although the field is still dynamic,9 it can be said that there
are good solutions to the problem of preparing “terminal”10
cyclopropenes 1 in a single enantiomer form (Figure 1). In
efficient for many types of cyclopropenes.12 Furthermore,
metalated cyclopropenes have been used as the nucleophiles
in Pd(0)-catalyzed cross-coupling reactions.13 Thus, it would
seem that the deprotonation of an enantiomerically pure
terminal cyclopropene 3 would provide simple access to
chiral, internal cyclopropenes 4 in high yield after the
addition of electrophiles (Scheme 1). It should also be
possible to break the symmetry of a prochiral cyclopropene,
ultimately in enantioselective fashion, and thereby provide
a route to diverse types of chiral cyclopropenes through the
reaction of electrophiles with a single, common precursor.
In practice, the transformations of anions 3 to internal
cyclopropenes 4 are not straightforward. The deprotonations
are followed by fragmentations to give ring-opened structures
(via 5) as shown in Scheme 1. To date, the only successful
transformations of anions of structure 3 are those in which
Me3GeCl or Me3SiCl is the electrophile,14 procedures that
are successful because of an inverse addition protocol that
allows the electrophile to trap the 1-lithiocyclopropene as
soon as it is formed. Our extensive efforts to broaden the
reaction scope of 3 to other electrophiles have been largely
unsuccessful.
Figure 1. Classification of “terminal” and “internal” cyclopropenes.
contrast, there is no general method for preparing enantio-
merically enriched “internal”10 cyclopropenes 2. Previous
attempts to prepare internal cyclopropenes by enantioselec-
tive catalysis were either unsuccessful or proceeded with low
enantiomeric excess.6,8
In the context of our program to develop synthetically
useful reactions of strained molecules,3f,7 we hoped to
develop a seemingly straightforward solution to the problem
of preparing chiral, internal cyclopropenes as shown in
Scheme 1. The alkene hydrogens of cyclopropenes are more
Upon further consideration of the problem, we speculated
that the dianion 6 might be more stable than monoanion 3.
We reasoned that the formation of 7 would be disfavored
because of increased Coulombic repulsion upon ring opening
(Scheme 2). We further speculated that the more reactive
carbanion would react in preference to the carboxylate to
selectively produce an internal cyclopropene of structure 8.
Scheme 1. Ring-Opening Is Generally Too Fast for Reactions
of Anions 3 to Provide a Useful Route to “Internal”
Cyclopropenes 4
Scheme 2. Dianion Strategy for Forming Internal
Cyclopropenes
In this Letter, we describe a general method for preparing
the dianions of cyclopropene carboxylic acids, and we show
acidic than those of unstrained alkenes,11 and it is well-known
that deprotonation and subsequent reaction with electrophiles
(e.g., alkyl halides, aldehydes, epoxides, silyl chlorides) are
(10) In analogy to the common nomenclature of alkynes, we refer to
cyclopropenes with a single alkene substituent as “terminal” cyclopropenes
and to those with two alkene substitutents as “internal” cyclopropenes. To
our knowledge, there are only two examples of resolutions for “internal”
cyclopropenes. See ref 7a and Arrowood, T. L.; Kass, S. R. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1999, 121, 7272.
(4) Reactions of cyclopropenone ketals: Nakamura, M.; Isobe, H.;
Nakamura, E. Chem. ReV. 2003, 103, 1295.
(5) For a comprehensive bibliography of nonracemic cyclopropene
synthesis, see ref 7a.
(11) Fattahi, A.; McCarthy, R. E.; Ahmad, M. R.; Kass, S. R. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 11746 and references therein.
(6) (a) Doyle, M. P.; Protopopova, M.; Mu¨ller, P.; Ene, D.; Shapiro, E.
A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 8492. (b) Mu¨ller, P.; Imogai, H.
Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 1998, 9, 4419. (c) Doyle, M. P.; Ene, D. G.;
Forbes, D. C.; Pillow, T. H. Chem. Commun. 1999, 1691. (d) Timmons, D.
J.; Doyle, M. P. J. Organomet. Chem. 2001, 617, 98. (e) Doyle, M. P.; Hu,
W. Tetrahedron Lett. 2000, 41, 6265. (f) Doyle, M. P.; Hu, W. H. Synlett
2001, 1364. (g) Imogai, H.; Bernardinelli, G.; Granicher, C.; Moran, M.;
Rossier, J. C.; Muller, P. HelV. Chim. Acta 1998, 81, 1754.
(7) (a) Liao, L.-a.; Zhang, F.; Yan, N.; Golen, J. A.; Fox, J. M.
Tetradedron 2004, 60, 1803. (b) Liao, L.-a.; Zhang, F.; Dmitrenko, O.;
Bach, R. D.; Fox, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 4490. (c) Fox, J. M.;
Dmitrenko, O.; Liao, L.-a.; Bach, R. D. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 7317.
(8) Davies, H. M. L.; Lee, G. H. Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 1233.
(12) Early examples of cyclopropene deprotonation/alkylation or depro-
tonation/silylation: see ref 4 and (a) Closs, G. L.; Closs, L. E. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1963, 85, 99. (b) Avezov, I. B.; Bolesov, I. G.; Levina, R. Y. J. Org.
Chem. (USSR), Engl. Trans. 1974, 10, 2129. (c) Isaka, M.; Matsuzawa, S.;
Yamago, S.; Ejiri, S.; Miyachi, Y.; Nakamura, E. J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54,
4727. (d) Kirms, M. A.; Primke, H.; Stohlmeier, M.; de Meijere, A. Recl.
TraV. Chim. Pays-Bas. 1986, 105, 462. (e) Schipperijn, A. J.; Smael, P.
Recl. TraV. Chim. Pays-Bas. 1973, 92, 1159.
(13) Cyclopropene deprotonation/cross-coupling: see refs 4, 12c and (a)
Gru¨ger, G.; Szeimies, G. Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 1563. (b) Unteidt, S.;
de Meijere, A. Chem. Ber. 1994, 127, 1511.
(14) (a) Zrinski, I.; Novak-Coumbassa, N.; Eckert-Maksic, M. Organo-
metallics 2004, 23, 2806. (b) Zrinski, I.; Eckert-Maksic, M. Synth. Commun.
2003, 33, 4071. (c) Zrinski, I.; Gadanji, G.; Eckert-Maksic, M. New J. Chem,
2003, 27, 1270.
(9) For a recent modification of the Doyle, Mu¨ller, Shapiro cyclopro-
penation system, see: Luo, Y.; Horikawa, M.; Kloster, R. A.; Hawryluk,
N. A.; Corey, E. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 8916.
4938
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 26, 2004