4.8 Article

Homologation of Electron-Rich Benzyl Bromide Derivatives via Diazo C-C Bond Insertion

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 144, 期 1, 页码 86-92

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.1c11503

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Minnesota
  2. American Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund [PRF 60782-DNI1]
  3. National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [R35GM137920]
  4. NIH Shared Instrumentation Grant [S10OD011952]
  5. National Science Foundation [1955876]
  6. RMACC Summit supercomputer - National Science Foundation [ACI-1532235, ACI-1532236]
  7. University of Colorado Boulder
  8. Colorado State University
  9. Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE) [TG-CHE180056]
  10. Division Of Chemistry
  11. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1955876] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability to manipulate C-C bonds for selective chemical transformations is a challenging and growing area of research. The study reported a formal insertion of diazo compounds into unactivated C-C bonds of benzyl bromide derivatives catalyzed by a simple Lewis acid, resulting in products containing benzylic quaternary centers and alkyl bromides amenable to further derivatization. Computational analysis provided insight into the reaction mechanism, particularly the key selectivity-determining step.
The ability to manipulate C-C bonds for selective chemical transformations is challenging and represents a growing area of research. Here, we report a formal insertion of diazo compounds into the unactivated C-C bond of benzyl bromide derivatives catalyzed by a simple Lewis acid. The homologation reaction proceeds via the intermediacy of a phenonium ion, and the products contain benzylic quaternary centers and an allcyl bromide amenable to further derivatization. Computational analysis provides critical insight into the reaction mechanism, in particular the key selectivity-determining step.

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