an axial orientation (small J values = equatorial orientation of
the proton at C-2). These data are consistent with a chair
conformation for all of the isolated compounds, in which the
products 5a–c have the substituents in a 1,3-cis arrangement,
and 6a–c in a 1,3-trans arrangement. In order to explain these
findings, we performed calculations on lactam 3 (MOPAC out
of SYBYL 6.3) which demonstrated that the conformer having
the carboxylate at C-2 in an axial disposition is, by far, more
stable (5 kcal mol21) than the corresponding equatorial
conformer‡ (Scheme 1). This result is the obvious consequence
of a strong A1,3 strain between the carboxylate at C-2 and the
Boc group on the nitrogen atom.16 Based on these calculations
and several literature reports on the stereoelectronic effects
during conjugated addition in related a,b-unsaturated cyclohex-
anones or 2,3-dihydro-4-pyridones,17,18 a strong axial bias was
expected to operate during the addition of nucleophilic reagents
to lactam 3. Therefore one should observe the preferential
formation of the cis adducts (5a–c) at the expense of the
corresponding trans epimers (6a–c). Indeed for the smallest
substituent (R = Me) an appreciable diastereoselectivity in
favor of the cis adduct was observed (5a:6a = 5:1). However
when the steric demand of the organocuprate was increased (R
= Bu), the facial selectivity was lost (5b:6b = 1:1) or, for still
bulkier groups (R = Ph) the facial steroselectivity was reversed,
and the trans diastereomer was the only one detected (5c:6c =
1:30). Allinger has discussed a closely related example
involving the 1,4-addition of Grignard reagents to 5-methyl-
cyclohex-2-enone,19 in which the importance of the conforma-
tion of the conjugated enolate (chair or boat) produced by
parallel or anti-parallel attack was considered. As the carbox-
ylate function in 3 is assumed to be axial, the major pathway for
the reaction with Me2CuLi2I was via an anti-parallel attack to
give the transient enolate of 5a. This intermediate possesses a
low energy chair-like conformation (TS chair), in spite of the
1,3-diaxial interaction between the carboxylate and the incom-
ing methyl group. When the nucleophile is larger, such as in
Bu2CuLi2I (5b/6b) or Ph2CuLi2I (5c/6c), the reaction pathway
via parallel attack takes place preferentially due to a competing
strong 1,3-diaxial interaction between the carboxylate and the
bulky incoming nucleophile. This gives a transient, boat-like
(TS boat) enolate, which collapses to the trans chair conformer.
The final transformation of 5a–c and 6a–c into the desired
substituted adipic acids was realized under hydrolytic condi-
tions and the amino acids 7a,b and 8a–c were obtained as
crystalline hydrochlorides.§
In conclusion, the diastereoselectivity observed for the
conjugate addition of organocuprates to cyclic enamide 3 could
be controlled by an appropriate choice of the transferable
nucleophilic reagent. The significant A1,3 strain inherent to the
ring system and the size of the nucleophile are probably the key
factors responsible for the diastereoselectivity observed in this
conjugate addition reaction. Our findings demonstrate that a,b-
unsaturated species 3 is an excellent substrate for the prepara-
tion of enantiomerically pure (2S,4S)- or (2S,4R)-2-amino-
4-substituted adipic acids.
We thank Dr Jacques Royer (Gif sur Yvette, France) and
Professor Maurizio Taddei (Sassari, Italy) for valuable discus-
sions.
Notes and references
† Selected data for 5a: mp 60 °C; Rf 0.30 (hexanes–Et2O = 5:5); [a]D
266.2 (c 5, CHCl3); dH(200 MHz, 30 °C) 4.51 (dd, J 10.2 and 6.2, 1 H), 3.74
(s, 3 H), 2.62 (dt, J 17 and 2.4, 1 H), 2.30 (m, 1 H), 2.10 (dd, J 17 and 10,
1 H), 2.15 (m, 1 H), 1.53 (m, 1 H),1.48 (s, 9 H), 1.02 (d, J 6, 3 H); dC(50
MHz) 172.1, 170.1, 151.9, 83.6, 58.6, 52.3, 42.7, 34.1, 28.3, 27.7, 26.3,
20.7. (Calc. for C13H21NO5 : C, 57.54; H, 7.80; N, 5.16. Found: C, 57.3; H,
7.9; N, 5.2%). For 6a: oil; Rf 0.35 (hexanes–Et2O = 6:5); [a]D +20.1 (c 2,
CHCl3, 30 °C); dH(200 MHz) 4.71 (dd, J 4 and 1.8, 1 H), 3.80 (s, 3 H), 2.66
(ddd, J 16.3, 3.2 and 1.4, 1 H), 2.21 (dd, J 9.1, 4 and 1.4, 1 H), 2.09 (dd, J
16.3 and 9.6, 1 H), 1.96 (m, 1 H), 1.73 (m, 1 H), 1.51 (s, 9 H), 1.01 (d, J
4.2, 3 H); dC(50 MHz) 172.2, 169.9, 152.2, 83.6, 58.3, 52.6, 42.8, 33.5, 29.7,
27.9, 25.1, 21.1. (Calc. for C13H21NO5: C, 57.54; H, 7.80; N, 5.16. Found:
C, 57.6; H, 7.6; N, 5.1%).
‡ In compound 3, the recorded coupling constant (dd, J 4.5) is consistant
with an axial orientation of the carboxylate.
§ Preparation of 7a: Lactam 5a (96 mg, 0.35 mmol) was heated at reflux for
2 h in a mixture of concentrated HCl (2 ml) and AcOH (4 ml). The mixture
was concentrated in vacuo and triturated with Et2O, to provide a solid which
was filtered to yield 7a (60 mg, 81%) as a hygroscopic solid; mp 178 °C;
[a]D 279 (c 1, MeOH); m/z (FAB) 176 (M + H+). For 8a: mp 196 °C; [a]D
+26 (c = 1.8, MeOH); m/z (FAB) 176 (M + H+).
parallel attack
a
H
O
Boc
H
N
H
H
1 F. J. Sardina and H. Rapoport, Chem. Rev., 1996, 96, 1825.
2 R. O. Duthaler, Tetrahedron, 1994, 50, 1539.
3 J. Jurczak and A. Golebiowski, Chem. Rev., 1989, 89, 149.
4 M. G. Moloney, Nat. Prod. Rep., 1998, 205.
H
CO2Me
b
5 T. Knöpfel, R. Kuhn and A. Allgeier, J. Med. Chem., 1995, 38, 1417.
6 C. G. Wermuth, A. Mann, A. Schoenfelder, R. A. Wright, B. G.
Johnson, J. P. Burnett, N.G. Mayne and D. D. Schoepp, J. Med. Chem.,
1996, 39, 814.
anti-parallel attack
b
a
7 Z.-Q. Gu, X.-F.Lin and D. P. Hesson, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett., 1995,
5, 1973.
8 R. H. Evans, A. A. Francis and J. C. Watkins, Brain Res., 1978, 148,
536.
9 J. Ezquerra, C. Pedregal, A. Escribano, M. C. Carreno and J. L. G.
Ruano, Tetrahedron Lett., 1995, 36, 3247.
10 I. Jako, P. Uiber, A. Mann, C. G. Wermuth, T. Boulanger, B. Norberg,
G. Evrard and F. Durant, J. Org. Chem., 1991, 56, 5729.
11 N. Krause and A. Gerold, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1997, 36,
186.
R
H
H
LiO
LiO
Boc
H
Boc
N
N
H
H
H
H
H
H
CO2Me
R
CO2Me
TS chair-like
TS boat-like
12 P. Perlmutter, in Conjugate Addition Reactions in Organic Synthesis,
Pergamon, Oxford, 1992, pp. 137–197 and references cited therein.
13 S. A. Hermitage and M. G. Moloney, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry, 1994, 5,
1463.
14 C. E. Davies, T. D. Heightman, S. A. Hermitage and M. G. Moloney,
Synth. Commun., 1996, 26, 687.
15 P. J. Murray and I. D. Starkey, Tetrahedron Lett., 1996, 37, 1875.
16 R. W. Hoffmann, Chem. Rev., 1989, 89, 1841.
17 P. Deslongchamp, in Stereoelectronic Effects in Organic Chemistry,
Pergamon, Oxford, 1983, p. 209.
18 J. D. Brown, M. A. Foley and D. L. Comins, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1988,
110, 7445.
H5
H4
H5
H3
O
H2
O
N
Boc
H2
H5
R
Boc
CO2Me
R
H3
N
H5
H3
H3
H4
CO2Me
5a–c (cis)
6a–c (trans)
4 Hz < J H-2 H-3ax < 5.6 Hz
7 Hz < J H-5ax H-4 < 12 Hz
10 Hz < J H-2 H-3ax <10.5 Hz
8 Hz < J H-5ax H-4 < 11 Hz
Scheme 2 Possible transition states and recorded values for coupling
19 N. L. Allinger and C. K. Riew, Tetrahedron Lett., 1966, 7, 1269.
constants.
Communication 8/09274F
684
Chem. Commun., 1999, 683–684