means to craft an enantioenriched cyclobutane precursor to
a related lactone.7
Scheme 1. Synthesis of Cyclobutanols (+)-10 and (-)-10
We have recently demonstrated that the deoxygenative ring
contraction of vinylated furanosides can be applied success-
fully to the elaboration of enantiopure polysubstituted
cyclobutanes that feature several stereogenic centers of
defined absolute configuration.8 With this success as a
backdrop, we have presently focused our attention on the
enantioselective construction of the core of 1. The pathway
originated with D-glyceraldehyde acetonide, a building block
readily available from D-mannitol.9
Kita and co-workers have demonstrated that Lewis acid
catalyzed aldol reactions of such aldehydes with ketene silyl
acetals proceed diastereoselectively to give the corresponding
â-siloxy ester exemplified by 3 (Scheme 1).10 In this instance,
the hydroxyl group could be unmasked quantitatively with
potassium carbonate in methanol, thereby allowing for the
convenient, large-scale separation of 4 from 5 (9:1). Because
the direct generation of 5 as the major product through an
uncatalyzed aldol reaction is not practical,11 inversion of the
epimeric ratio to 1:8 was realized by perruthenate oxidation12
of the original 4/5 mixture followed by low-temperature
(-100 to -40 °C) reduction of the resulting ketone with
zinc borohydride in ether.13 In turn, both hydroxy esters were
O-benzylated in a highly efficient manner provided that the
addition of benzyl bromide was conducted at a very slow
rate. The independent reduction of these products with
LiAlH4 generated the primary carbinols, making it possible
to effect sequential oxidation to the aldehyde level under
Swern conditions and cyclization to the methyl furanosides
6 and 7 with p-toluenesulfonic acid in methanol. Advantage
was next taken of the ability of IBX in refluxing acetonitrile14
to bring about conversion to the sensitive aldehydes, which
were submitted directly to Wittig olefination without column
chromatography. The extent of competing â-elimination was
more extensive when producing 8 relative to 9, presumably
as the direct result of a more sterically crowded trans E2
elimination option available to the former. Alternatively, this
phenomenon may reflect the increased accessibility of the
enolizable proton in the aldehyde leading to 8 with respect
to that leading to 9.
tactic well suited to accessing the enantiomerically pure gem-
dimethyl substituted cyclobutanols (+)-10 and (-)-10. The
desirability of crafting both antipodes of 10 originated from
our recognition of the fact that reductive removal of the
benzyloxy substituent in (+)-10 or the hydroxyl group in
(-)-10 permits targeting of the same enantiomer of pesta-
lotiopsin A. Furthermore, since the absolute configuration
of 1 is presently unknown, deoxygenation of (+)-10 or (-)-
10 in the reverse fashion would allow acquisition of the other
enantiomer of the target. Different chemical challenges were
anticipated. As matters have worked out, (-)-10 lends itself
well to efficient conversion to 17 (Scheme 2). Deoxygenation
studies performed at the vinylcyclobutanol stage proved to
be uniformly unsuccessful. To skirt this problem, the next
steps involved protection as the TBS ether and anti-
Markovnikov hydration. To ensure a high yield of 12, the
hydroboration reaction was performed with a low loading
Significantly, all four vinylated furanosides proved to be
responsive to the zirconocene ring contraction conditions,15
thus providing experimental verification of this route as a
(6) (a) Edmonds, D. J.; Muir, K. W.; Procter, D. J. J. Org. Chem. 2003,
68, 3190. (b) Johnston, D.; Francon, N.; Edmonds, D. J.; Procter, D. J.
Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 2001.
(7) Takao, K.; Saegusa, H.; Tsujita, T.; Washizawa, T.; Tadano, K.
Tetrahedron Lett. 2005, 46, 5815.
(8) Paquette, L. A.; Kang, H.-J. Tetrahedron 2004, 60, 1353.
(9) Schmid, C. R.; Bryant, J. D. Org. Synth. 1995, 72, 6.
(10) (a) Kita, Y.; Tamura, O.; Itoh, F.; Yasuda, H.; Kishino, H.; Ke, Y.
Y.; Tamura, Y. J. Org. Chem. 1988, 53, 554. (b) Kita, Y.; Yasuda, H.;
Tamura, O.; Itoh, F.; Ke, Y. Y.; Tamura, Y. Tetrahedron Lett. 1985, 26,
5777.
(11) Denmark, S. E.; Griedel, B. D.; Coe, D. M.; Schnute, M. E. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 7026.
(12) Griffith, W. P.; Ley, S. V. Aldrichimica Acta 1990, 23, 13.
(13) Kobayashi, Y.; Nakano, M.; Kumar, G. B.; Kishihara, K. J. Org.
Chem. 1998, 63, 7505.
(14) (a) Frigerio, M.; Santagostino, M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1994, 35, 8019.
(b) Yang, J.; Long, Y. O.; Paquette, L. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125,
1567.
(15) Paquette, L. A.; Cunie`re, N. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 1927.
Org. Lett., Vol. 8, No. 11, 2006
2430