Home Palladium complexes of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes derived from sydnones in catalysis
Article Publicly Available

Palladium complexes of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes derived from sydnones in catalysis

  • Ana-Luiza Lücke , Sascha Wiechmann , Tyll Freese , Zong Guan and Andreas Schmidt EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: April 1, 2016
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The anion of N-phenylsydnone, which can be generated on treatment of N-phenylsydnone with cyanomethyllithium without decomposition, can be represented as tripolar zwitterionic and as anionic N-heterocyclic carbene resonance forms. Its palladium complex was prepared from 4-bromo-3-phenylsydnone and tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium and proved to be active as catalyst in Suzuki-Miyaura reactions. Thus, 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene was effectively converted into 2,5-diaryl-3,4-dinitrothiophenes with 1-naphthyl, (4-trifluoromethoxy)phenyl, [4-(methylsulfanyl)phenyl], and biphenyl-4-yl boronic acid. 3-(Phenanthren-9-yl)quinoline was prepared by Suzuki-Miyaura reaction starting from 3-bromoquinoline. 1-Chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene cross-coupled with phenyl boronic acid, 1-naphthyl boronic acid, 9-phenanthryl boronic acid. 4-Bromobenzylic alcohol gave (4-isopropylphenyl)methanol on sydnone-palladium complex-catalyzed reaction with isopropyl boronic acid.

1 Introduction

Sydnones presumably are the most prominent of all mesomeric betaines. They not only are versatile 1,3-dipoles in cycloaddition reactions, but they also constitute a class of compounds of considerable pharmacological interest [13]. Sydnones have an interesting history. The parent compound N-phenylsydnone was first prepared in 1935 by Earl and Mackney [4] in Sydney by reaction of N-nitroso-N-phenyl-glycine (1) with acetic anhydride. Although structure I was allotted to the reaction product, Eade and Earl [5] stated in 1946 that “the originally prepared structure is still in doubt and that they are therefore referred to as ‘sydnones’”. Sydnones were later shown not to have the originally proposed bicyclic structure I, but the structure of 1,2,3-oxadiazolium-5-olates 2, in which all resonance forms are dipolar or tetrapolar [68] (Scheme 1). The adjective “mesoionic” was suggested as a consequence. As early as 1955, Katritzky [9] pointed out inconsistencies found in the literature concerning representations and suggested that the ± representation as shown in structures II and III, as well as the description “mesoionic” should be discontinued. He suggested the term “mesomeric betaine” as general term, which has indeed been accepted as the name of the entire compound class today. Among the numerous dipolar and tetrapolar resonance forms of sydnones, representation 2A is the most common, although it does neither reflect the spectroscopic properties nor the calculated or experimentally determined bond lengths [10]. With respect to this, the canonical form 2B seems to be more appropriate, whereas representation IV emphasizes single-, double-, and partial double-bond characters of sydnones [11]. Concerning the spectroscopic properties, carbonyl stretching frequencies of sydnones that correspond to an exocyclic C=O double bond are also in agreement with canonical form 2B [10].

Scheme 1: Synthesis of N-phenylsydnone and some representations, among them the historic structure proposal I.
Scheme 1:

Synthesis of N-phenylsydnone and some representations, among them the historic structure proposal I.

As an extension of an earlier system, Ramsden [12] published a new classification system for mesomeric betaines in 2013 that is based on a matrix-connectivity approach and is supported by calculations [13, 14]. As a consequence, the originally proposed classes of conjugated (CMB), cross-conjugated (CCMB), and pseudo-cross-conjugated heterocyclic mesomeric betaines (PCCMB) [1517] have been expanded by the classes of semi-conjugated and pseudo-semi-conjugated mesomeric betaines [12] (Fig. 1). Sydnones belong to type A mesoionic compounds that form the subgroup of several five-membered systems of conjugated heterocyclic mesomeric betaines (CMB) [18, 19] or to class 1B of the new classification [12].

Fig. 1: Classification system of heterocyclic mesomeric betaines according to Ramsden (2013/1985) and categorization of mesoionic compounds.
Fig. 1:

Classification system of heterocyclic mesomeric betaines according to Ramsden (2013/1985) and categorization of mesoionic compounds.

The definition of CMB is as follows: “Conjugated heterocyclic mesomeric betaines are cyclic mesomeric betaines in which the positive and negative charges are not restricted to separate parts of the π-electron system of the molecule. The positive and negative charges are in mutual conjugation and both are associated with the common conjugated π-electron system of the molecule” [15]. The following are the characteristic features: Sydnones are constructed of the 1,3-dipole azomethin-imine (V) and carbon dioxide (Fig. 2). In the dipolar resonance forms, sites for positive and negative charges exist (VI). They are isoconjugated to even, non-alternant hydrocarbon dianions VII. Mesoionic compounds of type A are constructed of atoms a–f, which contribute electrons to the system as indicated by the superscripts (VIII).

Fig. 2: Characteristic features of sydnones.
Fig. 2:

Characteristic features of sydnones.

The chemistry of sydnones has not been associated with the chemistry of N-heterocyclic carbenes so far, although their lithium adducts have been used for years in the synthesis of heterocycles and in metal-organic chemistry [2023]. In fact, sydnones form highly moisture sensitive anions on deprotonation, which can be represented by tripolar resonance forms such as IX and X and as anionic heterocyclic carbenes XI [10] (Scheme 2). We have found that cyanomethyllithium is a suitable base to generate sydnone anions without decomposition [10].

Scheme 2: Generation of sydnone anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes.
Scheme 2:

Generation of sydnone anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes.

Heteroaromatic tripoles are not necessarily carbenes [2426], but sydnone anions supplement the relatively new family of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes such as imidazol-2-yliden-4-olate 4 [2729], imidazol-2-yliden-4-aminide 5 [30], and imidazol-2-yliden-1-indolate 6 [3133], all of which are derivatives of conjugated mesomeric betaines (Scheme 3). The anionic N-heterocyclic carbene 7 was formed on deprotonation of a cross-conjugated heterocyclic mesomeric betaine [34, 35]. In addition, some formal trapping products of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes have been described [36, 37]. Among the anionic NHCs shown in Scheme 3, the sydnone anion has the strongest negative partial charge on the carbene center [10]. The first review dealing with the interesting area of overlap between the classes of N-heterocyclic carbenes and mesomeric betaines summarizes the results achieved thus far [38].

Scheme 3: Some members of the family of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes.
Scheme 3:

Some members of the family of anionic N-heterocyclic carbenes.

We report here on a palladium complex of the N-phenylsydnone anion that is catalytically active in transition metal catalyzed cross-coupling reactions.

2 Results and discussion

The palladium complexes of N-phenylsydnone and 5-ethoxy-3-phenyl-1,2,3-oxadiazolium tetrafluoroborate (O-ethylsydnone) were prepared starting from 4-bromo-3-phenylsydnone (8) and 4-bromo-5-ethoxy-3-phenyl-1,2,3-oxadiazolium tetrafluoroborate (10) and tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium in THF at room temperature, respectively, according to own procedures [10] and those of others [39] (Scheme 4). 31P NMR spectra showed that the sydnone palladium complex 9 and the O-ethylsydnone palladium complex 11 were formed as 93.5:6.5 and 100:16 mixtures of trans- and cis-isomers under these conditions, respectively. Upon warming to 90°C, the cis-isomer of 9 is transformed to the trans-isomer, so that only one 31P NMR signal could be observed at δ = 21.3 ppm.

Scheme 4: Synthesis of the palladium complexes 9 and 11.
Scheme 4:

Synthesis of the palladium complexes 9 and 11.

To test the catalytical properties, we first performed Suzuki-Miyaura reactions on 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene with phenylboronic acid and compared four catalyst systems (Scheme 5). Reactions under catalysis of tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium (catalyst I) as well as a mixture of N-phenylsydnone and tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium (catalyst II) gave high yields of 2,5-dibromo-3,4-diphenylthiophene (Scheme 5). The palladium complex of N-phenylsydnone (catalyst III), which we used as a mixture of trans- and cis-isomers as described above, gave even better yields under analogous reaction conditions. We also tested this reaction under catalysis of the pure trans-isomer of the palladium complex 9 and obtained identical yields of the coupling product, i.e. 96% of 13. The palladium complex of O-ethylsydnone (catalyst IV) resulted in the formation of very similar yields under identical reaction conditions. Thiophene 13 has been prepared before as starting material for the preparation of dyes for organic light-emitting diodes [40]. It was synthesized by cross-coupling tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium and potassium carbonate in a mixture of methanol and toluene over a period of 8 h at reflux temperature in 37% yield [41]. An alternative procedure was published that uses 1,2-dimethoxyethane as solvent to give 80% yield of 13 [42].

Scheme 5: A catalyst screening for Suzuki-Miyaura cross-couplings.
Scheme 5:

A catalyst screening for Suzuki-Miyaura cross-couplings.

Next, we tested the cross-coupling reactions starting from 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene (12) to prepare the sterically more hindered thiophene 14 [10] and the usage of more deactivated boronic acids as reaction partners such as (4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl)boronic acid, which yielded thiophene 15 (Fig. 3). It becomes obvious that the sydnone catalysts (catalysts III and IV) gave better yields than Pd(PPh3)4 (catalyst I) under the conditions outlined in Scheme 5. As catalysts III and IV proved to have a similar activity, we decided to pursue our investigations with catalysts I and III to synthesize thiophenes 16 and 17, respectively. To the best of our knowledge, thiophenes 1517 are new compounds.

Fig. 3: Preparation of thiophenes by cross-coupling reactions: spectroscopic numberings.
Fig. 3:

Preparation of thiophenes by cross-coupling reactions: spectroscopic numberings.

The electron-poor 3-chlorophenylboronic acid converted the thiophene 12 into the corresponding cross-coupled product 18, which is also, to the best of our knowledge, a new compound. In this reaction, we reduced the amount of catalyst to 5 mol%, but we applied a longer reaction time (Scheme 6).

Scheme 6: A cross-coupling of two electron-poor substrates: spectroscopic numbering.
Scheme 6:

A cross-coupling of two electron-poor substrates: spectroscopic numbering.

In the next series of reactions, we reduced the catalyst concentrations successively and chose the cross-coupling of 3-bromoquinoline with phenanthren-9-yl boronic acid as model reaction. We started from a catalyst concentration of 5.0 mol% of the palladium complex of sydnone (catalyst III), which resulted in the formation of 3-(phenanthren-9-yl)quinolone (21) in 90% yield, which decreased slightly with decreasing catalyst concentration as shown in Scheme 7.

Scheme 7: Variation of the catalyst concentration: spectroscopic numbering.
Scheme 7:

Variation of the catalyst concentration: spectroscopic numbering.

In continuation of our project, we applied the sydnone palladium complex catalyst to the electron-poor substrate 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene 22, which was reacted with three different boronic acids. Phenylboronic acid, 1-naphthylboronic acid, and 9-phenanthrylboronic acid were used to prepare the aromatics 23ac in 80%–99% yield as slightly yellowish solids (Scheme 8). The phenyl derivative 23a was described before as reaction product of the Suzuki-Miyaura reaction with 1-iodo-2,4-dinitrobenzene in a yield of 99% [43]. To the best of our knowledge, the compounds 23b, c are new.

Scheme 8: Preparation of aromatics by cross-coupling reactions employing a sydnone-palladium complex: spectroscopic numberings.
Scheme 8:

Preparation of aromatics by cross-coupling reactions employing a sydnone-palladium complex: spectroscopic numberings.

Finally, we tested the coupling of an aliphatic boronic acid with 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene 12 and chose isopropylboronic acid as reaction partner. However, under the conditions applied no reaction took place. By contrast, 4-bromobenzylic alcohol 24 gave the cross-coupled product in almost quantitative yield (Scheme 9). Numerous synthetic procedures for the preparation of (4-isopropylphenyl)methanol 25 exist, among those reductions of the corresponding aldehyde in the presence of iron catalysts [4447] or ruthenium catalysts [48], or by enzymatic oxidation of p-cymene [49, 50]. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first synthesis of 25 by a cross-coupling reaction.

Scheme 9: Coupling with an alkylboronic acid.
Scheme 9:

Coupling with an alkylboronic acid.

In summary, we show that the palladium complex of the N-phenylsydnone anion, which can be represented as anionic N-heterocyclic carbene, is catalytically active in cross-coupling reactions.

3 Experimental section

Bruker Avance 400 MHz and Bruker Avance III 600 MHz instruments were employed to measure the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra. The 1H NMR spectra were recorded at 400 or 600 MHz, and the 13C NMR spectra were recorded at 100 or 150 MHz. The solvent peaks or tetramethylsilane were used as the internal references. Multiplicities are described using the following abbreviations: s = singlet, d = doublet, t = triplet, q = quartet, and m = multiplet. Peak assignments were accomplished using H,H-COSY, HSQC, and HBMC measurements. FT-IR spectra were measured with a Bruker ALPHA spectrometer. A Varian 320 MS Triple Quad GC/MS/MS spectrometer with a Varian 450-GC gas chromatograph was employed to measure the mass spectra, whereas the electrospray ionization mass spectra (ESIMS) were measured with an Agilent LCMSD series HP 1100 with APIES. Samples for ESIMS were dissolved in methanol and sprayed from acetonitrile at 30-V fragmentor voltage unless otherwise noted. Melting points are uncorrected and were determined in an apparatus according to Dr. Tottoli (Büchi). Yields are not optimized.

3.1 2,5-Diphenyl-3,4-dinitrothiophene (13)

Under a nitrogen atmosphere, 0.075 g (0.2 mmol) of 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene was dissolved in 8 mL of anhydrous toluene and treated with 10 mol% of the catalyst. The mixture was then subjected to ultrasound irradiation for 5 min and then stirred at room temperature for 25 min. Then, 0.110 g (0.1 mmol) of phenylboronic acid, 0.318 g (1.5 mmol) of potassium phosphate and 2 mL of water were added, and the mixture was heated under reflux at 100°C for 24 h. After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was dried over magnesium sulfate and chromatographed (petroleum ether/dichloromethane 1:3). The following catalysts were used. Catalyst I consisted of 10 mol% (0.022 g) of tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium, and catalyst II constisted of 10 mol% (0.022 g) of tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium plus 10 mol% (0.020 g) of N-phenylsydnone. Catalyst III consisted of 10 mol% of cis/trans-bromo-(N-phenylsydnone)palladium complex 9, and catalyst IV consisted of 10 mol% of the palladium complex of O-ethylsydnone 11. Yields: Reaction with catalyst I, 0.083 g (87%), catalyst II, 0.080 g (83%), with catalyst III, 0.071 g (96%), with catalyst IV, 0.069 g (95%) of a yellowish solid, respectively; m.p. 145.9°C. Spectroscopic data of 13 are in agreement with those reported in the literature [51].

3.2 General procedure for the synthesis of the 2,5-diaryl-3,4-dinitrothiophenes (14–17)

Under a nitrogen atmosphere 0.075 g (0.2 mmol) of 2,5-dibromo-3,4-dinitrothiophene were dissolved in 8 mL of anhydrous toluene and treated with 10 mol% of the catalyst (catalysts IIV). The mixture was then subjected to ultrasound irradiation for 5 min and then stirred at room temperature for additional 25 min. Then, 0.5 mmol of the boronic acid, 1.6 mmol of potassium phosphate, and 2 mL of water were added, and the mixture was heated under reflux at 100°C for 48 h. After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was dried over magnesium sulfate and chromatographed (petroleum ether/dichloromethane 1:3).

3.2.1 2,5-Bis(naphthalen-1-yl)-3,4-dinitrothiophene (14)

According to the general procedure samples of 26 mg of catalyst I, 20 mg of catalyst III, and 22 mg of catalyst IV were used. Samples of 102 mg of naphthalen-1-ylboronic acid, 384 mg of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield: 0.038 g (40%; catalyst I)/0.077 g (80%, catalyst III) 0.076 g (79%, catalyst IV) of a yellowish solid; m.p. 261.0°C. Spectroscopic data are in agreement with those reported in the literature [10].

3.2.2 3,4-Dinitro-2,5-bis[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]thiophene (15)

According to the general procedure, samples of 26 mg of catalyst I, 20 mg of catalyst III, and 22 mg of catalyst IV were used. Samples of 116 mg of [4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]-boronic acid, 384 mg of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield: 0.035 g (31%; catalyst I)/0.094 g (84%, catalyst III)/0.095 g (85%, catalyst IV) of a yellowish solid; m.p. 168.0°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.60–7.56 (m, 4-H, 2′-H/6′-H), 7.37–7.35 (m, 4H, 3′-H/5′-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 151.2 (C4′), 139.6 (C2/C5), 137.3 (C3/C4), 131.2 (C2′/C6′), 126.3 (C1′), 121.5 (C3′/C5′) 120.5 (q, J = 257.4 Hz, CF3) ppm. – IR (ATR): 2923, 2853, 1607, 1514, 1386, 1323, 1294, 1256, 1200, 1151, 926, 906, 835, 804, 758, 514 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 494.0 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 494.0008 (calcd. 494.0007 for [C18H8N2O6SF6]+).

3.2.3 2,5-Bis[4-(methylsulfanyl)phenyl]-3,4-dinitrothiophene (16)

According to the general procedure, samples of 26 mg of catalyst I and 20 mg of catalyst III were used. Samples of 0.095 mg of [4-(methylsulfanyl)phenyl]boronic acid, 384 mg of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield: 59% (catalyst I) and 74% (catalyst III) of an orange solid; m.p. 130.8°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.43–7.40 (m, 4H, 2′-H/6′-H), 7.33–7.28 (m, 4H, 3′-H/5′-H), 1.52 (s, 6H, CH3) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 143.4 (C4′), 140.4 (C2/C5), 136.7 (C3/C4), 129.4 (C2′/C6′), 126.1 (C3′/C5′), 124.2 (C1′), 15.1 (CH3) ppm. – IR (ATR): 3102, 2920, 1589, 1538, 1511, 1505, 1314, 1200, 1095, 903, 812, 771, 734, 498 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 418.0 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 418.0113 (calcd. 418.0116 for [C18H14N2O4S3]+).

3.2.4 2,5-Di(biphenyl-4-yl)-3,4-dinitrothiophene (17)

According to the general procedure, samples of 26 mg of catalyst I and 20 mg of catalyst III were used. Samples of 112 mg of biphenyl-4-ylboronic acid, 384 mg of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield: <0.001 g (<1%; catalyst I)/0.075 g (69%, catalyst III) of a yellowish solid; m.p. 248.1°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.74–7.72 (m, 4H, 3′-H/5′-H), 7.65–7.61 (m, 8H, 2′-H/6′-H/8′-H/12′-H), 7.51–7.48 (m, 4H, 9′-H/11′-H), 7.44–7.40 (m, 2H, 10′-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 143.8 (C2/C5), 140.5 (C4′), 139.6 (C7′), 136.8 (C3/C4), 129.5 (C2′/C6′), 129.0 (C9′/C11′), 128.2 (C10′), 127.9 (CC3′/C5′), 127.2 (C8′/C12′), 126.9 (C1′) ppm. – IR (ATR): 3224, 3029, 2962, 2925, 2853, 1598, 1550, 1530, 1516, 1484, 1398, 1381, 1324, 1283, 1259, 1076, 1016, 796, 659, 504 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 478.1 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 478.0987 (calcd. 478.0987 for [C28H18N2O4S]+).

3.2.5 2,5-Bis(3-chlorophenyl)-3,4-dinitrothiophene (18)

According to the general procedure, a sample of 0.010 g (5 mol%) of catalyst III was dissolved in 8 mL of anhydrous toluene and treated as described. Then, 0.110 g (0.1 mmol) of 3-chlorophenylboronic acid, 0.318 g (1.5 mmol) of potassium phosphate, and 2 mL of water were added, and the mixture was heated under reflux at 100°C for 48 h. After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was dried over magnesium sulfate and chromatographed (petroleum ether/dichloromethane 1:3). Yield: 0.042 g (47%) of a yellowish solid; m.p. 163.3°C – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.40–7.41 (m, 2H, 4′-H), 7.43–7.46 (m, 2H, 3′-H), 7.51–7.52 (m, 2H, 2′-H), 7.52–7.53 (m, 2H, 6′-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 127.3 (C3′), 129.1 (C4′), 129.4 (C1′), 130.5 (C-2′), 131.1 (C-6′), 135.3 (C5′), 137.1 (C2/C5) 139.4 (C3/C4) ppm. – IR (ATR): 618, 700, 874, 1044, 1077, 1259, 1462, 1561, 1733, 2851, 2921, 2956 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 394.1 (100) [M] +. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 393.9582 (calcd. 393.9582 for [C16H8N2O4SCl2]+).

3.2.6 3-(Phenanthren-9-yl)quinoline (21)

According to the general procedure, using 20 mL of anhydrous toluene instead of 10 mL, samples of 0.27 mL (416 mg) of 3-bromoquinoline (19) and 87 mg of catalyst III (5 mol%) were employed as described. Samples of 488 mg of the phenanthren-9-ylboronic acid (20), 848 mg of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield after column chromatography (petrolether/EtOAc 10:1): 0.550 g (90%).

For the decreased catalyst concentration (1.0 mol%), 0.19 mL (0.285 g) of 3-bromoquinoline (19) and 12 mg of catalyst III (1 mol%) were treated as described with the exception of an increased solvent volume of anhydrous toluene (20 mL). Samples of 0.335 g of the phenanthrene-9-ylboronic acid (20), 0.636 g of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield after column chromatography (petrolether/EtOAc 10:1): 0.360 g (86%).

For the catalyst concentration of 0.5 mol%, samples of 0.68 mL (1.040 g) of 3-bromoquinoline (19) and 22 mg of catalyst III (0.5 mol%) were treated as described in 20 mL of anhydrous toluene. Samples of 1.221 g of the phenanthrene-9-ylboronic acid (20), 4.245 g of K3PO4, and 2 mL water were added. Yield after column chromatography (petrolether/EtOAc 10:1): 1.25 g (82%).

The product is a light brownish solid; m.p. 95.6°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 9.12–9.11 (m, 1H, 2-H), 8.82–8.80 (m, 1H, 6′-H), 8.76–8.74 (m, 1H, 9′-H), 8.32–8.31 (m, 1H, 4-H) 8.24–8.23 (m, 1H, 9-H), 7.94–7.89 (m, 2H, 6-H/12′-H), 7.88–7.86 (m, 1H, 3′-H), 7.81–7.79 (m, 1H, 8-H), 7.78–7.77 (m, 1H, 14′-H), 7.72–7.69 (m, 2H, 5′-H/10′-H), 7.66–7.61 (m, 2H, 7-H/11′-H), 7.57–7.54 (m, 1H, 4′-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 152.1 (C2), 147.6 (C10), 136.4 (C4), 135.1 (C1′), 133.9 (C3), 137.4 (C13′), 131.0 (C2′), 130.9 (C7′), 130.4 (C8′), 129.8 (C8), 129.5 (C9), 128.9 (C12′), 128.9 (C14′), 128.1 (C6), 128.0 (C5), 127.3 (C10′), 127.2 (C11′ or C7), 127.2 (C11′ or C7), 127.0 (C4′), 127.0 (C5′), 126.5 (C3′), 123.3 (C6′), 122.8 (C9′) ppm. – IR (ATR): 3015, 1488, 1449, 1432, 1413, 1384, 1353, 1336, 1301, 1264, 1222, 1192, 1162, 1143, 1123, 998, 952, 787, 743, 723, 665, 511 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (100) = 305.1 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 305.1203 (calcd. 305.1204 for [C23H15N]+).

3.3 General procedure for the synthesis of the 1-(2,4-dinitrophenyl)arenes (23a–c)

A sample of 0.075 g (0.2 mmol) of 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (22) was dissolved in 8 mL of anhydrous dioxane under an atmosphere of nitrogen. Then, 0.010 g (5 mol%) of the cis/trans-bromo-(N-phenylsydnone)palladium complex 9 (catalyst III) was added, the mixture was subjected to ultrasound irradiation for 5 min and then stirred at room temperature over a period of 25 min. Then, the corresponding boronic acid, 1.13 g (10.6 mmol) of sodium carbonate, and 2 mL of water were added, and the resulting mixture was heated at a temperature of 70°C for 30 min. After cooling to room temperature, the mixture was dried over magnesium sulfate and chromatographed on silica gel (petroleum ether/dichloromethane 1:3).

3.3.1 2,4-Dinitro-1,1′-biphenyl (23a)

A sample of 0.146 g (1.2 mmol) of phenylboronic acid was used. The product was obtained as yellowish solid in 99% yield (0.089 g); m.p. 109.9°C. Spectroscopic data are in agreement with those reported in the literature [52].

3.3.2 1-(2,4-Dinitrophenyl)naphthalene (23b)

A sample of 0.208 g (1.0 mmol) of 1-naphthylboronic acid was used. The product was obtained as yellowish solid in 95% yield (0.103 g); m.p. 115.8°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.34–7.37 (m, 2H, 4′-H/8′-H), 7.43–7.46 (t, 1 H, J = 6.7 Hz, 3′-H), 7.52–7.56 (m, 2 H, 2′-H/7′-H), 7.72–7.73 (d, 1 H, J = 6.7 Hz, 6-H), 7.93–7.97 (m, 2 H, 5′-H/6′-H), 8.53–8.55 (m, 1 H, 3-H), 8.91–8.92 (d, 1 H, J = 6.7 Hz, 5-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 119.9 (C3), 124.2 (C4′), 125.2 (C7′), 126.1 (C8′), 126.6 (C2′), 126.7 (C5), 127.3 (C3′), 128.8 (C5′), 129.8 (C6′), 130.7 (C1a′), 133.2 (C1′), 133.5 (C5a′), 134.6 (C6), 141.7 (C1), 147.4 (C2), 149.8 (C4) ppm. – IR (ATR): 3105, 2854, 1597, 1524, 1338, 1020, 969, 833 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 294.1 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 294.0641 (calcd. 294.0641 for [C16H10N2O4]+).

3.3.3 9-(2,4-Dinitrophenyl)phenanthrene (23c)

A sample of 0.208 g (1.0 mmol) of 9-phenanthrylboronic acid was used. The product was obtained as yellowish solid in 80% yield (0.102 g); m.p. 193.5°C. – 1H NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 7.38–7.37 (d, 1H, 2′-H), 7.52–7.54 (t, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 3′-H), 7.62 (s, 1H, 10′-H), 7.65–7.67 (t, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 8′-H), 7.69–7.72 (m, 1H, 4′-H), 7.72–7.73 (m, 1H, 7′-H), 7.79–7.81 (d, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 6-H), 7.88–7.89 (d, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 9′-H), 8.58–8.59 (d, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 5-H), 8.74–8.75 (d, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 6′-H), 8.80–8.81 (d, 1H, J = 6.7 Hz, 5′-H), 8.97–8.98 (s, 1H, 3-H) ppm. – 13C NMR (CDCl3 + TMS): δ = 120.0 (C3), 122.7 (C6′), 123.4 (C5′), 125.1 (C2′), 126.8 (C5), 127.17 (C10′), 127.27 (C4′), 127.29 (C3′), 127.31 (C8′), 127.82 (C7′), 129.0 (C9′), 129.7 (C1a′), 130.5 (C5a′), 130.6 (C9a′), 130.7 (C5b′), 132.3 (C1′), 134.6 (C6), 141.7 (C1), 147.5 (C4), 149.8 (C2) ppm. – IR (ATR): 3112, 2852, 1941, 1537, 1518, 1342 cm−1. – MS (EI, 70 eV): m/z (%) = 344.1 (100) [M]+. – HRMS (EI, 70 eV): m/z = 344.0797 (calcd. 344.0797 for [C20H12N2O4]+).

3.3.4 (4-Isopropylphenyl)methanol (25)

A sample of 0.075 g (0.4 mmol) (4-bromophenyl)methanol and 0.110 g (0.8 mmol) of isopropylboronic acid was used in the general procedure of 2,5-diaryl-3,4-dinitrothiophene (1217). The product was obtained as a brownish solid in 98% yield (0.059 g); m.p. 29.6°C. Spectroscopic data are in agreement with those reported in the literature [4550].


Corresponding author: Andreas Schmidt, Institute of Organic Chemistry, Clausthal University of Technology, Leibnizstrasse 6, D-38678 Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany

References

[1] D. L. Browne, J. P. Harrity, Tetrahedron2010, 66, 553.10.1016/j.tet.2009.10.085Search in Google Scholar

[2] T. L. Gilchrist in Science of Synthesis, Vol. 13, (Eds.: R. C. Storr, T. L. Gilchrist), Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, 2004, p. 109.Search in Google Scholar

[3] R. Chandrasekhar, M. J. Nanjan, Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2012, 12, 1359.10.2174/138955712804586666Search in Google Scholar

[4] J. C. Earl, A. W. Mackney, J. Chem. Soc.1935, 899.10.1039/jr9350000899Search in Google Scholar

[5] R. A. Eade, J. C. Earl, J. Chem. Soc. 1946, 591.10.1039/jr9460000591Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] W. Baker, W. D. Ollis, Nature1946, 158, 703.10.1038/158703a0Search in Google Scholar

[7] W. Baker, W. D. Ollis, V. D. Poole, J. Chem. Soc. 1949, 307.10.1039/jr9490000307Search in Google Scholar

[8] W. Baker, W. D. Ollis, V. D. Poole, J. Chem. Soc. 1950, 1542.10.1039/jr9500001542Search in Google Scholar

[9] A. R. Katritzky, Chem. Ind. 1955, 521.Search in Google Scholar

[10] S. Wiechmann, T. Freese, M. H. H. Drafz, E. G. Hübner, J. C. Namyslo, M. Nieger, A. Schmidt, Chem. Commun. 2014, 50, 11822.10.1039/C4CC05461JSearch in Google Scholar

[11] T. L. Gilchrist, P. M. O’Neill in Comprehensive Heterocyclic Chemistry II (Eds.: A. R. Katritzky, C. W. Rees, E. F. V. Scriven), Elsevier, Pergamon, Oxford, 1996, p. 165.Search in Google Scholar

[12] C. A. Ramsden, Tetrahedron2013, 69, 4146.10.1016/j.tet.2013.02.081Search in Google Scholar

[13] C. A. Ramsden, W. P. Oziminski, Tetrahedron2014, 70, 7158.10.1016/j.tet.2014.06.047Search in Google Scholar

[14] W. P. Oziminski, C. A. Ramsden, Tetrahedron2015, 71, 7191.10.1016/j.tet.2015.01.045Search in Google Scholar

[15] W. D. Ollis, S. P. Stanforth, C. A. Ramsden, Tetrahedron1985, 41, 2239.10.1016/S0040-4020(01)96625-6Search in Google Scholar

[16] C. A. Ramsden, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1977, 109.10.1039/c39770000109Search in Google Scholar

[17] C. A. Ramsden, Adv. Heterocycl. Chem. 1980, 26, 1.10.1016/S0065-2725(08)60139-7Search in Google Scholar

[18] W. D. Ollis, C. A. Ramsden, Adv. Heterocycl. Chem. 1976, 19, 1.10.1016/S0065-2725(08)60230-5Search in Google Scholar

[19] C. G. Newton, C. A. Ramsden, Tetrahedron1982, 38, 2965.10.1016/0040-4020(82)80186-5Search in Google Scholar

[20] H. Kato, M. Ohta, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1959, 32, 282.10.1246/bcsj.32.282Search in Google Scholar

[21] S. N. Lebedev, I. A. Cherepanov, V. N. Kalinin, Russ. Chem. Bull., Int. Ed. 2002, 51, 899.10.1023/A:1016065707957Search in Google Scholar

[22] L. N. Morozova, L. S. Isaeva, P. V. Petrovskii, D. N. Kratsov, S. F. Min, V. V. Kalinin, J. Organomet. Chem. 1990, 381, 281.10.1016/0022-328X(90)80120-OSearch in Google Scholar

[23] V. N. Kalinin, F. M. She, V. N. Khandozhko, P. V. Petrovskii. Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed.2001, 50, 525.10.1023/A:1011338029948Search in Google Scholar

[24] A. Schmidt, M. Nieger, Heterocycles1999, 51, 2119.10.3987/COM-99-8614Search in Google Scholar

[25] A. Schmidt, J. Heterocyl. Chem. 2002, 39, 949.10.1002/jhet.5570390515Search in Google Scholar

[26] A. Schmidt, M. K. Kindermann, J. Org. Chem. 1998, 63, 4636.10.1021/jo972349jSearch in Google Scholar

[27] L. Benhamou, N. Vujkovic, V. César, H. Gornitzka, N. Lugan, G. Lavigne, Organometallics2010, 29, 2616.10.1021/om1003607Search in Google Scholar

[28] L. Benhamou, V. César, H. Gornitzka, N. Lugan, G. Lavigne, Chem. Commun. 2009, 4720.10.1039/b907908dSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] A. T. Biju, K. Hirano, R. Fröhlich, F. Glorius, Chem. Asian J. 2009, 4, 1786.10.1002/asia.200900410Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[30] A. A. Danopoulos, K. Yu. Monakhov, P. Braunstein, Chem. Eur. J. 2013, 19, 450.10.1002/chem.201203488Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[31] N. N. Pidlypnyi, S. Wolf, M. Liu, K. Rissanen, M. Nieger, A. Schmidt, Tetrahedron2014, 70, 8672.10.1016/j.tet.2014.09.035Search in Google Scholar

[32] N. Pidlypnyi, J. C. Namyslo, M. H. H. Drafz, M. Nieger, A. Schmidt, J. Org. Chem. 2013, 78, 1070.10.1021/jo302479pSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[33] N. Pidlypnyi, F. Uhrner, M. Nieger, M. H. H. Drafz, E. G. Hübner, J. C. Namyslo, A. Schmidt, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2013, 7739.10.1002/ejoc.201300728Search in Google Scholar

[34] G. Lavigne, V. César, N. Lugan, Chem. Eur. J.2010, 16, 11432.10.1002/chem.201000870Search in Google Scholar

[35] V. César, N. Lugan, G. Lavigne, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 11286.10.1021/ja804296tSearch in Google Scholar

[36] M. Liu, M. Nieger, A. Schmidt, Chem. Commun. 2015, 51, 477.10.1039/C4CC08032GSearch in Google Scholar

[37] J. Zhang, N. Pidlypnyi, M. Nieger, J. C. Namyslo, A. Schmidt, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2014, 12, 2737.10.1039/C3OB42462FSearch in Google Scholar

[38] A. Schmidt, S. Wiechmann, T. Freese, ARKIVOC2013, i, 424.10.3998/ark.5550190.p008.251Search in Google Scholar

[39] V. N. Kalinin, S. F. Min, P. V. Petrovskii, J. Organomet. Chem. 1989, 379, 195.10.1016/0022-328X(89)80040-3Search in Google Scholar

[40] J. Li, Q. Li, D. Liu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces2011, 3, 2099.10.1021/am200317kSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[41] Q. Li, J. Li, R. Yang, L. Deng, Z. Gao, D. Liu, Dyes Pigm.2012, 92, 674.10.1016/j.dyepig.2011.05.029Search in Google Scholar

[42] H. Cheng, B. Djukic, H. A. Jenkins, S. I. Gorelsky, M. T. Lemaire, Can. J. Chem.2010, 88, 954.10.1139/V10-086Search in Google Scholar

[43] H. Mahdavi, P. Hashemi, J. Chin. Chem. Soc.2013, 60, 425.10.1002/jccs.201200257Search in Google Scholar

[44] M. Sh. Vakhitova, B. I. Pantukh, G. A. Tolstikov, O. P. Yablonskii, R. B. Svitych, Russ. Chem. Bull. 1987, 36, 1675.10.1007/BF00960131Search in Google Scholar

[45] T. Zell, Y. Ben-David, D. Milstein, Catal. Sci. Technol. 2015, 5, 822.10.1039/C4CY01501KSearch in Google Scholar

[46] N. Gorgas, B. Stöger, L. F. Veiros, E. Pittenauer, G. Allmaier, K. Kirchner, Organometallics2014, 33, 6905.10.1021/om5009814Search in Google Scholar

[47] G. Wienhoefer, F. A. Westerhaus, K. Junge, R. Ludwig, M. Beller, Chem. Eur. J.2013, 19, 7701.10.1002/chem.201300660Search in Google Scholar

[48] Y. Gao, S. Jaenicke, G.-K. Chuah, Appl. Cat. A2014, 484, 51.10.1016/j.apcata.2014.07.010Search in Google Scholar

[49] T. Nishio, A. Patel, Y. Wang, P. C. K. Lau, Appl. Microbiol. Biotech. 2001, 55, 321.10.1007/s002530000584Search in Google Scholar

[50] Y. Noma, E. Akehi, N. Miki, Y. Asakawa, Phytochemistry1992, 31, 515.10.1016/0031-9422(92)90028-OSearch in Google Scholar

[51] Q. Li, J. Li, L. Deng, Q. Wang, Z. Gao, Di Liu, Chem. Lett.2011, 40, 417.10.1246/cl.2011.417Search in Google Scholar

[52] Y. Yabe, T. Maegawa, Y. Monguchi, H. Sajiki, Tetrahedron2010, 66, 8654.10.1016/j.tet.2010.09.027Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-1-8
Accepted: 2016-2-2
Published Online: 2016-4-1
Published in Print: 2016-6-1

©2016 by De Gruyter

Downloaded on 9.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/znb-2016-0006/html
Scroll to top button