March 28, 2024, 03:27:12 PM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: An interesting Reaction  (Read 51595 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #60 on: November 10, 2009, 08:52:39 PM »
Go on, azmanam. Certainly you can finish the problem.
 
 
 

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #61 on: November 10, 2009, 08:55:54 PM »
Actually neither product of philmont702a' path 2 is the framework of opiod-type molecules. Check it carefully.

Offline azmanam

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
  • Mole Snacks: +160/-24
  • Mediocrity is a handrail -Charles Louis d'Secondat
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #62 on: November 10, 2009, 09:17:25 PM »
Actually, it looks a lot like the molecular skeleton of part of morphine.  It's not morphine and it's not likely going to be taken on to morphine, but it is the same carbon skeleton.

To do a FC, you need a carbocation, I don't like this pathway much, but here's my guess.
Knowing why you got a question wrong is better than knowing that you got a question right.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #63 on: November 10, 2009, 11:49:39 PM »
azmanam, your product is so strained that I think its formation is impossible. Sorry I made a mistake, the first product of philmont702a's path 2 is is the framework of opiod-type molecules, and maybe that way proposed by him was right, which was different from my own idea. I don't have the standard anwswer for the problem, we can have a disscussion. But both the products are certain. My only reference is my text book Medicinal Chemistry, so I had to take a photo. I copied it from the synthesis  of pentazocine, which is of the opiod-type.Maybe we are too boring with this problem now, so I post it.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #64 on: November 10, 2009, 11:53:46 PM »
The following is my own idea, I'm not quite sure whether it's right. For F-C rxn, 6-membered ring is most easily to be formed.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 12:12:14 AM by Heory »

Offline Ulfsaar

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
  • Mole Snacks: +2/-0
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #65 on: November 11, 2009, 05:35:57 AM »
 ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
That is so strange^ I can't understand why does not the amino group make addition to the carbonly group instead of  the Prins reaction?In a special words  that is 囧

Offline azmanam

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
  • Mole Snacks: +160/-24
  • Mediocrity is a handrail -Charles Louis d'Secondat
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #66 on: November 11, 2009, 05:59:40 AM »
Your product in red, and my molecule in blue (showing philmont's pdt's similarity to morphine) are the same except for the loss of the methyl group from the aryl ring.

OMe (or OH in your case) is a srong o,p director.  6 membered ring from straightaway FC rxn at the meta position is unlikely.  I like the p-directed FC followed by alkyl shift better.

I'm at home w/o chemdraw, but we can talk about stereochem when I get to work.  I don't think you've drawn the newman projection of the aldehyde piece correctly.  You have the aryl group directly attached to the aldehyde carbon, but there is a methylene in between.  The methylene makes the aryl chain much smaller than it looks and I suspect will not impart much selectivity on the prins step.  I suspect the stereodivergent step will be at the FC stage.
Knowing why you got a question wrong is better than knowing that you got a question right.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #67 on: November 11, 2009, 06:31:37 AM »
Yes, in my newman projection, the right group is Bn not Ar, but still Bn is the largest group that binds the aldehyde's carbonyl carbon.
Of course I agree that OH is a srong o,p director, but if the cabocation attacked p-position, strain of TS of the 5-membered ring would be quite large, or even the TS couldn't be organised, I think. OH is a srong o,p director, doesn't mean that activity of m-position is decreased by OH. Actually OH activated all position of the benzene ring, but o,p is more reactive than m.
Selectivity on the Prins step (maybe not very favorable) decides that on the F-C step.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 06:50:47 AM by Heory »

Offline philmont702a

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11
  • Mole Snacks: +1/-1
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #68 on: November 11, 2009, 09:28:22 AM »
ortho/para directing:  The OH is definitely an ortho/para director.  Thus, it will react preferentially at those positions FIRST, then if put under enough duress may react further. 

5-membered ring: The rates for 5 membered rings are faster than 6, which are faster than 7, etc.  This goes for a multitude of reactions from RCM to Dieckmann condensations. 

Stereochem: Though I can see from your newman projection why you might think that stereochemistry might be imparted on this reaction, that same newman projection can be rotated and the strain would not be significantly different.  If any selectivity is observed, it is minimal, and definitely diastereoselective, not enantioselective.  The stereochemistry you are predicting for the product is more probable to come from the cyclization step of the friedel-crafts reaction.  However, there appears to be no significant director for the stereochemistry of that step.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #69 on: November 11, 2009, 09:56:20 AM »
 ;)bad network.

Offline azmanam

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
  • Mole Snacks: +160/-24
  • Mediocrity is a handrail -Charles Louis d'Secondat
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #70 on: November 11, 2009, 11:11:51 AM »
Here are the relevant references.  One is in German, and we don't have access to it anyway (though I think it is the key reference we need!) and the other doesn't discuss the mechanism in any detail, only to say the product is one with the new alkyl group meta to the OH.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ange.19470590703
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jhet.5570060108

I disagree that the 5-membered spirocycle is disfavored.  I made a model of it and it fits together quite nicely.  Chem3D shows the piperidine in a nice chair, the 5-membered ring in a nice envelope and - in the lowest energy conformer - the correct C-C bond (the one from aryl to tertiary carbon) to be situated nicely to migrate. 
Knowing why you got a question wrong is better than knowing that you got a question right.

Offline Heory

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-2
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #71 on: November 11, 2009, 01:22:53 PM »
 ;)

Offline azmanam

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1417
  • Mole Snacks: +160/-24
  • Mediocrity is a handrail -Charles Louis d'Secondat
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #72 on: November 11, 2009, 02:18:38 PM »
I'm going to stir up the mud again.  Going back to the aldehyde and amine (the product of the Darzen's reaction), you can get to the product through imine formation.  If I would have drawn the immediate product of the Eshweiler-Clark cyclization correctly, we would have[1].  I really believe the lone pair on nitrogen is more nucleophilic than the pi bond of the alkene in this first step.  I believe imine formation happens followed by 6-endo-trig cyclization (favored under Baldwin's rules.  This transition state is much more ordered.  That gets us to the same carbocation which can be trapped by water to get us to the same piperidine/alcohol for the HBr step.

And, no, I really truly don't believe the meta position will attack anything.  The ortho and para positions are much, much more nucleophilic.  All it takes is a chair flip and rotation of the methylene linker to put the aryl group in close proximity to the carbocation without much steric interference.  Build a model, it fits quite nicely.  At that point, analogous to Bayer-Villiger type mechanisms, the more electron rich carbon atom (the tertiary one) will migrate.  It also happens to be nicely oriented to provide maximum overlap of the C-C sigma bond and the pi* orbital for migration.

[1] http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=37220.msg142811#msg142811
Knowing why you got a question wrong is better than knowing that you got a question right.

Offline movies

  • Organic Minion
  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1973
  • Mole Snacks: +222/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Better living through chemistry!
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #73 on: November 11, 2009, 02:28:32 PM »
??? ??? ??? ??? ???
That is so strange^ I can't understand why does not the amino group make addition to the carbonly group instead of  the Prins reaction?In a special words  that is 囧

I agree.  Why not like this?  Iminium ion cyclizations are certainly well precedented!


EDIT: Looks like azmanam beat me to it!

Offline sjb

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3653
  • Mole Snacks: +222/-42
  • Gender: Male
Re: An interesting Reaction
« Reply #74 on: November 11, 2009, 02:39:15 PM »
I agree.  Why not like this?  Iminium ion cyclizations are certainly well precedented!

Whilst iminium ion cyclisations are precedented, is there not a danger that the pH is so low that there is not really any significant RNH2 around, rather RNH3+, and so not nucleophilic enough?

Sponsored Links