mediated by stoichiometric copper hydride3 (Stryker’s
reagent [(Ph3PCuH)6]4) on propargylic acetates,5 there is only
a single catalytic method6 known leading to highly func-
tionalized allenes involving in situ generation of CuH and
reactions with propargylic oxiranes in the presence of
polymethylhydridosiloxane (PMHS).7 This shortage of syn-
thetic methods stands in stark contrast to the rich and highly
developed catalysis by CuH applied to both 1,2- and 1,4-
reductions of carbonyl compounds.3 While CuH-catalyzed
SN2′-reduction of propargylic oxiranes offers access to a
variety of R-hydroxyallenes,7 extension to other propargylic
electrophiles would have advantages, such as (i) greater
substrate reactivity, (ii) improved stereoselectivity, and (iii)
better insight as to ligand effects in CuH catalysis. Impor-
tantly, the limitation of Stryker’s reagent to SN2′-reductions
of terminal propargylic acetates5 might be overcome.
Table 1. Copper-Catalyzed SN2′-Reduction of Propargylic
Electrophiles 1
entry
1
LG
ligand
1/2 (yield, %)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
a
b
b
c
d
e
e
f
Ac
Piv
Piv
3c
3c
3a
3c
3c
3b
3c
3a
3c
35/40
25/70
0/0a
0/trace
60/20
trace/88
0/95
To establish the optimal combination of leaving group and
stabilizing ligand for the CuH catalyst, various propargylic
electrophiles 18 were treated in toluene at room temperature
with a mixture of CuCl, NaO-t-Bu and NHC-carbene
precursors 3a-c9 in the presence of PMHS as stoichiometric
hydride source10 (Table 1).
ClCH2CO
3-O2NC6H4CO
MeOCO
MeOCO
Boc
25/33
trace/75
Whereas acetate 1a and pivalate 1b in the presence of
IBiox12 (3c) afforded the desired allene 2 (albeit in a slow
reaction that did not go to completion; entries 1, 2), no
product was formed when 1b was exposed to SIMes ligand
3a (entry 3). Unexpectedly, more electron-deficient esters
are not suitable for this SN2′-reduction as well (entries 4 and
5). Best results were achieved with carbonates 1e and 1f,
which afforded allene 2 in up to 95% isolated yield (entries
6-9). Again, the Glorius ligands 3b/c performed in a far
superior fashion to the Arduengo carbene 3a (entries 6, 7, 9
vs 8). The bulkier IBiox12 carbene 3c11 relative to analogue
3b gave a slightly higher yield of the allene (entry 6 vs 7).12
f
Boc
a No conversion.
The proposed mechanistic model (Scheme 1) provides an
explanation for the pronounced leaving group effect.
Scheme 1
(3) Reviews: (a) Lipshutz, B. H. Copper(I)-Mediated 1,2- and 1,4-
Reductions. In Modern Organocopper Chemistry; Krause, N., Ed.; Wiley-
VCH: Weinheim, 2002; pp 167-187. (b) Rendler, S.; Oestreich, M. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 498–504. (c) Deutsch, C.; Krause, N.; Lipshutz,
B. H. Chem. ReV. 2008, 108, 2916–2927. (d) Lipshutz, B. H. Synlett 2009,
509–524.
(4) (a) Mahoney, W. S.; Brestensky, D. M.; Stryker, J. M. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1988, 110, 291–293. (b) Brestensky, D. M.; Huseland, D. E.;
McGettigan, C.; Stryker, J. M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1988, 29, 3749–3752.
(5) (a) Daeuble, J. F.; McGettigan, C.; Stryker, J. M. Tetrahedron Lett.
1990, 31, 2397–2400. (b) Brummond, K. M.; Lu, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1999, 121, 5087–5088.
(6) For a reductive allene synthesis using stoichiometric amounts of
Schwartz’s reagent, see: (a) Pu, X.; Ready, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008,
130, 10874–10875. (b) For the synthesis of allenic hydrocarbons using
catalytic CuH stabilized by phosphines, see: Zhong, C.; Sasaki, Y.; Ito, H.;
Sawamura, M. Chem. Commun. 2009, 5850-5852.
(7) Deutsch, C.; Lipshutz, B. H.; Krause, N. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2007, 46, 1650–1653.
Thus, the in situ formed copper hydride species A likely
reacts with the propargylic electrophile B to form π-com-
plex C, which is then converted into the σ-copper(III)
species D.13 Reductive elimination affords allene E and
the copper salt F. The key to efficiency of the catalytic
cycle is regeneration of the copper hydride catalyst A by
reaction of F with PMHS. It has been shown that the rate
of this transmetalation step depends strongly on the
(8) Substrates 1aa-ad: Ho¨fle, G.; Steglich, W.; Vorbru¨ggen, H. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1978, 17, 569–583. Substrates 1ae and 1af: Mandai,
T.; Matsumoto, T.; Tsujiguchi, Y.; Matsuoka, S.; Tsuji, J. J. Organomet.
Chem. 1994, 473, 343–352.
(9) (a) Arduengo, A. J.; Krafczyk, R.; Schmutzler, R. Tetrahedron 1999,
55, 14523–14534. (b) Jafarpour, L.; Stevens, E. D.; Nolan, S. P. J.
Organomet. Chem. 2000, 606, 49–54. (c) Altenhoff, G.; Goddard, R.;
Lehmann, C. W.; Glorius, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 15195–15201.
(10) Besides PMHS, also (Me2HSi)2O, Et3SiH, and (EtO)3SiH were used
as hydride source, but these silanes afforded diminished reactivities.
(11) Wu¨rtz, S.; Glorius, F. Acc. Chem. Res. 2008, 41, 1523–1533.
(12) Treatment of 1ae with stoichiometric amounts of Stryker’s reagent
led to decomposition of the substrate.
(13) For a recent review on the mechanism of copper-mediate reactions,
see: Gschwind, R. M. Chem. ReV. 2008, 108, 3029–3053.
Org. Lett., Vol. 11, No. 21, 2009
5011