10.1002/chem.201702591
Chemistry - A European Journal
COMMUNICATION
Science 1981, 212, 1512–1514.
[29] A. Venkatesham, K. Nagaiah, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2012, 23, 1186–
1197.
[9]
M. A. Tius, Chem. Rev. 1988, 88, 719–732.
[10] L. Paquette, P. Astles, J. Org. Chem. 1993, 58, 165–169.
[11] (a), B. Tang, C. D. Bray, G. Pattenden, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2009, 7,
4448–4457; (b) B. Tang, C. D. Bray, G. Pattenden, J. Rogers,
Tetrahedron 2010, 66, 2492–2500.
[30] The stereochemistry of the 1,3-diol 14 and its C8 diastereomer were
confirmed by 1H NMR analysis of the cyclic carbonates prepared from
both compounds. In the case of the cyclic carbonate prepared from the
1,3-diol 14, an NOE was observed between the protons of the methyl
substituent and the proton on the hydroxyl-bearing carbon (C7). This
NOE was absent in the case of the cyclic carbonate obtained from the
diastereomeric 1,3-diol.
[12] (a) J. A. Marshall, C. A. Sehon, J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 4313–4320; (b)
J. A. Marshall, E. A. Van Devender, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 8037–8041.
[13] (a) P. A. Roethle, D. Trauner, Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 345–347; (b) P. A.
Roethle, P. T. Hernandez, D. Trauner, Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 5901–5904; (c)
T. J. Kimbrough, P. A. Roethle, P. Mayer, D. Trauner, Angew. Chem. Int.
Ed. 2010, 49, 2619–2621; Angew. Chem. 2010, 122, 2675–2678.
[14] T. J. Donohoe, A. Ironmonger, N. M. Kershaw, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
2008, 47, 7314–7316.
[31] A 1:1 mixture of diasteromers was subjected to the cyclisation conditions
and so the maximum posssible yield of the lactone 22 was 50%.
[32] Y. Kobayashi, H. Miyazaki, S. Inukai, C. Takagi, R. Makino, K.
Shimowaki, R. Igarashi, Y. Sugiyama, S. Nakamura, M. Matsugi, Synlett
2016, 27, 2352–2356.
[15] Q. Huang, V. H. Rawal, Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 543–545
[16] (a) I. Paterson, M. Gardner, Tetrahedron 1989, 45, 5283–5292. (b) I.
Paterson, R. E. Brown, C. J. Urch, Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 40, 5807–
5810.
[33] Direct comparison was made using original 1H and 13C NMR spectra
provided by Professor W. Fenical, Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
UC San Diego.
[34] The configuration of the C7-C8 epoxide was confirmed by 1H NMR
analysis. NOEs were observed between the C7 proton and the protons
of the C8 methyl substituent and between the C7 proton the furan proton
(C5). For further details, see Supporting Information.
[17] (a) P. Wipf, M. J. Soth, Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 1787–1790; (b) P. Wipf, M.
Grenon, Can. J. Chem. 2006, 84, 1226–1241.
[18] C. Stock, F. Höfer, T. Bach, Synlett 2005, 3, 511–513.
[19] M. Tsubuki, K. Takahashi, K. Sakata, T. Honda, Heterocycles 2005, 65,
531–540.
[35] A reviewer queried whether the stereochemical integrity at the C8
position is maintained during the key cyclization reaction (10 + 17 → 19).
The evidence that the configurational integrity of this position is
maintained during the furan-forming reaction is as follows: i) in the
literature, the integrity of related enantiomerically pure epoxides is
maintained in the presence of carboxylic acids, even in cases where
tethering of the epoxide to the carboxylic acid could promote
intramolecular protonation and subsequent nucleophilic opening of the
epoxide; ii) we have found that there is little stereocontrol at the
stereogenic centre adjacent to the furan in cases where furan
construction occurs with concomitant cyclic ether formation and so
additional scrambling of the C8 stereocentre would be expected to
deliver four diastereomers, but only two isomers of epoxide 19 are
obtained from the reaction; iii) the ratio of the two diastereomers of the
epoxide 19 does not vary during the course of the reaction; iv)
compounds produced by external nucleophilic trapping of the C8
carbocation, arising from epoxide protonation and ring opening, are not
obtained.
[20] (a) N. Toelle, H. Weinstabl, T. Gaich, J. Mulzer, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
2014, 53, 3859–3862; Angew. Chem. 2014, 126, 3940–3943. (b) T.
Gaich, H. Weinstabl, J. Mulzer, Synlett, 2009, 1157–1166.
[21] J. S. Clark, A. Boyer, A. Aimon, P. Engel Garcia, D. M. Lindsay, A. D. F.
Symington, Y. Danoy, Angew. Chemie Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 12128–12131;
Angew. Chem. 2012, 124, 12294–12297.
[22] For a related fragment coupling strategy for synthesis of furanocembrane
natural products based on the Knoevenagel condensation reaction, see:
(a) Pattenden, G.; Winne, J. M. Tetrahedron Lett. 2010, 51, 5044–5047.
(b) Li, Y.; Pattenden, G. Tetrahedron Lett. 2011, 52, 2088–2092; (c) Li,
Y.; Palframan, M. J.; Pattenden, G.; Winne, J. M. Tetrahedron 2014, 70,
7229–7240.
[23] T. C. Tsai, H. Y. Chen, J. H. Sheu, M. Y. Chiang, Z. H. Wen, C. F. Dai,
J. H. Su, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2015, 63, 7211–7218.
[24] A. M. D’Souza, S. K. Paknikar, V. Dev, P. S. Beauchamp, S. P. Kamat,
J. Nat. Prod. 2004, 67, 700–702.
[25] J. B. van Beilen, R. Holtackers, D. Lüscher, U. Bauer, B. Witholt, W. A.
Duetz, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 1737–44.
[36] The specific rotation of our synthetic 7-acetylsinumaximol is [α]2D7 −38 (c
= 0.080, CHCl3) compared to a literature value of [α]2D5 −56.0 (c = 0.6,
CHCl3) reported for natural material (ref. 23). The discrepancy can be
accounted for by the low concentration of our synthetic sample and the
difference in temperature during measurement.
[26] K. Geoghegan, P. Evans, Tetrahedron Lett. 2014, 55, 1431–1433.
[27] (a) G. W. Gribble, D. C. Ferguson, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1975,
535–536. (b) G. W. Gribble, Chem. Soc. Rev. 1998, 27, 395–404.
[28] Christopher R. Holmquist, Eric J. Roskamp, J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54,
3258–3260.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.