SCHEME 1. General Three-Component Coupling with
Enoates
Conjugate Addition/Ireland-Claisen
Rearrangements of Allyl Fumarates: Simple
Access to Terminally Differentiated Succinates
Cory C. Bausch and Jeffrey S. Johnson*
Department of Chemistry, UniVersity of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3290
SCHEME 2. Proposed Conjugate Addition/
[3,3]-Rearrangement
ReceiVed October 19, 2007
classic complexity-building reactions that exploit that latent
nucleophilic character of the R-carbon in Michael acceptors
(Scheme 1).3 Conjugate addition/[3,3]-rearrangement reactions
represent an important subcategory of these tandem processes.4
We envisioned that by using an allyl fumarate as the conjugate
acceptor with an organometallic nucleophile, the metal enolate
or derived silyl ketene acetal generated in situ would undergo
a subsequent ester enolate Claisen rearrangement (Scheme 2).5
In accord with precedent, the use of a chlorotrialkylsilane was
projected to both accelerate the conjugate addition and generate
the requisite silyl ketene acetal.6,7
Organometallic nucleophiles for conjugate addition to dial-
lylfumarates8 were evaluated. For the purpose of the initial
screen, we examined only the 1,4-addition. The two catalysts
utilized were the commercially available CuBr‚SMe2 and easily
synthesized bis(N-tert-butylsalicylideneaminato)copper(II),9 here-
after referred to as Cu(NtBu‚sal)2.
The conjugate addition of dialkylzinc reagents to allyl
fumarates with subsequent Ireland-Claisen rearrangement
has been accomplished yielding substituted unsymmetrical
succinic acid derivatives. This one-pot reaction creates two
new carbon-carbon bonds at contiguous stereogenic centers.
The reaction proceeds for several alkylzinc reagents and
substituted allyl fumarates. The products contain distinguish-
able functional handles for further manipulation.
The conjugate addition of nonstabilized organometallic nu-
cleophiles to R,â-unsaturated carbonyls is a staple of organic
synthesis, but the fumarate and maleate electrophile subclass
in this reaction family has received scant attention relative to
simple enones and enoates. The comparative lack of research
activity is surprising since maleic and fumaric acid derivatives
represent cheap progenitors to functionalized succinic acids.
Notable advances in this area have been reported. Ibuka and
co-workers disclosed organocopper(I)-Lewis acid additions to
fumarate esters that afforded good yields of the addition
products; however, olefin reduction was a competing reaction
pathway.1 Hayashi and co-workers have reported enantioselec-
tive rhodium-catalyzed 1,4-additions of arylboronic acids to
fumarates and maleates.2 While these examples provide useful
conjugate adducts, a nonobvious feature of the reported additions
is that the carbonyls in the products are still functionally
equivalent and therefore challenging to distinguish. In this paper,
we describe the conjugate addition of dialkylzinc reagents to
diallyl fumarates with subsequent Ireland-Claisen rearrange-
ment to give unsymmetrical succinate products. A defining
characteristic of the title reaction is chemodifferentiation of the
two carbonyls that can be exploited in further selective
manipulations.
The Cu(NtBu‚sal)2-catalyzed addition of ethylmagnesium
bromide led to the desired 1,4-addition product along with
products derived from 1,2-addition and SN2′ displacement (Table
1, entry 1). The conjugate addition of ethylmagnesium bromide
also proceeds in the absence of copper (entry 2). An alternative
organometallic reagent, diethylzinc, is considerably less reactive
in THF (entry 3), but simply switching solvents to diethyl ether
provides clean conjugate addition in 90 min (entries 4 and 5).
(3) (a) Noyori, R. Asymmetric Catalysis in Organic Synthesis; Wiley:
New York, 1994; pp 298-322. (b) Guo, H.-C. and Ma, J.-A. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 354-366.
(4) (a) Aoki, Y.; Kuwajima, I. Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 7457-7460.
(b) Chai, Y.; Hong, S. P.; Lindsay, H. A.; McFarland, C.; McIntosh, M. C.
Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 2905-2928. (c) Eriksson, M.; Hjelmencrantz, M.
N.; Nilsson, M.; Olsson, T. Tetrahedron 1995, 51, 12631-12644. For an
alternative approach, see: (d) Lambert, T. H.; MacMillan, D. W. C. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 13646-13647.
(5) Ireland, R. E.; Mueller, R. H.; Willard, A. K. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1976, 98, 2868-2877.
(6) (a) Horiguchi, Y.; Matsuzawa, S.; Nakamura, E.; Kuwajima, I.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 4025-4028. (b) Matsuzawa, S.; Horiguchi,
Y.; Nakamura, E.; Kuwajima, I. Tetrahedron 1989, 45, 349-362.
(7) (a) Perlmutter, P. Conjugate Addition Reactions in Organic Synthesis;
Pergamon Press: Oxford, 1992. (b) Sakata, H.; Kuwajima, I. Tetrahedron
Lett. 1987, 28, 5719-5722. (c) Sakata, H.; Aoki, Y.; Kuwajima, I.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 1161-1164. (d) Magot-Cuvru, A.; Blanco, L.;
Drouin, J. Tetrahedron 1991, 47, 8331-83388.
Multicomponent couplings initiated by conjugate addition and
terminated by electrophilic trapping of the resulting enolate are
(1) Ibuka, T.; Aoyagi, T.; Kitada, K.; Yoneda, F.; Yamamoto, Y. J.
Organomet. Chem. 1985, 287, C18-C22.
(2) Shintani, R.; Ueyama, K.; Yamada, I.; Hayashi, T. Org. Lett. 2004,
6, 3425-3427.
(8) See the Supporting Information for the synthesis procedure.
(9) Sacconi, L.; Ciampolini, M. J. Chem. Soc. 1964, 276-80.
10.1021/jo701778k CCC: $40.75 © 2008 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 01/23/2008
J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 1575-1577
1575