had a diastereomeric ratio identical to that observed
above. Additionally, 29% of free diyne (removal of the
two TMS) werealsoisolated. Inlight of these observations,
we can postulate that a chelated lithium methoxide, formed
during the addition of the acetylide to the amino ester, is most
probably responsible for the TMS-cleavage. Moreover, when
the addition of lithium acetylide was carried out on Ts-Ala-
O-t-Bu instead of Ts-Ala-OMe, the ratio of 2b:1b was only
1:4. This result confirms the chelation hypothesis in that the
bulky alkoxide (t-BuOꢀ) would be less effective in the attack
of the TMS group.
An analogy could be made between the chelation of
MeOLi with compound 1 and TMEDA-BuLi chelation. A
monomer- or dimer-based pathway could be involved.18
The pro-(S) attack of the chelated methoxide on the silicon
atom would be diastereoselective giving rise to (S,S)-2.
This process is probably sequential (with preliminary
methoxide dissociation) and not concerted because of a
nonfavored constrained transition state of the attack. The
pro-(R) attack would be disfavored by the tosyl group; this
face is hindered as illustrated by the simplified Chem-3D
model of the monomer (Figure 1).19 Therefore, the sulfo-
nyl group could play a role in driving the MeOLi nucleo-
phile toward the pro-(S) trimethylsilylethynyl substituent.
Another possible explanation would be the formation
of a chiral trans-dimer or any analogue (Scheme 3). This
dimer is C2-symmetric and could be predominant in the
medium,20 by way of favoring the formation of the major
(S,S)-diastereomer. The suggested relative stereochemistry
was confirmed by an NOE sequence after derivatization of
2 (vide infra).
Scheme 2. Role of n-BuLi and MeOLi in the TMS-Removal
A more complex tetramer aggregate could also be
hypothesized since these complexes have already been
discussed.21
These hypotheses are coherent; the reaction of Ts-Val-
OMe showed low diastereoselectivity because of a bulky
isopropyl group which does not allow differentiation of
the two faces in the TMS deprotection. This was also
confirmed by a longer reaction time in the formation of
2l as compared to 2b (entry 15, Table 1).
The mechanism involving a five-membered chelate
would be preferred since the use of a β-alanine ester
substrate (entry 16, Table 1) did not afford deprotection
of the TMS group, and only compound 1m was isolated.
This is again in agreement with the proposed chelate.
In order to demonstrate the relative stereochemistry,
we coupled diynes 2 to ethyl diazoacetate in the presence
of a catalytic amount of copper(I) iodide22 to prepare the
pyrrolidine motif (Scheme 4).23
The reaction scope of different amino esters has been
then studied in the presence of 4 equiv of lithium acetylide.
Replacing the sulfonyl group by an acetyl one resulted in
slowing down the reaction rate. The yield of 2d was 55%
and 19% for 1d, but almost the same diastereoselectivity
was observed (entry 7, Table1).
N-Ts-phenylglycine methyl ester (Ts-Phg-OMe, entry 8)
gave similar results to those obtained with the alanine
analogue with the formation of 2e in 74% isolated yield
and 9:1 dr. A methionine-derived substrate was also tested
under the same conditions, and 2f was isolated in 69% with
drof 4:1 (entry 9). To better understand the mechanism, we
compared the reactivity of alanine and a lactate derivative.
It is interesting to mention that with the latter we observed
only the formation of 1g in 82% isolated yield and no trace
of 2g was detected (entry 10, Table 1). This behavior
indicates that the nitrogen atom is probably playing a
major role in the selective cleavage of the TMS group.
Lithium ligation by an amide anion should be involved in
the process as stated above.
When the diyne 2b was reacted with ethyl diazoacetate
in the presence of 5 mol % of CuI in acetonitrile, the
desired pyrrolidine 6 was obtained in 42% yield as a single
diastereoisomer with an ee >99%. Attempts to demon-
strate the relative stereochemistry of pyrrolidines 6 by
an NOE sequence were unsuccessful. We therefore
When methyl pyrroglutamate was used as the substrate
(entry 11), diyne 1h was formed in 82% yield. Reaction of
proline methyl ester showed the same behavior; i.e., no
TMS-cleavage occurred (entry 12). In the case of cyclic
substrates, the lack of flexibility or a constrained bicyclic
transition state would prevent the cleavage of the tri-
methylsilyl group.
The methodology was also applied to a tryptophan
derivative with free nitrogen at the indole moiety at gram
scale (3 g of substrate). Interestingly, the product 2i was
isolated in 65% yield with a 4:1 diastereomeric ratio and
high ee (>99.5%, entry 13). An unprotected serine analo-
gue gave also the same reactivity with lithium acetylide,
and the desymmetrized compound 2k was obtained in
satisfactory yield (50%) with a dr of 4:1 (entry 14).
(18) (a) Chadwick, S. T.; Rennels, R. A.; Rutherford, J. L.; Collum,
D. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 8640–8647. (b) Qu, B.; Collum, D. B.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 10820–10821. (c) For a computational
study of lithium methoxide mixed aggregates, see: Pratt, L. M.; Kwon,
O.; Ho, T. C.; Nguyen, N. V. Tetrahedron 2008, 64, 5314–5321.
(19) (a) For a lithium dianion, see: Gruver, J. M.; West, S. P.; Collum,
D. B.; Sarpong, R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 13212–13213. (b) For
aminoalkoxide lithium aggregates, see: Khartabil, H. K.; Gros, P. C.;
ꢀ
Fort, Y.; Ruiz-Lopez, M. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 2410–2416.
(c) For a review, see: Gros, P.; Fort, Y. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 3375–
3383.
(20) For an example of C2-symmetric Li-dimer, see: Martin, A.;
Kocks, B. M.; Spek, A. L.; Van Koten, G. J. Organomet. Chem. 2001,
624, 271–286.
(21) Jones, A. C.; Sanders, A. W.; Bevan, M. J.; Reich, H. J. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 3492–3493 and references cited therein.
(22) Suarez, A.; Fu, G. C. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 3580–
3582.
(23) For details, see Supporting Information.
3976
Org. Lett., Vol. 14, No. 15, 2012