4.8 Article

Mechanistic Origins of Regioselectivity in Cobalt-Catalyzed C(sp2)-H Borylation of Benzoate Esters and Arylboronate Esters

期刊

CHEM
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 237-254

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chempr.2020.11.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [5R01GM121441]
  2. Amgen
  3. Princeton University
  4. Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reported synthetic and mechanistic investigations into the C(sp(2))-H borylation of various electronically diverse arenes catalyzed by bis(phosphine)pyridine ( IPr PNP) cobalt complexes. The research found that kinetic control of B-H and C(sp(2)-H) oxidative addition can result in para-to-ester and para-to-boronate ester selectivity, overriding previous ortho-to-fluorine regioselectivity. This demonstrates that subtle changes in the relative rates of individual steps of the catalytic cycle can enable unique and switchable site selectivities.
Synthetic and mechanistic investigations into the C(sp(2))-H borylation of various electronically diverse arenes catalyzed by bis(phosphine)pyridine ( IPr PNP) cobalt complexes are reported. Borylation of various benzoate esters and arylboronate esters gave remarkably high selectivities for the position para to the functional group; in both cases, this regioselectivity was found to override the orthoto-fluorine regioselectivity, previously reported for ((PNP)-P-iPr)Co borylation catalysts, which arises from thermodynamic control of C(sp(2))-H oxidative addition. Mechanistic studies support pathways that result in para-to-ester and para-to-boronate ester selectivity by kinetic control of B-H and C(sp(2)-H) oxidative addition, respectively. Borylation of a particularly electron-deficient fluorinated arylboronate ester resulted in acceleration of C(sp(2))-H oxidative addition and concomitant inversion of regioselectivity, demonstrating that subtle changes in the relative rates of individual steps of the catalytic cycle can enable unique and switchable site selectivities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据