Abstract

Efficient optimization procedures in chiral catalysis are usually linked to a straightforward strategy to access groups of structurally similar catalysts required for fine-tuning. The ease of building up such ligand libraries can be increased when the structure-modifying step (introduction of a substituent) is done at a later stage of the synthesis. This is demonstrated for the extended family of di- and tetranaphtho azepinium compounds, widely used as chiral phase transfer catalysts (PTC). Using 2,6-diiodo-4,5-dihydro-3H-dinaphtho[2,1-c:1′,2′-e]azepine and 4,8-diiodo-6,7-dihydro-5H-dibenzo[c,e]azepine, respectively, as key intermediates, 18 spiro-azepinium compounds were synthesized in a total yield of 25–42% over 6–7 steps from 1,1′-binaphthyl-2,2′-dicarboxylic acid or diphenic acid, respectively. The replacement of iodo groups with aryl substituents was performed as the last or the penultimate step of the synthesis.

Highlights

  • For the practical application of organocatalytic transformations, an economic access to libraries of potentially useful catalysts is essential

  • Retrosynthetic analysis revealed that the economy of accessing azepinium compounds could be improved when structures C and D with X = I, Br were chosen as key intermediates (Scheme 2)

  • Intermediate 7, which is available in four steps from 6 [21] using an improved procedure for the last step, was cyclized to azepinium salts 5A–C or diiodoazepine 8

Read more

Summary

Introduction

For the practical application of organocatalytic transformations, an economic access to libraries of potentially useful catalysts is essential. The published syntheses from 2,20 -dihydroxy-1,10 -binaphthalene required in total 13 to 17 steps [15] with the introduction of 3,30 -aryl substituents in the third, fifth or tenth step of the linear sequence (8 or 12 steps) This in turn means that for each individual catalyst. Retrosynthetic analysis revealed that the economy of accessing azepinium compounds could be improved when structures C and D with X = I, Br were chosen as key intermediates (Scheme 2). This would allow the introduction of variable N-substituents at a late stage, just before attaching aromatic groups at C-3 and C-30 .

Results and Discussion
General Considerations
Synthesis
X-ray Analysis
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.