A. Wolfson et al. / Tetrahedron Letters 50 (2009) 5951–5953
5953
oil bath. The reactions were run for 5–24 h and were then allowed
to cool. The products were separated by extraction with diethyl
ether (3 Â 5 mL). The combined organic phase was concentrated
under reduced pressure, and the resulting crude residue was ana-
lyzed by gas chromatography (GC) using a HP-1 column to deter-
mine the extent of conversion.
substrates over three cycles with diethyl ether (25 mL), after which
fresh substrate was added and the reaction was run under condi-
tions similar to the first trial. Benzaldehyde conversions after the
second and third reaction cycles were found to be 56%, and 48%,
respectively. The lower conversion may be attributed to partial
deactivation of the catalyst. However, since hydrogenation–dehy-
drogenation transfers are equilibrium reactions, the conversion of
benzaldehyde in the second cycle may has been affected by the
partial dehydrogenation of glycerol, the hydrogen donor, during
the first reaction cycle.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that glycerol can be suc-
cessfully utilized as an environmentally friendly solvent and as
the hydrogen donor in the transfer hydrogenation of representa-
tive unsaturated organic compounds. Dehydrogenation of glycerol
resulted in the formation of dihydroxyacetone.
As illustrated in Table 1, glycerol can be used as a solvent and
hydrogen donor in the transfer hydrogenation of various unsatu-
rated compounds. When carbonyl and nitro-compounds were re-
duced (entries 1–7, 11 and 12, respectively), the addition of a
base as co-catalyst was essential, and performing the reaction with
a metal catalyst in the absence of a base did not yield any product.
However, performing the reaction with only KOH, under similar
reaction conditions, yielded the corresponding products in limited
amounts, and the conversions were lower than 15% even after 24 h.
It was found that both organic and inorganic bases could be used as
co-catalysts (entries 3 and 4). On the other hand, the transfer
hydrogenation of cyclohexene and styrene (entries 8–10) was
run only in the presence of Pd/C, while the addition of KOH deac-
tivated the catalyst, resulting in negligible amounts of cyclohexane
and ethylbenzene. In general, increasing the reaction temperature,
reaction time, or catalyst loading increased the conversions in all
the tested reactions. Finally, it was found that glycerol was
dehydrogenated to dihydroxyacetone as expected from the higher
oxidation potential of the secondary alcohols, however, mass
balance calculations showed that under the reaction conditions,
some of the dihydroxyacetone decomposed.
References and notes
1
.
Edenborough, M. Organic Reaction Mechanisms: A Step by Step Approach; Taylor
Francis: London, 1999.
Bäckvall, J. E. J. Organomet. Chem. 2002, 652, 105–111.
&
2
.
3. Le Page, M. D.; James, R. B. Chem. Commun. 2000, 17, 1647–1648.
4
5
6
.
.
.
Szollosi, G.; Bartok, M. Catal. Lett. 1999, 59, 179–185.
Andersson, P. G.; Munslow, I. J. Modern Reduction Methods; Wiley: VCH, 2008.
Brieger, G.; Nestrick, T. J. Chem. Rev. 1974, 74, 567–580.
7. Gotoh, K.; Kubo, J.; Ueda, W.; Mori, T.; Morikawa, Y. Chem. Lett. 2003, 32, 1132–
133.
Ben-Harush, K.; Wolfson, A.; Herskowitz, M. Lett. Org. Chem. 2006, 3, 664–
67.
1
8.
6
9. Wolfson, A.; Litvak, G.; Dlugy, C.; Shotland, Y.; Tavor, D. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2009,
30, 78–81.
The use of glycerol as a solvent also allowed easy product sep-
aration and catalyst recovery. For the first reaction cycle, benzalde-
hyde (2 g), Ru(p-cumene)Cl
2
-dimer (0.12 g), and KOH (0.17 g) were
1
1
0. Wolfson, A.; Dlugy, C. Chem. Papers 2007, 61, 228–232.
1. Wolfson, A.; Dlugy, D.; Tavor, D.; Blumenfeld, J.; Shotland, Y. Tetrahedron:
Asymmetry 2006, 17, 2043–2045.
dissolved in 25 g of glycerol and the reaction mixture was heated
in an oil bath to 70 °C. At the end of the reaction, after 18 hours,
the conversion of benzaldehyde was 62%. A catalyst recycling test
was performed after extraction of the product and the remaining
12. Wolfson, A.; Dlugy, C.; Shotland, Y. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2006, 5, 67–71.
1
1
1
3. Wolfson, A.; Tavor, D.; Dlugy, C.; Shotland, Y. US 61/137,239, 2008.
4. Demirel-Gulen, S.; Lucas, M.; Claus, P. Catal. Today 2005, 102–103, 166–172.
5. Taarning, E.; Madsen, A. T.; Marchetti, J. M.; Egeblad, K.; Christensen, C. H.
Green Chem. 2008, 10, 408–414.