P/S ligands derived from carbohydrates in Rh-catalyzed hydrosilylation of ketones

Article abstract of DOI:10.1039/c1ob06305g

Reported is the synthesis of a number of diastereomerically pure cationic Rh(i)-complexes I starting from phosphinite thioglycosides. These complexes were used in the asymmetric hydrosilylation of prochiral ketones. The reactivity and enantioselectivity o

Full text of DOI:10.1039/c1ob06305g

View Article Online / Journal Homepage / Table of Contents for this issue
Organic &
Biomolecular
Chemistry
Dynamic Article Links
Cite this: Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355
www.rsc.org/obc
PAPER
P/S ligands derived from carbohydrates in Rh-catalyzed hydrosilylation of
ketones†
Noureddine Khiar,*a Manuel Pern´ıa Leal,a Raquel Navas,a Juan Francisco Moya,a
Mar´ıa Victoria Garc´ıa Pe´rezb and Inmaculada Ferna´ndez*b
Received 1st August 2011, Accepted 28th September 2011
DOI: 10.1039/c1ob06305g
Reported is the synthesis of a number of diastereomerically pure cationic Rh(I)-complexes I starting
from phosphinite thioglycosides. These complexes were used in the asymmetric hydrosilylation of
prochiral ketones. The reactivity and enantioselectivity of the reaction was shown to be dependent on
the pyranose ring, the substituent at the sulfur atom, the hydroxylic protective groups and most
significantly on the alkene co-ligand.
ligands derived from D-sugars are excellent catalyst precursors in
Introduction
Pd-catalyzed allylic substitution and in Rh(I)-catalyzed enamide
hydrogenation.10–11 In the present work we report our results in the
hydrosilylation of prochiral ketones with cationic Rh(I)-complexes
type I, for the asymmetric synthesis of secondary carbinols, Fig. 1.
The ‘so called’ chiral market is in continuous expansion, as a
consequence of the importance of chiral compounds in agriculture,
fragances, medicine, and material science.1 Therefore, asymmetric
synthesis of enantiopure entities is one of the most dynamic and
creative fields in organic synthesis. Within the different ways de-
veloped so far to ensure a chiral transition state,2 enantioselective
catalysis is the method of choice, because it combines efficiency,
versatility, atom economy, and is well-suited from the “green chem-
istry” perspective.3 Enantioselective catalysis is usually achieved
by using a chiral organic ligand, which is responsible for the
enantiodiscrimination, either alone,4 or bound to a transition
metal.5 Nevertheless, despite the enormous and continuous efforts
devoted to the metal promoted asymmetric catalysis in the last
three decades, there are still significant problems which remain
unresolved, so reducing its impact in the arena of fine chemicals
synthesis.6 One of the main reasons for this scenario is that
the catalyst precursors are generally relatively expensive complex
molecules obtained through a multistep synthesis. Among the
different candidates, which can be used to circumvent this
drawback, carbohydrates are prominent.7 Indeed, carbohydrates
account for the 93% of the renewable biomass on earth, they are the
cheapest enantiopure compounds in the market, and compared to
other biomolecules, their chiral coding information capacity is by
far the most significant.8 Based on these premises, and within our
interest in the synthesis and application of chiral sulfur compounds
in asymmetric synthesis,9 we have recently found that mixed P/S
Fig. 1
Results and discussion
A large number of chiral ligands,12 including carbohydrates,13 have
been used in the hydrosilylation of prochiral ketones. While the
field has been dominated by the use of ligands with N- or P-
coordinating atoms, recently chiral sulfur ligands have emerged as
an excellent alternative.14 One of the most important features in the
sulfur carbohydrate based ligands is that the sugar acts as a chiral
relay to the nascent stereogenic sulfur centre upon coordination
to the metal. Consequently, efficient control of the stereochemical
outcome in the coordination step,15 leads to a well defined chiral
environment in very close proximity to the coordination sphere
of the metal, and thus to the reaction site.16 In our previous
work we have shown that this control may be exerted, in the
case of C2-symmetric bis-thioglycosides, through stereoelectronic
factors, namely the exo-anomeric effect,17 or through steric bias
aInstituto de Investigaciones Qu´ımicas (IIQ), CSIC-Universidad de Sevilla,
c/. Ame´rico Vespucio, 49., Isla de la Cartuja, 41092 Sevilla, Spain.
E-mail: khiar@iiq.csic.es; Fax: +34954460565; Tel: +34954489559
bDepartamento de Qu´ımica Orga´nica y Farmace´utica, Facultad de Farmacia,
Universidad de Sevilla, c/Profesor Garc´ıa Gonza´lez, 2, 41012, Sevilla, Spain.
E-mail: inmaff@us.es; Fax: +34954556737; Tel: +34954555993
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: [1H, 13C and
31PNMR spectra of the ligands 1–3, the catalysts 4–6, and 9–11. See DOI:
10.1039/c1ob06305g
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360 | 355
©

View Article Online
in the case of C1-symmetric phosphinite thioglycosides.11,18 Based
on the success of this catalyst design in the Rh(I)-hydrogenation
of enamides, in the present paper, we report our work on
the stereoselective synthesis of Rh(I)-complexes 4–6, Scheme 1,
and their application in the cited asymmetric hydrosilylation of
aromatic prochiral ketones.
Table 1 Hydrosilylation of 1-naphthyl methyl ketone 7 with catalysts 4–6,
a
using Ph2SiH2
Entry
1
Catalyst
Yield (%)b
Eec (%)
40
d
—
18e
60
2
3
45
80
Scheme 1 Synthesis of the catalysts 4–6.
42
The new ligand 2, derived from galactose, was designed to
determine the effect of enhanced bulkiness of the substituent on
the sulfur on the catalytic activity of the process. In contrast,
ligand 3, was designed to determine the effect of the relief of the
conformational strain within the ligand as well as the electron
density increase of the anomeric sulfur atom, on the catalytic
behavior of the ligands. Ligand 2 was obtained in 5 steps from
galactose pentaacetate using 1-adamanthane thiol as a glycosyl
acceptor, while ligand 3 was obtained in 6 steps, starting from
D-glucal.19
a All reactions were conducted in THF using 1 mol% of the catalyst.
b All the reactions were stopped after 24 h. c Determined by chiral HPLC
using Chiracel-OB column. d Silane polymerization. e Reaction conducted
in CH2Cl2.
In the light of these results, which suggest that these ligands can
potentially lead to an efficient catalyst for the hydrosilylation of
prochiral ketones, we decided to fine tune some of the structural
parameters encoded in their framework. Firstly, and in order to
find out if the diene co-ligand and the counterion are simple
spectators, or play a prominent role in the catalytic process,14a
we synthesized the Rh(I)-complexes 9–11 with norbornadiene co-
ligand and a triflate counterion. Condensation of the ligands 1–
3 with [(NBD)RhCl]2 followed by treatment with silver triflate
afforded the Rh(I)-complexes 9–11 as red solids in good yields,
Scheme 2. Once again the complexes were obtained as a single
Before conducting the catalytic study, we first synthesized an
advanced catalytic precursor with a well defined structure having
a cyclooctadiene coligand and SbF6 as counterion. Treatment
20
of the starting mixed P/S ligands 1–3 with Rh(cod)2SbF6 in
methylene chloride afforded the corresponding Rh(I) complexes
in excellent yields, Scheme 1. Interestingly, the 1H-, 13C-, and 31P-
NMR spectra indicated that complexes 4–6 are obtained as a single
diastereoisomer, which highlights the excellent sterochemical
control exerted by the tert-butyl and the adamantyl groups. With
these catalysts, and in order to determine their suitability for the
synthesis of chiral carbinols, we used hydrosilylation of 1-naphthyl
methyl ketone 7 as the model reaction, Table 1.
As can be seen from Table 1, in the case of the cationic
Rh(I) complex 4, which exhibits an excellent behavior in the
enantioselective hydrogenation of enamides, no product was
obtained, and only silane polymerization was observed (Table 1,
entry 1).21 Changing the solvent from THF to methylene chloride
allows the obtention of the secondary carbinol 8, in a modest 18%
yield and 40% ee. Surprisingly, structurally related Rh(I) complex
5, with an adamantyl group instead of the tert-butyl moiety, leads
to the secondary carbinol with a good 60% yield and 45% ee. In
contrast, the conformationally and electronically different Rh(I)-
complex 6, still exhibits some limitations in its catalytic efficiency
as the final product was obtained with a modest 42% chemical
yield, but it shows enhancement in its enantiomeric discrimination
as it gave the final product with a good 80% ee.
1
diastereoisomer as shown by HNMR, 31PNMR and 13CNMR.
With these catalysts we then performed the hydrosilylation of the
1-naphthyl methyl ketone using, as before, 1 mol% of the catalyst in
THF at room temperature. The results of this study, summarized in
Table 2, indicate that all the new Rh-complexes behave better than
those that have a COD co-ligand and SbF6 counterion. Indeed
with these catalysts 1-(1-naphthyl)-ethan-1-ol 8 was obtained in
better yields and with enhanced enantioselectivity.
Strained catalysts 9 and 10 derived from galactose afforded
mostly the same results, as the product was obtained with accept-
able yields (60–65%) and acceptable enantioselectivities 56% and
58% ee, respectively. Interestingly, the use of perbenzylated glucose
derived catalyst 11 afforded the desired product in quantitative
yield and an excellent 86% ee. With the most efficient catalyst
11, we then conducted a study in order to unravel the effect of the
solvent, temperature and silane structure on the reaction outcome,
356 | Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©

View Article Online
Table 2 Hydrosilylation of 1-naphthyl ketone 7 with catalysts 9–11, using
Table 3 Influence of solvent, temperature and silane structure on the
hydrosilylation of 7 with catalyst 11a
a
Ph2SiH2
Entry
1
Catalyst
Yield (%)b
60
Eec (%)
56
Entry
Solvent
Ar2SiH2
T/◦C Yield (%)b eec (%)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
THF
THF
THF
THF
CH2Cl2
CH2Cl2
THF
Ph2SiH2
Ph2SiH2
Ph2SiH2
Ph2SiH2
Ph2SiH2
Ph2SiH2
60
25
0
100
100
96
54
86
85
72
82
66
91
84
-20
25
0
28
83
40
51
Ph(1-naphthyl)SiH2 25
Ph(1-naphthyl)SiH2
2
3
65
58
86
THF
0
28
a All reactions were conducted using 1 mol% of the catalyst. b All the
reactions were stopped after 24 h. c Determined by chiral HPLC using
Chiracel-OB column.
100
determining stages in a reaction. Indeed, these results, are in
accord with Ojima’s mechanism for hydrosilylation where the
reversible coordination of the ketone to the hydridorhodium
complex, together with the irreversible insertion of the carbonyl
into the Si–Rh bond,25 offer two stages for the stereochemical
control of the hydrosilylation reaction. With regard to the effect of
the solvent, changing THF to methylene chloride has a negative
effect on the process, as both reactivity and enantioselectivity
dropped. Interestingly, the use of the more hindered silane source,
Ph(1-naphthyl)SiH2 obtained from the reaction of SiCl3 and Ph(1-
naphthyl)MgBr gave a product with an excellent 91% ee, but
with modest yield (Table 3, entries 7 and 8). From these results,
we can conclude that the best conditions at room temperature
are Ph2SiH2 as silane source, and THF as solvent. Using these
conditions, we conducted the asymmetric hydrosilylation of
other aromatic prochiral ketones, and the results are given in
Table 4.
a All reactions were conducted in THF using 1 mol% of the catalyst. b All
the reactions were stopped after 24 h. c Determined by chiral HPLC using
Chiracel-OB column.
Unhindered acetophenone 12 can be reduced with an acceptable
77% chemical yield and 82% ee (Table 4, entry 1). In the of
case 1-phenyl propanone 13 (Table 4, entry 2) the corresponding
carbinol has been obtained with lower enantiomeric excess
(70% ee). Interestingly, the system is able to reduce the more
challenging cyclic ketone 14 (Table 4, entry 3), as the cor-
responding carbinol has been obtained in quantitative yield
and 50% ee. The same result is also obtained with the
electronically deficient 3,5-bistrifluoromethyl phenyl ketone 15,
(Table 4, entry 4).
Scheme 2 Synthesis of the catalysts 9–11.
and to get some indication of the unknown mechanism of the
hydrosilylation reaction,22 Table 3.
With regard to the temperature effect, conducting the reaction
at 60 ◦C leads to the product 8 in quantitative yield but the
enantioselectivity drops to 54%. Lowering the temperature to 0 ◦C
(Table 3, entry 3) afforded the secondary carbinol in 96% yield a◦nd
with ee (85%). Surprisingly, lowering the temperature to -20 C
(Table 3, entry 4), had a dramatic effect both on the yield (28%)
and on the enantioselectivity (72% ee). This unusual temperature
effect, occasionally referred to as an isoinversion relationship,23
has already been observed in other catalytic reactions, including
hydrosilylation,24 and may be taken as evidence for two selectivity
Conclusions
In conclusion, mixed P/S ligands derived from carbohydrates
are good catalyst precursors for the asymmetric Rh(I)-catalyzed
hydrosilylation of prochiral ketones. Of all the catalysts assayed,
the cationic Rh(I)-catalyst 11, derived from the more electronically
rich perbenzylated glucose P/S ligand 3, gave the best results. With
regard to ketone structure, the preliminary results reported here,
indicate that catalyst 11 is the most efficient in hydrosilylation of
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360 | 357
©

View Article Online
Table 4 Hydrosilylation of aromatic prochiral ketones with catalyst 11
General procedure for the synthesis of ligands 1–3
a
and Ph(1-naphthyl)SiH2
To a solution of the corresponding monoalcohol (1.4 mmol)
in dry and deoxygented (1/1) THF/NEt3 (7 mL) solution, was
added diphenyl chlorophosphine (276 ml, 1.54 mmol) followed
by a catalytic amount of DMAP (30 mg). After 30 min, the
suspension was directly loaded on a short pad of silica and eluted
with the corresponding deoxygenated eluent. The phosphinite
thioglycosides, usually obtained as white solids, were immediately
stored in a dry glove box.
Entry
1
Ketone
Solvent
THF
T/◦C
Yield (%)b
75
Ee (%)c
74
25
tert-Butyl 6-O-acetyl-3,4-O-isopropylidene-2-O-diphenylphos-
phinite-1-thio-b-D-galactopyranoside (1). White solid. m.p.: 116–
120 ◦C; [a]D: +7.1 (1.0, CHCl3). 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d
(ppm) 7.56–7.47 (m, 4 H), 7.34–7.29 (m, 6 H), 4.51 (d, 1 H, J = 9.5
Hz), 4.33–4.26 (m, 3 H, H-3), 4.15 (dd, 1 H, JHH = 1.8 Hz and 5.6
Hz), 3.96–3.88 (m, 2 H), 2.03 (s, 3 H), 1.42 (s, 3 H), 1.29 (s, 3 H),
1.22 (s, 9 H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.8, 142.9
(d, JPC = 18.4 Hz), 142.1 (d, JPC = 15.2 Hz), 131.3 (d, JPC = 22.1 Hz),
0
25
77
100
82
70
2
3
4
THF
THF
THF
0
25
100
100
51
50
130.5 (d, JPC = 21.3 Hz), 129.0 (d, JPC = 32.5 Hz), 128.0 (d, JPC
=
6.4 Hz), 127.9 (d, JPC = 7.2 Hz), 110.5, 83.1 (d, JPC = 3.3 Hz), 80.6
(d, JPC = 18.7 Hz), 79.3 (d, JPC = 2.7 Hz), 73.6 (2C), 63.9, 44.1, 31.3,
27.7, 26.4, 20.8. 31P NMR (121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 119.8.
HRMS Calc. for [C27H35O6PNaS]+: 541.1792. Found: 541.1788.
0
25
100
100
50
56
(1-Adamantyl) 6-O-acetyl-3,4-O-isopropylidene-2-O-diphenyl-
phosphinite-1-thio-b-D-galactopyranoside (2). White solid, m.p.:
133 ◦C. [a]D: +19.0 (c. 1.0, CHCl3). 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3):
d (ppm) 7.55–7.53 (m, 2H), 7.48–7.46 (m, 2H), 7.32–7.28 (m, 6H),
4.56 (d, 1H, J = 9.4 Hz), 4.31–4.23 (m, 3H), 4.13 (dd, 1H, J =
5.5 and 2.0 Hz, H-6¢), 3.94–3.87 (m, 2H), 2.02 (s, 3H), 1,94 (bs,
3H), 1.79–1.55 (m, 12H), 1.41 (s, 3H), 1.28 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (125
MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.8, 143.0 (d, JPC = 18 Hz), 142.1 (d,
JPC = 18 Hz), 131.5 (d, JPC = 22 Hz), 130.5 (d, JPC = 21 Hz), 129.2,
128.9, 128.0 (d, JPC = 12 Hz), 127.9 (d, JPC = 13 Hz), 110.5, 80.8
(d, JPC = 3 Hz), 80.6 (d, JPC = 19 Hz), 79.2 (d, JPC = 3 Hz), 73.6,
73.5, 63.9, 46.2, 43.8 (3C), 36.2 (3C), 29.8 (3C), 27.7, 26.4, 20.7.
31P NMR (121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm)119.6. Elemental Anal.
Calc. for C33H41O6PS: C, 66.42%; H, 6.93%; S, 5.37%. Found: C,
66.24%; H, 6.93%; S, 5.74%.
0
100
50
a All reactions were conducted using 1 mol% of the catalyst. b All the
reactions were stopped after 24 h. c Determined by chiral HPLC using
Chiracel-OB column.
prochiral ketones with a large steric difference between the two
substituents.
Experimental
General methods
tert-Butyl 2-O-diphenylphosphinite-3,4,6-tri-O-benzyl-1-thio-b-
D-glucopyranoside (3). White solid. m.p.: decomposes [a]2D0: 13.6
(c, 0.9, CHCl3). 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 7.57–7.48
(m, 4H), 7.32–7.09 (m, 15H), 6.85 (dd, 2H, J = 1.6 and 7.0 Hz),
4.69 (d, 2H, J = 10.9 Hz), 4.61–4.56 (m, 2H), 4.53–4.56 (m, 2H),
4.34 (d, 1H, J = 10.9 Hz), 3.94 (dd, 1H, J = 9.6 and 8.5 Hz), 3.74
(t, 1H, J = 8.5 Hz), 3.69 (dd, 1H, J = 1.7 and 10.7 Hz), 3.61–
3.49 (m, 3H), 1.16 (s, 9H).13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm)
143.0, 139.9, 138.9, 138.4, 138.3, 131.3, 131.2, 130.8, 130.6, 129.3,
128.7, 128.3, 128.2, 128.1, 128.0, 127.9, 127.8, 127.7, 127.6, 127.5,
127.1, 86.4, 84.1, 82.4, 82.2, 78.6, 69.4, 44.1, 31.4. 31P NMR (121.4
MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 115.6 ppm. Elemental Anal. Calc. for
C43H47O5PS: C, 73.06%; H, 6.70%. Found: C, 72.72%, H, 6.58%.
All reactions were run under an atmosphere of dry argon using
oven-dried glassware and freshly distilled and dried solvents.
THF and diethyl ether were distilled from sodium benzophenone
ketyl. Dichloromethane was distilled from calcium hydride. TLC
was performed on Silica Gel GF254 (Merck) with detection
by charring with phosphomolybdic acid/EtOH. For flash chro-
matography, silica Gel (Merck 230–400 mesh) was used. Columns
were eluted with positive air pressure. Chromatographic eluents
are given as volume to volume ratios (v/v). NMR spectra were
recorded with a Bruker AMX500 (1H, 500 MHz) and Bruker
Avance DRX500 (1H, 500 MHz) spectrometers. Chemical shifts
are reported in ppm, and coupling constants are reported in
Hz. Routine spectra were referenced to the residual proton or
carbon signals of the solvent. High-resolution mass spectra were
recorded on a Kratos MS-80RFA 241-MC apparatus. Optical
rotations were determined with a Perkin-Elmer 341 polarimeter.
Elemental analyses were recorded on a leco CHNS-932 apparatus.
The organic extracts were dried over anhydrous sodium sulfate and
concentrated in vacuo.
General procedure for the synthesis of the cationic complexes
L-Rh(COD)SbF6, 4–6
To a solution of the corresponding ligand (1 mol equiv.) in
dry deoxygenated methylene chloride, was added under argon
atmosphere a solution of [Rh(COD)2]SbF6 (1 mol equiv.) in dry
358 | Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©

View Article Online
deoxygenated CH2Cl2. The mixture, which changes the colour
from red to orange, was stirred for 1 h. The solvent was
evaporated. Addition of ether followed by filtration through
canula, then evaporation, and finally addition of hexanes afforded
the complexes as orange solids.
112.1, 112.0, 89.0, 88.9, 84.7, 84.6, 83.5, 83.4, 83.1, 81.2, 79.3,
75.8, 74.9, 73.5, 68.5, 57.9, 32.8, 31.1, 30.9, 29.2, 28.0. 31P-NMR
(121.4 MHz): d (ppm) 123.5 (d, JPRh = 94.9 Hz). HRMS Calc. for
[C51H59O5PRhS]+: 917.2876. Found: 917.2188.
General procedure for the synthesis of the cationic complexes
L-Rh(NBD)OTf, 9–11
Complex [1-Rh(COD)]SbF6, 4
Starting from ligand
[Rh(COD)2]SbF6 (34.8 mg, 1 equiv.) and following the general
1
(32.5 mg, 0.06 mmoles) and
To a solution of [Rh(NBD)Cl]2 (0.7 equiv.) in dry deoxygenated
methylene chloride (1 mL) under argon at 0 ◦C was added a
solution of the ligand (1 equiv.) in dry methylene chloride at
procedure afforde◦d complex 4 (80%) as an orange solid. M.p.:
decomposes (190 C). [a]D20: -2.7 (c 0.2, CHCl3). H-NMR (500
1
0
◦C. The reaction was stirred at 0 ◦C for 5 min. After that
MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 7.96–7.92 (m, 2H), 7.60–7.29 (m, 8H),
5.78 (bs, 1H), 5.71 (bs, 1H), 4.80 (t, 1H, J = 5.6 Hz), 4.71 (d, 1H,
J = 10.2 Hz), 4.48–4.21 (m, 5H), 4.07 (brs, 1H), 3.88 (bs, 1H),
2.69–2.11 (m, 8 H), 2.04 (s, 3H), 1.63 (s, 3H), 1.43 (s, 3H), 1.21 (s,
the mixture was added via canula over a suspension of silver
trifluoromethanesulfonate (1.2 equiv.) and stirred 5 min at room
temperature. The reaction was filtered by canula and evaporated
until 0.3 mL of solvent, and finally addition of hexanes (5 mL)
afforded the complexes as orange solids.
9H). 13C-NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.6, 133.7 (d, JPC
=
50.8 Hz), 132.9, 132.7 (d, JPC = 59.6 Hz), 131.9 (d, JPC = 14.3 Hz),
131.7, 130.1 (d, JPC = 11.0 Hz), 129.7 (d, JPC = 11.7 Hz), 128.8
Complex [1-Rh(NBD)]TfO, 9
(d, JPC = 10.6 Hz), 114.9, 114.8, 110.9, 110.6, 110.5, 88.5 (d, JPC
=
Starting from ligand 1 (40 mg, 0.07 mmol), [Rh(NBD)Cl]2 (21.3
mg, 0.05 mmol) and AgOTf (24 mg, 0.09 mmol) and following
the general procedure afforded 45 mg (80% yield) of complex 9
as an orange solid. M.p.: decomposes (207 ◦C). [a]D: + 9.0 [c 0.2,
CHCl3]; 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 7.92–7.88 (m, 2H),
7.60–7.58 (m, 3H), 7.48–7.45 (m, 5H), 5.04 (d, 1H, JHH = 10 Hz),
4.76 (t, 1H, J = 6 Hz), 4.49 (m, 1H), 4.40–4.35 (m, 2H), 4.25 (dd,
1H, J = 3 Hz and 12 Hz), 4.18–4.05 (m, 3H, H-2, 2H), 2.04 (s,
3H), 1.72 (bs, 2H), 1.52 (brs, 2H), 1.48 (s, 3H), 1.43 (s, 9H), 1.39 (s,
3H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.6, 132.6, 132.1,
131.9, 131.8, 130.5, 130.4, 129.4, 129.3, 129.1, 128.9, 110.7, 81.1,
79.4, 78.3, 74.4, 74.0, 68.7, 63.4, 58.3, 53.2, 31.5, 29.0, 27.8, 26.1,
12.2 Hz), 83.8, 82.6 (d, JPC = 10.8 Hz), 80.2, 78.2 (d, JPC = 7.2 Hz),
74.7, 73.8, 63.3, 57.9, 32.1, 31.8, 31.6, 30.9, 29.7, 28.9, 28.1, 26.1,
20.7. 31P-NMR (121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 125.7 (d, JPRh = 94.9
Hz). Elemental Anal. Calc. for C35H47F6O6PRhSSb: C 43.54%, H
4.91%. Found: C 43.61%, H 5.08%.
Complex [2-Rh(COD)]SbF6, 5
Starting from ligand 2 (73 mg, 0.12 mmol) and [Rh(COD)2]SbF6
(67 mg, 0.12 mmol) and following the general procedure afforded
complex 5 as an orange solid in quantitative yield. M.p.: decom-
poses (129 ◦C). [a]D: -11.3 (c. 0.7, CHCl3). 1H NMR (400 MHz,
CDCl3): d (ppm) 7.95–7.91 (m, 2H), 7.60–7.52 (m, 3H), 7.40–7.36
(m, 5H), 5.73 (bs, 1H), 5.62(bs, 1H), 4.78 (t, 1H, = 5.7 Hz), 4.72 (d,
1H, J = 10.2 Hz), 4.40–4.32 (m, 4H), 4.22 (dd, 1H, J = 10.3 and
2.2 Hz), 4.08 (bs, 1H), 1.75 (d, 3H, J = 11.9 Hz), 1.63 (s, 3H), 1.51
(brs, 6H), 1.44 (d, 3H, J = 11.7 Hz), 1.42 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (400
MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.6, 133.9, 133.7, 133.4, 133.1, 132.7,
132.0, 131.9, 131.6, 129.9, 129.8, 129.6, 129.5, 128.8, 128.7, 115.2
(dd, JPC = 10.0 and 6.0 Hz), 110.4 (dd, JPC = 10.0 and 5.0 Hz), 88.7
(d, JPC = 12.5 Hz), 84.1, 82.4 (d, JPC = 11.0 Hz), 78.1 (d, JPC = 7.0
Hz), 77.8, 74.5, 73.8, 63.3, 61.1, 43.3, 35.1, 32.2, 31.6, 30.6, 29.0,
28.8, 28.2, 26.2, 20.8. 31P NMR (97.1 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 125.6
(d, JPRh = 94.2 Hz). HRMS Calc. for [C41H53O6PRhS]+: 807.2356.
Found: 807.2335.
20.7. 31P NMR (121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 132.2 (d, JPRh
=
105.9 Hz). HRMS Calc. for [C34H43O6PRhS]+: 713.1573. Found:
713.1602.
Complex [2-Rh(NBD)]TfO, 10
Starting from ligand 2 (87 mg, 0.140 mmol), [Rh(NBD)Cl]2 (49.6
mg, 0.1 mmol) and AgOTf (39 mg, 0.154 mmol) and following
the general procedure afforded complex 10 (120 mg, 0.13 mmol,
88% yield) as an orange solid. [a]D: + 25.3 [c. 1, CHCl3]. M.p.:
decomposes (116 ◦C). 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 7.93–
7.89 (m, 2H, Ph2P), 7.58–7.56 (m, 3H), 7.44–7.39 (m, 5H), 6.05–
5.85 (brs, 1H), 5.85–5.70 (bs, 1H), 5.00 (d, 1H, JHH = 10.0 Hz), 4.72
(t, 1H, J = 5.4 Hz), 4.45 (d, 1H, J = 6.6 Hz), 4.40–4.30 (m, 2H),
4.30–3.90 (m, 6H), 2.02–1.95 (m, 6H), 1.90–1.56 (m, 14H), 1.48 (s,
3H), 1.35 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 170.5,
132.6, 133.7, 132.1, 132.0, 131.6, 130.2, 130.1, 129.4, 129.3, 129.0,
128.9, 110.7, 81.4, 78.3, 77.3, 74.3, 73.9, 63.3, 61.7, 53.3, 43.9, 35.2,
30.5, 27.8, 25.9, 20.7. 31P NMR (121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm)
130.06 (d, JPRh = 104.5 Hz). HRMS Calc. for [C40H49O6PRhS]+:
791.2043. Found: 791.2121.
Complex [3-Rh(COD)]SbF6, 6
Starting from ligand 3 (65 mg, 0.09 mmol) and [Rh(COD)2]SbF6
(70 mg, 0.09 mmol) and following the general procedure afforded
complex 6 as an orange solid in quantitative yield. M.p.: decom-
poses. [a]2D0: -3.8 (c 1.0, CHCl3). 1H-NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d
(ppm) 7.90 (m, 2H), 7.60 (m, 3H), 7.30–6.95 (m, 20H), 5.80 (bs,
2H), 4.91 (d, 1H, J = 7.1 Hz), 4.89 (d, 1H, J = 7.5 Hz), 4.75 (d,
1H, J = 7.5 Hz), 4.73 (d, 1H, J = 7.8 Hz), 4.65–4.53 (m, 4H), 4.12
(t, 1H, J = 8.6 Hz), 4.00 (bs, 1H), 3.89 (t, 1H, J = 8.5 Hz), 3.79
(brs, 1H), 3.72 (m, 2H), 3.68–3.62 (m, 1H), 2.85–2.00 (m, 8H),
1.20 (s, 9H). 13C-NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 137.7, 137.6,
137.5, 133.1, 132.2, 132.1,131.5, 130.2, 130.1, 129.7, 129.6, 128.6,
128.5, 128.5, 128.4, 128.3, 127.9, 127.8, 127.7, 127.6, 115.0, 114.9,
Complex [3-Rh(NBD)]TfO, 11
Starting from ligand 3 (98.5 mg, 0.16 mmol), [Rh(NBD)Cl]2 (36
mg, 0.08 mmol) and AgOTf (40.3 mg, 0.16 mmol) and following
the general procedure afforded complex 11 as a yellow solid (144
◦
mg, 92% yield). M.p.: decomposes (183 C). [a]2D0: +15.8 (c. 0.1,
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360 | 359
©

View Article Online
1
acetone). H-NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 8.08–8.02 (m,
Sci. U. S. A., 2004, 101, 5356; (c) T. P. Yoon and E. N. Jacobsen, Science,
2003, 299, 1691.
6 (a) H. U. Blaser, B. Pugin and F. Spindler, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem.,
2005, 231, 1; (b) H.-U. Blaser, Chem. Commun., 2003, 293; (c) H. U.
Blaser, B. Pugin and F. Spindler, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem., 2005, 231,
1.
7 (a) M. M. K. Boysen, Chem. Eur J., 2007, 13, 8648; (b) S. Castillon,
C. Claver and Y. Diaz, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2005, 34, 702; (c) M. Dieguez,
O. P. Pamie´s and C. Claver, Chem. Rev., 2004, 104, 3189; (d) Y. D.
Wang, F. Wang, Z. W. Miao and R. Y. Chen, Prog. Chem., 2008, 20,
1923.
2H), 7.72–7.62 (m, 2H), 7.40–7.08 (m, 21H), 4.89 (d, 1H, J = 11.0
Hz), 4.88 (d, 1H, J = 11.0 Hz), 4.75 (d, 1H, J = 11.0 Hz), 4.67 (d,
1H, J = 11.0 Hz), 4.63–4.43 (m, 5H), 4.15–4.05 (brs, 2H), 4.03 (t,
1H, J = 9.5 Hz), 3.90 (t, 1H, J = 9.5 Hz), 3.72 (d, 2H, J = 3.5 Hz),
3.65–3.61 (m, 1H), 1.85–1.55 (m, 6H), 1.31 (s, 9H) ppm. 31P-NMR
(121.4 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 132.9 (d, JPRh = 105.9 Hz). MS (ESI)
[C50H55O5PRhS+]: 901.2 [M+].
8 R. I. Hollingsworth and G. J. Wang, Chem. Rev., 2000, 100,
General procedure for the enantioselective hydrosilylation of
aromatic prochiral ketones
4267.
9 (a) I. Ferna´ndez and N. Khiar, Chem. Rev., 2003, 103, 3651; (b) N.
Khiar, I. Ferna´ndez and F. Alcudia, Tetrahedron Lett., 1993, 34,
123; (c) N. Khiar, F. Alcudia, J.-L. Espartero, L. Rodr´ıguez and I.
Fernandez, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2000, 122, 7598; (d) N. Khiar, C.
S. Arau´jo, F. Alcudia and I. Ferna´ndez, J. Org. Chem., 2002, 67,
345.
10 (a) N. Khiar, C. S. Arau´jo, E. Alvarez and I. Ferna´ndez, Tetrahedron
Lett., 2003, 44, 3401; (b) N. Khiar, C. S. Arau´jo, B. Sua´rez and
I. Ferna´ndez, Eur. J. Org. Chem., 2006, 1685; (c) N. Khiar, R.
Navas, B. Suarez, E. Alvarez and I. Fernandez, Org. Lett., 2008, 12,
3697.
To a solution of the catalyst 11 (10.4 mg, 0.01 mmol) in THF
(1 mL) was added the aromatic ketone (1 mmol) at room
temperature and under argon atmosphere. Then diphenylsilane
(280 mL, 1.5 mmol, 1.5 equiv.) dissolved in THF (3 mL) was
added dropwise by syringe pump during 10 min. The reaction
mixture was monitored by TLC, and once the starting ketone was
completely consumed, methanol (2 mL) was added with a small
amount of pTsOH. After 30 min the solvents were removed under
vacuum and the mixture was purified by column chromatography,
and the ee’s were determined by GC or by HPLC.
11 F. L. Lam, F. Y. Kwong and A. S. C. Chan, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46,
4649.
12 (a) O. Riant, N. Mostefai and J. Courmarcel, Synthesis, 2004, 2943;
(b) S. Diez-Gonzalez and S. P. Nolan, Org. Prep. Proced. Int., 2007, 39,
523.
13 (a) A. Sua´rez, A. Pizzano, I. Ferna´ndez and N. Khiar, Tetrahedron:
Asymmetry, 2001, 12, 633; (b) M. Die´guez, O. Paˆmies and C. Claver,
Tetrahedron: Asymmetry, 2005, 16, 3877.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Inno-
vacio´n (grant No. CTQ2010-21755-CO2-00), and the Junta de
Andaluc´ıa (P07-FQM-2774).
14 (a) D. A. Evans, F. E. Michael, J. S. Tedrow and K. R. Campos, J.
Am. Chem. Soc., 2003, 125, 3534; (b) M. Mellah, A. Voituriez and E.
Schultz, Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 5133.
15 Inversion of metal-sulfur barrier is low and is around 15–20 kcal mol-1:
(a) E. Abel, S. K. Bhargava and K. G. Orrell, Prog. Inorg. Chem.,
1984, 32, 1; (b) E. Abel, J. Dormer, D. Ellis, K. G. Orrell, V. Sik, M.
B. Hursthouse and M. A. Mazid, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans., 1992,
1073.
Notes and references
1 (a) I. Agranat, H. Caner and J. Caldwell, Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery,
2002, 1, 753A; (b) M. Rouhi, Chem. Eng. News, 2004, 82, 47; (c) H.-
J Federsel, Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery, 2005, 4, 753; (d) G. Miglierini,
Chimica Oggi, 2005, 23, S3; (e) H. Murakami, Top. Curr. Chem., 2006,
269, 273.
2 (a) Chiral Auxiliaries and Ligands in Asymmetric Synthesis; J. Seyden-
Penne, Ed.; Wiley Interscience, New York, 1995; (b) Comprehensive
Asymmetric Catalysis, Vol. I-IIIE. N. Jacobsen and A. Pfaltz, H.
Yamamoto, Springer, Berlin, 1999; (c) E. Meggers, Chem. Eur. J., 2010,
16, 752; (d) Assymmetric Synthesis-The Essentials, M. Christmann and
S. Bra¨sse, ed.; Wiley-VCH,, Weinheim, 2008.
3 (a) Y. Uozomi, Synlett, 2010, 1988; (b) P. J. Walsh, H. M. Li and C.
A. De Parrodi, Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 2503; (c) J. Mlynarski and J.
Paradowska, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2008, 37, 1502.
4 For recent monographs and reviews on organocatalysis: (a) C. Grondal,
M. Jeanty and D. Enders, Nat. Chem., 2010, 2, 167; (b) A. Dondoni
and A. Massi, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 2008, 47, 167; (c) A.
G. Doyle and E. N. Jacobsen, Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 5596; (d) S.
Mukherjee, J. W. Yang, S. Hoffmann and B. List, Chem. Rev., 2007, 107,
5471.
16 (a) W. S. Knowles, M. J. Sabacky, B. D. Vineyard and D. J. Weinkauff,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1975, 97, 2567; (b) W. S. Knowles, Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed., 2002, 41, 1999.
´
17 N. Khiar, C. S. Arau´jo, B. Sua´rez, E. Alvarez and I. Ferna´ndez, Chem.
Commun., 2004, 44, 714.
18 The detailed syntheses of ligands 2 and 3, will be reported in due course.
19 N. Khiar, B. Sua´rez, V. Valdivia and I. Ferna´ndez, Synlett, 2005,
2963.
20 T. V. Rajanbabu, T. A. Ayers, G. A. Halliday, K. K. You and J. C.
Calabrese, J. Org. Chem., 1997, 62, 6012.
21 (a) T. D. Tilley and H. G. Woo, Polym. Prepr. Am. Chem. Soc. Div.
Polym. Chem., 1990, 31, 228; (b) T. D. Tilley, Comments Inorg. Chem.,
1990, 10, 37.
22 N. Schneider, M. Finger, C. Haferkemper, S. Bellemin-Laponnaz and
L. H. Gade, Chem. Eur. J., 2009, 15, 11515.
23 T. Go¨bel and K. B. Sharpless, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1993, 32,
1329.
24 (a) D. Haag, J. Rusnik and H.-D. Scharf, Organometallics, 1998, 17,
398; (b) V. Ce´sar, S. Bellemin-Laponnaz, H. Wadepohl and L. H. Gade,
Chem. Eur. J., 2005, 11, 2862.
25 I. Ojima, T. Kogure, M. Kumagai, S. Horiuchi and T. Sato, J.
Organomet. Chem., 1976, 122, 83.
5 For recent monographs and reviews on metal promoted asymmetric
catalysis see: (a) B. Trost, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2004, 101,
5348; (b) R. Noyori, M. Kitamura and T. Ohkuma, Proc. Natl. Acad.
360 | Org. Biomol. Chem., 2012, 10, 355–360
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2012
©