SCHEME 1. Two-Ligand Catalytic Asymmetric
Deprotonation of N-Boc Pyrrolidine 1, using s-BuLi/
(-)-Sparteine or (+)-Sparteine Surrogate 3
On the Two-Ligand Catalytic Asymmetric
Deprotonation of N-Boc Pyrrolidine: Probing the
Effect of the Stoichiometric Ligand†
Julia L. Bilke and Peter O’Brien*
Department of Chemistry, UniVersity of York, Heslington,
York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom
ReceiVed May 16, 2008
SCHEME 2. Two-Ligand Catalytic Asymmetric
Deprotonation of N-Boc Pyrrolidine 1
To map out the stoichiometric ligand requirements in the
two-ligand catalytic asymmetric deprotonation of N-Boc
pyrrolidine, 24 different ligands have been evaluated; the
highest enantioselectivity (90:10 er) was obtained by using
s-BuLi in the presence of 0.3 equiv of (-)-sparteine and 1.3
equiv of a cyclohexanediamine-derived ligand.
yield of silylated adduct (S)-2 of 90:10 er (Scheme 1).7 A similar
result, with the opposite sense of induction, was obtained by
using the (+)-sparteine surrogate 3. If bispidine 4 was omitted,
there was no turnover of the (-)-sparteine and low yield and
reduced enantioselectivity resulted. This two-ligand strategy was
also successful in Hoppe’s O-alkyl carbamate methodology.9
Bispidine 4 was designed with steric hindrance on the amines
so that its s-BuLi complex would have a low reactivity thus
minimizing background racemic deprotonation.8 To establish
whether such a design criteria was important and to map out
the structural requirements of the stoichiometric ligand, we have
now carried out an extensive ligand variation study. For the
synthesis of the ligands, our criteria were that the synthesis
should be no more than three steps, it must allow multigram
quantities to be prepared, and there should be only one
purification at the end of the synthesis. Herein, we report the
results of an investigation of 24 different stoichiometric ligands
in the s-BuLi-mediated two-ligand asymmetric deprotonation
of N-Boc pyrrolidine 1.
To evaluate the different stoichiometric ligands, the following
conditions were adopted for the deprotonation of N-Boc
pyrrolidine 1: 1.6 equiv of s-BuLi, 0.3 equiv of (-)-sparteine,
and 1.3 equiv of the stoichiometric ligand (either achiral or
racemic). Using bispidine 4 under these conditions gave a 70%
yield of silylated adduct (S)-2 of 95:5 er (Scheme 2), the same
enantioselectivity as we routinely obtain using stoichiometric
(-)-sparteine. This was the benchmark result and we hoped to
identify other ligands that would produce such high enantiose-
lectivity. We designed a series of more sterically hindered
analogues of commonly encountered ligands for organolithium-
mediated deprotonation reactions.
The asymmetric deprotonation of N-Boc pyrrolidine 1 with
s-BuLi/(-)-sparteine, first reported by Kerrick and Beak in
1991,1 is not only a landmark achievement in chiral base
methodology but has also proved to be a very useful approach
for the direct synthesis of chiral pyrrolidines.1b,2 Our group has
a long-standing interest in Beak’s N-Boc pyrrolidine methodol-
ogy: we have used it to evaluate the efficacy of (+)-sparteine
surrogates3–6 and in total synthesis.6 Recently, we reported a
two-ligand catalytic asymmetric deprotonation of N-Boc pyr-
rolidine 1.7,8 Thus, deprotonation of 1 was achieved by using
1.3 equiv of s-BuLi, 0.2 equiv of (-)-sparteine, and 1.2 equiv
of bispidine 4; subsequent trapping with Me3SiCl gave a 76%
† This paper is dedicated to the memory of Professor A. I. Meyers for his
numerous pioneering contributions to organolithium-mediated deprotonation
reactions.
(1) (a) Kerrick, S. T.; Beak, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 9708. (b) Beak,
P.; Kerrick, S. T.; Wu, S.; Chu, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 3231.
(2) (a) Campos, K. R.; Klapars, A.; Waldman, J. H.; Dormer, P. G.; Chen,
C.-Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 3538. (b) Dieter, R. K.; Chen, N. J. Org.
Chem. 2006, 71, 5674. (c) Deng, X.; Neelakandha, S. M. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry
2005, 16, 661. (d) Dieter, R. K.; Chen, N.; Watson, R. T. Tetrahedron 2005,
61, 3221. (e) Watson, R. T.; Gore, V. K.; Chandupatla, K. R.; Dieter, R. K.;
Snyder, J. P. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 6105. (f) Majewski, M.; Shao, J.; Nelson,
K.; Nowak, P.; Irvine, N. M. Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 6787.
(3) Dearden, M. J.; Firkin, C. R.; Hermet, J.-P. R.; O’Brien, P. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2002, 124, 11870.
(4) O’Brien, P.; Wiberg, K. B.; Bailey, W. F.; Hermet, J.-P. R.; McGrath,
M. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 15480.
(5) O’Brien, P. Chem Commun. 2008, 655.
(6) Stead, D.; O’Brien, P.; Sanderson, A. Org. Lett. 2008, 10, 1409.
(7) McGrath, M. J.; O’Brien, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16378.
(8) McGrath, M. J.; Bilke, J.; O’Brien, P. Chem. Commun. 2006, 2607.
(9) McGrath, M. J.; O’Brien, P. Synthesis 2006, 2233.
6452 J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 6452–6454
10.1021/jo8010655 CCC: $40.75 2008 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 07/19/2008