Calculated energy differences between cis- and trans- fused bicyclic ketones are provided for bicyclo(3.3.0)octanones, bi- cyclo(4.3.0)nonanones, bicyclo(5.3.0)decanones, bicyclo(6.3.0)un- decanones and the corresponding hydrocarbons with and without angular methyl groups. The calculations were performed for HF/6- 31G* and MP2/6-31G* optimized geometries. The latter were used for subsequent single-point energy MP2/6-311G* calculations. Whenever possible, the calculated energy differences were com- pared with experimental data and found to correspond well. The results of the calculations provide a complete picture of expected energetic differences in bicyclic ketone series and will be useful in both instruction and synthetic planning. Anyone who has ever taught a course on natural product synthesis has had a need to illustrate conformational equi- libria relationships and energy differences in cis- and trans-fused ring systems. The latter topic becomes very relevant in discussions of strategy and tactics of design in terpene total synthesis. Intuitively, most of us are aware that bicyclo(3.3.0)octanes prefer cis fusion by a sufficient energy margin to obviate any need for concern in synthet- ic sequences that are subject to thermodynamic control. With larger rings this situation becomes less clear and in the area of perhydroazulene terpenoid synthesis, for ex- ample, the energetic differences between cis- and trans- fused ketones are such that stereospecific construction of either diastereomer poses serious problems in situations where bridge enolization occurs. In the bicyclo(4.3.0)de- canes placement of a carbonyl next to the ring junction is almost always required for introduction of further substit- uents and is frequently introduced to such a position by ring expansion, ring contraction, or cycloaddition tactics. Mixtures of diastereomers result in thermodynamically controlled processes or through further manipulation of products and serious tactical obstacles must be overcome in maintaining stereocontrolled preparation of targets. The primary literature, as well as monographs that focus on stereochemistry, cover the energetics of ring fusion to some extent. However, the data is relatively diffused throughout the published work in physical organic chem- istry and, to our knowledge, no single publication offers a comparative view of the commonly encountered ring sys- tems. Some attempts at discussion of this topic have been made in Mundy's book 2 and in Eliel's stereochemistry text 3 but most available data is dispersed throughout the primary literature. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide calculated energy differences of bicyclo(m.3.0)alkanones as iso- meric pairs with respect to the ring fusion. Whenever available, the calculations are compared with experimen- tal data from the literature for either the ketone or the parent hydrocarbon or both. It is hoped that this compila- tion is of equal use to instructors as it is to practitioners of synthesis. The calculated energies and their differences are present- ed in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, and Table 4. Table 1 Energy Differences between cis- and trans- Bicyclo(3.3.0)octanes, cis- and trans-Bicyclo(3.3.0)octan-1-ones, and their Angularly Methylated Derivatives 8
Read full abstract