ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Mechanistic and Performance Studies on the Ligand-Promoted Ullmann Amination Reaction
My Activity
  • Open Access
Research Article

Mechanistic and Performance Studies on the Ligand-Promoted Ullmann Amination Reaction
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

View Author Information
Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
Process Studies Group, Jealott’s Hill Research Centre, Syngenta, Bracknell, Berkshire RG42 6EY, United Kingdom
*R.P.D.: e-mail, [email protected]; tel, +44 (0)207 5945754.
Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

ACS Catalysis

Cite this: ACS Catal. 2018, 8, 1, 101–109
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.7b03664
Published November 30, 2017

Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Over the last two decades many different auxiliary ligand systems have been utilized in the copper-catalyzed Ullmann amination reaction. However, there has been little consensus on the relative merits of the varied ligands and the exact role they might play in the catalytic process. Accordingly, in this work some of the most commonly employed auxiliary ligands have been evaluated for C–N coupling using reaction progress kinetic analysis (RPKA) methodology. The results reveal not only the relative kinetic competencies of the different auxiliary ligands but also their markedly different influences on catalyst degradation rates. For the model Ullmann reaction between piperidine and iodobenzene using the soluble organic base bis(tetra-n-butylphosphonium) malonate (TBPM) at room temperature, N-methylglycine was shown to give the best performance in terms of high catalytic rate of reaction and comparatively low catalyst deactivation rates. Further experimental and rate data indicate a common catalytic cycle for all auxiliary ligands studied, although additional off-cycle processes are observed for some of the ligands (notably phenanthroline). The ability of the auxiliary ligand, base (malonate dianion), and substrate (amine) to all act competitively as ligands for the copper center is also demonstrated. On the basis of these results an improved protocol for room-temperature copper-catalyzed C–N couplings is presented with 27 different examples reported.

Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society

1 Introduction

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The Ullmann C–N cross-coupling reaction dates back to the early 1900s, where the use of stoichiometric amounts of copper and high reaction temperatures allowed for the coupling of aryl halides and amines. (1) However, there were several drawbacks to this classical Ullmann reaction, where strong bases, long reaction times, and electron-deficient aryl substrates were required for the reaction to proceed. More recent developments include the use of bidentate ligands, such as 1,10-phenanthroline (phen), which allowed the cross-coupling reaction to be carried out catalytically under milder reaction conditions (Scheme 1). (2-12) Today, the modified Ullmann reaction is an important component in the toolbox of a synthetic organic chemist and has been employed in the synthesis of numerous bioactive compounds, natural products, and organic materials containing C–N bonds. (2-6, 13-17)

Scheme 1

Scheme 1. Modified Ullmann Amination Reaction
The low cost and toxicity of copper coupled with the use of cheap and readily available auxiliary ligands based on N and O atoms makes it an attractive alternative to the otherwise successful palladium-catalyzed Buchwald–Hartwig reaction. (18-21) Historically, the mechanism of the Ullmann reaction has been the subject of much debate, with often contradictory interpretations of experimental and computational data in the literature. (22-25) This lack of understanding has hindered the development of more robust catalytic systems and the improvement of existing systems.
However, recent studies have all pointed toward the copper catalyst playing an important role in the activation of the aryl halide substrate, (22, 23) with spectroscopic evidence for an oxidative addition/reductive elimination pathway via a copper(III) intermediate. (26-28) Despite these advances the role of the auxiliary ligand in the catalytic cycle remains relatively unexplored, with ligand optimization studies predominately based solely upon empirical final-yield figures, rather than any deeper kinetic or mechanistic insights.
Reaction progress kinetic analysis (RPKA) is a powerful methodology which can allow a simplified mechanism to be developed, taking into account catalyst inhibition/deactivation pathways and other reaction steps. (29, 30) However, commonly used inorganic bases in the Ullmann reaction such as K2CO3, K3PO4, and Cs2CO3 can obfuscate RPKA measurements due to their poor solubility in the polar aprotic solvents commonly used in this reaction. (13, 25) This prevents the collection of accurate kinetic data due to mass transfer effects of the base. Therefore, kinetic studies on copper-mediated coupling reactions have been limited in the past to reactions involving low-pKa substrates such as the Goldberg reaction. (31, 32) However, we have recently shown that using soluble organic bases, such as bis(tetra-n-butylphosphonium) malonate (TBPM), can mitigate any base mass-transfer effects and thus enable the collection of much more accurate kinetic data in these systems. (9, 33) In addition, using TBPM gave excellent yields of cross-coupled products at temperatures as low as 0 °C with aryl iodides. (9, 33) Studies on the TBPM-promoted ligand-free Ullmann reaction using the RPKA methodology carried out previously in our group have allowed us to recently propose a modified catalytic cycle (Scheme 2) and simplified steady-state rate law (eq 1 in Scheme 2) for this reaction and to explore in more depth possible catalyst deactivation pathways. First-order kinetics were observed with respect to [1], [2], and [Cu]total, coupled with negative dependence on [TBPM]. (33) This negative dependence on base was attributed to the formation of off-cycle copper(I) species. The key role of the base in Ullmann and Goldberg reactions and its ability to competitively bind to the copper(I/III) metal center, has also been highlighted in recent studies by Sharma (27) and Nguyen. (34)

Scheme 2

Scheme 2. Proposed Reaction Mechanism for the Cu-Catalyzed Cross Coupling Reaction between 1 and 2 under Ligand-Free Conditions (33)
In this work, we extend our studies on the mechanism of the catalytic Ullmann reaction by kinetically profiling a wide range of commonly used auxiliary ligands in the cross-coupling of piperidine and iodobenzene using TBPM as the base. These results allow us to move beyond just looking at product yields and compare for the first time the influence of the auxiliary ligand on the rate of reaction, rate dependence in substrates, and catalyst deactivation/inhibition pathways.

2 Results and Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

2.1 Ligand Screening

In continuation of our earlier work, the reaction between piperidine (1) and iodobenzene (2) was chosen as the model system for kinetic study. Vigorous air- and moisture-free conditions were employed. Piperidine is of particular interest, as it has been cited as one of the most frequently used nitrogen heterocycles in U.S. FDA approved drugs. (35) Under auxiliary-ligand-free conditions, we observed TBPM to give good reactivity (98% yield) at room temperature relative to inorganic bases such as K2CO3, K3PO4, and Cs2CO3 (all <6% yield). This can be attributed to the solubility of and dissociation of TBPM in DMSO at room temperature (9) in comparison to inorganic bases and the ability of the malonate component of TBPM to serve as a ligand as well as a base. (33) Initial screenings were carried out using a diverse range of auxiliary ligands, many of which are taken from successful Ullmann coupling protocols in the literature (Scheme 3). Although Ma and co-workers have recently reported a series of oxalic diamide ligands that can activate aryl bromides and chloride substrates in the Ullmann reaction, (36-41) these had to be omitted from this study due to their very poor solubility in DMSO at room temperature.

Scheme 3

Scheme 3. Kinetic Studies on the Ullmann Amination Reaction between 1 and 2 Using Various Auxiliary Ligandsa

Scheme aInitial reaction rates are shown in red. The initial rate of the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction was 5.2 × 10–3 M min–1.

The rate of reaction was monitored for each auxiliary ligand using reaction calorimetry. To verify that the calorimetric data do correctly correlate with the progress of the reaction, a sample reaction (using ethylene glycol, L14) was monitored using 1H NMR spectroscopy and the product yield directly compared against that determined using heat flow experiments. Close agreement between heat flow and NMR conversions was observed (see Figure 1).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Comparison between heat flow and 1H NMR conversions.

The determined enthalpy of reaction ΔHrxn for all experiments in this study was consistent within ±5% (ΔHrxn = 170.5 ± 8.5 kJ mol–1). Varying the initial substrate concentrations did not influence the calculated enthalpy of reaction ΔHrxn. These experiments therefore validate the use of reaction calorimetry as a tool to study the ligand-promoted Ullmann reaction.
Complete (100%) conversion of iodobenzene was obtained for all reactions. The yield of the desired cross-coupled product 3 in each case was in excess of 98% with approximately 2% yield of benzene side product also observed. In no cases were any aryl iodide to ligand couplings observed (even with ligands containing NH functionalities). The benzene is most likely formed from hydrodehalogenation of the iodobenzene, with similar hydrodehalogenation side products already reported in the literature for other copper(I)-catalyzed protocols. (33, 42-44) Variation in the type of auxiliary ligand had no effect on the amount of benzene formed, and the auxiliary ligand can thus be ruled out as a source of the hydrogen atom, with the piperidine NH (33) or the mono- or diprotonated base byproduct (34) being a likely source. The consistent value of ΔHrxn means that any heat flow from the hydrodehalogenation side reaction is negligible relative to the C–N cross-coupling reaction and can thus be ignored.
Heat flow vs time plots were collected using reaction calorimetry in the presence of each auxiliary ligand as well as under auxiliary-ligand-free conditions (Figure S2 in the Supporting Information). These highlight the difference in reactivity as seen by the variations in maximum heat flow. The heat flow plots were processed to give the initial rate of reaction for each studied auxiliary ligand (Scheme 3). Triphenylphosphine (L16) and the tetradentate Salen ligand (L17) were also studied but furnished product yields of only 13 and 48%, respectively; this led to large potential errors in their calorimetrically determined reaction rates, and hence they have not been included in Scheme 3.
Most of the auxiliary ligands studied gave a faster initial rate of reaction relative to the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction. However, L4 and L13 exhibited slower initial reaction rates and L3, L5, L12, and L15 had no observable effect on the reaction rate. Changing the ligand loadings of this latter set of ligands also had no effect on the initial reaction rates (Figure S3 in the Supporting Information). These results reflect the competitive nature of the binding of the auxiliary ligand and the malonate dianion for copper(I), with the equilibrium sitting far on the side of the malonate-coordinated species for L3, L5, L12, and L15.
Overall the ligand screening results show that auxiliary ligands containing secondary amine functionalities give the best reactivity. Tertiary amines are less active in promoting the reaction, as can be seen from the comparisons of L1 with L5 and of L6 with L7. A key factor in these observations is likely to be the steric bulk of the ligand. (23) In addition, auxiliary ligands with pyridine or alcohol/phenol functionalities display little or no ligand-based acceleration effect. While some similar patterns in ligand preferences have been reported in the literature, (8-10, 45-48) these have been based on final yield measurements and as far as we are aware have not incorporated any kinetic measurements.

2.2 Catalyst Deactivation

The collection of experimental rate data continuously over the course of a reaction combined with RPKA methods allows additional mechanistic insights over and above the initial rate calculations to be made. (29, 30) All reactions reported herein were monitored in situ using reaction calorimetry to produce “graphical rate equations”. (29, 30) Only data between 20 and 80% conversions are displayed to limit any inaccuracies as the limiting substrate (2) approaches zero and to eliminate any heat transfer effects. Representative examples of these plots are shown in Figure 2 (see the Supporting Information for all plots over all conversion values). It is immediately apparent that, in addition to differing initial rates, the curvature of these plots varies. Plots of auxiliary ligands with two NH groups (L1 and L2) have a higher curvature than the other plots. Thus, although L2 exhibits an initial rate identical with that of L6 (Scheme 3), this rate drops off far more quickly as the reaction progresses. This is indicative of differences in the mechanisms or the presence of alternative reaction pathways such as catalyst deactivation or inhibition. In order to probe these differences, information regarding catalyst deactivation and the rate dependence in substrates was sought through different and same excess experiments. For all experiments reported herein, 1 is in excess while 2 is the limiting substrate.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Graphical rate equations for experiments using L1, L2, L4, L6, and auxiliary-ligand-free reactions using the conditions shown in Scheme 3.

Same excess experiments were carried out in the presence of ligands L1, L4, and L6 to determine if catalyst deactivation occurs over the course of the reaction (Figure 3). These ligands were chosen as they differed the most from the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction, exhibiting either faster or slower reaction rates or, in the case of L1, a different reaction profile. The same excess experiment involved a reduction in [1]0, [2]0, and [TBPM]0, while keeping their difference in concentration the same (i.e., [e] = 0.0500 M). This is equivalent to starting the same reaction but at different starting points. Therefore, the lack of overlap between the same excess experiment (orange, Figure 3) and the standard experiment (blue, Figure 3) confirms that catalyst deactivation or product inhibition does indeed occur. Product inhibition was ruled out by carrying out an extra same excess experiment involving the addition of product 3 and byproducts 4 and 5 into the reaction mixture (green, Figure 3). Overlap between the second (green) and first (blue) same excess experiment curves shows that any catalyst inhibition caused by product coordination, solution conductivity changes caused by the formation of tetra-n-butylphosphonium iodide, or protonation of piperidine by monoanionic malonic acid are all negligible in this reaction regardless of the ligand used. Thus, catalyst decomposition is the most likely deactivation process.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Graphical rate equations for experiments carried out using the same excess protocol with L1 (top), L4 (middle), and L6 (bottom). See the Supporting Information for full plots.

The gap between the same excess experiment and the standard experiment in Figure 3 is noticeably larger for L1 than for L4, L6, and auxiliary-ligand-free reactions. At the arbitrary value of [2] = 0.4 M, the reaction rate was 60% lower with L1 in comparison to 30% lower with L6 and 12% lower with L4. Significantly increased catalyst deactivation is therefore occurring in the presence of L1, while a reduction in catalyst deactivation occurs with L4. On the basis of these studies, L6 would seem to provide the best balance with high rate of reaction and comparatively low catalyst deactivation.
A multiple substrate addition protocol was carried out to further verify the presence of catalyst deactivation: 0.1000 M of [1]0 and 0.0500 M of [2]0 in the presence of 10 mol % of ligand (L1, L2, L4, or L6) was initiated with 5 mol % of CuI. Once this first reaction had reached completion (i.e., negligible heat flow was detected by the calorimeter), a further solution of 1 and 2 (0.500 mmol each in 200 μL of DMSO) was added to the reaction mixture to restart the reaction. A third reaction was subsequently started once the second reaction had ended. If no catalyst deactivation occurs, each subsequent reaction should be marginally faster than the previous one owing to lower [TBPM]. This is due to the negative dependence in [TBPM] caused by the formation of off-cycle copper(I) dimalonate species (Scheme 2) as determined previously. (33) However, this was not the case, as each subsequent reaction was significantly slower than the previous one. An example of this with L1 is shown in Figure 4 (for other ligands see Figure S5 in the Supporting Information). Therefore, catalyst deactivation is indeed occurring. The change in catalyst concentration due to an increase in reaction volume is negligible, as it is much smaller than the change in rate of reaction. Due to catalyst deactivation, the third and final reaction gave only 75% yield of 3 for all four auxiliary ligands studied.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Graphical rate equations for each sequential reaction with L1.

The stability of the prospective copper(I) intermediates in the presence of these ligands was also investigated by addition of the respective ligand to freshly prepared copper(I) piperidide (49) in [D6]DMSO at room temperature under an inert atmosphere. Thus, addition of L1 to copper(I) piperidide resulted in total decomposition of the copper piperidide complex within 2 h (determined using 1H NMR with mesitylene as an internal standard). However, when L4 was added (or under auxiliary-ligand-free conditions), less than 1% complex decomposition was observed over a similar time period. Finally, addition of L6 gave approximately 60% copper(I) piperidide decomposition after 2 h. For each of these above reactions, an equivalence of iodobenzene was subsequently added to the resultant solution, and the mixture was stirred for 24 h at 80 °C. Conversion to the C–N coupled product 3 was determined using 1H NMR and found to be 0% for L1 and L2, 15% for L4, and 43% for L6. These results are consistent with the calorimetric data, showing L6 to confer the best balance between high rate of reaction and low rate of catalyst deactivation. The lack of any conversion at all for the L1- and L2-treated samples suggests that catalyst deactivation under these conditions is irreversible. However, a reversible catalyst deactivation process cannot be ruled out under the catalytic conditions and further studies are still required to clarify the exact mechanism of catalyst deactivation.

2.3 Rate Dependence in Substrates

Rate dependence in substrates was determined using RPKA methods for both L4 and L6. Reactions with these two auxiliary ligands both showed reasonable catalyst stability (vide supra) and allowed comparison between a ligand that gives a faster (L6) and slower (L4) rate of reaction relative to that of the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction. A series of different excess experiments were carried out to determine the rate dependence of [1]0, [2]0, [TBPM]0, and [Cu]total.
Decreasing [2]0 from 0.1000 to 0.0500 M while keeping the concentrations of other substrates and catalyst the same led to a corresponding decrease in the reaction rate (Figure 5; for full plots refer to Figure S6 in the Supporting Information) in the presence of either L4 and L6. Moderately good overlap between the normalized rate equations when the reaction rate was normalized by [2] is indicative of first-order dependence with respect to [2] (Figure 5). This is consistent with what was observed with the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction. (33)

Figure 5

Figure 5. Normalized graphical rate equations indicating first order in [2] for L4 (top) and L6 (bottom). [e] = “excess” = [1]0 – [2]0. See the Supporting Information for full graphical rate plots.

The rate dependence in [Cu]total was probed next. Lowering [Cu]total from 10 to 5 mol % gave a corresponding decrease in the reaction rate regardless of the auxiliary ligand used (Figure 6; for full plots refer to Figure S7 in the Supporting Information). Normalized rate equations revealed a first-order dependence in [Cu]total with either L4 or L6 (Figure 6).

Figure 6

Figure 6. Normalized graphical rate equations indicating first order in [Cu]total for L4 (top) and L6 (bottom). Full graphical rate plots are available in the Supporting Information.

Negative dependence in [TBPM] was observed in the presence of both L4 and L6, with increasing [TBPM]0 leading to slower reaction rates (Figure S8 in the Supporting Information). Negative dependence in [TBPM] can be attributed to the formation of off-cycle copper(I) dimalonate species which in turn can undergo disproportionation to copper(0) and copper(II) at room temperature even under inert atmospheres (see Scheme 2). (33, 50, 51)
Positive noninteger dependence on [1] was observed using the difference excess protocol with L4 or L6 (Figure S11 in the Supporting Information). In comparison, a first-order dependence on [1] was observed under ligand-free conditions. (33) This can be rationalized by the presence of off-cycle equilibria involving the auxiliary ligand (vide infra). However, reactions involving a large excess of [1]0 move toward first order in [1] with observed rate values that are independent of the auxiliary ligand employed (see Figures S12 and S13 in the Supporting Information). We believe this is due to displacement of the auxiliary ligand at very high [1] to give an on-cycle [Cu(C5H10N)(C5H10NH)] species. This behavior is indicative of competitive ligand binding at the copper center.
Taken together, these different excess experiments with L4 or L6 showed that, at ≤0.3 M of [1]0, [2]0, [TBPM]0, and [Cu]total, all reaction components influence the reaction rate. First-order dependence on [2] and [Cu]total, a positive dependence on [1], and a negative dependence on [TBPM] were observed.

2.4 Rate Dependence in Ligand

The effect of auxiliary ligand loading on the initial rate of reaction for several of the ligands is illustrated in Figure 7. The bar chart illustrates how positive dependence on L1, L2, and L6 was observed in the range of 5–20 mol %. (52)

Figure 7

Figure 7. Bar chart illustrating the reaction rate at different auxiliary ligand loadings.

Variation in L3 loadings did not influence the reaction rate, which remained essentially identical with that of the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction (Figure 7). This can be explained by the presence of an excess of malonate dianion from the base which acts competitively as a ligand for the copper center with L3, with the equilibrium siting predominately on the side of the malonate coordinated species.
Increasing L4 loadings led to a slower rate of reaction, which can be attributed to its higher binding affinity toward copper(I) (in comparison to L3), (53) combined with a tendency to form the unreactive separated ion-pair complexes [Cu(L4)2]+[Cu(piperidide)2] as shown in section 2.5. The formation of such an off-cycle species is already well-known for similar L4-ligated Cu(I) species (2, 32, 34, 43, 49, 54) and explains the observed negative dependence on L4 and slower rate of reaction in comparison to the auxiliary-ligand-free system.

2.5 Catalyst Speciation with Auxiliary Ligand

Attempts were made to study the catalyst speciation in the presence of auxiliary ligands L1, L2, L4, and L6. However, on addition of L1, L2, or L6 to copper(I) complexes (piperidide, iodide, or tert-butoxide) in [D6]DMSO, in all cases decomposition of the resultant species was observed (to copper(0) and copper(II) salts) even under vigorous air- and moisture-free conditions. However, similar studies with L4 proved more successful, giving stable complexes amenable to characterization by 1H NMR spectroscopy.
Thus, a series of NMR experiments were carried out with L4 to probe the formation and stability of the potential ion-separated species [Cu(L4)2]+[Cu(piperidide)2]. Lithium bis(piperidido)cuprate(I) was prepared from copper(I) iodide and lithium piperidide, (49) and its 1H NMR spectrum directly compared to that of a mixture of copper(I) piperidide and L4 (1:1 ratio). In both cases, identical shifts were observed for the piperidide resonances (Figure S16 in the Supporting Information). Moreover, addition of L4 and piperidine to [CuOtBu]4 in THF gave a waxy red solid (see the Supporting Information), which was analyzed by 1H NMR spectroscopy in [D6]DMSO (Figure S16) to give once more an identical spectrum, again supporting the formation of [Cu(L4)2]+[Cu(piperidide)2] during the cross-coupling reaction. These findings are consistent with previous literature reports for this ligand. (31, 32, 43, 54)
Addition of iodobenzene (2) to either lithium bis(piperidido)cuprate(I) or [Cu(L4)2]+[Cu(piperidide)2] gave no further reaction, and no N-phenylpiperidine (3) was observed. This supports the notion that these ion-pair species are unreactive in the Ullmann coupling reaction. In addition, all these cuprate species were observed to be stable at room temperature under inert atmospheres for approximately 2 days.

2.6 Aryl Halide Activation

The aryl halide activation step was investigated using 2-(allyloxy)iodobenzene as a radical probe to determine if radical intermediates are present under the reaction conditions used in this study. The presence of radical intermediates will cause the radical probe to undergo rapid ring closure via a 5-exo-trig process (k = 9.6 × 109 s–1 in DMSO), and the resulting methyl radical generated will subsequently react with the nucleophile. (55) However, in the absence of such radical intermediates C–N bond formation would be observed. The reaction between piperidine and the radical probe with L1, L2, L4, or L6 gave only the C–N coupled product (Scheme 4), suggesting that aryl halide activation proceeds via oxidative addition/reductive elimination through a copper(I)/copper(III) mechanism. This is consistent with previous work carried out by Hartwig et al. (54)

Scheme 4

Scheme 4. Reaction between 2-(Allyloxy)iodobenzene and Piperidine in the Presence of L1, L2, L4, or L6 To Determine if the Aryl Halide Activation Step Proceeds via Radical Intermediates

2.7 Reaction Design toward Improved Performance

One of the aims of this work is to allow a more systematic and informed quality-by-design approach to catalyst and auxiliary ligand selection in copper-catalyzed protocols. Hence, we sought to apply our findings to room-temperature C–N couplings using common inorganic bases which are currently very challenging with existing systems.
Initially several inorganic bases were tested for the cross-coupling of a model system (benzylamine and iodobenzene), and K3PO4 was shown to give excellent yields using a higher catalyst loading of 10% (Table S1 in the Supporting Information). Although TBPM is a significantly superior base under these conditions, it was thought that its lack of commercial availability would make it less attractive to the academic and industrial communities at present. Unfortunately, we have been unable to carry out a full kinetic evaluation of the reaction using K3PO4 due to mass transfer effects of the base. However, auxiliary ligand screening showed a good correlation between the achieved product yield with K3PO4 (Table S2 in the Supporting Information) and the observed reaction rates with TBPM (section 2.1). In addition, mechanisms equivalent to Scheme 2 have been proposed for Ullmann couplings employing K3PO4, and recent studies have shown that phosphonate ions can act as both a ligand and a base in the catalytic cycle (thus being analogous to the observed behavior of the malonate anion in TBPM). (26, 27)
On the basis of the RPKA results N-methylglycine (L6) was chosen as the auxiliary ligand, showing the best balance between fast initial rate of reaction and low levels of catalyst deactivation. A slight excess of amine (1.5 equiv) was employed to drive the reaction forward to the catalyst resting state (LCuNR2) and prevent catalyst deactivation (Scheme 2). (33)
The reaction scope was extended to a variety of amines and aryl iodides: 27 examples in total (Table 1). The product yields obtained all compare favorably with those of room-temperature copper(I) protocols (where known (11, 56)). Most substrate combinations gave high yields (75%+), although electron-deficient (11gi) and sterically bulky (11j,k) amines gave poorer conversions. In addition, ortho-substituted aryl iodides (11ux) gave no or little conversion, showing that the system is highly sensitive to steric bulk at this position. In no case was any coupling of the N-methylglycine with the aryl iodide observed.
Table 1. Coupling Reaction between Amines and Aryl Iodides with K3PO4 and L6a
Table a

Reaction conditions: HNRR′ (1.5 mmol), ArI (1 mmol), CuI (0.1 mmol), N-methylglycine (0.2 mmol), K3PO4 (2 mmol), DMSO (1 mL). Isolated yields are reported.

Given the mildness of the reaction conditions and its efficiency, the reaction was also carried out on a larger scale to test its scalability. No significant effects on the product yields were observed on scale-up (10 mmol scale): 85% yield for 11a and 70% for 11b.

3 Conclusions

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

An evaluation of some of the most commonly employed auxiliary ligands for application in the copper(I)-catalyzed Ullmann amination reaction has been undertaken. The model reaction between piperidine and iodobenzene in the presence of the soluble organic base bis(tetra-n-butylphosphonium) malonate (TBPM) has been adopted due to its high performance at room temperature and the absence of any mass transfer effects of the base. Kinetic studies using reaction calorimetry and RPKA methodology have revealed the relative catalytic reaction rates for each of these ligand systems as well as their different influences on catalyst deactivation. The rates of catalyst deactivation in particular are reported to vary considerably among the different auxiliary ligands. Together these data provide a much better insight into the relative merits of the different ligands in comparison to the final yield measurements which are usually cited.
Further kinetic, spectroscopic, and experimental studies strongly suggest that the on-cycle mechanism of C–N bond formation (namely, coordination of the amine to the copper(I), deprotonation of the amine, oxidative addition of the aryl iodide, and finally reductive elimination) is consistent across all auxiliary ligand systems. However, additional off-cycle processes have been observed for some auxiliary ligands, most notably phenanthroline (L4), which readily forms a very stable but dormant diionic species. In addition, kinetic rate experiments reveal the ability of the auxiliary ligand, base (malonate dianion), and substrate (amine) to all act competitively as ligands for the copper center. This adds significantly to the complexity of these systems, making optimization and modeling all the more challenging.
Nevertheless, on the basis of our studies N-methylglycine (L6) was identified to possess the best balance of high catalytic reaction rates and low catalyst deactivation for room-temperature C–N couplings. Hence, a new and efficient room-temperature Ullmann amination reaction system was designed where the combination of K3PO4 and N-methylglycine (L6) gave excellent reactivity with high room-temperature yields reported for a variety of amines and aryl iodides (27 examples in total). We are currently using a similar methodology to explore other copper-catalyzed aminations involving more challenging substrates with lower catalyst and auxiliary ligand loadings.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.7b03664.

  • Experimental procedures, experimental and spectroscopic data, full graphs related to the kinetic studies, and details of the kinetic modeling using COPASI (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Quintin A. Lo - Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
    • David Sale - Process Studies Group, Jealott’s Hill Research Centre, Syngenta, Bracknell, Berkshire RG42 6EY, United Kingdom
    • D. Christopher Braddock - Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-4161-7256
  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgment

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This work was supported by Syngenta and the UK EPSRC (Grant EP/M507878/1).

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 56 other publications.

  1. 1
    Ullmann, F. Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 1903, 36, 2382 2384 DOI: 10.1002/cber.190303602174
  2. 2
    Goodbrand, H. B.; Hu, N. X. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64, 670 674 DOI: 10.1021/jo981804o
  3. 3
    Zhang, H.; Cai, Q.; Ma, D. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 5164 5173 DOI: 10.1021/jo0504464
  4. 4
    Lin, H.; Sun, D. Org. Prep. Proced. Int. 2013, 45, 341 394 DOI: 10.1080/00304948.2013.816208
  5. 5
    Fischer, C.; Koenig, B. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2011, 7, 59 74 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.7.10
  6. 6
    Bedos-Belval, F.; Rouch, A.; Vanucci-Bacqué, C.; Baltas, M. MedChemComm 2012, 3, 1356 1372 DOI: 10.1039/c2md20199b
  7. 7
    Altman, R. A.; Koval, E. D.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 6190 6199 DOI: 10.1021/jo070807a
  8. 8
    Ma, D.; Cai, Q.; Zhang, H. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 2453 2455 DOI: 10.1021/ol0346584
  9. 9
    Yang, C.-T.; Fu, Y.; Huang, Y.-B.; Yi, J.; Guo, Q.-X.; Liu, L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 7398 7401 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200903158
  10. 10
    Ma, D.; Liu, F. Chem. Commun. 2004, 3, 1934 1935 DOI: 10.1039/b407090a
  11. 11
    Shafir, A.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 8742 8743 DOI: 10.1021/ja063063b
  12. 12
    Shafir, A.; Lichtor, P. A.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 3490 3491 DOI: 10.1021/ja068926f
  13. 13
    Evano, G.; Blanchard, N.; Toumi, M. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 3054 3131 DOI: 10.1021/cr8002505
  14. 14
    Evano, G.; Toumi, M.; Coste, A. Chem. Commun. 2009, 4166 4175 DOI: 10.1039/b905601g
  15. 15
    Ma, D.; Xia, C.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, J.; Tang, W. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 442 451 DOI: 10.1021/jo026125z
  16. 16
    Ma, D.; Zhang, Y.; Yao, J.; Wu, S.; Tao, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 12459 12467 DOI: 10.1021/ja981662f
  17. 17
    Ma, D.; Xia, C.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, J. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 2189 2191 DOI: 10.1021/ol016043h
  18. 18
    Hartwig, J. F. Acc. Chem. Res. 1998, 31, 852 860 DOI: 10.1021/ar970282g
  19. 19
    Wolfe, J. P.; Wagaw, S.; Marcoux, J.-F.; Buchwald, S. L. Acc. Chem. Res. 1998, 31, 805 818 DOI: 10.1021/ar9600650
  20. 20
    Hartwig, J. F. Pure Appl. Chem. 1999, 71, 1417 1423 DOI: 10.1351/pac199971081417
  21. 21
    Yang, B. H.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Organomet. Chem. 1999, 576, 125 146 DOI: 10.1016/S0022-328X(98)01054-7
  22. 22
    Sperotto, E.; van Klink, G. P. M.; van Koten, G.; de Vries, J. G. Dalt. Trans. 2010, 39, 10338 10351 DOI: 10.1039/c0dt00674b
  23. 23
    Sambiagio, C.; Marsden, S. P.; Blacker, A. J.; McGowan, P. C. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 3525 3520 DOI: 10.1039/C3CS60289C
  24. 24
    Monnier, F.; Taillefer, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 3096 3099 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200703209
  25. 25
    Monnier, F.; Taillefer, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 6954 6971 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200804497
  26. 26
    Casitas, A.; Ribas, X. Chem. Sci. 2013, 4, 2301 2318 DOI: 10.1039/c3sc21818j
  27. 27
    Gurjar, K. K.; Sharma, R. K. ChemCatChem 2017, 9, 862 869 DOI: 10.1002/cctc.201601174
  28. 28
    Rovira, M.; Jašíková, L.; Andris, E.; Acuña-Parés, F.; Soler, M.; Güell, I.; Wang, M.-Z.; Gómez, L.; Luis, J. M.; Roithová, J.; Ribas, X. Chem. Commun. 2017, 53, 8786 8789 DOI: 10.1039/C7CC04491G
  29. 29
    Blackmond, D. G. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 4302 4320 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200462544
  30. 30
    Blackmond, D. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 10852 10866 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b05841
  31. 31
    Strieter, E. R.; Blackmond, D. G.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 4120 4121 DOI: 10.1021/ja050120c
  32. 32
    Strieter, E. R.; Bhayana, B.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 78 88 DOI: 10.1021/ja0781893
  33. 33
    Sung, S.; Sale, D.; Braddock, D. C.; Armstrong, A.; Brennan, C.; Davies, R. P. ACS Catal. 2016, 6, 3965 3974 DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.6b00504
  34. 34
    Sherborne, G. J.; Adomeit, S.; Menzel, R.; Rabeah, J.; Brückner, A.; Fielding, M. R.; Willans, C. E.; Nguyen, B. N. Chem. Sci. 2017, 8, 7203 7210 DOI: 10.1039/C7SC02859H
  35. 35
    Ruiz-Castillo, P.; Buchwald, S. L. Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 12564 12649 DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00512
  36. 36
    Zhou, W.; Fan, M.; Yin, J.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 11942 11945 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b08411
  37. 37
    Fan, M.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. Org. Lett. 2015, 17, 5934 5937 DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.5b03230
  38. 38
    Fan, M.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 6211 6215 DOI: 10.1002/anie.201601035
  39. 39
    Xia, S.; Gan, L.; Wang, K.; Li, Z.; Ma, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 13493 13496 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.6b08114
  40. 40
    Gao, J.; Bhunia, S.; Wang, K.; Gan, L.; Xia, S.; Ma, D. Org. Lett. 2017, 19, 2809 2812 DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.7b00901
  41. 41
    Pawar, G. G.; Wu, H.; De, S.; Ma, D. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2017, 359, 1631 1636 DOI: 10.1002/adsc.201700026
  42. 42
    Rovira, M.; Soler, M.; Güell, I.; Wang, M.-Z.; Gomez, L.; Ribas, X. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 7315 7325 DOI: 10.1021/acs.joc.6b01035
  43. 43
    Tye, J. W.; Weng, Z.; Johns, A. M.; Incarvito, C. D.; Hartwig, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 9971 9983 DOI: 10.1021/ja076668w
  44. 44
    Tye, J. W.; Weng, Z.; Giri, R.; Hartwig, J. F. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 2185 2189 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200902245
  45. 45
    Cai, Q.; Zhang, H.; Zou, B.; Xie, X.; Zhu, W.; He, G.; Wang, J.; Pan, X.; Chen, Y.; Yuan, Q.; Liu, F.; Lu, B.; Ma, D. Pure Appl. Chem. 2009, 81, 227 234 DOI: 10.1351/PAC-CON-08-08-19
  46. 46
    Kwong, F. Y.; Klapars, A.; Buchwald, S. L. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 581 584 DOI: 10.1021/ol0171867
  47. 47
    Otto, N.; Opatz, T. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2012, 8, 1105 1111 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.8.122
  48. 48
    Uma Maheswar Reddy, K.; Santosh Kumar, K.; Panasa Reddy, A. Asian J. Chem. 2014, 26, 4747 4751 DOI: 10.14233/ajchem.2014.16194
  49. 49
    Sung, S.; Braddock, D. C.; Armstrong, A.; Brennan, C.; Sale, D.; White, A. J. P.; Davies, R. P. Chem. - Eur. J. 2015, 21, 7179 7192 DOI: 10.1002/chem.201405699
  50. 50
    He, C.; Zhang, G.; Ke, J.; Zhang, H.; Miller, J. T.; Kropf, A. J.; Lei, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 488 493 DOI: 10.1021/ja310111p
  51. 51
    Cheng, B.; Yi, H.; He, C.; Liu, C.; Lei, A. Organometallics 2015, 34, 206 211 DOI: 10.1021/om501053k
  52. 52

    Experiments involving higher ligand loadings could not be carried out owing to the poor solubility of amino acids in DMSO at concentrations above 20 mol % at room temperature.

  53. 53
    Rannulu, N. S.; Rodgers, M. T. J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111, 3465 3479 DOI: 10.1021/jp066903h
  54. 54
    Giri, R.; Hartwig, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 15860 15863 DOI: 10.1021/ja105695s
  55. 55
    Annunziata, A.; Galli, C.; Marinelli, M.; Pau, T. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 2001, 1323 1329 DOI: 10.1002/1099-0690(200104)2001:7<1323::AID-EJOC1323>3.0.CO;2-C
  56. 56
    Deldaele, C.; Evano, G. ChemCatChem 2016, 8, 1319 1328 DOI: 10.1002/cctc.201501375

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 44 publications.

  1. Janis M. Zakis, Rebeka A. Lipina, Sharon Bell, Simon R. Williams, Maurus Mathis, Magnus J. Johansson, Joanna Wencel-Delord, Tomas Smejkal. High-Throughput Enabled Iridium-Catalyzed C–H Borylation Platform for Late-Stage Functionalization. ACS Catalysis 2025, 15 (4) , 3525-3534. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.4c07711
  2. Haiyang Wang, Fujun Li, Wenbo Yang, Yuchao Wang, Alexander A. Miskevich, Valery A. Loiko, Lijing Zhang, Shengyang Tao. Impact of Adding N-hexylamine to Nickel Metallophotoredox C–N Coupling to Form Diarylamines. The Journal of Organic Chemistry 2025, 90 (3) , 1233-1244. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.joc.4c02106
  3. Nageswararao Moyilla, Ganeshdev Padhi, Deepti Kalsi, Nagaraju Barsu. Copper/Iron Cocatalyzed Depolymerization of Postconsumer Polycarbonate: A One-Pot Strategy to Synthesize Aryl Ethers. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering 2024, 12 (51) , 18362-18372. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.4c06990
  4. Benedikt S. Schreib, Timothy M. Swager. Poly(arylene ether)s via Cu(II)-Catalysis. ACS Macro Letters 2024, 13 (11) , 1565-1569. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsmacrolett.4c00703
  5. Amit K. Jaiswal, Priya Saha, Julong Jiang, Kimichi Suzuki, Anna Jasny, Bernd M. Schmidt, Satoshi Maeda, Stefan Hecht, Chung-Yang Dennis Huang. Accessing a Diverse Set of Functional Red-Light Photoswitches by Selective Copper-Catalyzed Indigo N-Arylation. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2024, 146 (31) , 21367-21376. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.4c03543
  6. Chaohong Jia, Yeye She, Yanhua Lu, Mengxiang Wu, Xiaohan Yang, Ling Chen, Yahong Li. Octalithium, Tetrasodium, and Decalithium Compounds Based on Pyrrolyl Ligands: Synthesis, Structures, and Activation of the C–H Bonds of Pyrrolyl Rings and C═N Bonds of a Series of Ligands by Organolithium Reagents. Inorganic Chemistry 2023, 62 (34) , 14072-14085. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.3c02208
  7. Jon I. Day, Katherine N. Allen-Moyer, Kevin P. Cole. Process Development for a 1H-Indazole Synthesis Using an Intramolecular Ullmann-Type Reaction. The Journal of Organic Chemistry 2023, 88 (7) , 4209-4223. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.joc.2c02771
  8. Antoine de Gombert, Andrea Darù, Tonia S. Ahmed, Michael C. Haibach, Rei Li-Matsuura, Cassie Yang, Rodger F. Henry, Silas P. Cook, Shashank Shekhar, Donna G. Blackmond. Mechanistic Insight into Cu-Catalyzed C–N Coupling of Hindered Aryl Iodides and Anilines Using a Pyrrol-ol Ligand Enables Development of Mild and Homogeneous Reaction Conditions. ACS Catalysis 2023, 13 (5) , 2904-2915. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c06201
  9. Swagata Sil, Athul Santha Bhaskaran, Soumi Chakraborty, Bhagat Singh, Rositha Kuniyil, Swadhin K. Mandal. Reduced-Phenalenyl-Based Molecule as a Super Electron Donor for Radical-Mediated C–N Coupling Catalysis at Room Temperature. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2022, 144 (49) , 22611-22621. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.2c09225
  10. Xin Ge, Hui Zhang, Meng Ge, Xuemin Liu, Shuang Yuan. Cu Nanoparticles Supported on Fe3O4@SiO2@N-Doped Carbon Core–Shell Nanocomposites for C–N Coupling Reactions in Water. ACS Applied Nano Materials 2021, 4 (11) , 11681-11692. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.1c02248
  11. Tedros A. Balema, Jiayuan Miao, Natalie A. Wasio, Colin J. Murphy, Amanda M. Larson, Dipna A. Patel, Yu-Shan Lin, E. Charles H. Sykes. Visualizing and Understanding Ordered Surface Phases during the Ullmann Coupling Reaction. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2021, 125 (14) , 7675-7685. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c00462
  12. Wenjie Liu, Jiamin Xu, Xiahong Chen, Fuxing Zhang, Zhifeng Xu, Deping Wang, Yongqiang He, Xiaohong Xia, Xin Zhang, Yun Liang. CuI/2-Aminopyridine 1-Oxide Catalyzed Amination of Aryl Chlorides with Aliphatic Amines. Organic Letters 2020, 22 (19) , 7486-7490. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.orglett.0c02672
  13. Richard Y. Liu, Joseph M. Dennis, Stephen L. Buchwald. The Quest for the Ideal Base: Rational Design of a Nickel Precatalyst Enables Mild, Homogeneous C–N Cross-Coupling. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2020, 142 (9) , 4500-4507. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.0c00286
  14. Devita V. Morarji, Kamlesh K. Gurjar. Theoretical and Experimental Studies: Cu(I)/Cu(II) Catalytic Cycle in CuI/Oxalamide-Promoted C–N Bond Formation. Organometallics 2019, 38 (12) , 2502-2511. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.organomet.9b00224
  15. Gargi Nikhil Vaidya, Arif Khan, Hansa Verma, Sanjeev Kumar, Dinesh Kumar. Structure Ligation Relationship of Amino Acids for the Amination Cross-Coupling Reactions. The Journal of Organic Chemistry 2019, 84 (5) , 3004-3010. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.joc.8b03214
  16. Fei-Dong Huang, Chang Xu, Dong-Dong Lu, Dong-Sheng Shen, Tian Li, Feng-Shou Liu. Pd-PEPPSI-IPentAn Promoted Deactivated Amination of Aryl Chlorides with Amines under Aerobic Conditions. The Journal of Organic Chemistry 2018, 83 (16) , 9144-9155. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.joc.8b01205
  17. Yu‐Yang Xie, Zhang Zhang, Ying‐Chun Wang. Halogen‐Mediated Electrochemical C−N Bond Construction of Amine. European Journal of Organic Chemistry 2025, 8 https://doi.org/10.1002/ejoc.202401352
  18. Jinhui Cai, Wenting Zhang, Usman Muhammad, Weishuang Li, Yanjun Xie. Recent advances in asymmetric synthesis of chiral benzoheterocycles via Earth-abundant metal catalysis. Organic Chemistry Frontiers 2024, 11 (22) , 6534-6557. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4QO01686F
  19. Yujuan Wu, Lianji Zhang, Huimin Liu, Yongfei Wang, Cuiping Wang, Zhizhi Hu, Zhiqiang Zhang. Construction of C–X (X = N, O) bonds from benzyl alcohols via Cu-BTC-catalyzed oxidative coupling. Catalysis Science & Technology 2024, 14 (15) , 4366-4375. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4CY00618F
  20. V. Sh. Saberov, G. F. Rayenko, A. S. Avksentiev, L. M. Vakhitova, N. I. Korotkikh. Catalytic Hydrodehalogenation of Haloarenes: Electron Transfer Reactions and Related Transformations: a Review. Theoretical and Experimental Chemistry 2024, 60 (1) , 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11237-024-09805-9
  21. Xiaodong Jin, Yongjie Lin, Robert P. Davies. On the mechanism of benzimidazole synthesis via copper-catalysed intramolecular N -arylation. Catalysis Science & Technology 2023, 13 (24) , 7181-7189. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3CY00767G
  22. Kamrul Hasan, Reshma G Joseph, Ihsan A. Shehadi, Shashikant P. Patole. Fe3O4-chitosan immobilized Cu(II) Schiff base catalyst for the microwave-assisted amination of aryl halides in water. Arabian Journal of Chemistry 2023, 16 (12) , 105317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2023.105317
  23. Connor P. Delaney, Eva Lin, Qinan Huang, Isaac F. Yu, Guodong Rao, Lizhi Tao, Ana Jed, Serena M. Fantasia, Kurt A. Püntener, R. David Britt, John F. Hartwig. Cross-coupling by a noncanonical mechanism involving the addition of aryl halide to Cu(II). Science 2023, 381 (6662) , 1079-1085. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adi9226
  24. Zhan-Guo Jiang, Hui-Min Zeng, Xiangyu Zhang, Yuan Tan, You-Zhao Lan, Yu Wang, De-Liang Long, Leroy Cronin, Cai-Hong Zhan. A synergistic {Cu 2 -W 12 O 40 } catalyst with high conversion for homo-coupling of terminal alkynes. Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers 2023, 10 (4) , 1255-1261. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2QI02368G
  25. J. Huang, D. Ma. 1.1 Modern Ullmann-Type Couplings. 2023https://doi.org/10.1055/sos-SD-238-00002
  26. Liang-liang Chi, Lin-lin Hao, Zhi-qiang Cai, Du-lin Kong, Ya-nan Wang, Wei-tao Qin, Yang Gao, Zhi-zhuo Qu. Design, Synthesis, and Biological Evaluation of Novel Pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidine and 1,3-Benzodiazine Derivatives as Potent Antitumor Agents. Russian Journal of General Chemistry 2022, 92 (12) , 2698-2707. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1070363222120209
  27. Josefredo R. Pliego. Car-Parrinello molecular dynamics study of CuF, AgF, CuPF6 and AgPF6 in acetonitrile solvent and Cluster-Continuum calculation of the solvation free energy of Cu(I), Ag(I) and Li(I). Journal of Molecular Liquids 2022, 359 , 119368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2022.119368
  28. Xuerui Ma, Robert P. Davies. Tartramide Ligands for Copper‐Catalyzed N‐Arylation at Room Temperature. Advanced Synthesis & Catalysis 2022, 364 (12) , 2023-2031. https://doi.org/10.1002/adsc.202200174
  29. Achille Antenucci, Stefano Dughera. C-N, C-O and C-S Ullmann-Type Coupling Reactions of Arenediazonium o-Benzenedisulfonimides. Reactions 2022, 3 (2) , 300-311. https://doi.org/10.3390/reactions3020022
  30. Josefredo R. Pliego Jr. QM/MM and molecular dynamics simulation of the structure and dissociation of CuF in acetonitrile solvent. Chemical Physics Letters 2022, 793 , 139468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2022.139468
  31. Sneha Prasad Bakare, Mahendra Patil. Thiolate-assisted copper( i ) catalyzed C–S cross coupling of thiols with aryl iodides: scope, kinetics and mechanism. New Journal of Chemistry 2022, 46 (13) , 6283-6295. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2NJ00043A
  32. Alexander Haydl, Arne Geissler, Dino Berthold. Metal-Catalyzed Amination: C N Bond Formation. 2022, 294-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820206-7.00091-3
  33. Majid Rouzifar, Sara Sobhani, Alireza Farrokhi, José Miguel Sansano. Fe-MIL-101 modified by isatin-Schiff-base-Co: a heterogeneous catalyst for C–C, C–O, C–N, and C–P cross coupling reactions. New Journal of Chemistry 2021, 45 (42) , 19963-19976. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1NJ03468E
  34. Milena Simic, Predrag Jovanovic, Milos Petkovic, Gordana Tasic, Milos Jovanovic, Vladimir Savic. Toward the synthesis of incargranine B and seneciobipyrrolidine. Synthesis of octahydro‐dipyrroloquinoline skeleton via dipolar cycloaddition/amination sequence. Journal of Heterocyclic Chemistry 2021, 58 (8) , 1665-1674. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhet.4303
  35. Mickael Choury, Gaëlle Blond, Mihaela Gulea. A Synthetic Route to Benzothiazocines with Two or Three Carbon Stereocenters via Copper‐Catalyzed Intramolecular N‐Arylation. European Journal of Organic Chemistry 2021, 2021 (15) , 2203-2211. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejoc.202100305
  36. Fengtian Wu, Jianwei Xie, Zhiqiang Zhu. 1,10‐Phenanthroline: A versatile ligand to promote copper‐catalyzed cascade reactions. Applied Organometallic Chemistry 2020, 34 (11) https://doi.org/10.1002/aoc.5926
  37. Jiao Gui, Haisheng Xie, Fengjuan Chen, Zhipeng Liu, Xiaoqi Zhang, Fubin Jiang, Wei Zeng. Brønsted acid/visible-light-promoted Markovnikov hydroamination of vinylarenes with arylamines. Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry 2020, 18 (5) , 956-963. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9OB02457C
  38. Kamlesh K. Gurjar, Rajendra K. Sharma. Synthetic and computational studies on CuI/ligand pair promoted activation of C(Aryl)-Cl bond in C–N coupling reactions. Heliyon 2020, 6 (2) , e03233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03233
  39. Jun Jiang, Jianjun Li. Mechanically Induced N ‐arylation of Amines with Diaryliodonium Salts. ChemistrySelect 2020, 5 (2) , 542-548. https://doi.org/10.1002/slct.201904188
  40. Viktor M Tkachuk, Oleh O Lukianov, Mykhailo V Vovk, Isabelle Gillaizeau, Volodymyr A Sukach. Chan–Evans–Lam N 1-(het)arylation and N 1-alkеnylation of 4-fluoroalkylpyrimidin-2(1 H )-ones. Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry 2020, 16 , 2304-2313. https://doi.org/10.3762/bjoc.16.191
  41. Yan Li, Ruhui Shi, Weiwei Lin, Haiyang Cheng, Chao Zhang, Masahiko Arai, Fengyu Zhao. A green and recyclable ligand-free copper (I) catalysis system for amination of halonitrobenzenes in aqueous ammonia solution. Molecular Catalysis 2019, 475 , 110462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcat.2019.110462
  42. Alejandra Dominguez‐Huerta, Inna Perepichka, Chao‐Jun Li. Direct Synthesis of Diphenylamines from Phenols and Ammonium Formate Catalyzed by Palladium. ChemSusChem 2019, 12 (13) , 2999-3002. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.201900928
  43. Quintin A. Lo, David Sale, D. Christopher Braddock, Robert P. Davies. New Insights into the Reaction Capabilities of Ionic Organic Bases in Cu‐Catalyzed Amination. European Journal of Organic Chemistry 2019, 2019 (9) , 1944-1951. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejoc.201900109
  44. Christian D.-T. Nielsen, Jordi Burés. Visual kinetic analysis. Chemical Science 2019, 10 (2) , 348-353. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8SC04698K

ACS Catalysis

Cite this: ACS Catal. 2018, 8, 1, 101–109
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.7b03664
Published November 30, 2017

Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Article Views

9488

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Scheme 1

    Scheme 1. Modified Ullmann Amination Reaction

    Scheme 2

    Scheme 2. Proposed Reaction Mechanism for the Cu-Catalyzed Cross Coupling Reaction between 1 and 2 under Ligand-Free Conditions (33)

    Scheme 3

    Scheme 3. Kinetic Studies on the Ullmann Amination Reaction between 1 and 2 Using Various Auxiliary Ligandsa

    Scheme aInitial reaction rates are shown in red. The initial rate of the auxiliary-ligand-free reaction was 5.2 × 10–3 M min–1.

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Comparison between heat flow and 1H NMR conversions.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Graphical rate equations for experiments using L1, L2, L4, L6, and auxiliary-ligand-free reactions using the conditions shown in Scheme 3.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Graphical rate equations for experiments carried out using the same excess protocol with L1 (top), L4 (middle), and L6 (bottom). See the Supporting Information for full plots.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Graphical rate equations for each sequential reaction with L1.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Normalized graphical rate equations indicating first order in [2] for L4 (top) and L6 (bottom). [e] = “excess” = [1]0 – [2]0. See the Supporting Information for full graphical rate plots.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. Normalized graphical rate equations indicating first order in [Cu]total for L4 (top) and L6 (bottom). Full graphical rate plots are available in the Supporting Information.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Bar chart illustrating the reaction rate at different auxiliary ligand loadings.

    Scheme 4

    Scheme 4. Reaction between 2-(Allyloxy)iodobenzene and Piperidine in the Presence of L1, L2, L4, or L6 To Determine if the Aryl Halide Activation Step Proceeds via Radical Intermediates
  • References


    This article references 56 other publications.

    1. 1
      Ullmann, F. Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 1903, 36, 2382 2384 DOI: 10.1002/cber.190303602174
    2. 2
      Goodbrand, H. B.; Hu, N. X. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64, 670 674 DOI: 10.1021/jo981804o
    3. 3
      Zhang, H.; Cai, Q.; Ma, D. J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 5164 5173 DOI: 10.1021/jo0504464
    4. 4
      Lin, H.; Sun, D. Org. Prep. Proced. Int. 2013, 45, 341 394 DOI: 10.1080/00304948.2013.816208
    5. 5
      Fischer, C.; Koenig, B. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2011, 7, 59 74 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.7.10
    6. 6
      Bedos-Belval, F.; Rouch, A.; Vanucci-Bacqué, C.; Baltas, M. MedChemComm 2012, 3, 1356 1372 DOI: 10.1039/c2md20199b
    7. 7
      Altman, R. A.; Koval, E. D.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 6190 6199 DOI: 10.1021/jo070807a
    8. 8
      Ma, D.; Cai, Q.; Zhang, H. Org. Lett. 2003, 5, 2453 2455 DOI: 10.1021/ol0346584
    9. 9
      Yang, C.-T.; Fu, Y.; Huang, Y.-B.; Yi, J.; Guo, Q.-X.; Liu, L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 7398 7401 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200903158
    10. 10
      Ma, D.; Liu, F. Chem. Commun. 2004, 3, 1934 1935 DOI: 10.1039/b407090a
    11. 11
      Shafir, A.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 8742 8743 DOI: 10.1021/ja063063b
    12. 12
      Shafir, A.; Lichtor, P. A.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 3490 3491 DOI: 10.1021/ja068926f
    13. 13
      Evano, G.; Blanchard, N.; Toumi, M. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 3054 3131 DOI: 10.1021/cr8002505
    14. 14
      Evano, G.; Toumi, M.; Coste, A. Chem. Commun. 2009, 4166 4175 DOI: 10.1039/b905601g
    15. 15
      Ma, D.; Xia, C.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, J.; Tang, W. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 442 451 DOI: 10.1021/jo026125z
    16. 16
      Ma, D.; Zhang, Y.; Yao, J.; Wu, S.; Tao, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 12459 12467 DOI: 10.1021/ja981662f
    17. 17
      Ma, D.; Xia, C.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, J. Org. Lett. 2001, 3, 2189 2191 DOI: 10.1021/ol016043h
    18. 18
      Hartwig, J. F. Acc. Chem. Res. 1998, 31, 852 860 DOI: 10.1021/ar970282g
    19. 19
      Wolfe, J. P.; Wagaw, S.; Marcoux, J.-F.; Buchwald, S. L. Acc. Chem. Res. 1998, 31, 805 818 DOI: 10.1021/ar9600650
    20. 20
      Hartwig, J. F. Pure Appl. Chem. 1999, 71, 1417 1423 DOI: 10.1351/pac199971081417
    21. 21
      Yang, B. H.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Organomet. Chem. 1999, 576, 125 146 DOI: 10.1016/S0022-328X(98)01054-7
    22. 22
      Sperotto, E.; van Klink, G. P. M.; van Koten, G.; de Vries, J. G. Dalt. Trans. 2010, 39, 10338 10351 DOI: 10.1039/c0dt00674b
    23. 23
      Sambiagio, C.; Marsden, S. P.; Blacker, A. J.; McGowan, P. C. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 3525 3520 DOI: 10.1039/C3CS60289C
    24. 24
      Monnier, F.; Taillefer, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 3096 3099 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200703209
    25. 25
      Monnier, F.; Taillefer, M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 6954 6971 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200804497
    26. 26
      Casitas, A.; Ribas, X. Chem. Sci. 2013, 4, 2301 2318 DOI: 10.1039/c3sc21818j
    27. 27
      Gurjar, K. K.; Sharma, R. K. ChemCatChem 2017, 9, 862 869 DOI: 10.1002/cctc.201601174
    28. 28
      Rovira, M.; Jašíková, L.; Andris, E.; Acuña-Parés, F.; Soler, M.; Güell, I.; Wang, M.-Z.; Gómez, L.; Luis, J. M.; Roithová, J.; Ribas, X. Chem. Commun. 2017, 53, 8786 8789 DOI: 10.1039/C7CC04491G
    29. 29
      Blackmond, D. G. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 4302 4320 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200462544
    30. 30
      Blackmond, D. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 10852 10866 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b05841
    31. 31
      Strieter, E. R.; Blackmond, D. G.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 4120 4121 DOI: 10.1021/ja050120c
    32. 32
      Strieter, E. R.; Bhayana, B.; Buchwald, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 78 88 DOI: 10.1021/ja0781893
    33. 33
      Sung, S.; Sale, D.; Braddock, D. C.; Armstrong, A.; Brennan, C.; Davies, R. P. ACS Catal. 2016, 6, 3965 3974 DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.6b00504
    34. 34
      Sherborne, G. J.; Adomeit, S.; Menzel, R.; Rabeah, J.; Brückner, A.; Fielding, M. R.; Willans, C. E.; Nguyen, B. N. Chem. Sci. 2017, 8, 7203 7210 DOI: 10.1039/C7SC02859H
    35. 35
      Ruiz-Castillo, P.; Buchwald, S. L. Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 12564 12649 DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00512
    36. 36
      Zhou, W.; Fan, M.; Yin, J.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 11942 11945 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5b08411
    37. 37
      Fan, M.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. Org. Lett. 2015, 17, 5934 5937 DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.5b03230
    38. 38
      Fan, M.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, D. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 6211 6215 DOI: 10.1002/anie.201601035
    39. 39
      Xia, S.; Gan, L.; Wang, K.; Li, Z.; Ma, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 13493 13496 DOI: 10.1021/jacs.6b08114
    40. 40
      Gao, J.; Bhunia, S.; Wang, K.; Gan, L.; Xia, S.; Ma, D. Org. Lett. 2017, 19, 2809 2812 DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.7b00901
    41. 41
      Pawar, G. G.; Wu, H.; De, S.; Ma, D. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2017, 359, 1631 1636 DOI: 10.1002/adsc.201700026
    42. 42
      Rovira, M.; Soler, M.; Güell, I.; Wang, M.-Z.; Gomez, L.; Ribas, X. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 7315 7325 DOI: 10.1021/acs.joc.6b01035
    43. 43
      Tye, J. W.; Weng, Z.; Johns, A. M.; Incarvito, C. D.; Hartwig, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 9971 9983 DOI: 10.1021/ja076668w
    44. 44
      Tye, J. W.; Weng, Z.; Giri, R.; Hartwig, J. F. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 2185 2189 DOI: 10.1002/anie.200902245
    45. 45
      Cai, Q.; Zhang, H.; Zou, B.; Xie, X.; Zhu, W.; He, G.; Wang, J.; Pan, X.; Chen, Y.; Yuan, Q.; Liu, F.; Lu, B.; Ma, D. Pure Appl. Chem. 2009, 81, 227 234 DOI: 10.1351/PAC-CON-08-08-19
    46. 46
      Kwong, F. Y.; Klapars, A.; Buchwald, S. L. Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 581 584 DOI: 10.1021/ol0171867
    47. 47
      Otto, N.; Opatz, T. Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2012, 8, 1105 1111 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.8.122
    48. 48
      Uma Maheswar Reddy, K.; Santosh Kumar, K.; Panasa Reddy, A. Asian J. Chem. 2014, 26, 4747 4751 DOI: 10.14233/ajchem.2014.16194
    49. 49
      Sung, S.; Braddock, D. C.; Armstrong, A.; Brennan, C.; Sale, D.; White, A. J. P.; Davies, R. P. Chem. - Eur. J. 2015, 21, 7179 7192 DOI: 10.1002/chem.201405699
    50. 50
      He, C.; Zhang, G.; Ke, J.; Zhang, H.; Miller, J. T.; Kropf, A. J.; Lei, A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 488 493 DOI: 10.1021/ja310111p
    51. 51
      Cheng, B.; Yi, H.; He, C.; Liu, C.; Lei, A. Organometallics 2015, 34, 206 211 DOI: 10.1021/om501053k
    52. 52

      Experiments involving higher ligand loadings could not be carried out owing to the poor solubility of amino acids in DMSO at concentrations above 20 mol % at room temperature.

    53. 53
      Rannulu, N. S.; Rodgers, M. T. J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111, 3465 3479 DOI: 10.1021/jp066903h
    54. 54
      Giri, R.; Hartwig, J. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 15860 15863 DOI: 10.1021/ja105695s
    55. 55
      Annunziata, A.; Galli, C.; Marinelli, M.; Pau, T. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 2001, 1323 1329 DOI: 10.1002/1099-0690(200104)2001:7<1323::AID-EJOC1323>3.0.CO;2-C
    56. 56
      Deldaele, C.; Evano, G. ChemCatChem 2016, 8, 1319 1328 DOI: 10.1002/cctc.201501375
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.7b03664.

    • Experimental procedures, experimental and spectroscopic data, full graphs related to the kinetic studies, and details of the kinetic modeling using COPASI (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.