Published on Web 02/08/2003
Quantum Mechanical Predictions of the Stereoselectivities of
Proline-Catalyzed Asymmetric Intermolecular Aldol Reactions
S. Bahmanyar,† K. N. Houk,*,† Harry J. Martin,‡ and Benjamin List*,‡
Contribution from the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, UniVersity of California,
Los Angeles, California 90095-1569, Department of Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research
Institute, 10550 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, California 92037
Received October 4, 2002
Abstract: Quantum mechanical calculations were employed to predict the ratio of four stereoisomeric
products expected from two complex reactions involving the aldol reactions of cyclohexanone with
benzaldehyde or with isobutyraldehyde catalyzed by (S)-proline. Experimental tests of these predictions
provide an assessment of the state-of-the-art in quantum mechanical prediction of products of complex
organic reactions in solution.
Scheme 1
I. Introduction
Although Dirac once noted that the Schro¨dinger equation
“leads to equations much too complicated to be soluble,”1
quantum mechanics has had an enormous impact on chemistry.
Although computers and algorithms bring us closer to accurate
approximations to exact solutions, quantitative predictions are
rare. We report quantum mechanical predictions of stereose-
lectivities of a synthetically useful reaction: the ratios of four
possible stereoisomeric aldol products of the reactions of
cyclohexanone and two aldehydes, catalyzed by proline, were
predicted using quantum mechanical hybrid density functional
theory,2 and then the experimentally determined product yields
were compared to theoretical predictions. These results provide
an assessment of the current state of computational methods
for the prediction of the products of complicated organic
processes.
Proline has long been known as an effective asymmetric
catalyst for the intramolecular aldol reaction.3 Recently, it was
discovered that this amino acid could also catalyze inter-
molecular aldol reactions between ketones and aldehydes.4-9
These reactions proceed through an enamine-mediated mech-
anism10-12 and provide a prototype for the burgeoning area of
organocatalysis.13,14
R ) Ph: 62% yield, 60% ee; R ) 4-O2NC6H5: 68% yield, 76% ee; R
) i-Pr: 97% yield, 96% ee; R ) tert-butyl: 81% yield, >99% ee.
The stereoselectivities of intermolecular proline-catalyzed
direct aldol reactions of acetone with a variety of aldehydes
have been rationalized with a Zimmerman-Traxler six-
membered ring chair-like model15 (shown at the top of Scheme
1).4,5,8,9
The minor product could arise from a switch to an axial
R, or via the alternative Zimmerman-Traxler transition state
shown at the bottom of Scheme 1.
Aldol reactions of cyclohexanone enamines with aldehydes
can produce four stereoisomers that are syn- and anti-diaster-
eomeric pairs of enantiomers (Scheme 2). Because the aldehyde
and enamine may adopt three staggered arrangements about the
forming bond, and because the cyclohexene of the enamine can
adopt two-half-chair conformations, there are 24 reasonable
transition states for this reaction.
† Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California.
‡ Department of Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute.
(1) Dirac, P. A. M. Proc. R. Soc. 1929 123, 714-733.
(2) Gill, P. M. W. Aust. J. Chem. 2001, 54, 661-662.
(3) (a) Hajos, Z. G.; Parrish, D. R. J. Org. Chem. 1973, 38, 3239-3243. (b)
Hajos, Z. G.; Parrish, D. R. J. Org. Chem. 1974, 39, 1615-1621. (c) Eder,
U.; Sauer, G.; Wiechert, R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1971, 10, 496-
497. (d) Experiments demonstrating that both the carboxylic acid group
and pyrrolidine ring of proline are essential for effective asymmetric
induction were carried out by Hiroi, K.; Yamada, S. I. Chem. Pharm. Bull.
1975, 23, 1103-1109. (e) List, B. Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 5573-5590.
(4) List, B.; Lerner, R. A.; Barbas, C. F., III J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122,
2395-2396.
(10) (a) Brown, K. L.; Damm, L.; Dunitz, J. D.; Eschenmoser, A.; Hobi, R.;
Kratky, C. HelV. Chim. Acta 1978, 298, 3108-3135. (b) Jung, M. E.
Tetrahedron 1976, 32, 3-31.
(11) Agami, C. Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr. 1988, 3, 499-507.
(12) Agami, C.; Levialles, J.; Sevestre, H. Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr. 1987, 2, 358-
360.
(5) Notz, W.; List, B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 7386-7387.
(6) List, B.; Pojarliev, P.; Castello, C. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 573-575.
(7) List, B. Synlett 2001, 11, 1675-1686.
(13) (a) Gro¨ger, H.; Wilken, J. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 529-532. (b)
Jarvo, E. R.; Miller, S. J. Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 2481-2495.
(14) MacMillan, D. W. C.; Northrup, A. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 6798-
6799.
(8) Sakthivel, K.; Notz, W.; Bui, T.; Barbas, C. F., III J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001,
123, 5260-5267.
(9) Coˆrdova, A.; Notz, W.; Barbas, C. F., III J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 301-
303.
(15) Zimmerman, H. E.; Traxler, M. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1957, 79, 1920-
1923.
9
10.1021/ja028812d CCC: $25.00 © 2003 American Chemical Society
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 2003, 125, 2475-2479
2475