Stable simple enols. Resolution of chiral 1-[9′-(2′-fluoroanthryl)]-2,2-dimesitylethenol. A different racemization mechanism for the enol and its acetate

Journal of Organic Chemistry

Volumn 68, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 216-226

  Rochlin, Elimelech ^a   Rappoport, Zvi ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RACEMIZATION;

CATALYSIS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; MOLECULES; SOLUTIONS; SOLVENTS; SYNTHESIS (CHEMICAL);

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS;

1 [9' (2' FLUORANTHRYL)] 2,2 DIMESITYLETHENOL; 1 [9' (2' FLUORANTHRYL)] 2,2 DIMESITYLVINYL ACETATE; 1 [9' (2' METHOXYANTHRYL)] 2,2 DIMESITYLETHENOL; ANTHRACENE DERIVATIVE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VINYL ACETATE;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHIRALITY; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; ENANTIOMER; HIGH PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; PROTON NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; STEREOCHEMISTRY; SYNTHESIS; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

EID: 0037462372     PISSN: 00223263     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jo020497q     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. th IUPAC Conference on Physical Organic Chemistry, Seoul, Korea, August 25-29, 1996; Rappoport, Z.; Frey, Y.; Sigalov, M.; Rochlin, E. Pure Appl. Chem. 1997, 69, 1933.
2. th IUPAC Conference on Physical Organic Chemistry, Seoul, Korea, August 25-29, 1996; Rappoport, Z.; Frey, Y.; Sigalov, M.; Rochlin, E. Pure Appl. Chem. 1997, 69, 1933.
3. Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z. Acc. Chem. Res. 1997, 30, 307.
4. Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984, 106, 477.
5. (a) Kurland, R. J.; Schuster, I. I.; Colter, A. K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1965, 87, 2279.
6. (b) Mislow, K.; Gust, D.; Finocchiaro, P.; Boettcher, R. J. In Topics in Current Chemistry, No. 47, Stereochemistry 1; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1974; p.1.
7. Rochlin, E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Org. Chem. 1994, 59, 3857.
8. Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Org. Chem. 1986, 51, 2245.
9. Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z.; Mannschreck, A.; Pustet, N. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1989, 28, 199.
10. Rochlin, E.; Rappoport, Z.; Kastner, F.; Pustet, N.; Mannschreck, A. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64, 8840.
11. Rochlin, E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Org. Chem., in press.
12. Fuson, R. C.; Armstrong, L. J.; Chadwick, D. H.; Kneisley, J. W.; Rowland, S. P.; Shenk, W. J.; Soper, Q. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1945, 67, 386.
13. Bapat, D. S.; Subba Rao, B. C.; Unni, M. K.; Venkataraman, K. Tetrahedron Lett. 1960, 15.
14. Yoffe, I. S.; Efros, L. S.; Sheglova, Z. N. Z. Obshch. Chim. 1936, 9, 1128.
15. Kaftory, M.; Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107, 1701.
16. Hine J.; Skoglurd, M. J. J. Org. Chem. 1982, 47, 4758.
17. ‡ = -18.5 eu which is inconsistent with a monomolecular ring-flip process.
18. Biali, S. E.; Rappoport, Z. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107, 1007.
19. Stang, P. J.; Rappoport, Z.; Hanack, M.; Subramanian, L. R. Vinyl Cations, Academic Press: New York, 1979; Rappoport, Z.; Stang, P. J. Dicoordinated Carbocations, Wiley: Chichester, 1997.
20. Stang, P. J.; Rappoport, Z.; Hanack, M.; Subramanian, L. R. Vinyl Cations, Academic Press: New York, 1979; Rappoport, Z.; Stang, P. J. Dicoordinated Carbocations, Wiley: Chichester, 1997.
21. + ion. Hence, neglecting other effects, C1 protonation, leading to 18, and C2 protonation have close probabilities. It is difficult to evaluate the contributions of the combined additional stabilization by the OH and destabilization by the 2-F in the C2 protonated ion, the different electron withdrawal by the β-groups in both cations and the lower steric effect to protonation at C1 than at C2, and the only conclusion is that protonation at C1 is a viable possibility, especially in view of the argument brought above against C2 protonation.
22. + ion. Hence, neglecting other effects, C1 protonation, leading to 18, and C2 protonation have close probabilities. It is difficult to evaluate the contributions of the combined additional stabilization by the OH and destabilization by the 2-F in the C2 protonated ion, the different electron withdrawal by the β-groups in both cations and the lower steric effect to protonation at C1 than at C2, and the only conclusion is that protonation at C1 is a viable possibility, especially in view of the argument brought above against C2 protonation.
23. + ion. Hence, neglecting other effects, C1 protonation, leading to 18, and C2 protonation have close probabilities. It is difficult to evaluate the contributions of the combined additional stabilization by the OH and destabilization by the 2-F in the C2 protonated ion, the different electron withdrawal by the β-groups in both cations and the lower steric effect to protonation at C1 than at C2, and the only conclusion is that protonation at C1 is a viable possibility, especially in view of the argument brought above against C2 protonation.
24. + ion. Hence, neglecting other effects, C1 protonation, leading to 18, and C2 protonation have close probabilities. It is difficult to evaluate the contributions of the combined additional stabilization by the OH and destabilization by the 2-F in the C2 protonated ion, the different electron withdrawal by the β-groups in both cations and the lower steric effect to protonation at C1 than at C2, and the only conclusion is that protonation at C1 is a viable possibility, especially in view of the argument brought above against C2 protonation.
25. Bunnett, J. F. In Investigation of Rates and Mechanisms of Reactions, 4th ed.; Bernasconi, C. F., Ed., Wiley: Chichester, 1986; Chapter 4, p 282.
26. Keeffe J. R.; Kresge, A. J. In The Chemistry of Enols; Rappoport, Z. Ed., Wiley: Chichester, 1990; Chapter 7, pp 434-446.
27. Saunders, W. H., Jr. In Investigation of Rates and Mechanisms of Reactions, 4th ed.; Bernasconi, C. F., Ed., Wiley: Chichester, 1986; Chapter 8, pp 601-604.
28. (a) Frey, J.; Rappoport, Z. J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 8372.
29. (b) Lei, Y. X.; Cerioni, G.; Rappoport, Z. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 8379.
30. Okamoto, Y.; Kaida, Y.; Hayashida, H.; Hatada, K. Chem. Lett. 1990, 909.
31. Mihai, G. G.; Tarassoff, P. G., Filipescu, N. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1975, 1374.
32. Vogel's Textbook of Practical Organic Chemistry, 5th ed.; Longman: New York, 1989; pp 939-941.
33. Meyer, A. Y.; Goldblum, A. Isr. J. Chem. 1973, 11, 791.