Scheme 1
Table 1. Pd(II)-Catalyzed Formation of â-N-Glycosyl
Trichloroacetamidea
controls the anomeric selectivity (Scheme 1). The cationic
Pd(II), which promotes ionization of the glycal imidate 1
by coordinating to the imidate nitrogen,7 results in the
formation of R-N-glycosyl trichloroacetamide 2. In contrast,
use of neutral Pd(II) promotes a concerted-type mechanism
to provide â-N-glycosyl trichloroacetamide 3.8 Although the
allylic imidate rearrangement is pioneered by Overman,9
there is no report on utilizing this method in carbohydrate
synthesis to control the R- and â-selectivity of the glycosyl
amide at the anomeric carbon.
phosphine
entry
ligand
none
Ph3P
additive
time yieldb R:âc
2 h 60% 1:1
16 h 83% 1:2
16 h 77% 1:3
25 h 73% 1:4
16 h 89% 1:7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
none
none
RUPHOS none
DTTBP
TTMPP
DTTBP
TTMPP
none
none
none
10 mol % of salicylaldehyde 4 h
10 mol % of salicylaldehyde 4 h
10 mol % of salicylaldehyde 1 h
70% 1:7
86% 1:9
71% 1:2
Treatment of glucal imidate 4 with 2.5 mol % of
Pd(PhCN)2Cl2 in CH2Cl2 at 25 °C for 2 h provided a 1:1
mixture of R- and â-N-glycosyl trichloroacetamide 5 in 60%
yield (Table 1, entry 1). It was anticipated that the anomeric
selectivity would depend on the ligand on palladium.
Accordingly, glucal imidate 4 was treated with a preformed
solution of Pd(PhCN)2Cl2 and Ph3P, and 5 was isolated in
83% yield with R:â ) 1:2 (entry 2). With the use of
RUPHOS and DTTBP as the phosphine ligands,10 the
anomeric selectivity was slightly improved, favoring the
â-anomer (entries 3 and 4). Employing TTMPP as the
phosphine ligand led to an improvement of both the yield
and the â-selectivity (entry 5). However, it took 16 h for
the reaction to go to completion. Gratifyingly, it was found
that addition of 10 mol % of salicylaldehyde significantly
shortened the reaction time to 4 h (entries 6 and 7), and the
desired N-glycosyl trichloroacetamide 5 was obtained in good
yield with excellent â-selectivity. Thus, the combination of
the bulky phosphine ligand and salicylaldehyde increased
both the yield and the â-selectivity as well as shortened the
reaction time. We also examined whether temperature
affected the selectivity; increasing or decreasing the reaction
temperature only decreased the â-selectivity. This is the first
example wherein a bulky phosphine ligand is employed to
control the stereoselectivity at the anomeric carbon in the
allylic imidate rearrangement.
a
All reactions were carried out in CH2Cl2 (0.2 M) with 2.5 mol % of
Pd(II)/ phosphine ligand. Isolated yield. c 1H NMR ratio.
b
When cationic palladium,11 Pd(CH3CN)4(BF4)2, was em-
ployed in the reaction, the desired R-N-glycosyl trichloro-
acetamide 5 was obtained in 73% yield as the major anomer
(Table 2, entry 1). Addition of 10 mol % of salicylaldehyde
Table 2. Pd(II)-Catalyzed Formation of R-N-Glycosyl
Trichloroacetamidea
entry palladium salicylaldehyde
time
yieldb
R:âc
1
2
3
4
2.5 mol %
2.5 mol %
0.1 mol %
0.5 mol %
none
45 min
1 h
2 h
73%
80%
78%
82%
9:1
14:1
9:1
10 mol %
0.4 mol %
2 mol %
1 h
13:1
(6) (a) Damkaci, F.; DeShong, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 4408-
4409. (b) He, Y.; Hinklin, R. J.; Chang, J.; Kiessling, L. L. Org. Lett. 2004,
6, 4479-4482. (c) Grandjean, C.; Boutonnier, A.; Guerreiro, C.; Fournier,
J.-M.; Mulard, L. A. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 7123-7132. (d) Bianchi, A.;
Bernardi, A. J. Org. Chem. 2006, 71, 4565-4577. (e) Temelkoff, D. P.;
Smith, C. R.; Kibler, D. A.; McKee, S.; Duncan, S. J.; Zeller, M.; Hunsen,
M.; Norris, P. Carbohydr. Res. 2006, 341, 1645-1656.
(7) (a) Calter, M.; Hollis, T. K.; Overman, L. E.; Ziller, J.; Zipp, G. G.
J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 1449. (b) Lappert, M. F.; Singh, A.; Atwood, J.
L.; Hunter, W. E.; Zhang, H.-M. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1983,
68-69
a
All reactions were carried out in CH2Cl2 with Pd(CH3CN)4(BF4)2 and
salicylaldehyde (1:4) except for entry 1. Isolated yield. c 1H NMR ratio.
b
significantly increased the R-selectivity (entry 2).12 Decreas-
ing the catalyst loading still maintained the yield and the
selectivity (entries 3 and 4). Thus, switching to the cationic
palladium reverses the anomeric selectivity, favoring the
R-anomer.13
(8) Waltson, M.; Overman, L. E.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2007, 129, 5031-5044.
(9) (a) Overman, L. E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1974, 96, 597-598. (b) For
a comprehensive review, see: Overman, L. E.; Carpenter, N. E. In Organic
Reactions; Overman, L. E., Ed.; WILEY-VCH: Weinheim, 2005; Vol. 66,
pp 1-107.
(10) Barder, T. E.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 5096-
5101.
(11) Mikami, K.; Hatano, M.; Akiyama, K. Top. Organomet. Chem. 2005,
14, 279-321 and references therein.
(12) Miller, K. J.; Baag, J. H.; Abu-Omar, M. M. Inorg. Chem. 1999,
38, 4510-4514.
4232
Org. Lett., Vol. 9, No. 21, 2007