On the origin of cis/trans stereoselectivity in intramolecular Diels-Alder reactions of substituted pentadienyl acrylates: A comprehensive density functional study

Journal of Organic Chemistry

Volumn 70, Issue 26, 2005, Pages 10841-10853

  Paddon Row, Michael N ^a   Moran, Damian ^a   Jones, Garth A ^a   Sherburn, Michael S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACRYLICS; ISOMERS; OLEFINS; REACTION KINETICS; SUBSTITUTION REACTIONS;

DIELS-ALDER REACTIONS; STEREOISOMERS; STEREOSELECTIVITY;

STEREOCHEMISTRY;

1,3 BUTADIENE DERIVATIVE; ACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; ACRYLIC ACID METHYL ESTER; CYCLOPROPANE DERIVATIVE; ETHYLENE DERIVATIVE;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL REACTION; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; DENSITY FUNCTIONAL THEORY; DIELS ALDER REACTION; ENERGY; GEOMETRY; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; STEREOCHEMISTRY;

EID: 29944440674     PISSN: 00223263     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jo051973q     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Cayzer, T. N.; Paddon-Row, M. N.; Moran, D.; Payne, A. D.; Sherburn, M. S.; Turner, P. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 5561-5570.
2. (a) Alder, K.; Schumacher, M. Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1951, 571, 87-107.
3. (b) Salem, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1968, 90, 553-566.
4. Woodward, R. B.; Hoffmann, R. The Conservation of Orbital Symmetry; Verlag Chemie: Weinheim, 1970.
5. Houk, K. N. Tetrahedron Lett. 1970, 2621-2624.
6. (e) Ginsburg, D. Tetrahedron 1983, 39, 2095-2135.
7. (f) Birney, D. M.; Houk, K. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 4127-4133.
8. (g) Singleton, D. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 6563-6564.
9. (h) Kong, S.; Evanseck, J. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 10418-10427.
10. Garcia, J. I.; Mayoral, J. A.; Salvatella, L. Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33, 658-664.
11. (j) Caramella, P.; Quadrelli, P.; Toma, L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 1130-1131.
12. For other examples of this anomalous trans-selectivity of Z-dienophiles in IMDA reactions, see: (a) White, J. D.; Sheldon, B. G. J. Org. Chem. 1981, 46, 2273-2280.
13. (b) He, J. F.; Wu, Y. L. Tetrahedron 1988, 44, 1933-1940.
14. Batchelor, M. J.; Mellor, J. M. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1989, 985-995.
15. Lilly, M. J.; Sherburn, M. S. Chem. Commun. 1997, 967-968.
16. (e) Turner, C. I.; Williamson, R. M.; Paddon-Row: M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 3963-3969.
17. (f) Cayzer, T. N.; Paddon-Row, M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 4059-4068.
18. Raimondi, L.; Brown, F. K.; Gonzalez, J.; Houk, K. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 4796-4804.
19. (a) Burke, S. D.; Smith Strickland, S. M.; Powner, T. H. J. Org. Chem. 1983, 48, 454-459.
20. (b) Jenkins, P. R.; Menear, K. A.; Barraclough, P.; Nobbs, M. S. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1984, 1423-1424.
21. Magnus, P.; Walker, C.; Jenkins, P. R.; Menear, K. A. Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 651-654.
22. White, J. D.; Nolen, E. G., Jr.; Miller, C. H. J. Org. Chem. 1986, 51, 1150-1152.
23. (e) Eberle, M. K.; Weber, H. P. J. Org. Chem. 1988, 53, 231-235.
24. (f) Becher, J.; Nielsen, H. C.; Jacobsen, J. P.; Simonsen, O.; Clausen, H. J. Org. Chem. 1988, 53, 1862-1871.
25. (g) Toyota, M.; Wada, Y.; Fukumoto, K. Heterocycles 1993, 35, 111-114.
26. (h) Berthon, L.; Tahri, A.; Uguen, D. Tetrahedron Lett. 1994, 35, 3937-3940.
27. Takatori, K.; Hasegawa, K.; Narai, S.; Kajiwar, M. Heterocycles 1996, 42, 525-528.
28. (j) Arseniyadis, S.; Brondi-Alves, R.; Yashunsky, D. V.; Potier, P.; Toupet, L. Tetrahedron 1997, 53, 1003-1014.
29. (k) White, J. D.; Demnitz, F. W. J.; Oda, H.; Hassler, C.; Snyder, J. P. Org. Lett. 2000, 2, 3313-3316.
30. Van Cauwenberge, G.; Gao, L.-J.; Van Haver, D.; Milanesio, M.; Viterbo, D.; De Clercq, P. J. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 1579-1582.
31. Wong, L. S.-M.; Sharp, L. A.; Xavier, N. M. C.; Turner, P.; Sherburn, M. S. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 1955-1957.
32. (n) Gao, L.-J.; Van Cauwenberge, G.; Hosten, N.; Van Haver, D.; Waelbroeck, M.; De Clercq, P. J. ARKIVOC 2003, (iv), 22-45.
33. (o) Wong, L. S.-M.; Sherburn, M. S. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 3603-3606.
34. (a) Lee, C.; Yang, W.; Parr, R. G. Phys. Rev. B 1988, 37, 785-789.
35. (b) Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648-5652. For reviews of density-functional methods, see:
36. Ziegler, T. Chem. Rev. 1991, 91, 651-667.
37. Density Functional Methods in Chemistry; Labanowski, J. K., Andzelm, J. W., Eds.; Springer-Verlag: New York, 1991.
38. (e) Parr, R. G.; Yang, W. Density-Functional Theory of Atoms and Molecules; Oxford University Press: New York, 1989.
39. (f) Koch, W.; Holthausen, M. C. A Chemist's Guide to Density Functional Theory; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2000.
40. (a) Hehre, W. J.; Radom, L.; Schleyer, P. v. R.; Pople, J. A. Ab Initio Molecular Orbital Theory; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1986.
41. (b) The Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry; Schleyer, P. v. R., Allinger, N. L., Clark, T., Gasteiger, J., Kollman, P. A., Schaefer, H. F., III; Schreiner, P. R., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chichester, 1998.
42. Cayzer, T. N.; Wong, L. S.-M.; Turner, P.; Paddon-Row, M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. Chem. Eur. J. 2002, 8, 739-750.
43. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Montgomery, J. A., Jr.; Stratmann, R. E.; Burant, J. C.; Dapprich, S.; Millam, J. M.; Daniels, A. D.; Kudin, K. N.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.; Cossi, M.; Cammi, R.; Mennucci, B.; Pomelli, C.; Adamo, C.; Clifford, S.; Ochterski, J.; Petersson, G. A.; Ayala, P. Y.; Cui, Q.; Morokuma, K.; Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Malick, D. K.; Rabuck, A. D.; Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Cioslowski, J.; Ortiz, J. V.; Baboul, A. G.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.; Liashenko, A.; Piskorz, P.; Komaromi, I.; Gomperts, R.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith, T.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson, B.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Andres, J. L.; Gonzalez, C.; Head-Gordon, M.; Replogle, E. S.; Pople, J. A. GAUSSIAN 98, Revision A.11; Gaussian, Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 2001.
44. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Montgomery, J. A., Jr.; Vreven, T.; Kudin, K. N.; Burant, J. C.; Millam, J. M.; Iyengar, S. S.; Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.; Mennucci, B.; Cossi, M.; Scalmani, G.; Rega, N.; Petersson, G. A.; Nakatsuji, H.; Hada, M.; Ehara, M.; Toyota, K.; Fukuda, R.; Hasegawa, J.; Ishida, M.; Nakajima, T.; Honda, Y.; Kitao, O.; Nakai, H.; Klene, M.; Li, X.; Knox, J. E.; Hratchian, H. P.; Cross, J. B.; Adamo, C.; Jaramillo, J.; Gomperts, R.; Stratmann, R. E.; Yazyev, O.; Austin, A. J.; Cammi, R.; Pomelli, C.; Ochterski, J. W.; Ayala, P. Y.; Morokuma, K.; Voth, G. A.; Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Dapprich, S.; Daniels, A. D.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Malick, D. K.; Rabuck, A. D.; Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Ortiz, J. V.; Cui, Q.; Baboul, A. G.; Clifford, S.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.; Liashenko, A.; Piskorz, P.; Komaromi, I.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith, T.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson, B.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople, J. A. Gaussian 2003, Version B; Gaussian, Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
45. (a) Wiest, O.; Montiel, D. C.; Houk, K. N. J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 8378-8388.
46. (b) Paddon-Row, M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. Chem. Commun. 2000, 2215-2216.
47. Tantillo, D. J.; Houk, K. N.; Jung, M. E. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 1938-1940.
48. Quadrelli, P.; Romano, S.; Toma, L.; Caramella, P. Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 43, 8785-8789.
49. For example, the anti conformation of acetic acid is 25 kJ/mol less stable than the syn conformation (B3LYP/6-31G(d)//HF/3-21G). The anti conformation can be preferred in the presence by external H-bonding acceptors (see later).
50. Brown, F. K.; Houk, K. N. Tetrahedron Lett. 1985, 26, 2297-2300.
51. For IMDA reactions on trienes containing vinylborane dienophiles, see: (a) Singleton, D. A.; Lee, Y.-K. Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 3473-3476.
52. (b) Batey, R. A.; Lin, D.; Wong, A.; Hayhoe, C. L. S. Tetrahedron Lett. 1997, 38, 3699-3702.
53. Albright, T. A.; Burdett, J. K.; Whangbo, M.-H. Orbital Interactions in Chemistry; Wiley-Interscience: New York, 1985; Chapter 1.
54. (a) Ma, J. C.; Dougherty, D. A. Chem. Rev. 1997, 97, 1303-1324.
55. (b) Caldwell, J. W.; Kollman, P. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 4177-4178.
56. Calculations suggest that the observed endo selectivity for the DA reaction between dienes and acrylonitrile in solution is due to solvent effects: Karcher, T.; Sicking, W.; Sauer, J.; Sustmann, R. Tetrahedron Lett. 1992, 33, 8027-8030.
57. The B3LYP/6-31G(d) HOMO/LUMO energies (eV) are: s-trans-butadiene (-6.24/-0.57); but-2-en-1-yne (-6.57/-0.675); acrylonitrile (-7.96/-1.39); nitroethene (-7.86/-2.42); methyl acrylate (-11.1.1/0.001); methyl vinyl ketone (-6.74/-1.64); acrolein (-7.01/-1.84).
58. 2Me will be addressed later in this paper using perturbation theory.
59. For a related treatment, applied to Lewis acid catalysis of Diels-Alder reactions, see: Houk, K. N.; Strozier, R. W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 4094-4096.
60. Fleming, I. Frontier Orbitals and Organic Chemical Reactions; Wiley-Interscience: New York, 1976; Chapter 4.
61. Dewar, M. J. S.; Dougherty, R. C. The PMO Theory of Organic Chemistry; Plenum Press: New York, 1975.
62. Strictly speaking, the orbitale are Kohn-Sham orbitals.
63. Using a stronger electron withdrawing substituent will also polarize the dienophile LUMO towards the substituent, thereby increasing the magnitude of the numerator of eq 1 and further strengthening the SOI term.
64. Consideration of the LUMO coefficients of other atoms which might give rise to SOIs, such as the carbonyl oxygen atom of the ester and formyl groups, leads to the same conclusions that are derived from considering only the bullet-labeled atoms.
65. 2H, 30, constitutes an exception, being cis, rather that irons, selective. However the degree of selectivity for this molecule is insignificant.
66. White, J. D.; Sheldon, B. G.; Solheim, B. A.; Clardy, J. Tetrahedron Lett. 1978, 19, 5189-5192.
67. Cayzer, T. N.; Lilly, M. J.; Williamson, R. M.; Paddon-Row, M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2005, 3, 1302-1307.
68. The predicted endo selectivity for the reaction between s-trans-anti-acrylic acid and butadiene, da32 (Table 2), in contrast to the exo selectivity predicted for the remaining conformations of acrylic acid, da29-da31, arises from stabilizing OH⋯diene-π electrostatic interactions in endo-da32TS; in this TS, the carboxyl group is significantly twisted, by 28°, out of the plane of the dienophile double bond, in the direction of the diene, bringing the OH hydrogen atom fairly close to both C2 and C3 atoms of the diene (ca. 2.7 Å). This effect is absent in cis-Z-32TS; in this TS, the OH forms a hydrogen bond with the tether carbonyl group, with the result that the OH bond is twisted 12° below the plane of the dienophile double bond, away from the diene.
69. Pearson, E. L.; Turner, C. I.; Kwan, L. C. H.; Jones, G. A.; Willis, A. C.; Paddon-Row, M. N.; Sherburn, M. S. Manuscript in preparation.
70. Important experimental observations and detailed analyses of transition states of closely related decatrienone systems have reported by Roush and co-workers: (a) Coe, J. W.; Roush, W. R. J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 915-930.
71. (b) Roush, W. R. In Comprehensive Organic Synthesis; Trost, B. M., Fleming, I., Paquette, L. A., Eds,; Pergamon: Oxford, 1991; Vol. 5, pp 513-550.
72. Dineen, T. A.; Roush, W. R. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 1355-1358. For an analysis of hexadienyl acrylate IMDA TSs, see refile.
73. The favored conformation of the forming six membered lactone ring in cis-Z-35TS has the tether carbonyl group nearly coplanar with the dienophile double bond. Coplanarity between tether carbonyl and dienophile cannot take place in the pentadienyl acrylate TSs, even in the absence of a 9-Z-substituent.