Chemoselective Transfer Hydrogenation of α,β-Unsaturated Ketones Catalyzed by Iridium Complexes

Abstract

Efficient chemoselective transfer hydrogenation of the C=C bond of α,β-unsaturated ketones has been developed, using the iridium complexes containing pyridine-imidazolidinyl ligands as catalysts and formic acid as a hydrogen source. In comparison with organic solvents or H₂O as solvent, the mixed solvents of H₂O and MeOH are critical for a high catalytic chemoselective transformation. This chemoselective transfer hydrogenation can be carried out in air, which is operationally simple, allowing a wide variety of α,β-unsaturated substrates with different functional groups (electron-donating and electron-withdrawing substituents) leading to chemoselective transfer hydrogenation in excellent yields. The practical application of this protocol is demonstrated by a gram-scale transformation.

Key words

transfer hydrogenation - iridium complex - α,β-unsaturated ketones - formic acid - chemoselective reduction

Saturated carbonyl compounds are ubiquitous, and many pharmaceutically active molecules contain 1,3-diaryl ketones (Figure [1]).[1]

Figure 1 Examples of pharmaceutically active molecules containing 1,3-diaryl ketones

Among the methodologies for the synthesis of saturated carbonyl compounds, one of the best ways is the selective reduction of carbon–carbon double bonds on α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds.[2] However, chemoselective reduction of carbon–carbon double bonds of α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds wherein the carbon–oxygen double bond is not affected,[3] is a challenge with a significant role in organic synthesis.[4]

Scheme 1 Selective reduction of the C=C bond of α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds

Traditional transformation of chemoselective reduction of C=C bonds of α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds include hydrogenation with hydrogen over a Pd/C catalyst.[5] It is well known that transition metals are not only good electron donors, but also electron acceptors due to the availability of vacant d-orbitals that possess specific electronic and spatial effects when coordinated with organic ligands.[6] Therefore, much effort has been devoted to the development of highly chemoselective reduction of C=C bonds for α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds catalyzed by transition-metal catalysts, such as Pd,[2d] [7] Rh,[8] Ru, [2c,e,f] Ni,[2b] [9] Ir,[10] Co,[11] and Fe (Scheme [1a]).[12] At the same time, nontransition-metal hydrides such as Sn, Se, Te, B, [13]and others[14] have also been employed for the selective reduction of C=C bonds in α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds. Furthermore, enzymic reduction is receiving increasing attention due to the potential for high chemoselectivity.

However, most of transition metals and their metal complexes are expensive, and the methodology is difficult to realize at industrial scale. Meanwhile, hydrogen is usually employed as the reductant, often under high pressures.[15] Besides these drawbacks, other disadvantages of these methodologies may include harsh reaction conditions, long reaction time, low yields, and low functional group selectivity, limiting their applications in organic synthesis. Therefore, more general, practical, mild, and efficient methods for the selective reduction of the C=C bond in α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds without affecting the C=O bond remain highly desirable.

Table 1 Optimization of Reaction Conditions^a

Entry	Catalyst	Hydrogen donor	Solvent	Yield (%)b
1	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O	60
2	TC-2	HCOOH	H2O	45
3	TC-3	HCOOH	H2O	49
4	TC-4	HCOOH	H2O	55
5	TC-5	HCOOH	H2O	52
6	TC-6	HCOOH	H2O	57
7	TC-1	HCOONa	H2O	48
8c	TC-1	HCOOH/Et3N	H2O	42
9d	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O	63
10	TC-1	HCOOH	DMF	43
11	TC-1	HCOOH	toluene	51
12	TC-1	HCOOH	THF	46
13	TC-1	HCOOH	CH2Cl2	57
14	TC-1	HCOOH	MeCN	48
15	TC-1	HCOOH	MeOH	57
16e	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O	69
17f	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O/CH2Cl2	80
18g	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O/MeOH	90
19h	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O/MeOH	93(90)
20i	TC-1	HCOOH	H2O	12
21j	TC-1	HCOOH	–	5

^a Reaction conditions: 1a (0.5 mmol), solvent (2 mL), catalyst (1 mol%), hydrogen donor (10 equiv) at room temperature under air for 12 h.

^b Determined by GC–MS using dodecane as the internal standard. The number in parentheses is the isolated yield.

^c The reaction was carried out with 5.0 equiv of HCOOH, 2.0 equiv of Et₃N.

^d The reaction was carried out under N₂ atmosphere.

^e The reaction was carried out at 80 °C.

^f CH₂Cl₂ (1 mL) was added in the reaction.

^g MeOH (1.0 mL) was added in the reaction.

^h MeOH (2mL) was added in the reaction.

ⁱ 2 equiv (n-Bu)₄NBr.

^j This reaction in only formic acid.

Transfer hydrogenation is a well-established and efficient protocol that has the advantage of not requiring special equipment or hydrogen gas. Recently, our group developed iridium complex catalyzed transfer hydrogenation of C=O and C=N bonds by using formic acid or formate as the hydride source.[16] As far as we know, reports on iridium complex catalyzed transfer hydrogenation of C=C bonds remain limited.[17] Therefore, we examined the iridium complex catalyzed chemoselective transfer hydrogenation of the C=C bond of α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds by adjusting the structures of the catalysts and hydrogen source. To achieve this goal, two problems needed to be settled: the effective catalytic system to realize C=C bond reduction and the suppression of side reactions. Herein, we describe an efficient and practical iridium complex catalyzed chemoselective transfer hydrogenation of the C=C bond of α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds.

In the initial attempts at selective reduction of α,β-unsaturated ketones, chalcone was used as model substrate, iridium complexes as catalysts, and HCOOH as hydrogen source at room temperature under air (Table [1]). Interestingly, the desired product 3aa was afforded in a yield of 60% with the TC-1 catalyst (entry 1). To explore better catalytic system, several other of Tang’s catalysts with different substituted functional groups were also screened (entries 2–6). Disappointedly, lower catalytic activities were obtained. As different hydride sources have important effects on transfer hydrogenation, other candidates were employed in this catalytic system. However, lower yields were obtained by using HCOONa and HCOOH/NEt₃ as hydride sources (entries 7 and 8). We also performed the reaction under N₂ under standard conditions, but this showed no obvious improvement (entry 9). During our study, we observed that the substrate did not dissolve in the water. Therefore, a screening of organic solvents was performed. As shown (Table [1], entries 10–15), only moderate yields were achieved in organic solvents. However, at the same time, we also found that the solubility of 1a in organic solvents was different. For example, MeOH and CH₂Cl₂ can dissolve 1a completely, while it did not dissolve in DMF. Furthermore, when the reaction was performed in water, a white suspension was observed on the water surface, which was characterized by NMR spectroscopy and found to be unreacted starting material 1a. A higher reaction temperature led to slightly better conversion (entry 16). In our previous study, we knew that the catalysts had the features of excellent water solubility. Based on our previous research and above results, we envisaged that mixed solvents could help to improve catalytic activity. With this in mind, mixed solvents were next tested. To our satisfaction, high yields of 3aa were achieved in a mixture of H₂O and MeOH under the standard conditions (entries 17–19). A phase-transfer catalyst such as quaternary ammonium salt ((n-Bu)₄NBr) was used in just water, but only 12% of desired product was detected (entry 20). When using formic acid as hydrogen source and solvent, only a 5% yield of 3aa was obtained (entry 21).

Intrigued by this simple and efficient procedure for the selective reduction of 1a, we then explored the substrate scope under the optimized transfer hydrogenation conditions (Scheme [2]). In general, electron-donating and electron-withdrawing substituents on the phenyl ring (β to carbonyl group) and benzoyl rings are well tolerated and furnished the desired products in good yields (Scheme [2]). For example, the substrate with a phenyl ring β to the carbonyl group contains substituents such as p-methyl, methoxy, chloride, fluoride, and bromide provided good to excellent yields of the corresponding products under standard conditions (3ab–ah). Notably, substrates with heterocyclic rings such as furyl, thiophenyl, and naphthyl also reacted smoothly and gave the desired products in high yields (3ai,aj).

Scheme 2 Substrate scope. Reagents and conditions: 1 (0.5 mmol), TC-1 (1.0 mol%), and HCOOH (10.0 equiv) in H₂O (2.0 mL) and MeOH (2.0 mL), room temperature, air, 12 h. Yield of isolated product.

To explore the utility of this iridium-catalyzed chemoselective transfer hydrogenation further, we also examined substrates with different substituents on the benzoyl ring. A variety of chalcones with halogen substituents on the benzoyl ring were selectively reduced in good yields (3ba–bc,be). Substrates with strongly electron-drawing groups on the benzoyl ring, such as trifluoromethyl and nitryl, were selectively reduced to give the desired substituted ketones in yields of 80% and 81%, respectively (3bd,bf). Substrates possessing methyl and methoxy groups on the benzoyl ring also reacted under the optimized conditions (3bg,bh). Of note, heterocyclic acyl substrates were also observed to be well-tolerated under the standard conditions, giving 3bi and 3bj in 87% and 81% yields, respectively. In addition, the sterically hindered 1-naphthoyl substrate (2bk) led to the successful synthesis of 3bk. In addition, the doubly unsaturated substrate 2bl with a β-aryl and β-cylcohexenyl substituent gave 3bl efficiently, which demonstrates that unsaturated double bonds contiguous with a β-aryl group can also be reduced selectively. In keeping with this observation, when dibenzylideneacetone was employed as the substrate, the corresponding doubly reduced product 3bm could be obtained in a yield of 76%.

In order to verify the practical synthetic application of this chemoselective transfer hydrogenation reduction of α,β-unsaturated ketones, a scaled-up experiment was conducted. When 1a (10 mmol) was carried out under above established conditions, 3aa was isolated by flash chromatography in a yield of 88% (Scheme [3]).

Scheme 3 Gram-scale experiment

Scheme 4 Mechanistic studies

Alcohols are usually employed as the proton source for transfer hydrogenation reduction[18] and are preferred as a convenient, economical, and environmentally relatively benign choice. In this catalytic system, the hydride and proton sources are derived from formic acid and methanol. To gain more insight into this catalytic system, deuterium-labeling experiments were performed (Scheme [4]). By using D₂O as solvent, the ratio of H/D at C2 was found to be 61:39 and C1 was not deuterated. The deuterium incorporation at C2 may be caused by H–D exchange between [Ir]–H and D₂O. However, the outcome was quite different when DCO₂D was employed. By using DCO₂D instead of HCOOH under standard reaction conditions, product 3aa was afforded in 90% yield with a C1 ratio of H/D of 44:56, with no deuteration at C2. Again, the incomplete deuterium incorporation at C1 may be caused by H–D exchange between [Ir]–D and H₂O. When D₃COD was employed, efficient preparation of 3aa was observed without deuterium incorporation.

Based on the above control experiments, we propose the following mechanism (Scheme [5]). Initially, the Ir hydride (Int-II) complex is formed by ligand exchange from Tc-1 with HCOOH followed by release of carbon dioxide.[19] Then, the Ir hydride species coordinates with substrate 1a to generate Int-III, followed by the insertion of the polar C=C bond to generate Int-IV.[20] Finally, the desired product 3aa is achieved by ligand exchange of Int-IV, from which Int-II is released for the next catalytic cycle.

Scheme 5 Proposed mechanism

In conclusion, we have developed an iridium-catalyzed chemoselective transfer hydrogenation of the C=C bond of chalcones to prepare 1,4-diaryl ketones in good to excellent yields by using formic acid as hydrogen source.[21] The broad substrates scope, simple operation, and high chemoselectivity are the attractive features of this transformation. Further investigations as well as exploration of asymmetric transfer hydrogenation are in progress.

• References and Notes

• 1a Langer T, Eder M, Hoffmann RD, Chiba P, Ecker GF. Arch. Pharm. 2004; 337: 317
• 1b Cheenpracha S, Karalai C, Ponglimanont C, Subhadhirasakul S, Tewtrakul S. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2006; 14: 1710
• 1c Lowes DJ, Guiguemde WA, Connelly M, Zhu CF, Sigal MS, Clark JA, Lemoff AS, Derisi JL, Wilson EB, Guy RK. J. Med. Chem. 2011; 54: 7477
• 2a Ohkuma T, Ooka H, Ikariya T, Noyori R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995; 117: 10417
• 2b Shevlin M, Friedfeld MR, Sheng H, Pierson NA, Hoyt JM, Campeau L.-C, Chirik PJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016; 138: 3562
• 2c Li W, Wu X.-F. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2015; 331
• 2d Ding B, Zhang Z, Liu Y, Sugiya M, Imamoto T, Zhang W. Org. Lett. 2013; 15: 3690
• 2e Farrar-Tobar R, Wei Z, Jiao H, Hinze S, de Vries JG. Chem. Eur. J. 2018; 24: 2725
• 2f Puylaert P, van Heck R, Fan Y, Spannenberg A, Baumann W, Beller M, Medlock J, Bonrath W, Lefort L, Hinze S, de Vries JG. Chem. Eur. J. 2017; 23: 8473
• 3a Wang D, Astruc D. Chem. Rev. 2015; 115: 6621
• 3b Odendaal A, Trader YD, Carlson JE. E. Chem. Sci. 2011; 2: 760
• 3c Volkov A, Tinnis F, Slagbrand T, Trilloa P, Adolfsson H. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016; 45: 6685
• 3d Serna P, Corma A. ACS Catal. 2015; 5: 7114
• 4a Haskel A, Keinan E. Handbook of Organopalladium Chemistry, Vol. 2 . Negishi E.-i, de Meijere A. Wiley; New York: 2002: 2767
• 4b Dupau P. In Organometallics as Catalysts in the Fine Chemical Industry . Beller M, Blaser H.-U. Springer; Heidelberg: 2012: 47
• 5a Rao HS. P, Reddy KS. Tetrahedron Lett. 1994; 35: 171
• 5b Yu H, Kang R, Ouyang X. Chin. J. Org. Chem. 2000; 20: 441
• 5c Luiza M, Holleben A, Zucolotto M, Zini CA, Oliveira ER. Tetrahedron 1994; 50: 973
• 5d Keinan E, Gleize PA. Tetra­hedron Lett. 1982; 23: 477
• 6a Albrecht M. Chem. Rev. 2010; 110: 576
• 6b Lu H, Yu T.-Y, Xu P.-F, Wei H. Chem. Rev. 2021; 121: 365
• 6c Petrone DA, Ye J, Lautens M. Chem. Rev. 2016; 116: 8003
• 6d Xia Y, Qiu D, Wang J. Chem. Rev. 2017; 117: 13810
• 7a Guo T, Ding Y, Zhou L, Xu H, Loh T.-P, Wu X. ACS Catal. 2020; 10: 7262
• 7b Ramar T, Subbaiah MA. M, Ilangovan A. J. Org. Chem. 2020; 85: 7711
• 8a Abooa AH, Begum R, Zhao L, Farooqi ZH, Xiao J. Chin. J. Catal. 2019; 40: 1795
• 8b Baán Z, Finta Z, Keglevich G, Hermecz I. Green Chem. 2009; 11: 1937
• 9 Hu X, Wang G, Qin C, Xie X, Zhang C, Xua W, Liu Y. Org. Chem. Front. 2019; 6: 2619
• 10a Zhang D, Iwai T, Sawamura M. Org. Lett. 2019; 21: 5867
• 10b Wang X, Han Z, Wang Z, Ding K. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2012; 51: 936
• 10c Császára Z, Szabóa EZ, Bényeib AC, Bakosa J, Farkas G. Catal. Commun. 2020; 146: 106128
• 11a Song T, Ma Z, Yang Y. ChemCatChem 2019; 11: 1313
• 11b Jiang B.-L, Ma S.-S, Wang M.-L, Liu D.-S, Xu B.-H, Zhang S.-J. ChemCatChem 2019; 11: 1701
• 11c Rösler S, Obenauf J, Kempe R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015; 137: 7998
• 12a Babu Syamala LV. R, Mete TB, Bhat RG. Tetrahedron Lett. 2018; 59: 3288
• 12b Lator A, Gaillard S, Poater A, Renaud J.-L. Chem. Eur. J. 2018; 24: 5770
• 12c Fleischer S, Zhou S, Junge K, Beller M. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2013; 52: 5120
• 12d Wienhöfer G, Westerhaus FA, Junge K, Ludwig R, Beller M. Chem. Eur. J. 2013; 19: 7701
• 13a Dahlen A, Hilmersson G. Chem. Eur. J. 2003; 9: 1123
• 13b Li J, Zhang Y.-X, Ji YJ. J. Chin. Chem. Soc. 2008; 55: 390
• 14 Prasanna R, Guha S, Sekar G. Org. Lett. 2019; 21: 2650
• 15a Lan X, Wang T. ACS Catal. 2020; 10: 2764
• 15b Garduño JA, García JJ. ACS Catal. 2020; 10: 8012
• 15c Crespo-Quesada M, Cárdenas-Lizana F, Dessimoz A.-L, Kiwi-Minsker L. ACS Catal. 2012; 2: 1773
• 16a Wang C, Xiao J. Chem. Commun. 2017; 53: 3399
• 16b Michon C, MacIntyre K, Corre Y, Agbossou-Niedercorn F. ChemCatChem 2016; 8: 1755
• 16c Wu X, Xiao J. Chem. Commun. 2007; 2449
• 16d Lei Q, Wei Y, Talwar D, Wang C, Xue D, Xiao J. Chem. Eur. J. 2013; 19: 4021
• 16e Ouyang L, Xia Y, Liao J, Luo R. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2020; 6387
• 16f Pan H.-J, Zhang Y, Shan C, Yu Z, Lan Y, Zhao Y. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2016; 55: 9615
• 16g Chen Y, Pan Y, He Y.-M, Fan Q.-H. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2019; 58: 16831
• 16h Wei Y, Xue D, Lei Q, Wang C, Xiao J. Green Chem. 2013; 15: 629
• 16i Yang Z, Zhu Z, Luo R, Qiu X, Liu J, Yang J.-K, Tang W. Green Chem. 2017; 19: 3296
• 16j Li J, Tang W, Ren D, Xu J, Yang Z. Green Chem. 2019; 21: 2088
• 16k Luo N, Zhong Y, Liu J, Ouyang L, Luo R. Synthesis 2020; 52: 3439
• 17a Václavíková Vilhanová B, Budinská A, Václavík J, Matoušek V, Kuzma M, Červený L. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2017; 5131
• 17b Yuan S, Gao G, Wang L, Liu C, Wan L, Huang H, Geng H, Chang M. Nat. Commun. 2020; 11: 621
• 17c Azran J, Buchman O. Tetrahedron Lett. 1981; 22: 1925
• 17d Higashino T, Sakaguchi S, Ishii Y. Org. Lett. 2000; 2: 4193
• 17e Zhang D, Iwai T, Sawanmura M. Org. Lett. 2019; 21: 5867
• 18a Hamid MH. S. A, Slatford PA, Williams JM. J. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2007; 349: 1555
• 18b Guillena G, Ramón D, Yus JM. Chem. Rev. 2010; 110: 1611
• 18c Irrgang T, Kempe R. Chem. Rev. 2019; 119: 2524
• 18d Reed-Berendt BG, Polidano KL, Morrill C. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2019; 17: 1595
• 18e Luo N, Zhong Y, Wen H, Luo R. ACS Omega 2020; 5: 27723
• 19a Mellmann D, Sponholz P, Junge H, Beller M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016; 45: 3954
• 19b Wang W.-H, Xu S, Manaka Y, Suna Y, Kambayashi HJ, Muckerman T, Fujita E, Himeda Y. ChemSusChem 2014; 7: 1976
• 19c Wang Z, Lu S.-M, Li J, Wang J, Li C. Chem. Eur. J. 2015; 21: 12592
• 20 Luo N, Liao J, Ouyang L, Wen H, Liu J, Tang W, Luo R. Organometallics 2019; 38: 3025
• 21 Procedure for the Preparation of 3To a 25.0 mL dried Schlenk tube was added the α,β-unsaturated ketone (2, 0.5 mmol), Ir catalyst (1.0 mol %), HCOOH (10.0 equiv), water (2.0 mL), and MeOH (2.0 mL) successively. The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 12 h under air. After reaction was complete, the mixture was diluted with H₂O (15.0 mL), neutralized with saturated aq. NaHCO₃, and extracted with EtOAc (3 × 10.0 mL). The combined organic layers were washed with brine (3 × 10.0 mL) and dried over anhydrous MgSO₄. After filtration and removal of the EtOAc under vacuum, the crude product was purified by column chromatography on silica gel, eluting with hexane or petroleum ether/ethyl acetate (10:1 to 50:1) to achieve the desired products.1,3-Diphenylpropan-1-one (3aa)^12b Yield 90% (94.5 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.00 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 2 H), 7.59 (t, J = 7.3 Hz, 1 H), 7.49 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 7.37–7.22 (m, 5 H), 3.37–3.30 (m, 2 H), 3.14–3.07 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 199.3, 141.3, 136.9, 133.1, 128.6, 128.6, 128.5, 128.1, 126.2, 40.5, 30.2.1-Phenyl-3-(p-tolyl)propan-1-one (3ab)¹⁴ Yield 90% (96.3 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.98–7.92 (m, 2 H), 7.55 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.45 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 7.13 (q, J = 8.1 Hz, 4 H), 3.31–3.24 (m, 2 H), 3.06–3.00 (m, 2 H), 2.32 (s, 3 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 199.4, 138.2, 136.9, 135.7, 133.1, 129.2, 128.6, 128.3, 128.1, 40.6, 29.7, 21.0.1-Phenyl-3-(m-tolyl)propan-1-one (3ac)^2d Yield 86% (95.2 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.96 (d, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H), 7.55 (t, J = 7.3 Hz, 1 H), 7.45 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.19 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 1 H), 7.04 (dd, J = 13.2, 9.1 Hz, 3 H), 3.33–3.26 (m, 2 H), 3.06–2.99 (m, 2 H), 2.33 (s, 3 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 199.4, 141.3, 138.1, 136.9, 133.1, 129.3, 128.6, 128.5, 128.1, 126.9, 125.4, 40.6, 30.1, 21.4.3-(2-Methoxyphenyl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3ad)¹⁴ Yield 85% (102 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.97 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 2 H), 7.53 (t, J = 7.3 Hz, 1 H), 7.43 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.23–7.16 (m, 2 H), 6.92–6.81 (m, 2 H), 3.81 (s, 3 H), 3.29–3.22 (m, 2 H), 3.08–3.01 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 200.0, 157.6, 137.0, 132.9, 130.2, 129.6, 128.6, 128.2, 127.6, 120.6, 110.3, 55.2, 39.0, 25.8.3-(4-Chlorophenyl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3ae)¹⁴ Yield 90% (109.8 mg), colorless oil (88.5–90 °C). ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.98–7.91 (m, 2 H), 7.56 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.45 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 7.28–7.24 (m, 2 H), 7.18 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 2 H), 3.28 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H), 3.04 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.9, 139.7, 136.8, 133.2, 131.9, 129.8, 128.7, 128.6, 128.0, 40.2, 29.4.3-(4-Bromophenyl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3af)¹⁴ Yield 83% (119.5 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.04–7.95 (m, 2 H), 7.58 (dd, J = 10.7, 4.0 Hz, 2 H), 7.48 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.35 (dd, J = 7.6, 1.6 Hz, 1 H), 7.27 (td, J = 7.5, 1.1 Hz, 1 H), 7.10 (td, J = 7.7, 1.7 Hz, 1 H), 3.37–3.32 (m, 2 H), 3.24–3.19 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.9, 140.6, 136.8, 133.2, 132.9, 130.8, 128.6, 128.1, 128.0, 127.7, 124.4, 38.6, 30.8.3-(2,3-Difluorophenyl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3ag)Yield 81% (99.6 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.01–7.95 (m, 2 H), 7.59 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.48 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 7.08–6.98 (m, 3 H), 3.34 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H), 3.15 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.6, 149.9 (dd, J = 243, 13 Hz), 136.6, 133.2, 130.6 (d, J = 12 Hz), 128.7, 128.0, 125.6 (t, J = 4 Hz), 123.9 (dd, J = 6, 4 Hz), 115.2 (d, J = 17 Hz), 38.6, 23.6.3-(2,3-Dimethylphenyl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3ah)Yield 86% (102.3 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.00 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.59 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.49 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.11–7.05 (m, 3 H), 3.27 (dd, J = 9.3, 6.5 Hz, 2 H), 3.15–3.08 (m, 2 H), 2.33 (s, 3 H), 2.28 (s, 3 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 199.5, 139.3, 137.1, 136.9, 134.6, 133.1, 128.6, 128.1, 128.1, 126.9, 125.6, 39.6, 28.3, 20.7, 15.1. ESI-HRMS: m/z calcd for C₁₇H₁₉O [M + H]⁺: 239.1436; found: 239.1433.3-(Furan-2-yl)-1-phenylpropan-1-one (3ai)^22a Yield 82% (82 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.99–7.95 (m, 2 H), 7.56 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.45 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 7.33–7.28 (m, 1 H), 6.30–6.25 (m, 1 H), 6.05 (d, J = 3.1 Hz, 1 H), 3.35–3.31 (m, 2 H), 3.11–3.07 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.7, 154.8, 141.1, 136.8, 133.2, 128.6, 128.1, 110.3, 105.3, 36.9, 22.5.1-Phenyl-3-(thiophen-2-yl)propan-1-one (3aj)^22b Yield 80% (86.4 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.98–7.93 (m, 2 H), 7.55 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 1 H), 7.45 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 7.11 (dd, J = 5.1, 0.9 Hz, 1 H), 6.91 (dd, J = 5.0, 3.5 Hz, 1 H), 6.85 (d, J = 3.1 Hz, 1 H), 3.38–3.33 (m, 2 H), 3.31–3.26 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.6, 143.9, 136.8, 133.2, 128.7, 128.1, 126.9, 124.7, 123.4, 40.6, 24.2.1-(4-Fluorophenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3ba)^2d Yield 88% (100.3 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.99–7.93 (m, 2 H), 7.32–7.18 (m, 5 H), 7.09 (t, J = 8.6 Hz, 2 H), 3.25 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 3.05 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 197.6, 165.7 (d, J = 253 Hz), 141.2, 133.3 (d, J = 2 Hz), 130.7 (d, J = 9 Hz), 128.60, 128.5 (d, J = 14 Hz), 126.2, 115.7 (d, J = 22 Hz), 40.4, 30.1. ESI-HRMS: m/z calcd for C₁₅H₁₄OF [M + H]⁺: 229.1029; found: 229.1030.1-(4-Chlorophenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bb)^2d Yield 84% (102.5 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.91–7.86 (m, 2 H), 7.42 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 2 H), 7.31–7.20 (m, 5 H), 3.26 (dd, J = 10.0, 5.3 Hz, 2 H), 3.06 (dd, J = 10.0, 5.2 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.0, 141.1, 139.5, 135.2, 129.5, 128.9, 128.,6 128.4, 126.2, 40.4, 30.1.1-(4-Bromophenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bc)^2d Yield 83% (119.5 mg), yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.84 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 2 H), 7.61 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 2 H), 7.36–7.22 (m, 5 H), 3.29 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 3.09 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.2, 141.1, 135.6, 131.9, 129.6, 128.6, 128.4, 128.3, 126.3, 40.4, 30.1.3-Phenyl-1-[4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]propan-1-one (3bd)^2d Yield 80% (111.2 mg), yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.07 (d, J = 8.2 Hz, 2 H), 7.74 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 2 H), 7.36–7.22 (m, 5 H), 3.35 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 3.11 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.2, 140.9, 139.5, 134.6 (q, J = 33 Hz), 128.6, 128.4, 128.4, 126.3, 125.7 (q, J = 4 Hz), 123.5 (q, J = 258 Hz), 40.8, 29.9.1-(3-Bromo-4-fluorophenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3be)Yield 87% (133.1 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.19 (dd, J = 6.6, 2.1 Hz, 1 H), 7.92 (ddd, J = 8.5, 4.7, 2.1 Hz, 1 H), 7.36–7.30 (m, 2 H), 7.28–7.18 (m, 4 H), 3.28 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 3.09 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 196.5, 162.0 (d, J = 244 Hz), 140.9, 134.4 (d, J = 3 Hz), 134.0 (d, J = 1 Hz), 129.2 (d, J = 8 Hz), 128.6, 128.4, 126.3, 116.7 (d, J = 23 Hz), 109.9 (d, J = 22 Hz), 40.4, 30.0. ESI-HRMS m/z calcd for C₁₅H₁₃OBrF [M + H]⁺: 307.0134; found: 307.0135.1-(4-Nitrophenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bf)^22c Yield 81% (103.3 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.32 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 2 H), 8.11 (d, J = 8.8 Hz, 2 H), 7.36–7.30 (m, 2 H), 7.27 (dd, J = 11.1, 4.1 Hz, 3 H), 3.37 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H), 3.12 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 197.7, 150.3, 141.3, 140.6, 129.1, 128.7, 128.4, 126.4, 123.9, 41.0, 29.9.3-Phenyl-1-(p-tolyl)propan-1-one (3bg)^2d Yield 90% (100.8 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.90 (d, J = 8.2 Hz, 2 H), 7.36–7.23 (m, 7 H), 3.34–3.28 (m, 2 H), 3.13–3.07 (m, 2 H), 2.44 (s, 3 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 198.9, 143.9, 141.4, 134.4, 129.3, 128.6, 128.5, 128.2, 126.1, 40.4, 30.3, 21.7.1-(4-Methoxyphenyl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bh)¹⁴ Yield 92% (110.4 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.72 (dd, J = 7.7, 1.7 Hz, 1 H), 7.51–7.46 (m, 1 H), 7.28 (dq, J = 21.7, 7.4 Hz, 5 H), 7.06–6.97 (m, 2 H), 3.91 (s, 3 H), 3.37–3.31 (m, 2 H), 3.09–3.03 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 201.8, 158.6, 141.8, 133.5, 130.4, 128.5, 128.4, 128.3, 125.9, 120.7, 111.5, 55.5, 45.5, 30.5.3-Phenyl-1-(thiophen-2-yl)propan-1-one (3bi)^12b Yield 87% (94.0 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.72 (d, J = 3.8 Hz, 1 H), 7.65 (d, J = 4.9 Hz, 1 H), 7.36–7.27 (m, 4 H), 7.24 (t, J = 7.5 Hz, 1 H), 7.14 (t, J = 4.3 Hz, 1 H), 3.29–3.24 (m, 2 H), 3.13–3.08 (m, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 192.2, 144.2, 141.0, 133.6, 131.9, 128.6, 128.5, 128.1, 126.3, 41.2, 30.4.1-(Furan-2-yl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bj)^12b Yield 81% (89.1 mg), pale yellow oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.59 (d, J = 0.9 Hz, 1 H), 7.34–7.19 (m, 6 H), 6.54 (dd, J = 3.5, 1.6 Hz, 1 H), 3.21–3.16 (m, 2 H), 3.07 (dd, J = 9.7, 5.3 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 188.5, 152.7, 146.4, 141.0, 128.5, 128.4, 126.2, 117.1, 112.2, 40.2, 30.0.1-(Naphthalen-1-yl)-3-phenylpropan-1-one (3bk)¹⁴ Yield 93% (120.9 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 8.60 (d, J = 8.5 Hz, 1 H), 8.01 (d, J = 8.2 Hz, 1 H), 7.91 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1 H), 7.85 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1 H), 7.64–7.55 (m, 2 H), 7.50 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 1 H), 7.31 (dq, J = 12.0, 7.3 Hz, 5 H), 3.42 (t, J = 7.7 Hz, 2 H), 3.18 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 2 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 203.6, 141.2, 136.0, 134.0, 132.6, 130.2, 128.6, 128.5, 128.5, 127.9, 127.5, 126.5, 126.2, 125.8, 124.4, 43.9, 30.6.(E)-5-Phenyl-1-(2,6,6-trimethylcyclohex-2-en-1-yl)pent-1-en-3-one (3bl)Yield 78% (110.0 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.36–7.18 (m, 7 H), 6.15 (d, J = 16.3 Hz, 1 H), 2.96 (td, J = 14.1, 6.9 Hz, 4 H), 2.08 (t, J = 6.0 Hz, 2 H), 1.76 (s, 3 H), 1.65 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 1 H), 1.49 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 2 H), 1.07 (s, 6 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 199.7, 142.5, 141.4, 136.2, 136.0, 130.5, 128.5, 128.4, 126.1, 42.2, 39.7, 34.1, 33.6, 30.4, 28.8, 21.8, 18.9. ESI-HRMS m/z calcd for C₂₀H₂₇O [M + H]⁺: 283.2062; found: 283.2064.1,5-Diphenylpentan-3-one (3bm)^22d Yield 76% (90.4 mg), colorless oil. ¹H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 7.31 (t, J = 7.4 Hz, 4 H), 7.22 (dd, J = 17.0, 7.3 Hz, 6 H), 2.93 (t, J = 7.6 Hz, 4 H), 2.75 (dd, J = 9.7, 5.5 Hz, 4 H). ¹³C NMR (100 MHz, CDCl₃): δ = 209.2, 141.0, 128.5, 128.3, 126.1, 44.5, 29.8
• 22a Seck C, Mbaye MD, Coufourier S, Lator A, Lohier J.-F, Poater A, Ward TR, Gaillard S, Renaud J.-L. ChemCatChem 2017; 9: 4410
• 22b Li P, Xiao G, Zhao Y, Su H. ACS Catal. 2020; 10: 3640
• 22c Kim H.-S, Lee S.-J, Yoon C.-M. Bull. Korean Chem. Soc. 2013; 34: 325
• 22d Mohan KJ, Purnima S. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2004; 77: 549

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 29. Dezember 2020

Angenommen nach Revision: 26. Januar 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
08. Februar 2021