Multi-Metal-Catalyzed Oxidative Radical Alkynylation with Terminal

Subscriber access provided by Kaohsiung Medical University

Multimetallic-Catalyzed Oxidative Radical Alkynylation with Terminal Alkynes: A New Strategy for C(sp3)-C(sp) Bond Formation Shan Tang, Yichang Liu, Xinlong Gao, Pan Wang, Pengfei Huang, and Aiwen Lei J. Am. Chem. Soc., Just Accepted Manuscript • Publication Date (Web): 20 Apr 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on April 20, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Journal of the American Chemical Society

Multimetallic-Catalyzed Oxidative Radical Alkynylation with Terminal Alkynes: A New Strategy for C(sp3)-C(sp) Bond Formation Shan Tang,†,§ Yichang Liu,†,§ Xinlong Gao,† Pan Wang,† Pengfei Huang,† Aiwen Lei*,†,‡ † College of Chemistry and Molecular Sciences, Institute for Advanced Studies (IAS), Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China ‡ State Key Laboratory of Organometallic Chemistry, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 345 Lingling Road, Shanghai 200032, P. R. China ABSTRACT: A new way for C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling with terminal alkynes has been developed by using a multimetallic-catalyzed reaction strategy. Alkyl radicals generated from different approaches are able to couple with terminal alkynes by judicious selection of catalyst combination. This reaction protocol offers an efficient alternative approach for the synthesis of substituted alkynes from terminal alkynes besides traditional Sonogashira coupling. Mechanistic studies have also been carried out to clarify the role of each metal catalyst in the radical alkynylation processes. The reactions were found to go through radical reaction pathways. Synergistic cooperation of the metal catalysts is the key for controlling the reaction selectivity of alkyl radicals toward C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation.

INTRODUCTION Substituted alkynes are fundamental structure motifs, which widely exist in natural products, bioactive molecules and functional materials.1 They also serve as versatile synthetic intermediates in organic transformations. Over the past decades, transition-metal-catalyzed Sonogashira coupling has been proven to be one of the most efficient and reliable approaches for the synthesis of substituted alkynes.2 The Sonogashira coupling of aryl electrophiles has been well established for the construction of C(sp2)-C(sp) bonds. In contrast, Sonogashira coupling of alkyl electrophiles for C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation still remains challenging. Fu and co-workers were pioneers in the Pd/Cu co-catalyzed Sonogashira coupling with unactivated primary halides3 and their protocol was extended to unactivated secondary halides by the group of Glorius.4 Similarly, Hu and co-workers developed a Ni/Cu cocatalyzed Sonogashira-type coupling with unactivated primary halides5 and Liu et al. modified the reaction system to be able to deal with secondary halides.6 More recently, an ultraviolet light promoted metal-free reaction protocol was developed by Li and co-workers to achieve the Sonogashira-type coupling with alkyl halides.7 Obviously, the developed Sonogashira-type alkynylation for C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation largely relies on the crosscoupling with alkyl halides (Scheme 1a).8 It is highly appealling to develop new reaction approaches to allow C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling with more alternatives. Scheme 1. C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling with Terminal Alkynes

a) Sonogashira-type alkynylation with alkyl halides [Pd] or [Ni], [Cu] ligand, base Alkyl X + H R or Ultraviolet light strong base

Alkyl

R

Alkyl

R

b) Sonogashira-type alkynylation with unactivated alkanes

Alkyl H

+

H

R

Cu(OTf)2, Ni(acac)2 AgOAc, dppb DTBP, PhCl R

R 7a, R = Me, 73% 7b, R = OMe, 91% 7j, R = nC5H11, 83% 7l, R = F, 61% 7m, R = Cl, 78% 7n, R = Br, 65% 7o, R = Ac, 50% 7p, R = COOMe, 65%

7k, R = Me, 76% 7c, R = Cl, 71%

7q, 66%

Alkyl

S

7r, Alkyl = nC5H11, 63% 7s, Alkyl = Cy, 86%

7e, 69%

1 3

2

n

7t, n = 1, 52% 7u, n = 3, 44%

7w 47% [C(1):C(2):C(3) = 3:6:2]

7v, 49%

c) Sonogashira-type alkynylation with various alkyl radicals Alkyl

+

H

R

[Cu], [M], [Ag] [Ox]

Alkyl

R

-N2

R1 R2

Sources of alkyl radicals [O]

R'

R1 R2 R' O

OH

NC

N

N

NC

R1 R2

O

[O]

O O

CN

Me Alkyl

H

Alkyl

O

- CO

Alkyl

In 2016, our group developed a multimetallic-catalyzed oxidative radical alkynylation of unactivated alkanes with

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Journal of the American Chemical Society 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

terminal alkynes (Scheme 1b).9 By using a catalyst combination of Cu(OTf)2, Ni(acac)2 and AgOAc, in situ generated cyclohexyl radical could couple with p-tolylacetylene to afford 7a in 73% yield. Good to high yields were observed for both aryl and aliphatic terminal alkynes (7b7s). Cyclic alkanes could give single products (7t-7v) while linear alkane afforded a mixture of regioisomers (7w). Since a lot of alkyl radicals can be easily generated under oxidative conditions, we envisioned a general method for C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling based on this multimetallic catalyzed oxidative radical alkynylation strategy (Scheme 1c). By judicious selection of the catalyst combination, tetrahydrofuran methyl radicals, α-cyano alkyl radicals, methyl radical and unactivated alkyl radicals generated under oxidative conditions were all found to be able to couple with terminal alkynes. Synergistic cooperation of different metal catalysts was the key for controlling the reaction selectivity of these alkyl radicals towards C(sp3)–C(sp) bond formation. In this article, we aim to report the reaction development for C(sp3)–C(sp) cross-coupling of terminal alkynes with different alkyl radical sources. Moreover, a comprehensive mechanistic study has been conducted to understand this novel multimetallic-catalyzed radical oxidative alkynylation reaction protocol. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Oxidative alkynylation of tetrahydrofuran methyl radicals. Propargyl tetrahydrofurans can serve as useful intermediates in the synthesis of some bioactive products and materials.10 Chemler and co-workers reported that tetrahydrofuran methyl radicals could be generated from 4-penten-1-ol derivatives under copper-catalyzed oxidative conditions.11 We envisioned the synthesis of propargylic tetrahydrofurans through a cascade oxidative cyclization/C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling between 4-penten-1ol derivatives and terminal alkynes (eq. 1).

Based on the multimetallic catalyzed oxidative radical alkynylation strategy, we found that 4-penten-1-ol with ptolylacetylene could furnish propargylic tetrahydrofuran 3a in 70% isolated yield by using Cu(OTf)2, CuOAc, Ni(acac)2 and Ag2O as combined catalysts (Effect of reaction parameters was shown in Table S1, Supporting Information). The scope of terminal alkynes was then studied (Scheme 2). Phenylacetylenes bearing electrondonating, electron-withdrawing and halide substituents were all suitable (3b-3f). Due to the fast homo-coupling of the alkyne substrate, electron-rich 4methoxyphenylacetylene only gave a 54% isolated yield (3c). Other aromatic alkynes such as 2– ethynylnaphthalene and 2–ethynylthiophene were also able to furnish the desired products with decreased reaction yields (3g and 3h). Aliphatic alkynes also showed good reactivity in the synthesis of propargylic tetrahydrofurans (3i-3l). It was worthy of noting that triisopropylsi-

lyl acetylene could furnish the desired product with a satisfactory yield (3m). Scheme 2. Radical C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling between 4-Penten-1-ol and Different Terminal Alkynesa

a Standard conditions A: 1a (5.0 equiv), 2 (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (15 mol%), CuOAc (15 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (15 mol%), Ag2O (7.5 mol%) and DTBP (2.0 equiv), PhCF3 (6.0 mL), 130 oC, 4 h. Isolated yields are shown. b PhCl (6.0 mL) was used instead of PhCF3 (6.0 mL), and DTBP (4.0 equiv) was used. c The yield was determined by NMR with CH2Br2 as the internal standard.

In the next step, different alkenols were applied as substrates under the standard conditions (Scheme 3). Various primary alcohols were suitable in this transformation, which furnished the desired products in good to high yields (3n-3u). It was worthy of noting that this transformation was applicable to the synthesis of spiro-bicyclic heterocycles with high reaction efficiency. With the increase of the substituted ring size, the reaction yields grew by 80% to 94% (3q-3t). In addition, the oxidative cyclization proceeded through a 6-exo-trig fashion to afford propargyl tetrahydropyran 3u when 5-hexen-1-ol was utilized as the substrate. Under slightly modified reaction conditions, secondary and tertiary alkenols were also able to furnish the desired products, accessing bridged-bicyclic and spiro-bicyclic heterocycles (3v-3y). Internal alkenols were not suitable substrates at this moment. Scheme 3. Radical C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling between Different Alkenols and p-Tolylacetylenea


Page 2 of 9

Page 3 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


a Standard conditions A: 1 (5.0 equiv), 2a (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (15 mol%), CuOAc (15 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (15 mol%), Ag2O (7.5 mol%) and DTBP (2.0 equiv), PhCF3 (6.0 mL), 130 oC, 4 h. Isolated yields are shown. b AgOAc (15 mol%) was used instead of Ag2O, DTBP (3.0 equiv) and PhCF3 (2.5 mL) were used. c DTBP (6.0 equiv) and PhCF3 (2.5 mL) were used.

Oxidative alkynylation of α-cyano alkyl radicals. 2,2-Azobisisobutyronitrile (AIBN) is one of the most widely used and commercially available radical initiators in organic synthetic chemistry and polymer chemistry. AIBN and its analogues are known to generate α-cyano alkyl radicals under mild conditions.12 We herein illustrate a novel way for the synthesis of propargylic nitriles from the direct coupling between AIBN and terminal alkynes (eq. 2).

a

Standard conditions B: AIBN (1.2 equiv), 2 (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), CuI (7.5 mol%), Fe(acac)2 (7.5 mol%), AgF (10 mol%), DTBP (5.0 equiv), DCE (1.0 mL), PhCF3 (1.0 mL), 80 oC, 12 h. Isolated yields are shown. b DCE (2.5 mL) and PhCl (2.5 mL) were used.

Oxidative alkynylation of methyl radical. Methylation is a fundamental transformation in organic chemistry. Recently, peroxides have been recognized as efficient methylation reagents since they can generate methyl radical during decomposition process.13 Thus, peroxides might be used to achieve the direct methylation of terminal alkynes through our multimetallic catalyzed radical alkynylation protocol (eq. 3). O

-methyl cleavage

H Me

R Me

R

(3)

O

After certain degree of optimization, we found that a catalyst combination of Cu(OTf)2, CuI, Fe(acac)2 and AgF could efficiently facilitate the C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling between isobutyronitrile radical and terminal alkynes (Scheme 4). Effect of the reaction parameters was studied to understand the role of the four different transition metal catalysts (See Table S2, Supporting Information for details). Phenylacetylenes bearing electron-neutral substituents such as methyl group, chloride and phenyl groups gave the desired products in similar yields (4a-4d). Electron-rich 4-methoxyphenylacetylene also showed similar reactivity with electron-neutral alkynes (4e). 1Ethynylnaphthalene afforded the corresponding propargylic nitriles in 62% yield (4f). Analogues of AIBN were also tested. 2,2-Azodi(2-methylbutyronitrile) showed similar reactivity with AIBN (4h) while 1,1'azobis(cyanocyclohexane) demonstrated decreased reaction efficiency (4i). Scheme 4. Radical C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling between AIBN and Different Terminal Alkynesa

By utilizing tert-butyl peroxybenzoate (TBPB) as the methyl radical source, we found that the combination of Cu(OTf)2, Ni(acac)2 and AgOAc as catalysts could give good results for the methylation of terminal alkynes (Scheme 5). 78% yield could be obtained in the case of ptolylacetylene (5a). The effect of each catalyst on the reaction yield was demonstrated in Table S3, Supporting Information. Substituted phenylacetylenes bearing halide, electron-donating and electron-withdrawing groups were all able to furnish the desired methylation products in good yields (5b-5f). 1-Ethynylnaphthalene was also suitable in this transformation with moderate reaction yields (5g). Notably, aliphatic alkynes such as but-3-yn-1-yl benzoate and but-3-yn-1-ylbenzene could undergo methylation with good reaction efficiency (5h and 5i). Besides methylation, our method was also applicable to the ethylation and propylation of terminal alkynes with corresponding alkyl peroxybenzoates but with decreased reaction yields (5j and 5k). Scheme 5. Radical C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling between Alkyl Peroxybenzoates and Different Terminal Alkynesa



Page 4 of 9

increased reaction efficiency (7f). Acyclic aliphatic aldehydes were also tested. Notably, site-specific substituted alkynes could be obtained although with low reaction yields (7g-7i). Scheme 6. Radical C(sp3)-C(sp) Cross-Coupling between Aliphatic Aldehydes and Terminal Alkynesa

a

Standard conditions C: TBPB (2.0 equiv), 2 (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (5.0 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (5.0 mol%), AgOAc (10 mol%), DBU (10 mol%), PhCl (7.0 mL), 100 oC, 3 h. Isolated yields are shown. bYields were determined by 1H NMR with CH2Br2 as the internal standard.

Oxidative alkynylation of alkyl radicals generated from aliphatic aldehydes. Aldehydes are readily available and inexpensive bulk chemicals, which have been utilized as a source of acyl radicals. It is known that aliphatic acyl radicals can undergo fast decarbonylation to deliver alkyl radicals. As shown in Scheme 1b, we achieved the direct oxidative C(sp3)-H alkynylation of unactivated alkanes with terminal alkynes.9 However, the alkyl radicals generated from hydrogen abstraction of acyclic alkanes usually have poor regioselectivity. Thus, mixtures of regioisomers were obtained for acyclic alkanes. In comparison, aliphatic aldehydes could furnish site-specific alkyl radicals under oxidative conditions.14 Herein, we describe a decarbonylative C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling between aliphatic aldehydes and terminal alkynes (eq. 4).

A satisfactory reaction efficiency could be achieved by using Cu(OTf)2, Fe(acac)2 and AgOAc as combined catalysts and DTBP as the oxidant (Effect of reaction parameters was shown in Table S4, Supporting Information). As shown in Scheme 6, 50% isolated yield of 7a could be obtained from the reaction between cyclohexanecarboxaldehyde and p-tolylacetylene. Electron-rich 4methoxyphenylacetylene furnished the desired product in an increased yield (7b). Phenylacetylene bearing an ortho chloride gave the C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling product in 44% yield (7c). Other aromatic alkynes including 1ethynylnaphthalene and 2-ethynylthiophene did afford the desired products but in decreased reaction yields (7d and 7e). Notably, but-3-yn-1-yl, an aliphatic alkyne, could produce the decarbonylative cross-coupling product with

a Standard conditions D: 6 (6.0 equiv), 2 (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (5.0 mol%), Fe(acac)2 (5.0 mol%), AgOAc (10 mol%), dppb (5.0 mol%), DTBP (.0 equiv), PhCl (6.0 mL), 130 oC, 3 h. Isolated yields are shown. bPhCF3 (6.0 mL) was used instead of PhCl (6.0 mL).

Mechanistic Insights. In all the above mentioned transformations, using suitable catalyst combination was the key for achieving the C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling. Thus, a series of experiments were carried out to understand the role of each catalyst. The oxidative C(sp3)-H alkynylation of cyclohexane (8a) with p-tolylacetylene (2a) was selected as a model reaction for investigation.9 The effect of each catalyst on the reaction yield was first demonstrated in Table 1. By using Cu(OTf)2/Ni(acac)2/AgOAc as the catalysts and dppb as the ligand, the C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation product 7a could be obtained in 75% yield (Table 1, entry 1). No desired product could be observed in the absence of Cu(OTf)2 while 6% of 7a was formed in the absence of Ni(acac)2 (Table 1, entries 2 and 3). Moreover, CuOTf failed to give the desired product, which demonstrated the crucial role of Cu(OTf)2 in this transformation (Table 1, entry 4). Silver catalyst had a minor effect on the reaction yield. Acceptable yield could still be obtained in the absence of AgOAc (Table 1, entry 5). Table 1. Effect of Catalysts on the Yields of C(sp3)C(sp) Cross-Coupling a

entry

Variation from the standard conditions

yield (%)

1

none

75

2

without Cu(OTf)2

n.d.


Page 5 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Journal of the American Chemical Society 3

without Ni(acac)2

6

4

CuOTf instead of Cu(OTf)2

n.d.

5

without AgOAc

63

a

Standard conditions E: 8a (4.0 mL), 2a (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (7.5 mol%), dppb (7.5 mol%), AgOAc (10 mol%) and DTBP (1.5 mmol), PhCl (3.0 mL), 130 oC, 3 h. Yields were determined by GC analysis with biphenyl as the internal standard, n.d. = not detected.

Though silver catalyst was not indispensable in the alkynylation reaction, the addition of silver catalyst was important for ensuring a good reaction efficiency with both electron-deficient and electron-rich alkynes. The effect of silver on the reaction yields of terminal alkynes with different electron density was shown in Table 2. Silver catalyst was essential for achieving a good reaction efficiency, especially for the reaction with electrondeficient phenylacetylenes (Table 2, entries 1-3). Table 2. Effect of AgOAc on the Reaction Yields with Different Terminal Alkynesa

Standard condtions Cu(OTf)2 Cu(OTf)2 + dppb

2500

3000

3500

4000

Field (G) Figure 1. The electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectra (X band, 9.4 Hz, 190K). (a) Standard conditions: cyclohexane (4.0 mL), p–tolylacetylene (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (0.038 mmol), Ni(acac)2 (0.038 mmol), dppb (0.038 mmol), AgOAc (0.050 mmol) and DTBP (1.5 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL) at 130 oC for 1 h. (b) Cu(OTf)2 in PhCl. (c) Cu(OTf)2 and dppb in PhCl.

Table 3. Reaction Results by Adding Different Silver Salts in the Absence of Coppera entry

R

yield without AgOAc

yield with AgOAc

1

Ac

14%

50%

2

Me

63%

73%

3

OMe

76%

91%

a

Standard conditions E: 8a (4.0 mL), 2 (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (7.5 mol%), dppb (7.5 mol%) and DTBP (1.5 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL) at 130 oC for 3 h. Isolated yields are shown.

In order to get some insights into the active metal species during the reaction, EPR detection of the reaction system was performed (Figure 1). Obvious Cu(II) signals were observed under the standard reaction conditions. Moreover, the Cu(II) signal during the reaction was different from the signal of Cu(OTf)2 without ligand and Cu(OTf)2 with dppb, which indicated the generation of new Cu(II) species in the reaction process. It has been reported that Ag(I) itself can activate C(sp)-H bonds to form alkynyl Ag(I) species.15 However, no desired C(sp3)C(sp) bond formation product could be observed by adding different Ag(I) salts in the absence of Cu(OTf)2. Instead, direct reductive addition product 9a was obtained in 12-16% yield (Table 3, entries 1-3). According to these experimental results, alkynyl Cu(II) species were more likely to be formed instead of alkynyl Ag(I) species during the C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling process.

entry

[Ag]

yield of 7a

yield of 9a

1

10 mol% AgOAc

n.d.

14%

2

5 mol% Ag2O

n.d.

12%

3

5 mol% Ag2CO3

n.d.

16%

a

Reaction conditions: 8a (4.0 mL), 2a (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (7.5 mol%), silver, dppb (7.5 mol%) and DTBP (1.5 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL) at 130 oC for 3 h. Isolated yields are shown.

Besides the combination of Cu(II)/Ag(I), Cu(II)/Cu(I)/Ag(I) was also used as the catalyst combination for the oxidative alkynylation with some radical sources (Schemes 3-5). In our previous study, we have demonstrated that C(sp)-H bond cleavage was the ratedetermine step in copper-promoted homo-coupling of terminal alkyne.16 Thus, the homo-coupling of terminal alkyne was chosen as the model reaction to compare the different reaction rates of C(sp)-H bond cleavage by utilizing different transition metal catalysts and their combinations. In the presence of 7.5 mol% Cu(OTf)2, 12% yield of homo-coupling product 10a was obtained (Table 4, entry 1). 7.5 mol% of CuOAc led to the formation of 9% of 10a (Table 4, entry 2). Ni(acac)2 was unable to furnish 10a under similar conditions (Table 4, entry 3). Moreover, the homo-coupling product was observed in 2% yield when 10 mol% AgOAc was added (Table 1, entry 4). Then, the reactions utilizing two catalysts were conducted. The combination of Cu(OTf)2 and CuOAc gave the highest yield of 10a (Table 4, entry 5). The combination of Cu(OTf)2 and Ni(acacc)2 gave a similar result with Cu(OTf)2 solely (Table 4, entry 6) while the combination



Page 6 of 9

of Cu(OTf)2 and AgOAc gave a higher yield of 10a than that of only with Cu(OTf)2 (Table 4, entry 7). Ag(I)15 and Cu(I)16 have both been reported to promote the C(sp)-H bond cleavage of terminal alkynes by forming πcomplexes with the triple bond of the alkyne. It explained why both Ag(I) and Cu(I) can promote the homocoupling of terminal alkyne in the presence of Cu(OTf)2.

alkyne. According to these results, the generation rate of the alkynyl metal species could be tuned by utilizing different catalyst combinations. The choice of copper and silver catalyst combinations was important for achieving a good reaction efficiency since the generation rate of the alkynyl metal species need to match with the different generation rates of the alkyl radicals.

Table 4. Homo-Coupling of Terminal Alkyne by Utilizing Different Catalystsa

Further efforts were taken to get some insights into the role of nickel catalyst in this transformation. To simplify the reaction system, the reactions between 8a and 2a were carried out in the absence of ligands. In the absence of nickel catalysts, the combination of Cu(OTf)2/AgOAc only afforded 6% of the C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation product 7a along with 2% of the terminal alkyne homocoupling product 10a (Table 5, entry 1). Afterwards, different nickel catalysts were added into the reaction system. Only Ni(acac)2 showed a high reactivity in promoting the C(sp3)-H alkynylation reaction while other nickel catalysts did not exert positive effects on the C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation (Table 5, entries 2-6). Other transition metal acetylacetonate salts were then tested. Fe(acac)2 and Fe(acac)3 demonstrated similar reactivities with Ni(acac)2 in this C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling reaction (Table 5, entries 7 and 8). Co(acac)2 and Co(acac)3 also enhanced this reaction but with lower reaction efficiency (Table 5, entries 9 and 10). Interestingly, even Cu(acac)2 could enhance this alkynylation reaction (Table 5, entry 11). A control experiment regarding the role of acetylacetonate ion was also conducted (Table 5, entry 12). Adding Kacac into the reaction suppressed the C(sp3)C(sp) cross-coupling process. In our previous study, we illustrated that cyclohexyl radical could be stabilized by forming a Ni(III) complex.17 Later on, Lan and co-works also demonstrated that Cu(acac)2 could easily react with cyclohexyl radical to generate Cu(III) complex.18 Based on these results, we thought that co-catalysts such as Ni(acac)2 and Fe(acac)2 were more favorable than Cu(OTf)2 to mediate the reactions with alkyls radicals by forming Ni(III) or Fe(III) species. Thus, metal acetylacetonate salts were likely to be the key catalysts for promoting the radical cross-coupling between alkyl radicals and alkynyl metal species.

entry

Cu(OTf)2

CuOAc

Ni(acac)2

AgOAc

yield (%)

1

7.5 mol%

0

0

0

12

2

0

7.5 mol%

0

0

9

3

0

0

7.5 mol%

0

n.d.

4

0

0

0

10 mol%

2

5

7.5 mol%

7.5 mol%

0

0

40

6

7.5 mol%

0

7.5 mol%

0

13

7

7.5 mol%

0

0

10 mol%

27

a

Reaction conditions: 2a (0.50 mmol), catalysts and DTBP (1.5 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL) at 130 oC for 3 h. Yield was determined by GC analysis with biphenyl as the internal standard.

Figure 2. Kinetic profile of the homo-coupling reaction of 2a by using stoichiometric amount of metal salts. Black line, Cu(OTf)2 (1.0 mmol), CuOAc (1.0 mmol), 2a (0.50 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL), 80 oC; red line, Cu(OTf)2 (1.0 mmol), CuOAc (1.0 mmol), AgOAc (1.0 mmol), 2a (0.50 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL), 80 oC; blue line, Cu(OTf)2 (1.0 mmol), AgOAc (1.0 mmol), 2a (0.50 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL), 130 o C.

To compare the differences between Ag(I) and Cu(I), the homo-coupling reaction rates of 2a with stoichiometric amount of Cu(II)/Cu(I), Cu(II)/Ag(I) and Cu(II)/Cu(I)/Ag(I) were determined. The homo-coupling reaction rate by using Cu(II)/Cu(I) together was much faster even at lower temperature than that by using Cu(II)/Ag(I) together (Figure 2, comparing the black line with the blue line). However, adding Ag(I) salt into the Cu(II)/Cu(I) system could suppress the homo-coupling reaction under 80 oC (Figure 2, comparing the red line with the black line). This might be due to the competition between Cu(I) and Ag(I) in coordinating with terminal

Table 5. Reaction Results with Co-catalystsa

entry

[M]

yield of 3aa

1

none

6%

2

Ni(OAc)2•4H2O

4%

3

Ni(OTf)2

6%

4

NiCl2

4%

5

Ni(COD)2

n.d.

6

Ni(acac)2

53%

7

Fe(acac)2

48%

8

Fe(acac)3

59%


Page 7 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Journal of the American Chemical Society 9

Co(acac)2

36%

10

Co(acac)3

20%

11

Cu(acac)2

38%

12

Kacacb

n.d.

a

Reaction conditions: 8a (4.0 mL), 2a (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), [M] (7.5 mol%), AgOAc (10 mol%) and DTBP (1.5 mmol) in PhCl (3.0 mL) at 130 oC for 3 h. b 15 mol% was added.

To provide an overview, the effect of ligands was also explored (Table 6). Similar with siver catalyst, ligand was also not indispensable for the C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation. A moderate yield could be obtained in the absence of ligand (Table 6, entry 1). The best result was obtained by using equal amount of dppb with the copper and nickel catalyst (Table 6, entries 2-4). Excess amount of ligand would suppress the alkynylation reaction (Table 6, entry 5). PPh3 was less effective than dppb in this transformation (Table 6, entry 6). Addition of bipyridine did not increase the reaction yield (Table 6, entry 7). It has been reported that phosphine ligands can coordinate with Ni(acac)2 to form six coordinated nickel complexes.19 Phosphine ligand was likely to play a role in stabilizing the nickel complexes during the reaction. Table 6. Effect of Ligandsa

entry

ligand

yield (%)

1

0

53

2

5 mol% dppb

70

3

7.5 mol% dppb

79

4

10 mol% dppb

70

5

15 mol% dppb

5

6

15 mol% PPh3

64

7

15 mol% Bipy

51

After understanding the role of each catalyst in the radical alkynylation reaction, efforts were paid to explore the radical generation processes in all the transformations. Radical trapping experiments were carried out by adding 1 equiv of 1,1-diphenylethylene under the standard conditions. The alkenylation products with 1,1diphenylethylene could all be observed though in different yields (Scheme 7, 9b-9e). The GC-MS analysis of the trapped radicals was shown in supporting information, Figure S1-S4. These results testified the assumption that the transformations reported in this article all proceeded through radical alkynylation processes. A proposed mechanism for the oxidative radical alkynylation of cyclohexane (8a) with p-tolylacetylene (2a) is presented in Scheme 8. Initially, an alkynyl Cu(II) complex B is generated from the Cu(OTf)2/AgOAc cocatalyzed C(sp)-H activation of 2a. Afterwards, transmetalation takes place between Ni(acac)2 and B to afford a Ni(II) complex (A). At the same time, cyclohexyl radical is generated through hydrogen abstraction by the in situ generated tert-butoxyl radical. Then, the generated cyclohexyl radical reacts with A to give the alkynyaltion product 7a and Ni(acac).20 Finally, Ni(acac)2 is oxidized by DTBP to regenerate Ni(acac)2. By using the optimized catalytic system, C(sp3)-H bond cleavage of 8a and C(sp)H bond cleavage of 2a are at considerable reaction rates. The dppb ligand is supposed to play a role in stabilizing the nickel complexes during the reaction process. Similar reaction mechanisms are expected for the alkyl radicals generated from other radical sources. Besides the differences in the radical generation processes, the speeds of C(sp)-H bond cleavage are also different by using different copper and silver catalyst combinations. Scheme 8. Proposed Catalytic Cycles for the Oxidative Radical Alkynylation between Cyclohexane and p-Tolylacetylene

a

Reaction conditions: 8a (4.0 mL), 2a (0.50 mmol), Cu(OTf)2 (7.5 mol%), Ni(acac)2 (7.5 mol%), ligand, AgOAc (10 mol%) and DTBP (1.5 mmol), PhCl (3.0 mL), 130 oC, 3 h. Yields were determined by GC analysis with biphenyl as the internal standard.

Scheme 7. Radical Trapping Experiments

CONCLUSION In summary, we have developed a versatile method for the direct C(sp3)-C(sp) cross-coupling with terminal alkynes. Alkyl radicals generated from different approaches are all able to couple with terminal alkynes by judicious selection of the catalyst combination. The reaction protocol is complementary to the traditional Sonogashira coupling for the synthesis of substituted alkynes. The reactions are found to go through radical reaction pathways and synergistic cooperation of the metal catalysts is the key for controlling the reaction selectivity of alkyl radicals toward C(sp3)-C(sp) bond formation. Cu(OTf)2 is the crucial catalyst in the C(sp)-H bond activation. Ag(I) and



Cu(I) catalysts can tune the reaction rate of C(sp)-H bond cleavage through coordination with the carbon-carbon triple bond. Metal acetylacetonate salts such as Ni(acac)2 and Fe(acac)2 are important for promoting the radical cross-coupling reaction of alkynyl metal species with alkyl radicals. Overall, the appropriate combination of these transition metal salts is crucial for achieving a good reaction efficiency. ASSOCIATED CONTENT Supporting Information. Experiment details and spectral data for all compounds are provided. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author *Email: [email protected]

Author Contributions §

Shan Tang and Yichang Liu contributed equally.

Notes The authors declare no competing financial interests.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21390402, 21520102003) and the Hubei Province Natural Science Foundation of China (2017CFA010). The Program of Introducing Talents of Discipline to Universities of China (111 Program) is also appreciated.

REFERENCES (1) (a) Stang, P. J.; Diederich, F. o. Modern acetylene chemistry; VCH: Weinheim ; New York, 1995; (b) Negishi, E.-i.; Anastasia, L. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 1979-2018; (c) Liu, J.; Lam, J. W. Y.; Tang, B. Z. Chem. Rev. 2009, 109, 5799-5867. (2) (a) Sonogashira, K.; Tohda, Y.; Hagihara, N. Tetrahedron Lett. 1975, 16, 4467-4470; (b) Chinchilla, R.; Nájera, C. Chem. Rev. 2007, 107, 874-922; (c) Chinchilla, R.; Najera, C. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2011, 40, 5084-5121. (3) Eckhardt, M.; Fu, G. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 13642-13643. (4) Altenhoff, G.; Würtz, S.; Glorius, F. Tetrahedron Lett. 2006, 47, 2925-2928. (5) (a) Vechorkin, O.; Barmaz, D.; Proust, V.; Hu, X. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 12078-12079; (b) Pérez García, P. M.; Ren, P.; Scopelliti, R.; Hu, X. ACS Catal. 2015, 5, 1164-1171. (6) Yi, J.; Lu, X.; Sun, Y.-Y.; Xiao, B.; Liu, L. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2013, 52, 12409-12413. (7) (a) Liu, W.; Li, L.; Li, C.-J. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6526; (b) Liu, W.; Chen, Z.; Li, L.; Wang, H.; Li, C.-J. Chem. Eur. J. 2016, 22, 5888-5893. (8) Jin, L.; Hao, W.; Xu, J.; Sun, N.; Hu, B.; Shen, Z.; Mo, W.; Hu, X. Chem. Commun. 2017, 53, 4124-4127. (9) Tang, S.; Wang, P.; Li, H.; Lei, A. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11676. (10) (a) Colby, E. A.; O'Brie, K. C.; Jamison, T. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 998-999; (b) Colby, E. A.; O'Brie, K. C.; Jamison, T. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 4297-4307; (c) Nicolai, S.; Waser, J. Org. Lett. 2011, 13, 6324-6327; (d) Nicolai, S.; Sedigh-Zadeh, R.; Waser, J. J. Org. Chem. 2013, 78, 3783-3801. (11) (a) Miller, Y.; Miao, L.; Hosseini, A. S.; Chemler, S. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 12149-12156; (b) Bovino, M. T.; Liwosz, T. W.; Kendel, N. E.; Miller, Y.; Tyminska, N.; Zurek, E.; Chemler, S. R. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2014, 53, 6383-6387. (12) (a) Wei, W.; Wen, J.; Yang, D.; Guo, M.; Tian, L.; You, J.; Wang, H. RSC Adv. 2014, 4, 48535-48538; (b) Zhou, D.; Li, Z.-H.; Li, J.;

Li, S.-H.; Wang, M.-W.; Luo, X.-L.; Ding, G.-L.; Sheng, R.-L.; Fu, M.-J.; Tang, S. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2015, 2015, 1606-1612; (c) Tang, S.; Deng, Y.-L.; Li, J.; Wang, W.-X.; Wang, Y.-C.; Li, Z.-Z.; Yuan, L.; Chen, S.-L.; Sheng, R.-L. Chem. Commun. 2016, 52, 44704473. (13) (a) Zhang, Y.; Feng, J.; Li, C.-J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 29002901; (b) Dai, Q.; Yu, J.; Jiang, Y.; Guo, S.; Yang, H.; Cheng, J. Chem. Commun. 2014, 50, 3865-3867; (c) Kubo, T.; Chatani, N. Org. Lett. 2016, 18, 1698-1701; (d) Tan, F.-L.; Song, R.-J.; Hu, M.; Li, J.-H. Org. Lett. 2016, 18, 3198-3201; (e) Zhu, N.; Zhao, J.; Bao, H. Chem. Sci. 2017, 8, 2081-2085. (14) (a) Tang, R.-J.; Kang, L.; Yang, L. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2015, 357, 2055-2060; (b) Zong, Z.; Wang, W.; Bai, X.; Xi, H.; Li, Z. Asian J. Org. Chem. 2015, 4, 622-625; (c) Paul, S.; Guin, J. Chem. Eur. J. 2015, 21, 17618-17622; (d) Biswas, P.; Paul, S.; Guin, J. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 7756-7760. (15) (a) Létinois-Halbes, U.; Pale, P.; Berger, S. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 9185-9190; (b) Halbes-Letinois, U.; Weibel, J.-M.; Pale, P. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2007, 36, 759-769; (c) Vitérisi, A.; Orsini, A.; Weibel, J.M.; Pale, P. Tetrahedron Lett. 2006, 47, 2779-2781; (d) Liu, J.; Fang, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, Q.; Bi, X. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2013, 52, 6953-6957. (16) Zhang, G.; Yi, H.; Zhang, G.; Deng, Y.; Bai, R.; Zhang, H.; Miller, J. T.; Kropf, A. J.; Bunel, E. E.; Lei, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 924-926. (17) Liu, D.; Li, Y.; Qi, X.; Liu, C.; Lan, Y.; Lei, A. Org. Lett. 2015, 17, 998-1001. (18) Qi, X.; Zhu, L.; Bai, R.; Lan, Y. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 43579. (19) Lennartson, A.; Christensen, L. U.; McKenzie, C. J.; Nielsen, U. G. Inorg. Chem. 2014, 53, 399-408. (20) (a) Jones, G. D.; Martin, J. L.; McFarland, C.; Allen, O. R.; Hall, R. E.; Haley, A. D.; Brandon, R. J.; Konovalova, T.; Desrochers, P. J.; Pulay, P.; Vicic, D. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 13175-13183; (b) Lin, X.; Phillips, D. L. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 3680-3688; (c) Lin, X.; Sun, J.; Xi, Y.; Lin, D. Organometallics 2011, 30, 32843292; (d) Biswas, S.; Weix, D. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 16192-16197; (e) Breitenfeld, J.; Ruiz, J.; Wodrich, M. D.; Hu, X. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 12004-12012; (f) Schley, N. D.; Fu, G. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 16588-16593; (g) Zuo, Z.; Cong, H.; Li, W.; Choi, J.; Fu, G. C.; MacMillan, D. W. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 1832-1835.


Page 8 of 9

Page 9 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Cu Alkyl

+

H

R

Ag

Ni or Fe

Alkyl

R

[Ox]

9 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Multi-Metal-Catalyzed Oxidative Radical Alkynylation with Terminal

Recommend Documents