower yields of the Mannich product (10a) were obtained.
Whereas in DCM, THF, MeTHF, benzene and toluene, only
trace amounts of the Mannich product (10a) was formed. The
best result was obtained in DMSO in comparison to DMF.
Surprisingly however, when the reaction is carried out under
solvent-free conditions, both the yield and reaction time were
significantly improved. The results of this study are shown in
Table 2.
Under these optimized reaction conditions a number of
Mannich products were synthesized and the results obtained are
represented in Table 3. The reaction of N-alkylated indoles (N-
methyl indole and N-benzyl indole) were also considered during
the study. It was observed that the N-alkylated indole took
longer to form the respective products (10o, 10p) in comparison
to indole. However, other derivatives of indole easily form the re-
spective Mannich products under the same reaction conditions.
Unfortunately, the result obtained in the case of aliphatic alde-
hyde was not as competent as in the case of the aromatic aldehyde
(Table 3).
MacMillan and co-workers20 have reported a Diels–Alder
cycloaddition reaction via the formation of an iminium ion21
(with a chiral secondary amine). They suggested that the LUMO
orbital of the iminium species is lower in energy. Keeping this
fact in mind, we hypothesized the mechanism of our reaction as
shown in Scheme 3. The reaction commences with the formation
of an imine intermediate from benzaldehyde with either proline
(11) or pyrrolidine (8). The formation of 12 may destabilized
by water molecules generated, whereas the imine intermediate
(13) with proline gets stabilized by the carboxylic acid group.
Thus favouring the nucleophilic addition of indole from C3 to
form the intermediate 14, which is susceptible towards nucle-
ophilic attack of the pyrrolidine which then yields the desired
product (10).
Fig. 2 LUMO–HOMO gap between donor and acceptor. Blue color
represents LUMO of intermediate and brown color represent HOMO
of donor.
In conclusion, we have developed a green and efficient
organocatalysed multicomponent reaction of aldehydes, sec-
ondary amines, and indoles for the synthesis of 3-amino-
alkylated indole derivatives under solvent-free conditions. L-
Proline is a very useful organocatalyst and forms imine in-
termediates through which the reaction proceeded in a more
favourable manner. The advantage of our presented method-
ology is improved conditions for the synthesis of 3-amino-
alkylated indole derivatives without the formation of bis-
indole.
Experimental
General experimental procedure for synthesis of compounds
(10)
In a typical experiment, the aldehyde (1 mmol), secondary
amine (1 mmol), indole (1 mmol) and L-proline (30 mol%) were
placed in a 25 ml round-bottom flask. The reaction mixture
was stirred at room temperature until the reaction was complete
(monitored by TLC). After completion the reaction mixture
was diluted with water and extracted with ethyl acetate, dried
over sodium sulphate and evaporated under vacuum to give
the crude product, which was purified by silica gel (230–400
mesh) column chromatography to afford the corresponding
product.
The results were further supported by a computational study
(optimization of the structures was performed using RHF 3-
292 | Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©

View Online
Table 3 L-Proline catalysed synthesis of 3-amino-alkylated indole derivativesa,19
Entry
1
Indole
Aldehyde
Secondary amine
Productb (10)
Time (h)
5.5
Yieldc (%)
87
2
5.0
85
3
4
5
7.5
5.0
6.0
86
84
86
6
7.5
81
7
8
6.5
5.5
79
85
9
5.5
5.0
89
78
10
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295 | 293
©

View Online
Table 3 (Contd.)
Entry
11
Indole
Aldehyde
Secondary amine
Productb (10)
Time (h)
5.0
Yieldc (%)
79
12
13
5.5
5.0
84
81
14
14
18
68
84
8.5
15
8.5
84
16
17
5.0
5.0
86
81
a The reaction was conducted with benzaldehyde (1 mmol), indole (1 mmol), secondary amine (1 mmol) and L-proline (30 mol%), solvent-free
conditions for the specified number of hours. b All products were characterized by 1H and 13C NMR, IR and mass spectroscopy. c Isolated yield. d
A MS (50 mg) was added.
4
˚
Acknowledgements
References
M. K. G. and M. K. acknowledge the CSIR-UGC, New Delhi
for the award of a SRF. We are thankful to Mr R. K. Purshottam
for providing the HPLC data. The authors also acknowledge the
SAIF-CDRI for providing spectral and analytical data. CDRI
communication No. 8150.
1 (a) Multicomponent Reactions, J. Zhu and H. Bienayme´, ed. Wiley-
VCH, Weinheim, 2005. For recent reviews, see: (b) A. Domling,
Chem. Rev., 2006, 106, 17–89; (c) J. Zhu and Eur, J. Org. Chem., 2003,
1133–1144; (d) D. J. Ramo´n and M. Yus, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.,
2005, 44, 1602–1634; (e) C. Simon, T. Constantieux and J. Rodriguez,
Eur. J. Org. Chem., 2004, 4957.
294 | Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©

View Online
2 (a) R. W. Armstrong, A. P. Combs, P. A. Tempest, S. D. Brown and T.
A. Keating, Acc. Chem. Res., 1996, 29, 123–131; (b) L. Weber, Curr.
Med. Chem., 2002, 9, 2085; (c) S. L. Schreiber, Science, 2000, 287,
1964–1969; (d) C. Hulme and V. Gore, Curr. Med. Chem., 2003, 10,
51–80.
3 (a) A. H. Blatt and N. Gross, J. Org. Chem., 1964, 29, 3306. For
reviews, see: (b) M. M. B. Marques, Angew. Chem., 2006, 118,
356–360; (c) K. Manabe and S. Kobayashi, Org. Lett., 1999, 1,
1965; (d) A. Co´rdova, Acc. Chem. Res., 2004, 37, 102–112; (e) N.
Kumaragurubaran, K. Juhl, W. Zhuang, A. Bogevig and K. A.
Jørgensen, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2002, 124, 827–833.
12 For recent reviews on indole containing natural products, see: (a) D.
Faulkner, Nat. Prod. Rep., 1999, 16, 155; (b) A. Kumar, S. Sharma
and R. A. Maurya, Tetrahedron Lett., 2009, 50, 5937–5940; (c) P.
Srihari, V. K. Singh, D. C. Bhunia and J. S. Yadav, Tetrahedron Lett.,
2009, 50, 3763–3766.
13 M.-P. Le´ze´, M. Le Borgne, P. Marchand, D. Loquet, M. Kogler, G.
Le Baut, A. Palusczak and R. W. J Hartmann, J. Enzyme Inhib. Med.
Chem., 2004, 19, 549.
14 R. Contractor, I. J. Samudio, Z. Estrov, D. Harris, J. A. McCubrey,
S. H. Safe, M. Andreeff and M. Konopleva, Cancer Res., 2005, 65,
2890.
4 (a) Li. Hongming, B. Wang and Li. Deng, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006,
128, 732–733; (b) A. Kumar and R. A. Maurya, Tetrahedron lett.,
2007, 48, 4569–4571; (c) D. S. Bose, L. Fatima and H. B. Mereyala,
J. Org. Chem., 2003, 68, 587–590.
5 (a) P. R. Andreana, C. C. Liu and S. L. Schreiber, Org. Lett., 2004,
6, 4231–4233; (b) J. Brioche, G. Masson and J. Zhu, Org. Lett., 2010,
12, 1432–1435; (c) C. K. Z. Andrade, S. C. S. Takada, P. A. Z. Suarez
and M. B. Alves, Synlett, 2006, 1539–1541.
6 For reviews, see: (a) A. Domling and I. Ugi, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.,
2000, 39, 168–3210; (b) M. Majid, B. B. Heravi, A. O. Hossein and
R. Hekmatshoar, Tetrahedron Lett., 2008, 49, 5389; (c) L. El. Kaim,
L. Grimaud and J. Oble, Angew. Chem, 2005, 117, 6101–6103.
7 (a) S. J. Tu, J. F. Zhou, X. Deng, P. J. Cai, H. Wang, J. C. Chin and
Feng, J. Org. Chem., 2001, 21, 313–316; (b) S. J. Ji, Z. Q. Jiang, J.
Lu and T. P. Loh, Synlett, 2004, 831–835; (c) A. Kumar and R. A.
Maurya, Synlett, 2008, 883–885; (d) A. Kumar and R. A. Maurya,
Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 1946–1952.
15 (a) H. J. Grumbach, M. Arend and N. Risch, Synthesis, 1996,
883–887; (b) G. Matthias, M. Corinna, PCT Int. Appl. 2001, WO
2001047882.
16 S. Shirakawa and S. Kobayashi, Org. Lett., 2006, 8, 4939–
4942.
17 (a) D. Uraguchi, Y. Ueki and T. Ooi, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130,
14088–14089; (b) B. Eftekhari-Sis, A. Abdollahifar, M. M. Hashemi
and M. Zirak, Eur. J. Org. Chem., 2006, 22, 5152–5157; (c) J. Zhang,
Z. Cui, F. Wang, Y. Wang, Z. Miao and R. Chen, Green Chem., 2007,
9, 1341–1345; (d) W. Y. Chen, X. S. Li and J. Lu, Synth. Commun.,
2008, 38, 546–552.
18 (a) A. Kumar, S. Sharma, R. A. Maurya and J. Sarkar, J. Comb.
Chem., 2010, 12, 20–24; (b) A. Kumar, G. Gupta and S. Srivastava, J.
Comb. Chem., 2010, 12, 458; (c) A. Kumar, S. Srivastava, G. Gupta,
V. Chaturvedi, S. Sinha and R. Srivastava, ACS Comb. Sci., 2010, 13,
65–71; (d) A. Kumar and S. Sharma, Green Chem., 2011, 13, 2017–
2020; (e) A. Kumar, G. Gupta and S. Srivastava, Green Chem., 2011,
13, 2459–2463.
19 No enantioselectivity was observed under solvent/solvent-free con-
ditions as determined by Chiralpak IA HPLC column.
20 (a) K. A. Ahrendt, C. J. Borths and D. W. C. MacMillan, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2000, 122, 4243–4244; (b) D. W. C. MacMillan, Nature,
2008, 455, 304–307; (c) W. S. Jen, J. J. M. Wiener and D. W. C.
MacMillan, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2000, 122, 9874–9875; (d) N. A. Paras
and David W. C. MacMillan, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2001, 123, 4370–
4371.
21 (a) J. R. Hwu and P. S. Furth, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1989, 111, 8834;
(b) C. B. Jacobsen, K. L. Jensen, J. Udmark and K. A. Jørgensen,
Org. Lett., 2011, 13, 4790–4793; (c) A. Prieto, N. Halland and K.
A. Jørgensen, Org. Lett., 2005, 7, 3897–3900; (d) K. R. Knudsen,
T. Risgaard, N. Nishiwaki, K. V. Gothelf and K. A. Jørgensen,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2001, 123, 5843–5844; (e) T. Fukuyama,
R. K. Frank and C. F. Jewell, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1980, 102,
2122.
8 (a) C. M. Bode, A. Ting and S. E. Schaus, Tetrahedron, 2006, 62,
11499–11505; (b) Shi-Kai Tian and Li Deng, Tetrahedron, 2006, 62,
11320–11330.
9 (a) A. Kumar and R. A. Maurya, Tetrahedron, 2008, 64, 3477–3488;
(b) A. Kumar, M. Kumar and M. K. Gupta, Tetrahedron Lett., 2009,
50, 7024–7027; (c) A. Kumar and R. A. Maurya, Tetrahedron, 2007,
63, 1946–1952; (d) M. Radi, V. Bernardo, B. Bechi, D. Castagnolo, M.
Pagano and M. Botta, Tetrahedron Lett., 2009, 50, 6572–6575; (e) B.
List, R. A. Lerner and C. F. Barbas (III), J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2000,
122, 2395–2396; (f) B. List, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2000, 122, 9336–9337.
10 (a) Z. X. Wang and H. L. Qin, Green Chem., 2004, 6, 90; (b) C. L.
Raston and J. L. Scott, Green Chem., 2000, 2, 49; (c) K. Tanaka, T.
Sugino and F. Toda, Green Chem., 2000, 2, 303.
11 (a) C. J. Li and T. H. Chan, Organic Reaction in Aqueous Media, John
Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, 1997; (b) U. M. Lindstrom, Chem.
Rev., 2002, 102, 2751; (c) A. Kumar, M. K. Gupta and M. Kumar,
Tetrahedron Lett., 2010, 51, 1582; (d) A. Kumar, M. K. Gupta and
M. Kumar, Tetrahedron Lett., 2011, 52, 4521–4525; (e) A. Kumar, V.
D. Tripathi and P. Kumar, Green Chem., 2011, 13, 51.
22 D. E. Manolopoulos, J. C. May and S. E. Down, Chem. Phys. Lett.,
1991, 181, 105.
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Green Chem., 2012, 14, 290–295 | 295
©