Article
Selective Ruthenium-Catalyzed Transformations of Enynes with Diazoalkanes into Alkenylbicyclo[3.1.0]hexanes
Laboratoire “catalyse et organométalliques”, Institut Sciences Chimiques de Rennes.
In papers with more than one author, the asterisk indicates the name of the author to whom inquiries about the paper should be addressed.
Groupe Matière Condensée et Matériaux.
ICCOM-CNR.
Abstract

Reaction of a variety of C
CH bond-containing 1,6-enynes with N2CHSiMe3 in the presence of RuCl(COD)Cp* as catalyst precursor leads, at room temperature, to the general formation of alkenylbicyclo[3.1.0]hexanes with high Z-stereoselectivity of the alkenyl group and cis arrangement of the alkenyl group and an initial double-bond substituent, for an E-configuration of this double bond. The stereochemistry is established by determining the X-ray structures of three bicyclic products. The same reaction with 1,6-enynes bearing an R substituent on the C1 carbon of the triple bond results in either cyclopropanation of the double bond with bulky R groups (SiMe3, Ph) or formation of alkylidene−alkenyl five-membered heterocycles, resulting from a β elimination process, with less bulky R groups (R = Me, CH2CH
CH2). The reaction can be applied to in situ desilylation in methanol and direct formation of vinylbicyclo[3.1.0]hexanes and to the formation of some alkenylbicyclo[4.1.0]heptanes from 1,7-enynes. The catalytic formation of alkenylbicyclo[3.1.0]hexanes also takes place with enynes and N2CHCO2Et or N2CHPh. The reaction can be understood to proceed by an initial [2+2] addition of the Ru
CHSiMe3 bond with the enyne C
CH bond, successively leading to an alkenylruthenium−carbene and a key alkenyl bicyclic ruthenacyclobutane, which promotes the cyclopropanation, rather than metathesis, into bicyclo[3.1.0]hexanes. Density functional theory calculations performed starting from the model system Ru(HC
CH)(CH2
CH2)Cl(C5H5) show that the transformation into a ruthenacyclobutane intermediate occurs with a temporary η3-coordination of the cyclopentadienyl ligand. This step is followed by coordination of the alkenyl group, which leads to a mixed alkyl−allyl ligand. Because of the non-equivalence of the terminal allylic carbon atoms, their coupling favors cyclopropanation rather than the expected metathesis process. A direct comparison of the energy profiles with respect to those involving the Grubbs catalyst is presented, showing that cyclopropanation is favored with respect to enyne metathesis.
View: Full Text HTML | Hi-Res PDF
Tools
-
Add to Favorites
-
Download Citation
-
Email a Colleague -
Permalink
Order Reprints
Rights & Permissions
Citation Alerts
History
- Published In Issue May 09, 2007
- Received January 2, 2007
Cart


