Organic Letters
Letter
a
little influence on the reaction. Second, we inspected different
alkyls (such as methyl, ethyl, n-propyl, and n-butyl) on the
aromatic ring at the terminal alkyne (R2), and the reactions
were also performed successfully with corresponding products
3i−3y in good yields. In addition, the reaction revealed that
1,7-enyne with a methoxy or ethoxy group was more suitable
for this synthesis process and the higher yields could be
obtained (3z, 3aa−3ae). However, when a halogen atom
(Cl−) was present on the aromatic ring of 1,7-enyne, the yields
of the products were lower than those of alkyl and alkoxy (3f−
3aj). While 1,7-enyne has a stronger electron-withdrawing
group, the reaction failed completely (3ak−3an), which
indicates that the substituent properties on 1,7-enyne had a
greater influence on the reaction. Due to the steric hindrance,
the products are mainly (E)-isomer, indicating that the
reaction has excellent configurational selectivity. The X-crystal
diffraction analysis of 3c further confirmed this conclusion.
Subsequently, we investigated the substitution effect on the
aromatic ring at phenol (R1) (Scheme 3). When R1 was a
Scheme 4. Scope for the Synthesis of Compound 6
a
Scheme 3. Scope for the Synthesis of Compound 4
a
Condition: 5 (0.2 mmol), 2 (0.2 mmol), TBHP (1 equiv, 0.2 mmol),
EtOH (2.5 mL), 80 °C (oil bath temperature), under a nitrogen
b
atmosphere for 10 h. Isolated yield.
reported reactions proceeded well, which given the corre-
sponding products with favorable yields (6k−6p). In addition,
when R1 was a methyl, the explored reactions were afforded
the corresponding products in excellent yields (6q−6t) (up to
91%). Consistent with the result of product 3, the reaction
failed when R2 was a strongly electron-withdrawing group
(NO2−, −CN, and MeCO−) (6u−6x). Interestingly, because
of the steric hindrance effect of methyl, the structure 6 was
confirmed as an (E)-isomer by the X-ray crystal diffraction of
6p. Therefore, this indicated that the configuration of the
products was highly controlled by the structure of 1,7-enyne.
Strangely, when substrate 7 is derived from aliphatic alkynes,
the obtained product 8 is only the vicinal thiosulfonylation27 of
7 and thiosulfonate (Scheme 5), which may be due to the
difference in the electronic effects of the alkyl group from the
aryl group. This can be demonstrated by 8g, indicating that
allyl is not involved in the reaction. In addition, the
selenosulfonate can also be used in this reaction to give
product 8h with good yield.
The gram scale reaction was also verified. When 1a (1.0 g,
4.3 mmol) reacted with 2a (1.07 g, 4.3 mmol) under standard
conditions, the desired product 3a could be obtained with 73%
yield (1.18 g). Moreover, the obtained compound 3 can be
further applied to the Julia−Kosinski-type reaction to give β-
alcohol derivatives (Scheme 6).
In order to understand the mechanism of the reaction, the
control reaction of 1a and 2a was investigated under the
standard conditions with the typical radical scavengers
TEMPO (3 equiv) and BHT (3 equiv), respectively, and the
a
Conditions: 1′ (0.2 mmol), 2 (0.2 mmol), TBHP (1 equiv, 0.2
mmol), EtOH (2.5 mL), 80 °C (oil bath temperature), under a
nitrogen atmosphere for 10 h. Isolated yield.
b
methyl, the 1,7-enyne could effectively react with thiosulfonate
bearing different groups (Me−, F−, Cl−) to give the
corresponding products (4a−4d) in good yield. We further
found that R2 was an electron-donating group (Me−, Et−) or a
weak electron-donating group (F−), the reactions were all
carried out smoothly to afford compounds (4e−4l) with
satisfactory yields. When R1 was a chlorine group (Cl−), the
yield of the reaction decreased significantly (4m−4s),
indicating that the substituents on 1,7-enyne had a great
influence on the reaction.
Next, a series of oxygen-containing 1,7-enyne 1-((2-
methylallyl)oxy)-2-(arylethynyl)benzene 5 was also studied
with thiosulfonate 2 to investigate the scope of the annulation
reaction (Scheme 4). At first, 1-((2-methylallyl)oxy)-2-
(phenylethynyl)benzene could react well with different
thiosulfonates to give 6a−6d in good yields. When R2 was a
electron-donating group (Me−, Et−, Pr−, MeO−, and EtO−),
which all could tolerate the screened conditions, providing the
corresponding compounds with high yields (6e−6j). In
addition, when R2 was a halogen atom (F−, Cl−), the
C
Org. Lett. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX