C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
Table 1. Quantum Yields of Acetate Release and Product
Distribution (%) of the Isolated Photoproducts after Irradiation of
(2S,3R)-1 and 3
Scheme 3
substrate
Φb
trans-2
cis-2
4
(threo-)(2S,3R)-1, 300 nm
(erythro-) 3, 300 nm
0.40 ( 0.05
0.22 ( 0.05
>95
20
>95
30
65
40
15
30
(threo-)(2S,3R)-1, 350 nmc
(erythro-) 3, 350 nmc
a 5 × 10-3 M, buffer solution pH ) 7, 120 min, using RPR-3000 Å and
3500 Å lamps in a rayonet housing. b Measured at 313 nm, monitoring the
formation of 2. c Irradiation times were longer, because of the low
absorbance (ca. 8 h).
A simple and general strategy for chiral caging is the use of the
serine-derived â-lactone 5 (Scheme 3) that can be ring-opened by
a variety of nucleophiles.16 The decaging activity depends on the
leaving group ability of the molecule thus inserted: For example,
caged pyrazole 6 did not lead to the liberation of pyrazole but to
the product of simple decarboxylation, as opposed to 7, which
cleanly liberates acetate.
In summary, a new PRPG has been developed, which can be
advantageously applied for the caging of carboxylates and similar
molecules. This PRPG includes a chiral moiety, derived from
natural amino acids. The scope of chiral photocaging has been
preliminarily explored by the analysis of a model system.
Figure 1. Newman projections of the threo and erythro configurations,
depicted in the conformations yielding the lower number of steric repulsions.
Scheme 2
Acknowledgment. A.S. thanks the Comunidad Auto´noma de
La Rioja (Spain) for a postdoctoral grant.
Supporting Information Available: Experimental procedures,
copies of NMR spectra. This material is available free of charge via
References
(1) Momotake, A.; Lindegger, N.; Niggli, E.; Barsotti, R. J.; Ellis-Davies, G.
C. R. Nature Methods 2006, 3, 35-40.
(2) (a) McCray, J. A.; Trentham, D. R. Annu. ReV. Biophys. Biophys. Chem.
1989, 18, 239-270. (b) Pelliciolli, A. P.; Wirz, J. Photochem. Photobiol.
Sci. 2002, 1, 441-458.
fit into the singlet-state decarboxylation type, which comprises only
intramolecular processes greatly influenced by substitution (position)
effects.7,8
(3) (a) Pillai, V. N. R. Synthesis 1980, 1, 1-26. (b) Pillai, V. N. R. In Organic
Photochemistry, Padwa, A., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1987; Vol.
9, pp 225-323.
A different process was verified for the diastereomeric photocage
with the erythro configuration. When caged acetate 3 was irradiated
(Scheme 2), a mixture of cis- and trans-propenylphthalimides 2
was observed, along with some 1-phthalimido-2-propanol acetate
(4), the product of simple decarboxylation.15 The different distribu-
tion of photoproducts after the irradiation of the two diastereoiso-
mers is shown in Table 1. The compounds were also irradiated at
350 nm, showing only marginal wavelength dependence for the
reaction of 3.
A plausible explanation for this behavior stems from geometrical
considerations. The Newman projections of both diastereoisomers
(Figure 1) show that the threo diastereoisomers can lead to the trans
double bond through an antiperiplanar geometrical disposition of
-COO• and -OAc leaving groups, which is the preferred situation
for an E2 concerted â-elimination. During the formation of the
double bond, conjugation with the π-system of the phthalimide and
electronic reorganization take place in a concerted fashion. By
contrast, in the case of the erythro diastereoisomers, the steric
interactions avoid the concerted â-elimination, and an intermediate
carbanion is formed after decarboxylation (Scheme 2). This
carbanion can be protonated by the aqueous solvent or eliminate
acetate via E1cB mechanism, yielding either the cis or the trans
double bond.
(4) Flickinger, S. T.; Patel, M.; Binkowski, B. F.; Lowe, A. M.; Li, M.-H.;
Kim, C.; Cerrina, F.; Belshaw, P. J. Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 2357-2360.
(5) (a) Bochet, C. G. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 2002, 125-142. (b)
Givens, R. S.; Conrad, P. G.; Yousef, A. L.; Lee, J.-I. In CRC Handbook
of Organic Photochemistry and Photobiology, 2nd ed.; Horspool, W. M.,
Lenci, F., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2004; Chapter 69.
(6) Falvey, D. E.; Sundararajan, C. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2004, 3, 831-
838.
(7) Lukeman, M.; Scaiano, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 7698-7899.
(8) Blake, J. A.; Gagnon, E.; Lukeman, M.; Scaiano, J. C. Org. Lett. 2006,
8, 1057-1060.
(9) Griesbeck, A. G.; Henz, A.; Hirt, J.; Ptatschek, V.; Engel, T.; Lo¨ffler, D.;
Schneider, F. W. Tetrahedron 1994, 50, 701-714.
(10) Wada, T.; Nishijima, M.; Fujisawa, T.; Sugahara, N.; Mori, T.; Nakamura,
A.; Inoue, Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 7492-7493.
(11) (a) Lhiaubet-Vallet, V.; Sarabia, Z.; Bosca´, F.; Miranda, M. A. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 9538-9539. (b) Lhiaubet-Vallet, V.; Encinas, S.;
Miranda, M. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 12774-12775.
(12) (a) Griesbeck, A. G.; Heckroth, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 396-
403. (b) Singhal, N.; Koner, A. L.; Mal, P.; Venugopalan, P.; Nau, W.
M.; Moorthy, J. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 14375-14382.
(13) Griesbeck, A. G.; Warzecha, K.-D.; Neudo¨rfl, J. M.; Go¨rner, H. Synlett
2004, 2347-2350.
(14) Warzecha, K.-D.; Go¨rner, H.; Griesbeck, A. G. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006,
110, 3356-3363.
(15) Identified by comparison with a sample prepared independently. The
photostability of 4 upon irradiation at 300 nm was verified as well.
(16) (a) Arnold, L. D.; Kalantar, T. H.; Vederas, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985,
107, 7105-7109. (b) Lall, M. S.; Ramtohul, Y. K.; James, M. N. G.;
Vederas, J. C. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 1536-1547.
JA066582N
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 128, NO. 51, 2006 16473