product 2 in 58% yield. It was accompanied by 26% of
product 3, epimeric at C3. The configuration at C3 had been
established in 1, and epimerization was completely unex-
pected.
The most plausible mechanism for the epimerization
invokes a 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement, Figure 1. Oxocar-
ions 8 and 7. We conclude that the 2-oxonia Cope rear-
rangement plays an important role in this unusual Prins
cyclization.
Does the 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement compete with the
Prins cyclization with a typical substrate? This question is
difficult to answer because the 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement
is usually undetectable by product analysis. Figure 2 shows
Figure 1. The chair and boat 2-oxonia Cope rearrangements that
lead to tetrahydropyran 2 and its C3 epimer 3.
Figure 2. Racemization test for a 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement
in a Prins cyclization reaction.
benium ion 6 could rearrange to 7 via a chair transition state.
Both 6 and 7 would cyclize to the expected product 2.9
Product 3 could arise by a 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement in
a boat transition state to produce the oxocarbenium ion 8.
Cyclization of 8 from a chair transition state would produce
3, the C3 epimer. A 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement from a
chair transition state (e.g., 6 to 7) leads to the expected
product 2. Epimerization at C3 requires a boat transition state
in the Cope rearrangement. Nokami’s crotyl transfer reactions
proceed with good stereochemical fidelity and suggest that
such a boat transition state is unexpected.6 Further evidence
of the intermediacy of 8 in the formation of 3 comes from
the treatment of 1 with TMSOTf (Scheme 1.) The E-alkene
5 was produced as a minor product, along with Z-alkene 4.
Both presumably arise from hydrolysis of the oxocarbenium
a typical Prins cyclization substrate 9. Oxocarbenium ion
10 can rearrange via a chair transition state to 11, or cyclize
to 12. Compound 11, however, also cyclizes to 12. The
2-oxonia Cope rearrangement with a chair transition state
does not affect the outcome of a Prins cyclization and in
most cases can be ignored.9
Figure 2 outlines a test for the 2-oxonia Cope rearrange-
ment in a Prins cyclization substrate. If we add a nucleophile
to the Prins cyclization reaction, it could add to the
oxocarbenium ions 10 and 11 in competition with the Prins
cyclization. If the two alkyl groups are not equivalent, two
different compounds, 13 and 14, would be produced.
Producing both 13 and 14 would be good evidence for a
2-oxonia Cope rearrangement, but it would be difficult to
analyze the relative rate of the reactions, as 13 and 14 could
be formed as a kinetic or a thermodynamic mixture. A more
sensitive test uses optically pure 9. In this case, 13 and 14
are enantiomers, and the 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement
mediates racemization of the substrate. Racemization is a
one-way process, and so a thermodynamic (racemic) mixture
of 13 and 14 can be easily distinguished from a kinetic
(optically active) mixture. Racemization of the side products
would be good evidence for the 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement
competing with the Prins cyclization.
(6) (a) Nokami, J.; Yoshizane, K.; Matsuura, H.; Sumida, S.-i. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 6609-6610. (b) Nokami, J.; Anthony, L.; Sumida,
S.-I. Chem. Eur. J. 2000, 6, 2909-2913. (c) Nokami, J.; Ohga, M.;
Nakamoto, H.; Matsubara, T.; Hussain, I.; Kataoka, K. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2001, 123, 9168-9169.
(7) (a) Loh, T.-P.; Hu, Q.-Y.; Ma, L.-T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
2450-2451. (b) Loh, T.-P.; Tan, K.-T.; Hu, Q.-Y. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2001, 40, 2921-2922.
(8) (a) Gerth, K.; Schummer, D.; Hoefle, G.; Irschik, H.; Reichenbach,
H. J. Antibiot. 1995, 48, 973-6. (b) Christmann, M.; Bhatt, U.; Quitschalle,
M.; Claus, E.; Kalesse, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 4364-4366.
(c) Bhatt, U.; Christmann, M.; Quitschalle, M.; Claus, E.; Kalesse, M. J.
Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 1885-1893. (d) Williams, D. R.; Ihle, D. C.;
Plummer, S. V. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 1383-1386.
(9) (a) Jaber, J. J.; Mitsui, K.; Rychnovsky, S. D. J. Org. Chem. 2001,
66, 4679-4686. (b) Rychnovsky, S. D.; Thomas, C. R. Org. Lett. 2000, 2,
1217-1219.
The 2-oxonia Cope rearrangement was evaluated as
outlined in Scheme 2. Optically active 1610 was prepared as
3816
Org. Lett., Vol. 3, No. 23, 2001