intriguing, as it indicates that the regioselectivity can be
controlled by judicious choice of diyne substitution.
Table 1. Nickel-Benzyne + 1,3-Diyne Cycloadditionsa
entry
diyne
R
product
% yield 3b
1
2b
2c
2d
2e
2f
2g
2h
2i
Ph
CO2Et
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
3h
3i
85
82
74
68
40
36
27
21
2c
3
4
5d
6
7
8
CH2CH2OTBS
n-Bu
CH2OMe
CH2CH2CO2Me
CH2OAc
The structural assignments of dialkynyl naphthalenes 3 and
1
SiMe3
10 were originally based primarily on the H NMR spectrum.
The number of signals revealed that symmetric products had
formed in both cases. Because of the proximity of the
a
Conditions: 1 equiv of 1b, 2.2 equiv of 2, 5 equiv of Et3P, toluene,
b
c
6
1
0 °C. Isolated yield. Reaction was performed at -78 to 23 °C with
0 equiv of 2c in the absence of Et3P. Et3P was omitted from the reaction.
d
1
,4-substituents to the 5,8-protons, the two constitutional
isomers can be distinguished by the different shielding effects
of an alkyl versus an alkynyl group. The observed chemical
shifts of δ 7.6-8.0 ppm for naphthalenes 3 are similar to
the shifts for H8 of 1-alkyl naphthalenes reported in the
products are purified by silica gel column chromatography
to give the dialkynyl naphthalenes 3 as yellow oils or white
solids. The highest yields of naphthalene were obtained using
diynes with relatively electroneutral phenyl (Table 1, entry
12
literature. In contrast, the δ 8.8 ppm shift observed for H8
13
in 10 is indicative of a 1,4-dialkynyl naphthalene.
1) or noncoordinating n-alkyl substituents (entries 3 and 4).
With the more reactive conjugated diester 2c, low yields were
initially obtained due to competitive decomposition of the
1
1
diyne. To circumvent this, the reaction was performed at
a lower temperature and the diyne was used in excess,
resulting in 82% yield of naphthalene 3c (entry 2). In some
cases (entries 2 and 5) triethylphosphine was not added, as
the diynes were reactive toward the phosphine.
We interpret the lower yields observed for entries 5-8 to
indicate restricted approach of diynes 2f-i to the metal
center. Of particular note is the lower yield for reaction of
diyne 2g (entry 6) when compared with the much higher
yield for 2d (entry 3), as the two diynes differ only in remote
To confirm our structural assignments further, we were
gratified to find that cycloadduct 3b formed a crystalline
product that could be analyzed by X-ray diffraction, which
confirmed our NMR structural analysis (Figure 1).
Because of its higher stability, the nickel-4,5-difluoro-
benzyne 1b could be isolated and purified, which enabled
the precise determination of the yield of the cycloaddition
reactions. However, the ability to access nonfluorinated
2 2 2 2 2
substituents (CH CH CO Me versus CH CH OTBS, respec-
tively). This suggests that the Lewis basic oxygens of the
esters in 2g coordinate to the metal center, preventing
productive reaction (vide supra, Scheme 1). Such side chain
coordination cannot occur with the sterically shielded oxygen
of 2d. This can also explain the lower yields observed for
the oxygen-containing methyl ether 2f (entry 5) and acetate
2h (entry 7). For trimethylsilyl-substituted diyne 2i, steric
2
,3-dialkynyl naphthalenes would constitute a more general
hindrance is likely the cause of the lower yield obtained
method. Knowing that 1,4-diphenylbutadiyne 2b gave the
highest yield of the cycloadduct, nickel-benzyne 1a, pre-
pared in situ from complex 4, was reacted with an excess of
(entry 8).
A further exploration of sterically demanding diyne
substituents led us to react 2,5-di-tert-butoxyhexadiyne 2j
with nickel-benzyne 1b. Although we were expecting little
or no yield of naphthalene product because of the steric
congestion at the terminal carbon of the diyne, we were
surprised to find that a 70% yield of the 1,4-dialkynyl
naphthalene 10 was formed (eq 4). This result is particularly
(12) (a) Rigaudy, J.; Lachgar, M.; Saad, M. M. A. Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr.
1994, 131 (2), 177. (b) Brown, R. F. C.; Browne, N. R.; Coulston, K. J.;
Eastwood, F. W. Aust. J. Chem. 1990, 43 (11), 1935. (c) Best, W. M.;
Collins, P. A.; McCulloch, R. K.; Wege, D. Aust. J. Chem. 1982, 35 (4),
8
43.
(13) (a) Pschirer, N. G.; Bunz, U. H. F. Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 40 (13),
2
481. (b) John, J. A.; Tour, J. M. Tetrahedron 1997, 53 (45), 15515.
(
c) Butler, I. R.; Soucy-Breau, C. Can. J. Chem. 1991, 69 (7), 1117.
(11) Varela, J. A.; Castedo, L.; Maestro, M.; Mah ´ı a, J.; Sa a´ , C. Chem.
(d) Klusener, P. A. A.; Hanekamp, J. C.; Brandsma, L.; Schleyer, P. v. R.
Eur. J. 2001, 7 (23), 5203.
J. Org. Chem. 1990, 55 (4), 1311.
Org. Lett., Vol. 5, No. 14, 2003
2479