Key words
C–H functionalization - pyridotriazoles - acrylates
Transition-metal-catalyzed C–H bond activation has emerged as a new tool in organic synthesis for the functionalization of arenes.[1] In general, selective C–H functionalization is controlled by the directing/functional groups present on the substrates. Therefore, the use of directing groups by transition-metal-catalyzed C–H functionalization has aroused much attention in recent years.[2] Directing groups such as carboxyl,[3] carbonyl,[4] cyano,[5] and hydroxyl[6] are well-known for various transition-metal-catalyzed C–H functionalizations of arenes.
Pyridotriazole is an important scaffold in organic chemistry and plays an important role in several transition-metal-catalyzed denitrogenative transannelation reactions to generate diverse heterocycles.[7]
[8] However, to the best of our knowledge, C–H alkenylation reaction using the pyridotriazole as a directing group to form C(sp2)–C(sp2) bonds has never been attempted. In continuation of our works on the transannelation of pyridotriazoles,[8] we herein describe the ruthenium-catalyzed regioselective alkenylation of pyridotriazoles (Scheme [1]).
Scheme 1 Alkenylation of pyridotriazoles
Initially, we focused on the optimization of reaction conditions for the selective alkenylation of pyridotriazole 1a with 2a in the presence of [RuCl2(p-cymene)]2 (5 mol%) as the catalyst with 2.0 equiv. of potassium acetate at 140 °C in 1,4-dioxane (1 mL) for 36 h (Table [1]). Under these conditions, a trace amount of product 3a formation was observed (entry 1). With Cu(OAc)2 (0.5 equiv.) as an additive in the absence of base, 20% yield of 3a was obtained (entry 2).
Table 1 Optimization of Reaction Conditions for 3a
a
|
Entry
|
Catalyst
(5 mol%)
|
Additive
(equiv.)
|
Base
(equiv.)
|
Solvent
(1 mL)
|
Yield (%)b
|
1
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
–
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
trace
|
2
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
–
|
1,4-dioxane
|
20
|
3
|
–
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
nr
|
4
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
42
|
5
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
DCE
|
nr
|
6
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
toluene
|
nr
|
7
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
DMF
|
nr
|
8
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
DMSO
|
nr
|
9
|
Pd(OAc)2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
26
|
10
|
PdI2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
20
|
11
|
Co(OAc)2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
nr
|
12
|
Ni(acac)2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (0.5)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
nr
|
13
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (1.0)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
53
|
14
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
Cu(OAc)2 (2.0)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
62
|
15
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
ZnCl2 (2.0)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
36
|
16
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
FeCl3 (2.0)
|
KOAc (2.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
73
|
17
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
FeCl3 (2.0)
|
KOAc (1.0)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
90
|
18
|
[RuCl2(p-cymene)]2
|
FeCl3 (2.0)
|
KOAc (0.5)
|
1,4-dioxane
|
74
|
a Conditions: 1a (0.25 mmol), 2a (0.5 mmol), catalyst, additive, base, solvent (1 mL), in an oil bath at 140 ℃ for 24 h.
b Isolated yield.
When the reaction was performed without any catalyst, no product formation was observed (entry 3). When the reaction was performed with 5 mol% [RuCl2(p-cymene)]2, 0.5 equiv. of Cu(OAc)2, and 2.0 equiv. of KOAc, a 42% yield of 3a was obtained after 48 h (entry 4). After screening various solvents (DCE, toluene, DMF, and DMSO) as well as different catalysts (Co, Ni, and Pd) either no reaction or no improvement in yield was observed (entries 5–12). On increasing the amount of additive Cu(OAc)2, to one and two equivalents, the yield of the product was increased to 62% (entries 13 and 14). Performing the reaction with two equivalents of ZnCl2 and FeCl3 as additives 36% and 73% yields of desired product were obtained, respectively (entries 15 and 16). With FeCl3 as additive, the amount of base (KOAc) was decreased to 1.0 equiv., and under these conditions the desired product 3a was obtained in 90% yield (entry 17). On decreasing the base to 0.5 equiv. the yield was reduced to 74% (entry 18). The best yield of 3a was thus obtained under the conditions of entry 17; hence these parameters were set as optimum for further alkenylations of pyridotriazoles with different acrylates (Table [1]).
With this set of optimized conditions, the C–H functionalization of 3-phenyl[1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine (1a) with different acrylates was examined (Scheme [2]).
Scheme 2 Substrate scope of triazolo[1,5-a]pyridines. Reagents and conditions: 1a (0.25 mmol), 2 (0.5 mmol), catalyst (5 mol%), additive (2.0 equiv.), base (1.0 equiv.), solvent (1 mL), in an oil bath, isolated yield.
Acrylates bearing Me, Et, and Bu groups at the terminal position reacted smoothly with 3-phenyl-[1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine (1a) to afford the corresponding alkenylated products 3a–c in good to excellent yields (72–90%). The reaction of methyl methacrylate also gave the corresponding functionalized product 3d in good yield (87%). Other acrylates such as 2-methoxyethyl acrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl (Z)-but-2-enoate, and 2,2,2-trifluoroethyl acrylate reacted well under the optimized conditions and afforded the corresponding products 3e–g in good to excellent yields (70–90%). Under the same conditions, 3-[(allyloxy)methyl]heptane and acrylonitrile afforded the corresponding products 3h and 3i in 91% and 67% yields, respectively. As is evident from the yields of products 3f–i, effects associated with electron-donating or electron-withdrawing substituents on the acrylate moiety do not affect the efficiency of the transformation.
This transformation is not limited to the 3-phenyl[1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine (1a); indeed, the triazole bearing a chlorine substituent at the 4-position of the phenyl ring 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-[1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine (1b) proved to be amenable to this procedure under the same optimized conditions. Similar reactivities of a range of acrylates were observed with 1b and afford the differently functionalized products 4a–h in good yields ranging from 65–88% (Scheme [3]).
Scheme 3 Substrate scope with 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-[1,2,3]triazolo[1,5-a]pyridine. Reagents and conditions: 1b (0.25 mmol), 2 (0.5 mmol), catalyst (5 mol%), additive (2.0 equiv.), base (1.0 equiv.), solvent (1 mL), in carousel reaction station, 48 h, isolated yield.
To gain insight into the reaction mechanism, some control experiments were performed (Scheme [4]). Initially, the reaction was conducted by the addition of the radical scavenger TEMPO under the optimized conditions to establish whether the reaction proceeds via a radical or ionic pathway (Scheme [4a]). Under these conditions, no adduct formation was observed, indicating that the reaction does not proceed through a radical pathway. However, 2-benzoyl pyridine (5) was observed as a side product. To establish possible intermediates, 2-benzylpyridine (6) was reacted with 2a under the standard conditions, but the expected product 3a was not observed (Scheme [4b]). Furthermore, when 2-benzoylpyridine (5) was reacted with 2a under the same conditions, it did not yield 3a (Scheme [4c]). These two reactions (Scheme [4b] and c) suggest that both 5 and 6 are not intermediates in the reaction pathway.
Scheme 4 Control experiments
Based on the control experiments and literature reports,[9] a plausible reaction mechanism is proposed (Scheme [5]). Initially, [RuCl2(p-cymene)]2 in the presence of base (KOAc) generates the active Ru(II) species A, which upon coordination with a nitrogen of the pyridotriazole ring and subsequent ligand-assisted C–H ruthenation via intermediate B gives the ruthenacyclic intermediate C.
Scheme 5 Plausible reaction mechanism
Coordination of the Ru center of C with the addition of the alkene leads to the ruthenacyclic intermediate D that, followed by β-hydride elimination, gives the desired alkenylated products 3/4.
In conclusion, we have developed a ruthenium-catalyzed regioselective C–H alkenylation of pyridotriazoles with a range of acrylates.[10] Different acrylates bearing Me, Et, Bu, trifluoroethyl, 2-methoxyethyl acrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl (Z)-but-2-enoate, 3-((allyloxy)methyl)heptane, and acrylonitrile reacted smoothly and afforded the corresponding products in good yields. Control experiments suggest that the reaction proceeds through an ionic pathway.