A new reaction between E-cinnamaldehyde and phenyllithium. Mechanistic studies

Abstract

The reaction of phenyllithium (in excess) with E-cinnamaldehyde gives a surprising tandem addition β-alkylation, which can be successfully used for the synthesis of substituted dihydrochalcones. The mechanism by which these unexpected reactions could occur is unknown and experimental and theoretical studies were carried out as a contribution to its understanding.

The observed concentration effects, the surprising changes in the product distribution upon changes in the reaction conditions, the haptomeric structure of the calculated intermediates and the calculated activation energies are consistent with a reaction pathway in which dimeric phenyllithium attacks the E-cinnamaldehyde without prior deaggregation. Solvated structures were also calculated using a “dielectric continuum” model for solvent effects.

References

1. K. Bergander, R. He, N. Chandrakumar, O. Eppers and H. Günther, Tetrahedron, 1994, 50, 5861.
2. N. S. Nudelman, Carbonylation of Main-Group Organometallic Compounds, in The Chemistry of Double Bonded Functional Groups, ed. S. Patai and Z. Rappoport, Wiley, Chichester, 1989, ch. 13, and references therein.
3. N. J. R. v. Eikema Hommes and P. v. R. Schleyer, Tetrahedron, 1994, 50, 5903.
4. N. S. Nudelman, E. Lewcowicz and J. Furlong, J. Org. Chem., 1993, 58, 1847.
5. W. Bauer and D. Seebach, Helv. Chim. Acta, 1984, 67, 1972.
6. O. Eppers and H. Günther, Helv. Chim. Acta, 1992, 75, 2553.
7. W. Bauer, W. R. Winchester and P. v. R. Schleyer, Organometallics, 1987, 6, 2371.
8. P. P. Power and H. Hope, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1983, 119, 5320.
9. R. J. Wehmschulte and P. P. Power, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1997, 119, 2847.
10. N. S. Nudelman, H. Schulz, G. G. Liñares, A. Bonatti and G. Boche, Organometallics, 1998, 17, 146.
11. N. S. Nudelman, G. V. García and H. G. Schulz, J. Org. Chem., 1998, 63, 5730.
12. N. S. Nudelman, H. G. Schulz and G. V. García, J. Phys. Org. Chem., 1998, 11, 722.
13. (a) K. Gregory, P. v. R. Schleyer and R. Snaith, Adv. Inorg. Chem., 1991, 37, 47; (b) P. G. Williard, Q.-Y. Liu and L. Lochmann, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 11003; (c) A. Sekiguchi, Y. Sugai, K. Ebata, C. Kabuto and H. Sakurai, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1993, 115, 1144; (d) D. R. Armstrong, M. G. Davidson, R. P. Davies, H. J. Mitchell, R. M. Oakley, P. R. Raithby and S. Warren, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1996, 35, 1942.
14. R. P. Davies, P. R. Raithby and R. Snaith, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1997, 36, 1215.
15. The PM3 method was also used, but the results correlate better with the MNDO calculations.
16. W. Zarges, M. Marsch, K. Harms and G. Boche, Chem. Ber., 1989, 122, 2303.
17. (a) W. N. Setzer and P. v. R. Schleyer, Adv. Inorg. Chem., 1985, 24, 353; (b) G. A. Suñer, P. M. Deyá and J. M. Saá, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1990, 112, 1467; (c) J. M. Saá, P. Ballester, P. M. Deyá, M. Capó and X. Garcías, J. Org. Chem., 1996, 61, 1035.
18. MNDO: M. J. S. Dewar and W. Thiel, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1977, 99, 4899.
19. MOPAC 97 Fujitsu Limited, Cambridge Soft Corporation, 875 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
20. Lithium parameters for MNDO: taken from MNDOC by W. Thiel, QCPE, 1982, 438, vol. 2, p. 63.
21. (a) E. Kauffmann, K. Raghavachari, A. Reed and P. v. R. Schleyer, Organometallics, 1988, 7, 1597; (b) R. Glaser and A. Streitweiser, J. Org. Chem., 1989, 54, 5491.
22. (a) J. W. Bausch, P. S. Gregory, G. A. Olah, G. K. Prakasch, P. v. R. Schleyer and G. A. Segal, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1989, 111, 3633; (b) L. A. Paquette, W. Bauer, M. R. Sivik, M. Bühl, M. Feigel and P. v. R. Schleyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1990, 112, 8776; (c) W. Bauer, G. A. O'Doherty, P. v. R. Schleyer and L. A. Paquette, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 7093; (d) J. M. Saá, P. M. Deyá, G. A. Suñer and A. Frontera, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 9093; (e) F. E. Romesberg and D. B. Collum, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1994, 116, 9187; (f) J. M. Saá, J. Morey, A. Frontera and P. M. Deyá, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995, 117, 1105.
23. W. Bauer, G. A. O'Doherty, P. v. R. Schleyer and L. Paquette, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 7093.
24. R. Glaser and A. Streitwieser, J. Mol. Struct. (THEOCHEM), 1988, 163, 19.
25. J. W. McIver and A. Komornicki, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1972, 94, 2625.
26. (a) E. C. Ashby, Tetrahedron Lett., 1982, 23, 2273; (b) A.-C. Malmvik, U. Obenius and U. Henriksson, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, 1986, 1905.
27. (a) N. S. Nudelman, F. Doctorovich, G. Garcia Liñares, H. Schulz and S. Mendiara, Gazz. Chim. Ital., 1996, 126, 19; (b) N. S. Nudelman and F. Doctorovich, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, 1994, 1233; (c) F. Doctorovich and N. S. Nudelman, Magn. Reson. Chem., 1990, 28, 576.
28. The reactions were carried out in more concentrated solutions, [PhLi]=[1]= 0.2 M, and under these conditions the existence of 5 can be appreciated.
29. J. F. McGarrity and C. A. Ogle, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1984, 107, 1805.
30. (a) T. Koizumi, K. Morihashi and O. Kikuchi, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn., 1996, 69, 305; (b) T. Koizumi and O. Kikuchi, Organometallics, 1995, 14, 987; (c) D. Seebach, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1990, 29, 1320; (d) E. Kauffman and P. v. R. Schleyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1985, 107, 5560.
31. W. Bauer, W. R. Winchester and P. v. R. Schleyer, Organometallics, 1987, 6, 2371.
32. We carried out the semiempirical studies with MNDO and PM3. Both methods gave us similar geometrical results but dissimilar relative energies. The previous successful use of MNDO for calculations of very closely related structures (cinnamyl and aryl derivatives, see references 16(b) and (c)) led us to take the decision to present only the MNDO results.
33. COSMO (conductor-like screening model) evaluates the solvent screening energy for a cavity based on the solvent-accessible surfaces for a charge distribution derived from a distributed multipole analysis: A. Klamt and G. Schüürmann, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, 1993, 799.
34. The calculated alternative pathways were: (a) attack of monomeric PhLi and similar rearrangement with a [1,2]-hydride shift; (b) previous deaggregation of dimer PhLi and attack followed by the [1,2]-hydride rearrangement (c) addition of PhLi followed by attack of a second lithium with [1,2]-hydride shift and (d) attack of dimer PhLi with H shift from the carbonyl C to O. Options (a) and (b) seem attractive but the energetic changes in these options were unfavorable.
35. E. Kauffmann, J. Gose and P. v. R. Schleyer, Organometallics, 1989, 8, 2577.
36. This η³ arrangement with the lithium atom coordinately bonded to the benzylic C, C ipso, and C ortho, is also observed in the X-ray structure of benzyllithium, in S. P. Patterman, I. L. Karle and G. D. Stucky, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1970, 92, 1150.
37. We thank one of the referees for this comment.
38. J. March, Advanced Organic Chemistry, Reactions, Mechanisms and Structure, 4th edn., Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1992, ch. 18.
39. For a number of previous calculations in which discrete solvation was used see: (a) J. F. Remenar, B. L. Lucht and D. B. Collum, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1997, 119, 5567; (b) A. Abbotto, A. Streitwieser and P. v. R. Schleyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1997, 119, 11255; (c) F. E. Romesberg and D. B. Collum, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 2112 (d) refs. 17(b), 21(d).
40. Other “dielectric continuum” models are: (a) G. P. Ford and B. Wang, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 10563; (b) C. J. Cramer and D. G. Truhlar, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 8305; (c) H. S. Rzepa, M. M. Yi, M. M. Karelson and M. C. Zerner, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2, 1991, 635; (d) A. R. Katritzky and M. J. Karelson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 1561.
41. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, ed. David R. Lide, CRC Boca Raton, New York, 78th edn., 1997.
42. The reaction of 2 equivalents of PhLi with 2, at 20 °C in THF gives only 79% of 5 and 21% of 4.
43. (a) S. Klein, I. Marek, J. F. Poisson and J. F. Normant, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995, 117, 8853; (b) S. Norsikian, I. Marek, J. F. Poisson and J. F. Normant, J. Org. Chem., 1997, 62, 4898.