2
A. Petri et al. / Tetrahedron Letters xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Table 1
Initial screening of substrates, catalysts, and conditions
Entrya
Alkene
Solvent
Catalyst
Yieldb (%)
eec (%)
Figure 1. Nitroalkene substrates.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
aq acetone
aq DMA
aq acetone
aq acetone
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq acetone
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq DMA
aq acetone
aq DMA
aq acetone
aq DMA
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
ꢀ5 (GC)d
0 (GC)e
51
33
36
78
94
67
47
42
17
9
15
16
86
36
72
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
83
85
51
38
22
49
58
81
75
70
41
—
2
3f
4
5
6
7
8f
9f
9
10f
11f
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
10
11
9
10
10
9
10
10
11
12
9
Figure 2. Pd-catalysts employed.
49
0
81
76
68
56
84
85
61
64
aq acetone
aq DMA
aq DMA
9
10
11
substrates, especially 2-nitroacrylates, leading to their reasonable
decomposition. Therefore we decided to explore a more favorable
combination of readily available 2-nitroacrylate derivatives and
their precursors (Fig. 1)7 with ArB(OH)2 and phosphine–Pd cata-
lysts (Fig. 2).
a
The reaction was carried out on a 2 mmol scale with PhB(OH)2 (4 mmol), cat-
alyst (0.04 mmol), AgBF4 (0.2 mmol), 50% aq HBF4 (6 mmol) in 12 ml of solvent–
H2O 2:1 mixture at 20 °C for 18 h.
Furyl derivative 1 appeared to be too unreactive under the reac-
tion conditions, and nitrile 2 underwent complete decomposition.
Dimethylacetal 3 was more promising showing up to 67% yield
and 85% ee (Table 1, entries 8–11), however reasonable amounts
of hydrate (CH3O)2CH(OH)CH2NO2 (up to 20%) were isolated to-
gether with the desired product. The conjugated addition of water
to the C@C bond could be mostly suppressed by addition of HBF4,
but this led in its turn to partial hydrolysis of the acetal group thus
reducing the yield. Nitroacrylates 4 and 5 exhibited high reactivity
but the reaction was accompanied by numerous side reactions: di-
phenyl formation and formation of cinnamic acid esters, which
could result from inverted addition to the C@C bond followed by
NO2-group elimination. The latter substrates brought generally
low yields and moderate ee values (entries 12–14). 2-Nitroacryla-
mides 6 and 7 (entries 15–23) showed most clean reactions almost
without substrate decomposition and substrate derived side prod-
ucts (<5%, GC). Chiraphos catalyst 9 exhibited better activity and
enantioselectivity than that derived from DIPAMP 10. Other cata-
lysts revealed less promising or even no activity. The 2-nitroacryla-
mide 6 was chosen for further optimizations for best stability and
ease of handle.
b
Yield of isolated product if not indicated otherwise.
Determined by chiral HPLC analysis.
Marginal conversion of substrate.
Substrate decomposition.
c
d
e
f
Without HBF4 and AgBF4.
under different conditions. Last but not the least, the conditions al-
lowed to reduce the amount of PhB(OH)2 to 1.5 equiv.
In order to screen more chiral ligands and to check a possibility
to generate the catalysts in situ we tested
(Pd(acac)2, PdCl2, Pd(OAc)2, and Pd(cod)Cl2). It appeared that only
Pd(cod)Cl2 is inactive to catalyze the racemic background reaction
without support of a phosphine ligand. Corresponding in situ gen-
erated catalysts were than tested in the reaction of 2-nitroacryla-
mide 6 and PhB(OH)2 (Table 3).
4 precatalysts:
All precatalysts in combination with Chiraphos demonstrated
comparable results (entries 1–3), and Pd(cod)Cl2 being slightly bet-
Table 2
Influence of solvents on the reaction of 2-nitroacrylamide 6
Extensive solvent screening showed that all tested solvents can
be divided into two parts (Table 2). The first group comprises
mainly of polar aprotic DMF, DMA, tetramethylurea, NMP, DMSO,
acetonitrile, sulfolane, and PEG-400 which caused relatively slow
main reaction, but also very slow protodeboronation of PhB(OH)2.
The second group (acetone, MeOH, EtOH, dioxane, THF, and nitro-
methane) facilitated both reactions. However, as appeared, an
important requirement for organic co-solvents is their miscibility
with water. Solvents which do not form binary aqueous solutions
with high water content (e.g., TBME, toluene) proved to be an inap-
propriate medium for very slow reaction rates.
Entrya
Solvent
Yieldb (%)
eec (%)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
DMA/water
Acetone/water
MeOH/water
EtOH/water
i-PrOH/water
t-BuOH/water
THF/water
85
72
76
81
84
88
87
81
81
77
81
82
83
84
A minor influence of solvent on enantioselectivity should be
also noted. Finally we chose to use THF as a compromise solution
of several practical factors (protodeboronation, reaction rate, and
toxicity). The ratio THF–H2O 2:1 and substrate concentration
ꢀ1.7 M appeared to be optimal, as the reaction became sluggish
a
The reaction was carried out on a 10 mmol scale with PhB(OH)2 (15 mmol),
[Pd((S,S)-Chiraphos)(PhCN)2](SbF6)2 catalyst (0.02 mmol), AgBF4 (1 mmol), 50% aq
HBF4 (30 mmol) in 60 ml of solvent–H2O 2:1 mixture at 20 °C for 18 h.
b
Isolated yield.
Determined by chiral HPLC analysis.
c