aromatic ring into the backbone of the enyne would reduce
the conformational degrees of freedom of the side chains,
thereby preorganizing the alkyne and alkene for cyclization.
After an initial, largely unsuccessful, foray with substrates
patterned after 1,7 our attention was drawn to the alternate
series 2.8,9 This Letter details our initial findings in this latter
substrate.
Some time ago, Sammes and co-workers demonstrated that
the introduction of substituents ortho to conformationally
flexible side chains in aromatic substrates had a beneficial
effect on both the rates and yields of the [3 + 2] azide-
alkene cycloadditions under study.11 These “steric buttresses”
decreased the conformationally accessible space, and hence
the entropic change during the reaction was reduced. This
strategy appeared to be a sound one, and therefore it was
applied to the substrates in this study (Figure 2).12
The cyclization precursors were readily prepared via
alkylation of the TMS-protected 2-ethynylphenol 3,10 either
directly with the alkyl bromide or through a Mitsunobu
protocol (Scheme 1).8 Desilylation then provided the requisite
Scheme 1a
Figure 2. Steric buttressing in aryl enynes.
Initially it was decided to evaluate substrates that contained
an o-t-Bu group as the buttressing element. For the sake of
synthetic convenience, 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol was employed
as starting material, since regiochemical complications could
be avoided in the preparation of o-ethynylphenol 8.13 With
this material in hand, the hydroxyl group was alkylated either
with the alkyl halide or through a Mitsunobu reaction as
before (Scheme 2). After desilylation, the enynes were
converted into the corresponding Co2(CO)6 complex and then
treated with NMO. The influence of the t-Bu group on these
reactions was immediately apparent. In the case of enyne
10a, it was converted into the expected enone 12a in 70%
yield. However, instead of requiring 8 h for complete
consumption of starting material such as 4a, the reaction of
10a was complete after 30 min (after the addition of NMO
was complete). In a similar fashion, the consumption of the
higher homologues 10b and 10c was rapid, leading to the
formation of new compounds. However, when the products
were isolated, it was clear from the NMR data that although
the products were cyclic and they possessed carbonyls, they
were not the expected cycloadducts 13a or 16a.14 In the case
of the PKR of enyne 10b, two new compounds were isolated
in 18% and 36% yields. The determination of the identity
of the major cycloadduct proved to be quite challenging as
inter alia the mass spectrum revealed that the compound
contained one more oxygen atom than expected. Fortunately,
this compound provided crystals of suitable quality for
analysis by X-ray crystallography. The results obtained from
this determination were quite surprising (Figure 3). The
a (a) K2CO3, acetone, allyl bromide; (b) Ph3P, DEAD, 3-buten-
1-ol, THF; (c) K2CO3, NaI, acetone, 5-bromo-1-pentene; (d) K2CO3,
MeOH, THF; (e) Co2(CO)8, CH2Cl2 then NMO.
enynes 4a-c.8 After conversion to the corresponding
Co2(CO)6 complexes, the enynes were treated with excess
N-methylmorpholine oxide (NMO) to initiate the cyclization
process. In the case of enyne 4a, a smooth cyclization
reaction was observed, providing the 6,6,5-tricyclic system
5 in 75% yield.8 On the other hand, both enynes 4b and 4c
failed to undergo cyclization. While this and other experi-
ments confirmed that the aromatic ring was a suitable
scaffold for PKR’s, apparently the entropic issues were not
addressed in the higher homologues.8,9
(4) For an attempt to prepare seven-membered rings through the
intramolecular Pauson-Khand reaction, see: Mukai, C.; Sonobe, H.; Kim,
J. S.; Hanoaka, M. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 6654. See also Wender, P. A.;
McDonald, F. E. Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 3691.
(5) (a) Petasis, N. A.; Patane, M. A. Tetrahedron 1992, 48, 5757. (b)
Roxburgh, C. J. Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 10749.
(6) (a) Jung, M. E. Synlett 1999, 843. (b) Jung, M. E. Synlett 1990, 186.
(7) Seshadri, H. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Arlington,
Arlington, TX, 2001.
(10) Arcadi, A.; Cacchi, S.; Del Rosario, M.; Fabrizi, G.; Marinelli, F.
J. Org. Chem. 1996, 61, 9280.
(11) Orlek, B. S.; Sammes, P. G.; Weller, D. J. Tetrahedron 1993, 49,
8179.
(12) For a review of this approach see Sammes, P. G.; Weller, D. J.
Synthesis 1995, 1205.
(8) Lovely, C. J.; Seshadri, H. Synth. Commun. 2001, 31, xxxx. See
also: Blanco-Urgoiti, J.; Casarrubios, L.; Dom´ınguez, G.; Pe´rez-Castells,
J. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 3315.
(9) For studies relating to systems derived from o-vinylphenol, see:
Pe´rez-Serrano, L.; Blanco-Urgoiti, J.; Casarrubios, L.; Dom´ınguez, G.;
Pe´rez-Castells, J. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 3513.
(13) The o-ethynylphenols were prepared by iodination of the corre-
sponding phenol and then Sonogashira cross-coupling of the iodide with
TMS-acetylene. See Supporting Information for details.
(14) The absence of a three-proton doublet quickly ruled out migration
of the double bond to an internal position followed by cyclization to provide
a methylcyclopentenone: see ref 4.
2608
Org. Lett., Vol. 3, No. 16, 2001