Scheme 1. Synthesis of C-Glycosides via the Lewis Acid
Scheme 2. Working Hypothesis for the Kinetic Anomeric
Effect-Dependent Silane Reduction Forming the â-C-Glycosides
Prompted Silane Reduction
of reduction depends on the starting sugar structure, and the
stereoselectivity is not always high.4 For example, when the
method was applied to mannose derivatives, the reduction
was almost nonstereoselective.4 We report here a completely
stereoselective construction of â-C-glycosides via the Lewis
acid-promoted Et3SiH reduction by manipulation of the
anomeric effect through use of the conformationally restricted
substrates.
The anomeric effect8,9 is a stereoelectronic effect ascribed
to n f σ* hyperconjugation between the nonbonding orbital
on the ring oxygen and the antibonding orbital of the
anomeric carbon-heteroatom bond.8-10 When this kind of
orbital interaction stabilizes the transition state during
anomeric bond-forming (or bond-cleavage) processes, it is
referred to as the kinetic anomeric effect.8-10 We have shown
that, in radical and Lewis acid promoted C-glycosidation
reactions, the kinetic anomeric effect can be manipulated by
the substrate conformation. Depending on whether the
conformation of the substrates is restricted to the 4C1- or the
1C4-form, R- or â-selective reactions can be made to occur
highly stereoselectively.3,6
In the Lewis acid-promoted silane reduction (Scheme 1),
hydride attack on the oxocarbenium intermediate seems to
occur predominantly from the R-axial direction4a due to the
kinetic anomeric effect, at least in the cases of glucose and
galactose derivatives. We expected that the stereoselectivity
of the reduction could be improved even further by enhancing
the kinetic anomeric effect through placing conformational
restrictions in the substrates employed. The conformation
of the transition state and the intermediate can be strongly
influenced by conformational effects, which stabilize the
ground-state conformation.3,6,9,11 Therefore, as shown in
Scheme 2, in the reduction of substrate A conformationally
restricted to a C1-chair form, the transition state would
4
assume the 4C1-chairlike form B, where the anomeric center
would be pyramidal. Accordingly, the â-C-glycosidic product
C could be produced highly selectively. The axial attack
transition state B in the 4C1-restricted form would be
significantly stabilized by the interaction between the anti-
bonding σ*q of the newly forming anomeric C-H bond and
the orbital of a nonbonded electron pair (nO) on the ring
oxygen because of their planar arrangement.12
Based on this hypothesis, we planned to examine the Lewis
acid promoted Et3SiH reduction with the various conforma-
tionally restricted and unrestricted substrates. In this study,
the glucose- and mannose-type substrates were employed to
compare their stereochemical outcomes, since these two were
considered the typical stereoselective and nonselective
substrates in the reductions reported previously.4,7 Thus, we
designed the conformationally restricted substrates 2a-c,
4a-c, and 5 and the corresponding conformationally unre-
stricted substrates 1a-c and 3a-c (Table 1), derived from
D-glucose or D-mannose. The conformation of the pyranose
ring of the substrates 2a-c and 4a-c bearing a 3,4-O-cyclic
diketal group and the substrate 5 bearing a 4,6-O-benzylidene
group would be restricted in the desired 4C1-form due to the
trans-decalin-type ring system.3,6,13,14
The conformationally unrestricted substrates 1a-c and
3a-c were prepared by the previously reported method.4a,7c,15
The conformationally restricted substrates 2a-c and 4a-c
were synthesized from 1-thiophenyl-2,3,4,6,-tetra-O-acetyl
sugars 6 or 7 via mannolactones 1016 or 11 (Scheme S1 in
the Supporting Information). Similarly, another conforma-
(12) In the transition state of nucleophilic addition reactions to carbonyls,
the energy of the transition state can be lowered by hyperconjugation
between an antiperiplanar vicinal σ-bond to the antibonding component (σ*q)
of the newly forming bond; see: (a) Cieplak, A. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1981, 103, 4540-4552. (b) Cieplak, A. S.; Tait, B. D.; Johnson, C. R. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 111, 8447-8462. (c) Cieplak, A. S. Chem. ReV.
1999, 99, 1265-1336.
(13) (a) Montchamp, J.-L.; Tian, F.; Hart, M. E.; Frost, J. W. J. Org.
Chem. 1996, 61, 3897-3899. (b) Hense, A.; Ley, S. V.; Osborn, H. M. I.;
Owen, D. R.; Poisson, J.-F.; Warriner, S. L.; Wesson, K. E. J. Chem. Soc.,
Perkin Trans. 1 1997, 2023-2032.
(14) For a highly â-stereoselective O-glycosylation using conformation-
ally restricted 4,6-O-benzylidenemannose donors, see: Crich, D.; W. Cai,
W.; Dai, Z. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 1291-1297.
(15) Li, X.; Ohtake, H.; Takahashi, H.; Ikegami, S. Tetrahedron 2001,
57, 4297-4309.
(8) (a) Juaristi, E.; Cuevas, G. Tetrahedron 1992, 48, 5019-5087. (b)
The Anomeric Effect and Associated Stereoelectronic Effects; Thatcher, G.
R. J., Ed.; ACS Symposium Series 539; American Chemical Society:
Washington, DC, 1993. (c) Juaristi, E.; Cuevas, G. The Anomiric Effect;
CRC: Boca Raton, 1995. (d) Thibaudeau, C.; Chattopadhyaya, J. Stereo-
electronic Effects in Nucleosides and Nucleotides and their Structural
Implication; Uppsala University: Uppsala, 1999.
(9) Pothier, N.; Goldstein, S.; Deslongchamps, P. HelV. Chim Acta 1992,
75, 604-620.
(10) Deslongchamps, P. Stereoelectronic Effects in Organic Chemistry;
Pergamon: New York, 1983; pp 209-221.
(11) For a stereoelectronic model explaining the stereoselective nucleo-
philic reactions via six membered-ring oxocarbenium ions, see: Romero,
J. A. C.; Tabacco, S. A.; Woerpel, K. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122,
168-189.
3752
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 21, 2004