Lewis acid catalyst free electrophilic alkylation of silicon-capped π donors in 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propanol

Angewandte Chemie - International Edition

Volumn 47, Issue 50, 2008, Pages 9739-9742

  Ratnikov, Maxim O ^a   Tumanov, Vasily V ^a   Smit, William A ^a  

^a N D ZELINSKY INSTITUTE OF ORGANIC CHEMISTRY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Electrophilic addition; Hydrogen bonds; Lewis acids; Silanes; Solvent effects

Indexed keywords

ADDITION REACTIONS; CATALYSIS; CHEMICAL REACTIONS; HYDROCARBONS; HYDROGEN; HYDROGEN BONDS; SILANES; SILICON; SOLVENTS;

2 PROPANOLS; DIVERSE RANGES; ELECTROPHILIC ADDITION; ELECTROPHILIC ADDITION REACTIONS; ELECTROPHILIC ALKYLATIONS; HIGHLY POLAR SOLVENTS; LEWIS ACID CATALYSTS; LEWIS ACIDS; SOLVENT EFFECTS;

ACIDS;

EID: 57049099775     PISSN: 14337851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/anie.200803927     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. M. Santelli, J.-M. Pons, Lewis Acids and Selectivity in Organic Chemistry, CRC, Boca Raton, 1996, p. 334;
2. see also A. D. Dilman, S. L. Ioffe, Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 733.
3. For a discussion of the basic concepts of this approach, see: a) S. S. Minegishi, S. Kobayashi, H. Mayr, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 5174;
4. b) B. Denegri, S. Minegishi, O. Kronja, H. Mayr, Angew. Chem. 2004, 116, 2353;
5. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 2302;
6. c) H. Mayr, B. Kempf, A. F. Ofial, Acc. Chem. Res. 2003, 36, 66.
7. a) M. Hofmann, N. Hampel, T. Kanzian, H. Mayr, Angew. Chem. 2004, 116, 5518;
8. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 5402;
9. b) M. Westermaier, H. Mayr, Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 4791.
10. Preliminary results of this study were presented at ESOC-2007, Dublin, Ireland (Book of Abstracts, 342).
11. a) W. A. Smit, M. I. Lazareva, I. P. Smolyakova, R. Caple, Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2001, 50, 1949;
12. b) A. Hosomi, Acc. Chem. Res. 1988, 21, 200;
13. c) T. Mukaiyama, Angew. Chem. 1977, 89, 858;
14. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1977, 16, 817;
15. d) T. Mukaiyama, M. Murakami, Synthesis 1987, 1043;
16. e) H. Hosomi, H. Sakurai, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 1673;
17. f) K. Narasaka, K. Soai, T. Mukaiyama, Chem. Lett. 1974, 1223;
18. T. Mukaiyama, Y. Sagawa, S. Kobayashi, Chem. Lett. 1986, 1017;
19. g) P. Perlmutter, Conjugate Addition Reactions in Organic Synthesis, Pergamon, Oxford, 1992, p. 373.
20. For a review, see: a) J.-P. Bégué, D. Bonnet-Delpon, B. Crousse, Synlett 2004, 18;
21. b) I. A. Shuklov, N. V. Dubrovina, A. Börner, Synthesis 2007, 2925.
22. T=1 (for water), see: C. Reichardt, Chem. Rev. 1994, 94, 2319.
23. From the data of solvolytic studies, the ionizing power Y for HFIP is 3.61 (cf. Y=3.04 for HCOOH), see: F. L. Schadt, T. W. Bentley, P. von R. Schleyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1976, 98, 7667.
24. According to recent estimates by Mayr and co-workers, the magnitude of the nucleophilicity parameter N≈-2.4 for HFIP, which is much lower than N values for the majority of other polar solvents and synthetically useful π donors (see Refs. [2a, 3a]).
25. M. A. Matesich, J. Knoefel, H. Feldman, D. F. Evans, J. Phys. Chem. 1973, 77, 366.
26. G. W. Caldwell, J. A. Massuchi, M. G. Ikonomou, Org. Mass Spectrom. 1989, 24, 8.
27. HFIP was shown to be a much stronger hydrogen-bond donor than phenol towards various acceptors, regardless of the experimental parameters used to measure this property (calorimetric data, shift in O-H-stretching frequency, hydrogen-bond chemical shifts; see K. F. Purcell, J. A. Stikeleather, S. D. Brunk, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1969, 91, 4019).
28. Calculations based upon the Kamlet-Taft generalized solvatochromic equation point to the much higher hydrogen-bond-donor ability of HFIP (α=1.96) than such proton donors as methanol (α=0.93) or acetic acid (α=1.09); see: M. J. Kamlet, J.-L. Abboud, M. H. Abrham, R. W. Taft, J. Org. Chem. 1983, 48, 2877.
29. For example, a 1:1 complex of HFIP with THF was stable enough to tolerate distillation at 100°C; recovery of the alcohol from this complex required its treatment with 20% oleum; see: W. J. Middleton, R. V. Lindsey, Jr., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 4948.
30. L. Eberson, M. P. Hartshorn, O. Persson, F. Radner, Chem. Commun. 1996, 2105, and references therein.
31. P. H. Ferber, G. E. Gream, Aust. J. Chem. 1981, 34, 2217.
32. A full account of the studies, dealing with elaboration of the preparative methods, will be published shortly.
33. max= 54-60 nm) was detected for the methoxycarbenium ion derived from 5 following treatment with boron trihalide or a structurally similar cationic complex of 16 with boron trihalide (c.f. data in H. Mayr, G. Gorath, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 7862).
34. 2/HFIP (1:5) mixture. The addition of HFIP resulted in a substantial downfield shift of C1 and C3 signals (Δδ=7.0 and 5.7 ppm, respectively) and an upfield shift for the C2 signal (Δδ=1.1 ppm). Similar, but substantially more strongly expressed, effects were observed earlier for the complexes of conjugated carbonyl compounds with various Lewis acids (for example, Δδ=8.3, -3.3, and 26.1 ppm for C1, C2, and C3, respectively, for the crotonaldehyde-boron trifluoride complex, see: R. F. Childs, D. L. Mulholland, A. Nixon, Can. J. Chem. 1982, 60, 801).