Organic Letters
Letter
Table 1. Screening Ligands for the Asymmetric
Table 2. Optimization of the Reaction Conditions for the
Asymmetric Hydrogenation of (E)-2a
a
Hydrogenation of (E)-2-Methyl-3-benzoylpropenoic Acid
a
2a
b
c
entry
solvent
MeOH
EtOH
i-PrOH
CF3CH2OH
EtOAc
DCM
metal precursor
conv. (%)
ee (%)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Rh(NBD)2]BF4
[Ir(COD)Cl]2
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
96
95
>99
36
97
97
98
97
90
79
95
78
NA
NA
95
THF
MTBE
MeOH
MeOH
MeOH
9
10
11
[Rh(COD)Cl]2
[Rh(NBD)Cl]2
53
>99
a
Reaction conditions: 0.2 mmol scale, [substrate] = 0.2 mol·L−1,
solvent = 1.0 mL, 1.0 mol % of catalyst (metal/SL-J404-1 1:1.1).
b
c
1
Conversions were determined by H NMR analysis. Enantiomeric
excesses were determined by chiral HPLC analysis using a chiral
column after the products were converted to the corresponding
amides.
b
c
entry
ligand
Trifer
conv. (%)
ee (%)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
80
89
76
96
97
90
96
−63
87
ChenPhos
SL-J005-1
SL-J404-1
SL-J008-1
SL-J418-1
(R)-BINAP
DuPhos
because of the lack of a coordinating group at the β-position of
the double bond, the enantiocontrol in the asymmetric
hydrogenation of (E)-2 might also be a problem. Therefore,
we are focused on the highly chemo- and enantioselective
hydrogenation of internal conjugate acid (E)-2 (Scheme 1d).
Our investigation was initiated by using (E)-2-methyl-3-
benzoylpropenoic acid 2a as the model substrate. When TriFer
and ChenPhos were used as ligands,9 the Rh-catalyzed
hydrogenation gave excellent chemoselectivities (100%) but
moderate enantioselectivities (89 and 76% ee, respectively)
(Table 1, entries 1 and 2). Then, the ferrocene-based
bisphosphine ligand JosiPhos family was screened. To our
delight, better results were obtained (entries 3−6), and the
ligand SL-J404-1 afforded the best results (>99% conversion
and 97% ee) (entry 4). Other well-known diphosphine ligands,
such as (R)-BINAP, Duphos, and (R)-SegPhos, showed less
attractive catalytic results (entries 7−9). The absolute
configuration of 3a was assigned by a comparison of its
optical rotation with the reported value.5d
>99
>99
(R)-SegPhos
−76
a
Reaction conditions: 0.2 mmol scale, [substrate] = 0.2 mol·L−1,
solvent = 1.0 mL, 1.0 mol % of catalyst [Rh(NBD)2]BF4/ligand 1:1.1,
b
9 h. Conversions were determined by 1H NMR analysis.
c
Enantiomeric excesses were determined by chiral HPLC analysis
using a chiral column after the products were converted to the
corresponding amides.
precursors (Scheme 1a),3 the organometallic-catalyzed enan-
tioselective Friedel−Crafts alkylation (Scheme 1b),4 and the
asymmetric hydrogenation of α-methylene-γ-keto-carboxylic
acids (Scheme 1c).5
It is well known that catalytic asymmetric hydrogenation6 is
one of the most efficient, environmentally friendly, and cost-
effective approaches to various chiral compounds. Among
these reported methods, the chemo- and enantioselective
hydrogenation of α-methylene-γ-keto-carboxylic acid 1 has
been one of the most efficient and straightforward approaches
to chiral α-substituted-γ-keto acids. However, the terminal C
C bond undergoes rapid isomerization, shifting to the
thermodynamically more stable internal conjugate acid (E)-
2.7 Therefore, it might be more practical to synthesize chiral α-
substituted-γ-keto acids by the chemo- and enantioselective
hydrogenation of this internal conjugate acid (E)-2.
α-Methylene-γ-keto-carboxylic acid 1, which bears a
coordinating carbonyl group at the β-position of the CC
double bond, enables efficient enantioinduction in hydro-
genation due to the secondary coordination.8 Unlike terminal
olefin 1, the conjugate groups make internal olefin in (E)-2
more challenging for asymmetric hydrogenation. In addition,
Next, the solvent and metal precursors for the hydro-
genation were investigated with the ligand SL-J404-1 (Table
2). Among polar solvents, the enantioselectivities enhanced
with the increase in the bulkiness of the alcohols, whereas the
conversions remained excellent (entries 1−4, Table 2). i-PrOH
was highly beneficial in terms of enantioselectivity and catalytic
activity (>99% conversion, 98% ee) (entry 3, Table 2). Polar
aprotic solvents such as EtOAc, MTBE, THF, and DCM gave
less attractive results. Cationic [Rh(NBD)2]BF4 was superior
to the neutral precursor [Rh(NBD)Cl]2 with respect to
enantioselectivity (97 vs 95% ee) (entry 1 vs 11, Table 2).
Other metal precursors [Rh(COD)Cl]2 and [Ir(COD)Cl]2
showed poor catalytic activity under the reaction conditions
(entries 9 and 10, Table 2).
With the optimized conditions in hand ([Rh(NBD)2]BF4/
SL-J404-1 in i-PrOH under 15 atm hydrogen pressure at room
temperature), we turned our attention to explore the substrate
scope. A variety of 2-methyl-4-oxo-2-alkenoic acids (E)-2 were
B
Org. Lett. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX