4.8 Article

Manganese-Catalyzed Hydrogenative Desulfurization of Thioamides

期刊

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.202215963

关键词

Amines; Desulfurization; Hydrogenation; Manganese; Thioamides

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Earth-abundant transition metal catalysis has been developed as a viable substitute for noble transition metal catalysis in hydrogenation reactions. However, the hydrogenation of thioamides using earth-abundant transition metals has not been reported due to catalyst poisoning by sulfur-containing molecules. In this study, we successfully achieved manganese-catalyzed hydrogenative desulfurization of thioamides to amines or imines by employing MnBr(CO)(5) instead of commonly-used pincer-manganese catalysts, along with NEt3 and CuBr. This reaction demonstrated excellent selectivity in breaking the C=S bond of thioamides, unlike the only known Ru-catalyzed hydrogenation of thioamides, and it exhibited unprecedented chemo-selectivity towards vulnerable functional groups.
Earth-abundant transition metal catalysis has emerged as an important alternative to noble transition metal catalysis in hydrogenation reactions. However, there has been no Earth-abundant transition metal catalyzed hydrogenation of thioamides reported so far, presumably due to the poisoning of catalysts by sulfur-containing molecules. Herein, we described the first manganese-catalyzed hydrogenative desulfurization of thioamides to amines or imines. The key to success is the use of MnBr(CO)(5) instead of commonly-employed pincer-manganese catalysts, together with simple NEt3 and CuBr. This protocol features excellent selectivity on sole cleavage of the C=S bond of thioamides, in contrast to the only known Ru-catalyzed hydrogenation of thioamides, and unprecedented chemo-selectivity tolerating vulnerable functional groups such as nitrile, ketone, aldehyde, ester, sulfone, nitro, olefin, alkyne and heterocycle, which are usually susceptible to common hydride-type reductive protocols.

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