1,2-Hydrogen shifts in thermal and photic Bamford-Stevens reactions of cyclohexanones. Activation by an endocyclic oxygen

Tetrahedron

Volumn 54, Issue 40, 1998, Pages 12161-12172

  Olmstead, Kay Kim ^a,b   Nickon, Alex ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CYCLOHEXANONE DERIVATIVE; OXYGEN;

ARTICLE; PHOTOLYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTON NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; REACTION ANALYSIS;

EID: 0032191723     PISSN: 00404020     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0040-4020(98)00757-1     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. 1. Bamford, W.R.; Stevens, T.S. J. Chem. Soc. C 1952, 4735-4740. For reviews of the Bamford-Stevens reaction see: (a) Kirmse, W. Carbene Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Academic: New York, 1971.
2. 1. Bamford, W.R.; Stevens, T.S. J. Chem. Soc. C 1952, 4735-4740. For reviews of the Bamford-Stevens reaction see: (a) Kirmse, W. Carbene Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Academic: New York, 1971.
3. (b) Jones, M., Jr.; Moss, R.A. Eds. Carbenes; Academic: New York, 1973; Vol. 1.
4. (c) Regitz, M.; Maas, G. Diazo Compounds; Academic: New York, 1986, pp 257-295.
5. 2. Nickon, A.; Zurer, P. St. J. J. Org. Chem. 1981, 46, 4685-4694.
6. 3. For a discussion and leading references see: Nickon, A. Acc. Chem. Res. 1993, 26, 84-89.
7. 4. Friedman, L.; Shechter, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1961, 83, 3159-3160.
8. 5. Theoretical calculations suggest that at the transition state, even though the migrating H has not moved far along the reaction coordinate ("early" transition state), the nonmigrating groups are positioned similarly as in the alkene product (a) Evanseck, J.D.; Houk, K.N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 9148-9156.
9. (b) Kyba, E.P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 8330-8332.
10. (c) Sulzbach, H.M.; Platz, M.S.; Schaefer, H.F.; Hadad, C.M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 5682-5689.
11. 6. (a) Kenar, J.A.; Nickon, A. Tetrahedron 1997, 53, 14871-14894.
12. (b) Published product ratio data upon which all migration ratios are based do not warrant use of three significant figures, especially when one product component is formed in small proportion relative to another component (see for e.g., Table 1 in reference 3). However, we retain three figures for discussion so readers can readily connect them to numbers that have appeared in several earlier publications. Any final conclusions should take into account the quantitative limitations of the data.
13. 7. (a) Nickon, A.; Stern, A.G.; Ilao, M.C. Tetrahedron Lett. 1993, 34, 1391-1394.
14. (b) Stern, A.G.; Ilao, M.C.; Nickon, A. Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 8107-8118. The reported photochemical value (1.17 at 25 °C) becomes 1.40 after adjustment for isotope effects as described in ref. 6a, footnote 32.
15. 8. Press, L.S.; Shechter, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1979, 101, 509-510.
16. 9. Note that in the transition state for shift of the 3° H in each epimer of 2, the bystander OMe must necessarily be anti to the ring methylene at C-6.
17. 10. Fieser, L.F.; Herz, J.E.; Klohs, M.W.; Romero, M.A.; Utne, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1952, 74, 3309-3313.
18. eq see: Nickon, A.; Castle, M.A.; Harada, R.; Berkoff, C.E.; Williams, R.O. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963, 85, 2185-2186.
19. 12. Unlike B-S reactions, in which it is important to use just one equivalent of strong base (e.g. RLi), Shapiro reactions utilize excess base and involve different intermediates. Chamberlin, R.A.; Bloom, S.H. Org. Reactins 1990, 39, 1-83 and references cited there.
20. 13. (a) Bertz, S.H. Tetrahedron Lett. 1980, 21, 3151-3154.
21. (b) Shapiro, R.H.; Gadek, T. J. Org. Chem. 1974, 23, 3418-3419.
22. 14. Holbert, G.W.; Weiss, L.B.; Ganem, B. Tetrahedron Lett. 1976, 4435-4448.
23. 15. Kirmse, W.; Buschoff, M. Chem. Ber. 1967, 700, 1491-1506.
24. 16. Shechter, H. Personal communication. See: Gould, K.A. Ph.D. Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1975; Diss. Absir. Int. 1975, 36, 2806-B.
25. 16. Shechter, H. Personal communication. See: Gould, K.A. Ph.D. Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1975; Diss. Absir. Int. 1975, 36, 2806-B.
26. 16. Shechter, H. Personal communication. See: Gould, K.A. Ph.D. Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1975; Diss. Absir. Int. 1975, 36, 2806-B.
27. 17. (a) Platz, M.S.; Modarelli, D.A.; Morgan, S.; White, W.R.; Mullins, M.; Celebi, S.; Toscano, J.P. Prog. Reac. Kin. 1994, 19, 93-137.
28. (b) Liu, M.T.H. Acc. Chem. Res. 1994, 27, 287-294.
29. (c) Jackson, J.E.; Platz, M.S. in Advances in Carbene Chemistry, Brinker, U.H., Ed.; JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, Vol 1, 1994, pp 89-160.
30. (d) Modarelli, D.A.; Morgan, S.; Platz, M.S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 7034-7041.
31. (e) Seburg, R.A.; McMahon, R.J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 7183-7189.
32. (e) Fox, J.M.; Scacheri, J.E.G.; Jones, K.G.L.; Jones, M., Jr. Tetrahedron Lett. 1992, 33, 5021-5024.
33. 18. Robson, J.H.; Shechter, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1967, 59, 7112-7114.
34. 19. For anomeric effects and their influence on cationic, anionic, and free radical intermediates see: (a) Kirby, A.J. The Anomeric Effect and Related Stereoelectronic Effects at Oxygen; Springer Verlag: Berlin 1983.
35. (b) Deslongchamps, P. Stereoelectronic Effects in Organic Chemistry; Pergamon Press: Oxford, 1983.
36. (c) Kirby, A.J.; Martin, R.J. J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1978, 803-805.
37. (d) Meyers, A.I.; Campbell, A.L. Tetrahedron Lett. 1979, 4159-4162.
38. (e) Eliel, E.L.; Hartmann, A.A.; Abatjoglon, A.G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1974, 96, 1807-1816.
39. (f) Lehn, J.M.; Wipff, G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1976, 98, 7498-7505.
40. (g) Beckwith, A.L.J.; Duggan, P.J. Tetrahedron 1998, 54, 4623-4632.
41. 20. Still, W.C.; Kahn, M.; Mitra, A. J. Org. Chem. 1978, 43, 2923-2925.
42. 21. Winkle, M.R.; Lansinger, J.M.; Ronald, R. J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1980, 87-88.
43. 22. McKillop, A.; Fiaud, J.C.; Huag, R.P. Tetrahedron 1974, 30, 1379-1382.
44. 23. Anner, G.; Miesher, K. Helv. Chim. Acta 1948, 31, 2173-2183.
45. 24. Levi, H.; Jacobson, R.P. J. Biol. Chem. 1947, 171, 871-879.
46. 25. Grieco, P.A.; Yokoyama, Y.; Gilman, S.; Ohfune, Y. J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1977, 870-871.
47. 26. Baran, J.S. J. Org. Chem. 1965, 30, 3564-3566.
48. 27. For additional details see Kim, K. Ph.D. Dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1986.
49. 28. Carbon analysis on this sample was ca. 4% low and after one sublimation was ca. 1% low, presumably from tenacious residual solvent(s) of recrystallization. Possible contamination by enol ether 7 (or its hemiacetal precursor) or by epimer 8a would not account for low carbon analyses.
50. 29. Corey, E.J.; Schmidt, G. Tetrahedron Lett. 1979, 399-402.