Geraint H M Davies1, Matthieu Jouffroy1, Fatemeh Sherafat1,2, Borna Saeednia1,3, Casey Howshall1, Gary A Molander1. 1. Roy and Diana Vagelos Laboratories, Department of Chemistry, University of Pennsylvania , 231 South 34th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6323, United States. 2. School of Chemistry, College of Science, University of Tehran , PO Box 14155 6455 Tehran, Iran. 3. Laboratory of Organic Synthesis and Natural Products, Department of Chemistry, Sharif University of Technology , Azadi Street, PO Box 111559516 Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
Methods for the regioselective C-H borylation and subsequent cross-coupling of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene core are reported. Azaborines are dependent on B-N/C═C isosterism when employed in strategies for developing diverse heterocyclic scaffolds. Although 2,1-borazaronaphthalene is closely related to naphthalene in terms of structure, the argument is made that the former has electronic similarities to indole. Based on that premise, iridium-mediated C-H activation has enabled facile installation of a versatile, nucleophilic coupling handle at a previously inaccessible site of 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes. A variety of substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalene cores can be successfully borylated and further cross-coupled in a facile manner to yield diverse C(8)-substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes.
Methods for the regioselective C-H borylation and subsequent cross-coupling of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecore are reported. Azaborines are dependent on B-N/C═C isosterism when employed in strategies for developing diverse heterocyclic scaffolds. Although 2,1-borazaronaphthalene is closely related to naphthalene in terms of structure, the argument is made that the former has electronic similarities to indole. Based on that premise, iridium-mediated C-H activation has enabled facile installation of a versatile, nucleophiliccoupling handle at a previously inaccessible site of 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes. A variety of substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecores can be successfully borylated and further cross-coupled in a facile manner to yield diverse C(8)-substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes.
Isosteres provide versatile
molecular scaffolds to optimize chemical
space for biological and materials applications.[1] By providing a diverse array of exchangeable, electronically
and sterically related chemical motifs, isosteres allow molecules
to be fine-tuned for specific needs. Azaborines exemplify one such
class of valuable compounds.[2] Capitalizing
on the ability of the B–N bond to mimic a C=C bond,
numerous aromatic and heteroaromatic systems have been successfully
imitated with prospects for rapid diversification patterns not available
in the parent system. The 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecore is one of the
most prominent azaborine systems, highlighted by robust synthetic
methods and several strategies for derivatization.[3] Furthermore, the potential bioisosteric viability of this
specific system has been recently demonstrated in comparisons with
a β-blocker[4a] and phosphodiesterase
10A inhibitors.[4b]The versatility
of 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes arises from the desymmetrization
of the heterocycliccore, providing several modes of functionalization
(Figure ). Our group
reported accessing these substructures from o-aminostyrene
and trifluoroborate derivatives, providing diverse substituents off
both boron and nitrogen.[3a] Additionally,
diversification off boroncan be established by nucleophilic substitution
and cross-coupling strategies.[3c,3d] Based on the electronics
of the system, selective bromination occurs at the C(3)-position,
followed by secondary bromination at C(6). Recently, halogenation
at C(4) has been reported when accessing the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene
from the corresponding 2-alkynyl-anilines with dichloroboranes.[3g] The brominated cores can be functionalized by
traditional cross-coupling,[3b,3g] reductive-coupling,[3e] and even sp2–sp3 photoredox cross-coupling,[3f] to install
myriad functional groups. Employing an iterative process, this protocol
has been successfully applied to the sequential 3,6-difunctionalization
of 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecores.[3b] However,
access to the remaining positions of substitution has continued to
be challenging, limiting the viability of the system as a whole. This
is exemplified in the synthesis of 2,1-borazaronaphthalene mimetics
of propranolol,[4a] where C(5) and C(8) ethereally
substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalene derivatives required pre-installation
of the oxygen functional unit, followed by protection, deprotection,
and two subsequent modification steps to introduce the desired side
chain. Although such a synthesis might be tolerated from an exploratory,
chemical design viewpoint, this strategy would be inefficient for
a more expansive molecular diversity study, costing significant time,
effort, and material.
Figure 1
Diversification of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene core.
Diversification of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecore.
Reaction Design and Optimization
When considering ways
to expand the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene motif, installing a nucleophiliccoupling handle directly on the azaborinecore
would be beneficial. This would present an alternative approach to
those employing an electrophilic, brominated core,
opening up a wide array of complementary transformations.[5] One major drawback to most classical methods
for installing nucleophiliccoupling partners is that they are often
derived from the corresponding halides, effectively passing through
the electrophiliccoupling partner in an inefficient synthetic pathway.
A direct C–H borylation would circumvent that limitation and
would lead directly to a readily diversifiable handle on the azaborinecore.[6] Inspired by the report of the borylation
of 1,2-dihydro-1,2-azaborine,[7] along with
the diversity of methods for bicyclic systems, it was envisioned that
iridium-catalyzed C–H borylation would provide a versatile
platform capable of high regioselectivity.Structurally, the
2,1-borazaronaphthalene is isosteric to naphthalene, which diborylates
as a mixture of 2,6- or 2,7-disubstituted isomers (Figure A),[8] owing to a lack of inherent directing effects. Quinolines, which
have a similar atomic placement, undergo C(8)-borylation using silica-supported
phosphine ligands (Figure B1).[9] With traditional amine ligands,
borylation of quinoline is predominantly favored at the C(4)-position
(Figure B2), with
subsequent addition at either the C(6)- or C(7)-positions.[10] Indoles, which possess an aromatic N–H
functional unit with a geometric trade-off to a 6,5-ring system, typically
borylate at the C(2)-position.[11] However,
introducing substitution at the C(2)-position of indole, which is
consonant with B-substitution on 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes,
causes exclusive borylation at the C(7)-position (Figure D).[12] Furthermore, it is interesting to note the similarity between the
electrophilic bromination patterns of 2-phenylindole and 2-phenyl-2,1-borazaronaphthalene,
as both brominate at the 3-position (Figure ).[3b,13]
Figure 2
Iridium-catalyzed C–H
borylation of bicyclic systems. The
first site of borylation depicted in bold; second sites of borylation
are depicted depicted by dotted line.
Figure 3
Electrophilic bromination of 2-phenyl 2,1-borazaronaphthalene and
2-phenylindole.
Iridium-catalyzed C–H
borylation of bicyclic systems. The
first site of borylation depicted in bold; second sites of borylation
are depicted depicted by dotted line.Electrophilic bromination of 2-phenyl 2,1-borazaronaphthalene and
2-phenylindole.Considering these three representative bicyclic models for 2,1-borazaronaphthalene,
computationally derived electrostatic potential maps were compared
to determine their surface electronic similarities (Figure ). Cursory observation validates
the archetypal resemblance of the 2-phenyl-2,1-borazaronaphthalene
(Figure A) to 2-phenylnaphthalene
(Figure C). However,
with our interest in leveraging the desymmetrization of the azaborinecore, a deeper look into the distribution of electron density across
the surface of the molecules yields a clear likeness to 2-phenylindole
(Figure B). In both
the azaborine and indole electrostatic potential maps, a significant
density of electrons resides around the N–H bond, not seen
in either of the other structures (Figure C,D). Also, there appears to be a distinct
similarity in the asymmetric distribution of the partially electron-deficient
region within the bicycliccores. Encouraged by the congruence of
the electrostatic potentials and the comparable reactivity profile
for electrophilic bromination, indolecould be considered electronically
comparable and potentially useful in providing a foundation to predict
the selectivity of C–H borylation.
Figure 4
Electrostatic potentials
(from +31.38 kcal/mol to −15.69
kcal/mol) for bicyclic systems. Calculations performed at B3LYP/6-31G(d)
level of theory[14] using Gaussian 09[15] visualized via WebMO.[16]
Electrostatic potentials
(from +31.38 kcal/mol to −15.69
kcal/mol) for bicyclic systems. Calculations performed at B3LYP/6-31G(d)
level of theory[14] using Gaussian 09[15] visualized via WebMO.[16]The iridium-catalyzed borylation
of 2-substituted indoles and similarly
structured aniline scaffolds have been extensively studied by Smith
and co-workers, with the anilines proposed to go through a mechanism
in which outer-sphere hydrogen-bond coordination of the nitrogen occurs
to direct the C–H functionalization.[12,17] The nitrogen of indole is suggested to be incorporated in the mechanism,
providing selectivity for the C(7)-position. Computational elucidation
of the iridium-catalyzed C–H borylation of several aromatic
systems indicates that the transition state for C–H activation,
which is predictive of the regioselectivity, contains “significant
proton-transfer character”.[18] It
was surmised that the relative anionic stability of the different
C–H centers of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecore, a trait of
proton-transfer processes, could generally predict the site of C–H
borylation in these systems. This method is analogous to Liu’s
use of theoretically derived pKa values
in justifying the site selectivity for iridium C–H borylation
of 1,2-dihydro-1,2-azaborine.[7]To
validate this approach, computational comparisons of the anion
stability at various positions around 2-phenylindole were used as
a representative system (see Supporting Information for complete anionic stability studies). Surprisingly, both the
C(3)-position and the ortho-site of the external
phenyl ring were more anionically stabilizing than the known C(7)-borylation
site (Figure ). However,
it is well documented that those sites are inaccessible based on steric
factors, considering the steric bulk of the iridium catalyst.[19] Anionic stability only accounts for the electronic
factors of the C–H activation event, thus stericconstraints
must also be entertained. Removing these two nonviable sites, the
theoretical method correctly predicted the C(7)-site for borylation.
Applying this method to 2-phenyl-2,1-borazaronaphthalene, the C(8)-position
appeared to be significantly more amenable to anioniccharge stabilization
that any other position. Considering this predicted site of borylation
in the azaborine has no foreseeable stericconstraints, this functionalization
method was anticipated to provide access to a previously unattainable
position of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
Figure 5
Regioselective analysis
for iridium C–H activation for 2-phenyl
indole and 2-phenyl-2,1-borazaraonaphthalene.
Regioselective analysis
for iridium C–H activation for 2-phenyl
indole and 2-phenyl-2,1-borazaraonaphthalene.Excited by the potential regioselectivity of the C–H
activation
strategy, high-throughput experimentation (HTE) was leveraged to survey
the various reported C–H borylation conditions for optimal
regioselectivity for the 2,1-borazaronaphthalene system (eq ).[6f] In
total, close to 450 conditions (see Supporting Information) were screened to assess variables such as iridium
sources, ligands, solvents, and relative ratios of these components.
Bipyridine- and phenanthroline-based ligands proved to be superior
to other nitrogen-containing homobidentate ligands, with reaction
incorporating those ligands going to full conversion. In contrast,
diphosphine ligands showed minimal conversion.[6g] It was further found that catalyst loading was optimal
at 4 mol % with a 1:1.25 metal-to-ligand ratio. A slight excess (1.05
equiv) of B2Pin2 was required for the reaction
to go to completion. However, significant excess led to an increase
of diborylated product. As previously observed, solvent played an
important role in controlling selectivity, with nonpolar solvents
such as hexane and methylcyclohexane proving optimal.Upon validation of these conditions on benchtop scale, it
was observed
that higher reaction concentration coincided with increased diborylation.
Temperature also played a significant role in sequestering an N-borylated
byproduct and preventing significant diborylation. However, given
that the solubility of some of the substrates in methylcyclohexane
was very low at room temperature, those less soluble substrates required
elevated temperatures (40 °C vs 80 °C) for the reaction
to proceed. NMR analysis of the isolated, monoborylated compound indicated
exclusive borylation at the previously predicted (C)8-position, and
this was later confirmed via single crystal X-ray diffraction analysis
(Figure ).
Figure 6
X-ray crystal
structure of C(8)-borylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
X-ray crystal
structure of C(8)-borylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
C–H Borylation Substrate Scope
With conditions
for C–H borylation at the (C)8-position of 2,1-borazaronaphthalene
established, the applicability to various substrates was considered,
starting with substitution off of the boron of the borazine (Table ). A variety of different B-aryl-2,1-borazaronaphthalene substructures (3a–k) were tolerated with various levels of success.
Electronic diversification off the aryl substituent seemed to have
little impact on the reaction outcome (compare 3a,d,h). However, the substitution pattern off the B-aryl subunit did influence the effectiveness of the reaction,
with para-substitution being preferred over either meta- or ortho-substitution (compare 3e to 3f and 3h–j). Furan substitution (3m) was tolerated, albeit modestly,
as it presents a competing site for C–H borylation.[20] Alkyl-substituted 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes (3o–r) were typically well behaved, presumably
because of the increased solubility in the reaction solvent. In almost
all cases, the mass balance for the reaction consisted exclusively
of starting material, product, and various amounts of a single diborylated
byproduct, suggesting that reoptimization for a specific substrate
would provide a high return of product.
Table 1
Borylation
Scope of Boron-Substituted
2,1-Borazaronaphthalenes
More elaborate 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes were next
explored and
found to be competent in the selective C–H borylation process
(Table ). 3-Bromo-2,1-borazaronaphthalenes
(4a,b) and the 3,6-dibrominated core (4c) reacted reasonably efficiently, as did a substrate with
aryl substitution at the 3-position (4d), a cross-coupled
product of 4a.[3b] 7-Fluoro-2,1-borazaronaphthalene
was also suitable in the selective reaction, providing 4e in modest yield. However, no other substituent at the 7-positions
(e.g., i-Pr, Me) allowed productive borylation. Presumably,
the stericconstraints imparted by substitution at this position prevent
accessibility by the sterically congested catalyst. Functionalization
at the 6-position was well tolerated, including substrates containing
cyano, (4f), trifluoromethyl (4g), isopropyl
(4h), and trifluoromethoxy (4i) groups.
Compounds with electrophiliccoupling handles, either installed off
the boron subunit (3g–k) or the brominated
borazaronaphthalenecore (4a–c),
provide potential lynchpins for rapid core diversification. One such
avenue could be photoredox cross-coupling, which has demonstrated
tolerance of aryl borinates[21] and has already
been applied with great success to azaborines.[3f]
Table 2
Borylation of Elaborated 2,1-Borazaronaphthtalene
Scaffolds
As previously
mentioned, the exclusive byproduct affecting yields
came from diborylation. Fortuitously, the second C–H borylation
event again occurrs regioselectively, this time at
the C(6)-position (Figure ). When increasing the amount of B2Pin2 in the reaction, this product can be purposely formed (Table ). These diborylated
cores (5a–c) might be further elaborated
in divergent functionalization, capitalizing on the stereoelectronic
disparities between the sites of borylation, similar to prior work
of selective cross-coupling of polyborylated molecules.[22]
Figure 7
X-ray validation of 6,8-diborylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
Table 3
Diborylation of 2,1-Borazaronaphthalene
Cores
X-ray validation of 6,8-diborylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.While screening the borylation
of the 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes,
one observed phenomenon was the formation of the N-borylation product.
Although only observed in trace amounts at elevated temperatures and
lower ligand to metal ratio, similar products have been previously
noted and used as an in situ “traceless”
directing group for the C(3) borylation of indoles.[17a] To probe whether this byproduct was an intermediate of
the reaction pathway, the N-deuterated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene 6 was synthesized and subjected to the borylation conditions
(eq ). No scrambling
of the deuterium was observed in the crude reaction mixture. The C(8)-borylated,
N-deuterated product 7 could be isolated, suggesting
that the N–H insertion, required to obtain the N-borylated
product, is not part of the mechanistic pathway for borylation at
the C(8)-position. However, it does appear that the N–H is
intrinsically valuable for the regiospecificity of the borylation.
When the N-methyl-2,1-borazaronaphthalene 8 was subjected to the borylation reaction, complete conversion was
observed to an inseparable mixture of two regioisomeric products (eq 3). Analysis by 2D NMR suggests that none of the
C(8)-borylated product was obtained. Rather, the isomers obtained
were the C(7)-borylated 9a and C(6)-borylated 9b 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes, with the major product being the C(7)-borylated
isomer. The relative ratio of observed products concurs with the computational
model as the C(7)-position has greater favorable anioniccharge stabilization
compared to the C(6)-positions. It is interesting to note that while
C(7) is the second most favorable point of anionic stabilization,
C(6) ranks fifth, behind both C(5) and C(4). The lack of observed
borylation at those sites could be explained by a peri-interaction,[23] marginally disfavoring those sites. This further
suggests that the N–H could play a fundamental role in enabling
the C(8)-borylation event, consistent with the outer-sphere, hydrogen-bond
coordination model used to explain the ortho-C–H
borylation for similarly structured anilines.[17b]
Cross-Coupling of 8-Borylated 2,1-Borazaronaphthalenes
With a diverse array of borylated compounds in hand, the viability
of the subsequent Suzuki–Miyaura cross-coupling reaction was
studied. Taking from conditions previously established for the inverted
coupling of brominated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene with organotrifluoborates,[3b] with only minor modification to the solvent
and ligand choice, the reaction worked exceedingly well. It was observed
that alcoholic solvent mixtures with water were highly effective (Table ) and that sterically
bulky alcohols produced the best results (entries 3 and 4), avoiding proto-deborylation.
Table 4
Solvent
Optimization of Cross-Couplinga
Product ratios determined by HPLC
using 4,4′-di-tert-butylbiphenyl as internal
standard (IS).
Product ratios determined by HPLC
using 4,4′-di-tert-butylbiphenyl as internal
standard (IS).These optimized
conditions were then tested on a variety of the
borylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalenecores, focusing on adding heterocyclic
diversity to a variety of substituted azaborine substrates (Table ). Across the board,
the yields were generally excellent, with several of the reactions
proceeding nearly quantitatively (10a,c–e,h,i,o). Indeed, for
reactions that went to full conversion, oftentimes the only purification
required was simple aqueous workup followed by rapid purification
through a plug of silica to remove the palladiumcatalyst. In most
cases, yield losses corresponded to the required use of column chromatography,
owing to incomplete reaction. 5-Bromopyrimidinecross-coupled well
with various 8-borylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene analogues (10a–c). Pyridine (10d), quinoline
(10e), and thiophene (10f,g) substrates also worked well. Although highly functionalized cores
such as caffeinecould easily be installed with little difficulty
(10h,i), substitution on the all-carbon
ring of the azaborinecore seemed to hinder the reaction (10j,k). Standard aryl bromidescould also be cross-coupled
in high yields (10n–q), including
challenging electron-rich N,N-dimethylamino derivatives
(10p,q). Unusual substuctures were synthesized
using both nucleophilic and electrophilic2,1-borazaronaphthalene
derivatives that could be conjoined to generate heterodimeric-azaborines
(10l,m).
Table 5
Cross-Coupling of
(Hetero)aryl Bromides
with 8-Borylated 2,1-Borazaronaphthalene Cores
Conclusions
In summary, a protocol
for the selective C–H borylation
and subsequent cross-coupling of 2,1-borazaronaphthalenes has been
developed, allowing late-stage functionalization of a previously inaccessible
position (Figure ).
Furthermore, an isoelectroniccorrelation of 2,1-borazaronaphthalene
to indole is presented for the first time. Computational methods to
account for the electronic factors of proton-transfer-like C–H
activation were applied to identify the potential site of borylation.
High-throughput experimentation was utilized for rapid identification
of viable reaction conditions that were applicable across a wide array
of substrates. Subjecting the reaction to excess B2Pin2 resulted in the exclusive formation of a diborylated adduct,
providing an unprecedented opportunity for chemoselective functionalization
in the all-carbon ring. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that the
N–H is imperative for selectivity, although the reaction is
most probably not going through a productive N–H insertion
pathway. The resulting borylated substrates could be further cross-coupled
using mild Suzuki–Miyaura conditions to provide highly elaborated
azaborine scaffolds. These developed methods open up new opportunities
for the diversification of 2,1-borazaronaphthalene and thus entries
into unexplored isosteric space wholly inaccessible to the all-carbonnaphthalenecore itself.
Figure 8
Methods of diversification for 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
Methods of diversification for 2,1-borazaronaphthalene.
Experimental Section
General
Considerations
All reactions were carried out
under an inert atmosphere of nitrogen or argon in oven-dried glassware,
unless otherwise noted. Toluene was dried using a J. C. Meyer solvent
system. Methylcyclohexane was degassed under a stream of argon. All
reagents were purchased commercially and used as received, unless
otherwise noted. Column chromatography was performed by Combiflash
using RediSep Rf Gold Normal-Phase Silicacolumns. Melting points
(°C) are uncorrected. Mass spectra (ESI- or EI-TOF) were recorded
using CH2Cl2 or MeCN as the solvent. IR spectra
were recorded using FTIR-ATR of the neat oil or solid products. NMR
spectra (1H, 13C {1H}, 11B, 19F {1H}) were performed at 298 K. 1H (500.4 MHz) and 13C {1H} (125.8 MHz)
NMR chemical shifts are reported relative to internal TMS (δ
= 0.00 ppm) or to residual protiated solvent. Any observed splitting
in the 13C {1H} NMR spectra is due to 13C–19F coupling. 11B (128.4 MHz) and 19F {1H} NMR (470.8 MHz) chemical shifts were referenced
to external BF3·Et2O (0.0 ppm) and CFCl3 (0.0 ppm), respectively. Data are presented as follows: chemical
shift (ppm), multiplicity (s = singlet, d = doublet, t = triplet,
q = quartet, sept = septet, m = multiplet, br = broad), coupling constant J (Hz), and integration.
Unreported 2,1-Borazaronaphthalene
Scaffolds
2,1-Borazaronaphthalene
structures were synthesized by conditions as previously reported.[3a] In cases where the o-aminostyrene
was not available, o-bromoaniline derivatives (1.0
equiv) were cross-coupled with vinyltrifluoroborate (1.1 equiv) using
PdCl2·dppf (10 mol %) and Cs2CO3 (2.5 equiv) in THF/H2O (9:1–0.1 M) mixture at
70 °C for 16 h. After consumption of the bromoaniline, the reaction
was quenched with H2O, extracted with Et2O,
dried (MgSO4), and concentrated in vacuo. The resulting solids were subject to a flash plug of silica, eluting
with a 1:1 mixture of hexane/EtOAc, and then concentrated in vacuo. The resulting crude o-aminostyrenes
were then subjected to the azaborinecyclization reaction with p-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl-trifluoroborate (1.05 equiv) using
SiCl4 (1.0 equiv) and Et3N (1.5 equiv) in CPME/toluene
(1:1–0.25 M) at 60 °C for 16 h. The reactions were then
subjected to a silica gel plug and flushed with 9:1 mixture of hexane/EtOAc
and further purified by automated column chromatography if required.
7-Fluoro-2-(4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-2,1-borazaronaphthalene
(Starting Material 4e)
Deuteration of 2,1-borazaronaphthalene N-Deuterio-2-(4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-2,1-borazaronaphthalene
(6)
To a microwave vial with a stir bar, 2-(4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-2,1-borazaronaphthalene
(273 mg, 1 mmol, 1 equiv) was added. The vial was capped and purged
with argon. Et2O (3 mL) was added followed by KHMDS (2
mL of a 1 M solution in THF, 2 equiv). The reaction was stirred for
20 min at rt, at which time D2O (3 mL) was added dropwise
and stirred for an additional 30 min. The reaction mixture was then
extracted with EtOAc (5 mL) and dried (MgSO4). Removal
of the solvent afforded 218 mg (80%) of a yellow solid; mp: 149–150
°C; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 500.4 MHz): δ
8.19 (d, J = 11.5 Hz, 1H), 8.00 (d, J = 7.7 Hz, 2H), 7.71 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 2H), 7.69 (d, J = 7.9 Hz, 1H), 7.48 (t, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H),
7.37 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 7.30–7.19 (m, 2H)
ppm; 13C {1H} NMR (CDCl3, 125.8 MHz):
δ 146.1, 139.7, 132.8, 131.2 (q, J = 32.1 Hz),
129.5, 128.6, 125.7, 124.7 (q, J = 3.7 Hz), 124.3
(q, J = 272.0 Hz), 121.4, 118.2 ppm; 19F {1H} NMR (CDCl3, 470.8 MHz): δ −62.7
ppm; 11B NMR (CDCl3, 128.4 MHz): δ 33.0
ppm; IR: ν = 2923, 2502, 1612, 1325, 1118, 1108, 1071, 812,
762, 643 cm–1; HRMS (EI) m/z calcd for C15H10DBNF3 [M]+ 274.0999, found 274.1018.
Experimental
Procedure for Iridium-Catalyzed C–H Borylation
of 2,1-Borazaronaphthalenes
In a microwave vial with stir
bar, 2,1-borazaronaphthalene (0.5 mmol, 1.0 equiv) and B2Pin2 (133.3 mg, 0.53 mmol, 1.05 equiv) were added. The
reaction vessel was capped and purged with argon followed by the addition
of 1 mL of degassed methylcyclohexane. In a separate vial, [Ir(μ-OMe)(COD)]2 (6.6 mg, 0.01 mmol, 2 mol %) and di-t-Bu-bipyridine
(6.7 mg, 0.025 mmol, 5 mol %) were precomplexed under an inert atmosphere
in 1 mL degassed methylcyclohexane, stirring 30 min at rt as the mixture
turned magenta. The catalyst mixture was then added to the reaction
mixture via syringe. The reaction was then heated and run for 16 h
while being monitored by HPLC for completion. Upon cooling, the reaction
mixture was condensed and adhered to silica, which was directly subjected
to purification by automated silica gelcolumn chromatography with
a gradient solution of hexane/EtOAc as the mobile phase.
Experimental Procedure for Palladium-Catalyzed Cross-Coupling
of 8-Borylated 2,1-Borazaronaphthalenes
To a microwave vial
with a stir bar were added borylated 2,1-borazaronaphthalene (1.0
equiv), solid aryl bromide (1.1 equiv), K2CO3 (3.0 equiv), and XPhos-Pd-G2catalyst (2 mol %). The reaction vial
was then capped and purged with argon. A solvent mixture of degassed t-BuOH/H2O (1:1–2 mL/mmol) was added followed
by any liquid aryl bromides (1.1 equiv). The reaction vessel was then
heated at 40 °C for 18 h. Upon cooling, the solution was washed
with H2O, extracted with CH2Cl2,
further washed with saturated NH4Cl, dried (Na2SO4), and concentrated in vacuo. If required,
the product was further purified by automated column chromatography
with silica gel and hexane/EtOAc as eluent to yield 8-substituted
2,1-borazaronaphthalenes.
Authors: Ibraheem A I Mkhalid; Jonathan H Barnard; Todd B Marder; Jaclyn M Murphy; John F Hartwig Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2010-02-10 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Xie Wang; Geraint H M Davies; Adriel Koschitzky; Steven R Wisniewski; Christopher B Kelly; Gary A Molander Journal: Org Lett Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 6.005
Authors: Ayan Bhattacharjee; Geraint H M Davies; Borna Saeednia; Steven R Wisniewski; Gary A Molander Journal: Adv Synth Catal Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 5.837