Synlett, Inhaltsverzeichnis Synlett 2024; 35(09): 983-988DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1751527 cluster Chemical Synthesis and Catalysis in Germany Remote Enantioselective Epoxidation Reactions Catalyzed by Chiral Iron Porphyrin Complexes with a Hydrogen-Bonding Site Hussayn Ahmed a Technische Universität München, School of Natural Sciences Department Chemie and Catalysis Research Center (CRC), 85747 Garching, Germany , Alexander Pöthig a Technische Universität München, School of Natural Sciences Department Chemie and Catalysis Research Center (CRC), 85747 Garching, Germany , Khai-Nghi Truong b Rigaku Europe SE, Hugenottenallee 167, 63263 Neu-Isenburg, Germany , Thorsten Bach ∗ a Technische Universität München, School of Natural Sciences Department Chemie and Catalysis Research Center (CRC), 85747 Garching, Germany › Institutsangaben Artikel empfehlen Abstract Artikel einzeln kaufen Alle Artikel dieser Rubrik Abstract Iron porphyrin complexes, which were linked via a para-phenylethynyl group to a chiral scaffold with a lactam binding site, were probed as catalysts in the enantioselective epoxidation of 4-(ω-alkenyl)-quinolones. It was found that the 3-butenyl group in the substrate accounts for the highest enantioselectivity (up to 44% ee) and the absolute configuration of an oxirane product was elucidated by electron diffraction. A two-point hydrogen bond of the substrate to the catalyst is likely responsible for enantioface differentiation at a remote position. The study shows chirality transfer to be possible via four nonstereogenic carbon atoms between the binding site of the substrate and its reactive C=C double bond. Key words Key wordscatalysis - enantioselectivity - epoxidation - iron - porphyrins Volltext Referenzen References and Notes 1a Katsuki T, Sharpless KB. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980; 102: 5974 1b Gao Y, Hanson RM, Klunder JM, Masamune H, Ko SY, Sharpless KB. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1987; 109: 5765 1c Finn MG, Sharpless KB. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991; 113: 113 Reviews: 2a Reek JN. H, de Bruin B, Pullen S, Mooibroek TJ, Kluwer AM, Caumes X. Chem. Rev. 2022; 122: 12308 2b Fanourakis A, Docherty PJ, Chuentragool P, Phipps RJ. ACS Catal. 2020; 10: 10672 2c Proctor RS. J, Colgan AC, Phipps RJ. Nat. Chem. 2020; 12: 990 2d Kuninobu Y, Torigoe T. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2020; 18: 4126 2e Vidal D, Olivo G, Costas M. Chem. Eur. J. 2018; 24: 5042 2f Mote NR, Chikkali SH. Chem. Asian J. 2018; 13: 3623 2g Milan M, Bietti M, Costas M. Chem. Commun. 2018; 54: 9559 For seminal contributions by Breslow and co-workers on remote functionalization, see: 3a Breslow R, Winnik MA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1969; 91: 3083 3b Breslow R. Acc. Chem. Res. 1980; 13: 170 3c Breslow R, Zhang X, Huang Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997; 119: 4535 4 Fanourakis A, Hodson NJ, Lit AR, Phipps RJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2023; 145: 7516 5 Review: Burg F, Bach T. J. Org. Chem. 2019; 84: 8815 Recent studies: 6a Burg F, Gicquel M, Breitenlechner S, Pöthig A, Bach T. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2018; 57: 2953 6b Annapureddy RR, Jandl C, Bach T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2020; 142: 7374 6c Burg F, Breitenlechner S, Jandl C, Bach T. Chem. Sci. 2020; 11: 2121 6d Burg F, Buchelt C, Kreienborg NM, Merten C, Bach T. Org. Lett. 2021; 23: 1829 6e Annapureddy RR, Burg F, Gramüller J, Golub TP, Merten C, Huber SM, Bach T. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2021; 60: 7920 7 Zhong F, Bach T. Chem. Eur. J. 2014; 20: 13522 8a Fackler P, Berthold C, Voss F, Bach T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010; 132: 15911 8b Fackler P, Huber SM, Bach T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012; 134: 12869 For early reports on the topic, see: 9a Groves JT, Nemo TE, Myers RS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1979; 101: 1032 9b Groves JT, Nemo TE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983; 105: 5786 9c Groves JT, Myers RS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983; 105: 5791 9d Mansuy D, Battioni P, Renaud JP, Guerin P. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1985; 155 9e Collman JP, Kodadek T, Raybuck SA, Brauman JI, Papazian LM. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985; 107: 4343 For reviews, see: 10a Ahmad I, Shagufta Shagufta, Rehman S. Tetrahedron 2022; 104: 132604 10b Barona-Castaño JC, Carmona-Vargas CC, Brocksom TJ, de Oliveira KT. Molecules 2016; 21: 310 10c Rose E, Andrioletti B, Zrig S, Quelquejeu-Ethève M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2005; 34: 573 11 Rucareanu S, Mongin O, Schuwey A, Hoyler N, Gossauer A, Amrein W, Hediger HU. J. Org. Chem. 2001; 66: 4973 12a Zaidi SH. H, Fico RM, Lindsey JS. Org. Process Res. Dev. 2006; 10: 118 12b Dogutan DK, Bediako DK, Teets TS, Schwalbe M, Nocera DG. Org. Lett. 2010; 12: 1036 13 Borbas KE, Mroz P, Hamblin MR, Lindsey JS. Bioconjugate Chem. 2006; 17: 638 14 Rebelo SL. H, Silva AM. N, Medforth CJ, Freire C. Molecules 2016; 21: 481 15 Stephenson NA, Bell AT. J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 2007; 275: 54 16 Zwergel C, Czepukojc B, Evain-Bana E, Xu Z, Stazi G, Mori M, Patsilinakos A, Mai A, Botta B, Ragno R, Bagrel D, Kirsch G, Meiser P, Jacob C, Montenarh M, Valante S. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2017; 134: 316 17 Rit RK, Li H, Argent SP, Wheelhouse KM, Woodward S, Lam HW. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2023; 365: 1629 18 Xu D, Kaiser F, Li H, Reich RM, Guo H, Kühn FE. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2019; 17: 49 19 Representative Procedure for the Fe-Catalyzed Epoxidation The iron porphyrin catalyst (0.20 mol%) was dissolved in anhydrous CH2Cl2 (5 mL per 50 μmol substrate) and added to the substrate (1.00 equiv.) in a flame dried Schlenk tube. The solution was stirred for 10 min at 0 °C. PhIO (1.00 equiv.) was added to the reaction solution in one portion, and the resulting reaction suspension was stirred for 4 h at 0 °C. The reaction was stopped by removing the solvent in vacuo, and the crude material was purified by automated column chromatography (MeOH/CH2Cl2 0/100 → 3/97 or EtOAc/hexanes 5/95 → 75/25). Exemplarily, product 10b (3.3 mg, 15.3 μmol, 31%, 44% ee) was obtained from substrate 2b (10.0 mg, 0.05 mmol) and iron porphyrin 5 (114 μg, 0.10 μmol) after purification by automated column chromatography (MeOH/CH2Cl2 0/100 → 3/97) as an off-white solid. 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d 6, 298 K): δ = 11.65 (s, 1 H, NH), 7.77 (dd, 3 J = 8.2 Hz, 4 J = 1.2 Hz, 1 H, H-5), 7.49 (ddd, 3 J = 8.2 Hz, 3 J = 7.1 Hz, 4 J = 1.2 Hz, 1 H, H-7), 7.31 (dd, 3 J = 8.2 Hz, 4 J = 1.2 Hz, 1 H, H-8), 7.20 (ddd, 3 J = 8.2 Hz, 3 J = 7.1 Hz, 3 J = 1.2 Hz, 1 H, H-6), 6.39 (s, 1 H, H-3), 3.07–3.00 (m, 1 H, H-3′), 2.99–2.86 (m, 2 H, H-1′), 2.71 (dd, 2 J = 5.1 Hz, 3 J = 4.0 Hz, 1 H, H-4′), 2.53–2.51 (m, 1 H, H-4′), 1.94–1.83 (m, 1 H, H-2′), 1.82–1.71 (m, 1 H, H-2′) ppm. 13C NMR (126 MHz, DMSO-d 6, 298 K): δ = 162.1 (s, C=O), 151.3 (s, C-4), 139.4 (s, C-8a), 130.7 (d, C-7), 124.8 (d, C-5), 122.2 (d, C-6), 120.6 (d, C-3), 119.1 (s, C-7a), 116.2 (d, C-8), 51.6 (d, C-3′), 46.7 (t, C-4′), 31.8 (t, C-2′), 28.2 (t, C-1′). Chiral HPLC: 44% ee [©CHIRALPAK AD-H 250 × 4.6 mm, 20 °C, 10% i-PrOH/n-heptane, 1 mL/min, 210 nm, t R = 26.1 min (major), t R = 27.7 min (minor). 20 Ito S, White FJ, Okunishi E, Aoyama Y, Yamano A, Sato H, Ferrara JD, Jasnowski M, Meyer M. CrystEngComm 2021; 23: 8622 21a Truong K.-N, Ito S, Wojciechowski JM, Göb CR, Schürmann CJ, Yamano A, Del Campo M, Okunishi E, Aoyama Y, Mihira T, Hosogi N, Benet-Buchholz J, Escudero-Adán EC, White FJ, Ferrara JD, Bücker R. Symmetry 2023; 15: 1555 21b Klar PB, Krysiak Y, Xu H, Steciuk G, Cho J, Zou X, Palatinus L. Nat. Chem. 2023; 15: 848 Zusatzmaterial Zusatzmaterial Supporting Information
