Evaluation Only. Created with Aspose.PDF. Copyright 2002-2021 Aspose Pty Ltd.
depicts the mechanism and transition-state geometry.14 The
hydrogen transfer associated with transition structure 14
makes the predicted KIEs for this step less quantitatively
reliable, but the qualitative pattern of predicted isotope effects
should be correct.
If hydropalladation of styrene is irreversible, medium-sized
KIEs are predicted (Figure 3a) for both of the olefinic
carbons of styrene, with very small KIEs for the aromatic
carbons. This pattern does not fit with the experimental KIEs
in Figure 1. In contrast, for nucleophilic attack on the η3
complex, a large 13C KIE is predicted at the R-olefinic carbon
along with small but significant KIEs at the ortho and ipso
aromatic carbons (Figure 3b). Considering the differences
between the calculational model and the actual experimental
system, the agreement between the predicted KIEs of Figure
3b and experiment is excellent.15
The regiochemically opposite hydropalladation of styrene
suggested by the formation of 10 was also modeled theo-
retically. The π-complex 19 leading to the reverse hydro-
palladation is very similar in energy to 13 in the regular
catalytic cycle. Although olefin insertion in 19 is less
exothermic than the formation of η3 complex 15, there is
little barrier predicted for the insertion process via 20 to
afford 21. This is consistent with the formation of 8 and 9
versus 10 at roughly similar rates. The electron-deficient Pd
in 21 attempts to gain an extra ligand through an agostic
interaction with an adjacent C-H bond. However, 21 is still
much less stable than the alternative 16e- 15, and the re-
versed hydropalladation is predicted to be readily reversible.
16. The high energy of this transition state accounts for the
regiospecificity of the reaction.
The enantioselectivity observed in reactions employing
BINAP-type ligands should reflect factors influencing
the relative energy of diastereomeric transition states for
nucleophilic attack on the η3 complex. A qualitative model
for this transition state was built by combining transi-
tion structure 16 and a molecular mechanics model of
(R)-BINAP-Pd (with parameters chosen to approximate
Hartwig’s crystal structure4 of a η3 complex). At the stage
of the η3 complex, there was no obvious steric preference
among the possible diastereomeric structures; this is in line
with Hartwig’s observation of multiple η3 complexes present
under the reaction conditions.4 However, the η3 complex
must twist as it turns into a η2-benzene complex in the
process of nucleophilic displacement. In the complex leading
to the major product (Figure 4a), this twist appears to relieve
Figure 4. Model for understanding the enantioselectivity in
hydroaminations mediated by BINAP-type ligands. (a) Transition
state leading to the major enantiomer. (b) Transition state leading
to the minor enantiomer.
The mechanistic picture that emerges from the combination
of experimental observations and calculations provides
insight into the selectivity in these reactions. The regiochem-
istry of the overall hydroamination is not derived from
regioselectivity in the hydropalladation process but rather
reflects the relative energy of transition states for nucleophilic
displacement on a η3 complex versus a primary alkyl Pd
complex. Our model for the latter process was attack of NH3
on 21; a transition structure located for this displacement
(see Supporting Information) was 11.8 kcal/mol higher than
steric interactions. In the complex leading to the minor
enantiomeric product, the necessary twist of the benzyl group
seems to increase steric interactions. It should be emphasized
that this is currently only a qualitative model, but it does
account for the direction of the observed enantioselectivity.
In summary, a combination of kinetic isotope effects,
deuterium exchange observations, and theoretical calculations
supports a consistent mechanism in which the key selectivity-
determining step is a nucleophilic displacement on a η3 com-
plex. This suggests ways to gain further control of selectivity
in these reactions, and we plan to pursue such studies.
(14) (a) Beno, B. R.; Houk, K. N.; Singleton, D. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1996, 118, 9984. (b) Meyer, M. P.; DelMonte, A. J.; Singleton, D. A. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 10865. (c) DelMonte, A. J.; Haller, J.; Houk,
K. N.; Sharpless, K. B.; Singleton, D. A.; Strassner, T.; Thomas, A. A. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 9907. (d) Singleton, D. A.; Merrigan, S. R.;
Liu, J.; Houk, K. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 3385.
(15) The experimental KIE of ≈1.006 at the â-carbon of styrene is
recognizably in the opposite direction of the predicted KIE of 0.999 at this
carbon. This discrepancy may be the result of small amounts of polymer-
ization during the reaction or the distillative reisolation of the unreacted
styrene, as polystyrene was always observed in the pot residue. Polymer-
ization of styrene would contribute to the observed â-carbon KIE but have
little effect on the other carbons. For 13C KIEs for free-radical polymeri-
zation, see: Singleton, D. A.; Nowlan, D. T., III.; Jahed, N.; Matyjaszewski,
K. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 8609.
Acknowledgment. We thank the NIH (Grant GM-45617)
and The Robert A. Welch Foundation for research support
and the NSF (CHE-0077917) for NMR instrumentation.
Supporting Information Available: Experimental pro-
cedures, as well as energies and geometries of all calculated
structures. This material is available free of charge via the
OL049137A
2472
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 14, 2004