37
Table 5
analysis, B. Fähndrich from the Institute for Technical Chemistry
and Environmental Chemistry in Jena for TGA, B. Lentvogt from the
Institute of Organic Chemistry and Macromolecular Chemistry in
Jena for elementary analysis and D. Merten from the Institute of
Geosciences in Jena for performing ICP-MS analysis. For the pro-
vided help special thanks goes to M. Hoffmann in Brockport, New
York.
Results of the microwave-promoted Sonogashira reaction of phenylacetylene with
iodobenzene to tolane (cf. Scheme 4b).
Catalyst
mol% Pd
t (min)
T (◦C)
Ya (%)
Sa (%)
0.40
0.80
10
10
170
190
70
64
60
64
A1
0.19
0.60
10
10
150
190
67
54
62
54
A2
B1
C1
References
0.20
0.65
3
10
170
190
48
20
47
20
[1] (a) L. Yin, J. Liebscher, Chem. Rev. 107 (2007) 133–173;
(b) G.P. McGlacken, I.J.S. Fairlamb, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 24 (2009) 4011–4029;
(c) X. Chen, K.M. Engle, D.-H. Wang, J.-Q. Yu, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 48 (2009)
5094–5115.
[2] P.T. Anastas, M.M. Kirchhoff, T.C. Williamson, Appl. Catal. A 221 (2001) 3–13.
[3] H.-U. Blaser, Catal. Today 60 (2000) 161–165.
[4] A. Wali, S.M. Pillai, S. Satish, React. Kinet. Catal. Lett. 60 (1997) 189–
194.
[5] (a) R.B. Bedford, C.S.J. Cazin, M.B. Hursthouse, M.E. Light, K.J. Pike, S. Wimperis,
J. Organomet. Chem. 633 (2001) 173–181;
0.48
0.48
0.48
0.48
10
5
10
15
190
150
150
150
39
50
49
41
39
45
48
41
Condition: 2 mmol iodobenzene, 3.2 mmol phenylacetylene, 3.2 mmol NaOAc, 20 ml
DMF; microwave settings: Pmax = 400 W.
a
Yields refer to the peak area.
(b) N.C. Mehendale, C. Bezemer, C.A. van Walree, R.J.M. Klein Gebbink, G. van
Koten, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 257 (2006) 167–175;
(c) K. Shimizu, S. Koizumi, T. Hatamachi, H. Yoshida, S. Komai, T. Kodama, Y.
Kitayam, J. Catal. 228 (2004) 141–151.
iodobenzene (benzene) or from intermolecular reactions of pheny-
lacetylene or of the coupling products. Those side reactions are
the reason for the inferior selectivities reported in Table 5. The
A catalysts resulted in somewhat higher yields and selectivities
than B1 and C1. The selectivities are comparable to those reported
previously for the use of the starch-supported Pd catalyst [9d,26].
Higher catalyst amounts (100–200 mg) led to a decrease of selectiv-
ity. Shorter reaction times and lower temperatures did not result in
significant higher or lower product yields but decreased the forma-
tion of side-products and would limit the risk of possible catalyst
damage due to excessive high temperatures at the catalyst surface
in consequence of hot spots.
[6] R.L. Augustine, S.T. O’Leary, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 95 (1995) 277–
285.
[7] (a) H. Kosslick, I. Monnich, E. Paetzold, H. Fuhrmann, R. Fricke, D. Muller, G.
Oehme, Micropor. Mesopor. Mater. 44–45 (2001) 537–545;
(b) L. Artok, H. Bulut, Tetrahedron Lett. 45 (2004) 3881–3884;
(c) L. Djakovitch, K. Koehler, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 142 (1999) 275–
284.
[8] (a) O. Ibarguren, C. Zakri, E. Fouquet, F.-X. Felpin, Tetrahedron Lett. 50 (2009)
5071–5074;
(b) M. Gruber, S. Chouzier, K. Koehler, L.D. Djakovitch, Appl. Catal. A: Gen. 265
(2004) 161–169.
[9] (a) J.H. Ding, D.L. Gin, Chem. Mater. 12 (2000) 22–24;
(b) R. Duboc, M. Savignac, J.-P. Genêt, J. Organomet. Chem. 643–644 (2002)
512–515;
(c) K.R. Reddy, N.S. Kumar, P.S. Reddy, B. Sreedhar, M.L. Kantam, J. Mol. Catal.
A: Chem. 252 (2006) 12–16;
4. Conclusion
(d) M.J. Gronnow, R. Luque, D.J. Macquarrie, J.H. Clark, Green Chem. 7 (2005)
552–557.
[10] E. Guibal, Prog. Polym. Sci. 30 (2005) 71–109.
[11] (a) D.J. Macquarrie, J.J.E. Hardy, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44 (2005) 8499–8520;
(b) M.N.V.R. Kumar, React. Funct. Polym. 46 (2000) 1–27;
(c) E. Guibal, Sep. Purif. Technol. 38 (2004) 43–74;
The co-precipitation method is not suitable for the prepara-
tion of catalysts where higher and easily accessible Pd-amounts
are required. Only a small fraction of the weighed in Pd is located
on the catalyst surface and can act as catalyst. Prior the adsorption
method similar to the preparation of A2, the supports for B1 and
C1 were both modified as imino derivatives. A2 showed high activ-
ity in Suzuki and Heck couplings and also acceptable selectivities
in Sonogashira reaction. Especially in comparison to the mentioned
thermal Heck reactions, C1 and A2 showed that the microwave irra-
diation was advantageous shortening reaction times and increasing
yields. For Suzuki reaction in water under microwave conditions,
B1 and A2 showed the highest activity. Also the Suzuki reaction
in water under conventional heating (1 h under reflux) gave good
yields even without PTC for activated (bromoacetophenone) and
deactivated bromoaryls (bromophenol). In Sonogashira reaction
all four catalysts were less selective and gave some side-products
beside the coupling product in comparison to the other investigated
C–C coupling reactions. With respect to other publications in this
field of Sonogashira reactions the results are acceptable, although
no direct comparison is possible because to the best of the authors’
knowledge this is the first example of a Sonogashira reaction using
chitosan-based catalysts.
(d) M.N.V. Ravi Kumar, R.A.A. Muzzarelli, C. Muzzarelli, H. Sashiwa, A.J. Domb,
Chem. Rev. 104 (2004) 6017–6084;
(e) M. Rhazi, J. Desbrières, A. Tolaimate, M. Rinaudo, P. Vottero, A. Alagui, M. El
Meray, Eur. Polym. J. 38 (2002) 1523–1530.
[12] (a) T. Vincent, E. Guibal, Ind. Eng. Res. Chem. 41 (2002) 5158–5164;
(b) L.-M. Tang, M.-Y. Huang, Y.-Y. Jiang, Macromol. Rapid Commun. 15 (1994)
527–529;
(c) H.-S. Han, S.-N. Jiang, M.-Y. Huang, Y.-Y. Jiang, Polym. Adv. Technol. 7 (2002)
704–706.
[13] M.-Y. Yin, G.-L. Yuan, Y.-Q. Wu, M.-Y. Huang, Y.-Y. Liang, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem.
147 (1999) 93–98.
[14] F. Quignard, A. Choplin, A. Domard, Langmuir 16 (2000) 9106–9108.
[15] W. Sun, C.-G. Xia, H.-W. Wang, New J. Chem. 26 (2002) 755–758.
[16] (a) Y. Chang, Y. Wang, Z. Su, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 83 (2002) 2188–2194;
(b) D. Hu, Y. Cui, X. Dong, Y. Fang, React. Funct. Polym. 48 (2001) 201–
207.
[17] J. Zhang, C.-G. Xia, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 206 (2003) 59–65.
[18] J.J.E. Hardy, S. Hubert, D.J. Macquarrie, A.J. Wilson, Green Chem. 6 (2004) 53–
56.
[19] X. Xu, P. Liu, S. Li, P. Zhang, X. Wang, React. Kinet. Catal. Lett. 88 (2006) 217–223.
[20] C. Schmöger, T. Szuppa, A. Tied, F. Schneider, A. Stolle, B. Ondruschka, Chem-
SusChem 1 (2008) 339–347.
[21] N.V. Kramareva, A.Y. Stakheev, O.P. Tkachenko, K.V. Klementiev, W. Grünert,
E.D. Finashina, L.M. Kustov, J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 209 (2004) 97–106.
[22] S.-S. Yi, D.-H. Lee, E. Sin, Y.-S. Lee, Tetrahedron Lett. 48 (2007) 6771–6775.
[23] P. Liu, L. Wang, X.Y. Wang, Chin. Chem. Lett. 15 (2004) 475–477.
[24] Y. Cui, L. Zhang, Y. Li, Polym. Adv. Technol. 16 (2005) 633–637.
[25] H.-F. Zhang, L. Zhang, Y. Cui, React. Funct. Polym. 67 (2007) 322–328.
[26] V.L. Budarin, J.H. Clark, R. Luque, D.J. Macquarrie, R.J. White, Green Chem. 10
(2008) 382–387.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank R. Wagner from the Institute of
Materials Science and Technology in Jena for performing the XPS