PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
 
J Org Chem. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 September 4.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2883892
NIHMSID: NIHMS137746

Examination of the Mechanism of Rh2(II)-Catalyzed Carbazole Formation Using Intramolecular Competition Experiments

Abstract

The use of a rhodium(II) carboxylate catalyst enables the mild and stereoselective formation of carbazoles from biaryl azides. Intramolecular competition experiments of triaryl azides suggested the source of the selectivity. A primary intramolecular kinetic isotope effect was not observed and correlation of the product ratios with Hammett σ+-values produced a plot with two intersecting lines with opposite ρ-values. These data suggest that electronic donation by the biaryl π-system accelerates the formation of rhodium nitrenoid and that C–N bond formation occurs through a 4π-electron-5-atom electrocyclization.

Keywords: Rhodium(II), azide, carbazole, indole, catalysis, electrocyclization

Introduction

The development of efficient methods for the selective transformation of carbon–hydrogen bonds into carbon–heteroatom bonds remains a goal of synthetic chemistry.1 The direct incorporation of functionality into carbon–hydrogen bonds improves synthetic efficiency2 by minimizing functional group manipulation.1f,3 Dirhodium(II) complexes have proven to be efficient C–H bond amination catalysts by stabilizing the nitrene intermediate.1e,49 Our group has used these complexes to catalyze the intramolecular formation of C–N bonds from vinyl- or aryl azides to form indoles, pyrroles, and carbazoles.10 Use of the rhodium catalyst provides a mild and stereoselective alternative to the thermal-or photochemical reaction (Scheme 1).11 In this paper, we report mechanistic studies aimed at determining the role of the catalyst in promoting and controlling this regioselective transformation. Our results enable distinction between a concerted aryl C–H bond insertion, electrophilic aromatic substitution, and electrocyclization of the rhodium nitrenoid as the mechanism for C–N bond formation.

Scheme 1
Comparison of Regioselectivity of Carbazole Formation from Biaryl Azide 1; Potential Mechanisms for C–N Bond Formation.

In contrast to the thorough studies on the mechanism of thermal or photolytic nitrene formation from ortho-biaryl azides,11e,12,13 mechanistic studies on metal nitrenoids generated from aryl azides are less common.14 The improved regioselectivity observed when biaryl azide 1 was treated with rhodium(II) octanoate (as compared to thermolysis) reveals that the rhodium catalyst is involved in the C–N bond forming step of the mechanism. The analogous reactivity of the E- or Z-stilbene isomer of 4 towards rhodium(II) octanoate indicated that the functionalization of the C–H bond occurs by a stepwise mechanism (Scheme 2).10b This behavior contrasts with the metal-free pyrolysis of 4, where the yield of 2-phenylindole 5 depended on the stereochemistry of the styryl azide (88% from E-4; 18% from Z-4).15 These results illustrate the differences between a rhodium nitrenoid and an arylnitrene, and suggest that arylnitrenes might not be the best models for rhodium arylnitrenoids.

Scheme 2
Comparison of the Reactivity of E- and Z-isomers of Styryl Azide 4.

Instead, we anticipated that the rhodium arylnitrenoid might be more similar to an arylnitrenium ion.16,17 The singlet ground state of an arylnitrenium ion contains extensive delocalization of the positive charge into the adjacent π-system (Scheme 3).17d,18,19 If rhodium nitrenoid 8 behaved similarly to 7, the electronic nature of the aryl substituents would influence the mechanism of N-heterocycle formation through stabilization of the quinoid resonance structure 9. Herein, we report the results of our mechanistic studies, which support this assertion. Our data suggest that electronic donation by the biaryl π-system accelerates rhodium nitrenoid formation from 10 and that C–N bond formation occurs through a 4π-electron-5-atom electrocyclization of 11.

Scheme 3
Arylnitrenium Ions as Potential Models for Rhodium(II)-Arylnitrenoids; Mechanistic Conclusions

Results and Discussion

Triaryl azides 15 were chosen to study the rhodium-catalyzed N-heterocycle formation. These substrates allowed the investigation of an intramolecular competition reaction between the reactive intermediate and the C–H bond on either the phenyl- or aryl substituent. This was necessary because the rate-determining step of the mechanism was unknown,20,21 and the intramolecular reaction would allow the ratio of carbazole products obtained from 15 to offer insight into the mechanism of the C–N bond-forming event even if it occurred after the turnover-limiting step. The triaryl azides that were used for the intramolecular competition experiments were synthesized from dibromoaniline 13 by two consecutive Suzuki cross-coupling reactions (Scheme 4).22 Carbazoles 17 were also independently synthesized from carbazole 16 through a Suzuki cross-coupling reaction to verify the product ratio. Triaryl azides 15 would be used first to determine if C–H bond cleavage and C–N bond formation occurred simultaneously and then to investigate the electronic effect of substituents on the ortho-aryl group.

Scheme 4
Synthesis of Triaryl Azides to Study the Mechanism of Carbazole Formation.

Triaryl azide 15ad5 was used to determine if the reaction between the rhodium nitrenoid and the ortho-aryl C–H bond was concerted (Scheme 5).23,24 If C–N bond formation and C–H bond cleavage occurred simultaneously (via 20),24 a primary kinetic isotope effect would result from preferential reaction of the reactive intermediate with the unlabeled phenyl substituent.25,26 Exposure of 15a-d5 to rhodium(II) perfluorobutyrate at 70 °C, however, gave a kinetic isotope effect of 1.01. A similar isotope effect was observed in 21-d1.10a These experiments show that C–H bond cleavage occurs after the product-determining step of the reaction.27,28 Together with the equal reactivity of Z- and E-4, these results confirm that a concerted insertion of the nitrenoid into the ortho-aryl C–H bond is not occurring to form either carbazole- or indole-products.

Scheme 5
Secondary Kinetic Isotope Effect Obtained from Intramolecular Competition Experiments.

A series of triaryl azides with electron-donating or electron-withdrawing aryl substituents were screened as substrates to determine the electronic dependence of the C–H bond functionalization (Table 1). 4-Substituted aryl groups were chosen to simplify product analysis by providing only one regioisomer. The results of these experiments are given in Table 1 and show that C–N bond formation occurs preferentially with the more electron-rich aryl group.

Table 1
Rhodium-Catalyzed Intramolecular Competition Reactions of Triaryl Azides.

The product ratios from the reaction of 15 were analyzed using the Hammett equation to determine if an electrophilic aromatic substitution produced the C–N bond (Scheme 6).29 In this mechanism, nucleophilic attack of the pendant aryl- or phenyl group onto the electrophilic rhodium nitrenoid 22 would form arenium ion 23 or 24. If this mechanism occurs, a linear correlation of the product ratios from triaryl azides 15 with Hammett σm-values should be observed because the C–N bond is forming meta to the R group.30,31 Figure 1 clearly shows that the relationship between σm-values and the product ratios from 15 is not linear. We interpret this result to mean that C–N bond formation does not occur by electrophilic aromatic substitution.32 This conclusion is supported by the reactivity patterns of aryl- and vinyl azides (40, 42, and 43), which will be discussed below (eq 2 and Scheme 9).

Figure 1
Correlation of log (krel) of the Rhodium-catalyzed Decomposition of Triaryl Azides 15 with σm-values in the Hammett Equation.
Scheme 6
Nucleophilic Attack of the Aryl Group as the C–N Bond Forming Step.
Scheme 9
Potential Explanation for Reactivity Differences of Methoxy-Substituted Azidoacrylates.

Alternatively, the aryl substituents could affect the formation of rhodium nitrenoid by controlling the amount of electron density in the π-system (Scheme 7). Overlap of the π-system with σ*N–N2 best occurs when the N2-leaving group is oriented orthogonal to the triaryl group (31). If all three arenes are planar, a destabilizing steric interaction occurs between the rhodium catalyst and an ortho-aryl hydrogen (32). As a result, the more electron-deficient aryl group would rotate out of the plane to form 27 or 28. Expulsion of N2 then occurs to form N-rhodiumimine 29 or 30.33,34 If the electronic nature of the R group affects the rate of nitrenoid formation, linear correlation of the product ratios from 15 with Hammett σ+-values (or σp-values) would be expected because the reaction is occurring para to the R substituent. Because electron density is flowing away from the arene, a ρ-value less than zero should be observed.

Scheme 7
Influence of the Electronic Nature of the R Group on the Formation of the Rhodium Nitrenoid.

The product ratios from 15 were plotted against Hammett σ+-values29c,35 to test this mechanistic hypothesis (Figure 2).36 Both rhodium perfluorobutyrate and rhodium octanoate gave plots that contained two intersecting lines (Figure 2). As predicted by our hypothesis, a negative ρ-value was obtained from triaryl azides 15b15f. Triaryl azides with stronger electron-withdrawing groups (15f15h), however, diverged from this trend to provide a line with a positive ρ-value. The V-shaped Hammett plot suggests a change in mechanism (or rate-determining step) because the two lines exhibit opposite ρ-values.37 We did not observe this V-shape for the metal-free thermolysis of triaryl azides 15, which gave a single line with a negative ρ-value (–0.66; Figure 3).31,38,39

Figure 2
Hammett Correlation of log (krel) with σ+-Values for the Rhodium-Catalyzed Decomposition of Triaryl Azides 15.
Figure 3
Hammett Correlation of log (Krel) with σ+-Values for the Thermolysis of Triaryl Azides 15.

equation image
(1)

The V-shape of the Hammett plot suggests that at least two mechanisms are occurring in the rhodium-catalyzed formation of carbazoles.37 The negative ρ-value observed for triaryl azides 15b15g reveals that electron density is leaving the aryl π-system in the product-determining step. This result is best accommodated by a mechanism where the R substituent assists in the extrusion of N2 from the initial metal-azide complex to form quinoid 35 (Scheme 8). In support of the potential quinoidal structure of 35, time-resolved infared spectroscopy of related N-aryl-N-methyl nitrenium ions revealed that the frequency of the C=C bond stretch increased in proportion to the electron-donating ability of the aryl-substituent.40 Falvey and co-workers interpreted these results as evidence that arylnitrenium ions can be described as 4-iminocyclohexa-2,5-dienyl cations.40

Scheme 8
Possible 4π-Electron-5-Atom Electrocyclization Step to Account for C–N Bond Formation.

Electronic donation by the biaryl π-system to form the rhodium nitrenoid influences the mechanism of C–N bond formation (Scheme 8). The planar nature of quinoid 35 enables a 4π-electron-5-atom electrocyclization to form the C–N bond.28,41,42 This pericyclic reaction can be visualized easier by examining 36, the resonance form of 35, which clearly contains a contiguous, planar array of π-orbitals.43 Upon formation of 38, a 1,5-hydride shift then provides carbazole 39.4446

Aryl azide 40, which contains a methylene spacer in between the two arenes, was examined to test the requirement for a contiguous array of π-orbitals (eq 2). Exposure of 40 to reaction conditions did not produce dihydroacridine 41. Instead, >95% of azide 40 was recovered. The lack of reactivity of 40 agrees with our proposed electrocyclization mechanism and is inconsistent with an electrophilic aromatic substitution mechanism, which would not require a contiguous π-system.

equation image
(2)

The electrocyclization mechanism also offers an explanation for the unusual reactivity trends that we observed with methoxy-substituted azidoacrylates (Scheme 9). In azide 42, the para-methoxy-substituent is positioned to donate electron density to accelerate the formation of the nitrenoid species to result in the efficient formation of indole 44. In contrast, placing the methoxy group at the 3-position of vinyl azide causes it to act as an inductive electron-withdrawing group and slow nitrenoid formation from 45: only 22% of azide 45 was converted into indole 47 with 5 mol % of catalyst. The remainder of the mixture was unreacted vinyl azide 45. If an electrophilic aromatic substitution mechanism occurred to form indole, azide 45 would be expected to react faster because the methoxy group is positioned to donate electron density to attack the electron-deficient rhodium nitrenoid (48).

The V-shape of the Hammett plot indicates that a change in mechanism occurs for substrates bearing strongly electron-withdrawing groups (σ+ ≥ 0.6). The positive ρ-value for this portion of the plot reveals that the aryl group accepts electron density in the product-determining step. Changing the identity of the product-determining step to the electrocyclization or hydride shift appears unlikely, however, because it would require a nucleophilic rhodium(II) nitrenoid species47,48,49 and a reversible N2-extrusion step.21 Alternatively, a different mechanism could be operating for these substrates. Coordination of the rhodium carboxylate complex to the nitro- or sulfone group might cause the catalytic system to deviate from the thermal behavior of these substrates (Scheme 10).50

Scheme 10
Possible Mechanism Involving Coordination of Rhodium to Arene.

Triaryl azide 15i (X = NMe3) was used to investigate if the rhodium carboxylate were functioning as a Lewis acid through σ-coordination to the X substituent (eq 3).50,51 If this phenomenon was occurring, the product ratio from 15i would not correlate linearly with substrates 15f15h because coordination to the trimethylammonium substituent is not possible. The product ratio from 15i, however, does correlate linearly with the azides 15f15h using Hammett σp-values. This relationship reveals that σ-coordination of the R substituent to the rhodium(II) carboxylate is not occurring in the mechanism for substrates bearing strongly electron-withdrawing groups (Figure 4).

Figure 4
Hammett Correlation of log (Krel) with σp-Values for the Rhodium-Catalyzed Decomposition of Triaryl Azides 15f – 15i.

equation image
(3)

Conclusions

The mechanism of N-heterocycle formation from aryl- and vinyl azides was examined through intramolecular competition experiments. The lack of a primary intramolecular kinetic isotope effect suggests that the C–H(D) bond cleavage does not occur in the product-determining step. Correlation of the product ratios obtained from a series of substituted triaryl azides with the Hammett equation generated plots with two intersecting lines. The best linear correlation was obtained when the methoxy substituent was considered to be an electron-donating group. We interpreted these results as evidence for two different mechanisms. Electron-rich substrates appear to react through a mechanism in which electronic donation by an aryl R substituent assists in the formation of a planar arylnitrenoid that undergoes a 4π-electron-5-atom electrocyclization to form the new C–N bond. In agreement with our mechanistic hypothesis, substrates that lack a contiguous π-system are unreactive. While our experimental results prevent definitive conclusions for the mechanism operating in electron-deficient substrates, our data does suggest that the rhodium carboxylate does not σ-coordinate to the R group. We believe that these studies provide new models for azide reactivity toward rhodium carboxylates, and that the mechanistic insight gained herein will guide future methodology development that builds on our understanding of the interactions of metal complexes and azides.

EXPERIMENTAL SECTION

2-Bromo-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline

In a dry 500 mL round bottom flask, phenylboronic acid (5.00 g, 43.0 mmol, 1.3 equiv), K2CO3 (21.50 g, 156 mmol, 4.0 equiv), and Pd(PPh3)4 (2.00 g, 1.73 mmol, 0.1 equiv) were then dissolved in 150 mL of toluene, 100 mL of H2O, and 50 mL of EtOH. 2,6-Dibromo-4-methylaniline (10.48 g, 39.8 mmol, 1.0 equiv) was added, and the resulting mixture was heated to 95 °C for 16 hours. After cooling, the biphasic solution was diluted with 100 mL of saturated aqueous NH4Cl and 100 mL of CH2Cl2 and separated. The aqueous phase was extracted with an additional 2 × 100 mL of CH2Cl2, and the combined organic phases were washed 1 × 100 mL of water and 1 × 100 mL of saturated aqueous NaHCO3. The organic phase was dried over Na2SO4 and filtered. The filtrate was concentrated in vacuo to afford a brown oil. Purification by MPLC (15:85 benzene:hexanes) afforded 2-bromo-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline as a white powder (4.90 g, 47%), mp 58 °C, Rf = 0.31 (15:85 benzene:hexanes, visualized by 254 nm UV light). 1H NMR (CDCl3, 500 MHz): δ 7.50-7.45 (m, 4H), 7.42-7.38 (m, 1H), 7.31 (s, 1H), 6.93 (s, 1H), 4.04 (s, 2H), 2.30 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 125 MHz): 139.3 (C), 139.0 (C), 132.1 (CH), 130.4 (CH), 129.1 (CH), 128.9 (CH), 128.7 (C), 128.5 (C), 127.7 (CH), 109.9 (C), 20.2 (CH3); IR (thin film): 3477, 3385, 3045, 3028, 2924, 1619, 1593, 1473, 1441, 1302, 1234, 1073, 1058, 861, 638, 575 cm−1. HRMS (EI) m / z calculated for C13H12NBr (M+): 261.0153, found: 261.0154.

2-(4-Chlorophenyl)-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline

To a dry 100 mL round bottom flask equipped with a stir bar were added 2-bromo-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline (0.500 g, 1.90 mmol, 1.0 equiv), 4-chlorophenylboronic acid (0.343 g, 2.09 mmol, 1.3 equiv), K2CO3 (1.050 g, 7.63 mmol, 4.0 equiv), and Pd(PPh3)4 (0.110 g, 0.950 mmol, 0.1 equiv). Toluene (30 mL), 20 mL of H2O, and 10 mL of EtOH were added and the resulting mixture was heated to 95 °C for 16 hours. After cooling, the biphasic solution was diluted with 100 mL of saturated aqueous NH4Cl and 100 mL of CH2Cl2 and separated. The organic phase was washed 1 × 100 mL of water and 1 × 100 mL of saturated aqueous NaHCO3. The organic phase was dried over Na2SO4 and filtered. The filtrate was concentrated in vacuo to afford a brown oil. Purification by MPLC (0:10:90 – 10:10:80 EtOAc:benzene:hexanes) afforded 2-(4-chlorophenyl)-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline as a white powder (0.463 g, 83%), mp 101 °C, Rf = 0.56 (10:10:80 benzene:EtOAc:hexanes, visualized by 254 nm or 365 nm UV light). 1H NMR (CDCl3, 500 MHz): δ 7.55-7.45 (m, 8H), 7.42-7.39 (m, 1H), 7.03 (d, J = 1.6 Hz, 1H), 6.98 (d, J = 1.6 Hz, 1H), 3.67 (br s, 2H), 2.36 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 125 MHz): δ 139.7 (C), 138.4 (C), 138.2 (C), 133.2 (C), 130.8 (CH), 130.7 (CH), 130.3 (CH), 129.4 (CH), 129.0 (CH), 128.9 (CH), 128.4 (C), 127.6 (C), 127.4 (CH), 126.9 (C), 20.5 (CH3); IR (thin film): 3455, 3386, 3053, 2985, 2923, 2859, 2305, 1615, 1599, 1492, 1466, 1438, 1392, 1265, 1092, 1015, 896, 872, 837, 749, 704 cm−1. HRMS (EI) m / z calculated for C19H16NCl (M+): 293.0971, found: 293.0973.

Azide 15b

In a 20 mL scintillation vial, 2-(4-methoxyphenyl)-4-methyl-6-phenylaniline (0.076 g, 0.253 mmol, 1.0 equiv) was dissolved in 3 mL of HOAc and chilled in an ice bath. NaNO2 (0.026 g, 0.367 mmol, 1.45 equiv) was added slowly, and the resulting mixture was stirred at 0 °C for one hour. NaN3 (0.393 g, 0.393 mmol, 1.55 equiv) was then added slowly, and the resulting mixture was warmed to ambient temperature, and stirred for 30 minutes. The solution was diluted with 20 mL of water and 20 mL of CH2Cl2 and basified by the slow addition of K2CO3 until bubbling ceased. The phases were separated and the aqueous phase was extracted with an additional 2 × 20 mL of CH2Cl2. The combined organic phases were washed 1 × 20 mL of water and 1 × 20 mL of brine. The resulting organic phase and dried over Na2SO4 and filtered. The filtrate was concentrated in vacuo to afford an oil. Purification by MPLC (100% hexanes) afforded azide 15b as a faint yellow oil (0.080 g, 97%), Rf = 0.55 (10:10:80 benzene:EtOAc:hexanes, visualized by 254 nm UV light). lH NMR (CDCl3, 500 MHz): δ 7.53-7.52 (m, 2H), 7.49-7.45 (m, 4H), 7.42-7.39 (m, 1H), 7.13 (m, 2H), 7.03–7.00 (m, 2H), 3.88 (s, 3H), 2.42 (s, 3H); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 125 MHz): δ 159.2 (C), 138.7 (C), 136.4 (C), 136.1 (C), 135.2 (C), 132.1 (C), 131.1 (CH), 131.0 (C), 130.8 (CH), 130.5 (CH), 129.4 (CH), 128.4 (CH), 127.6 (CH), 113.9 (CH), 55.4 (CH3), 20.9 (CH3); IR (thin film): 2122, 2093, 1513, 1455, 1422, 1290, 1265, 1179, 1033, 896 cm−1. HRMS (EI) m / z calculated for C20H17ON3 (M+): 315.13717, found: 315.13679.

Supplementary Material

1_si_001

2_si_002

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the National Institutes of Health NIGMS (R01GM084945), Petroleum Research Fund administered by the American Chemical Society (46850-G1), and the University of Illinois at Chicago for their generous support. We thank Professors Martin E. Newcomb (UIC), Laura L. Anderson (UIC), Douglass Taber (U Delaware), Hélène Lebel (U Montreal) for helpful discussions. We also thank Dr. Dan McElheny (UIC) for assistance with NMR spectroscopy, and Mr. Furong Sun (UIUC) for mass spectrometry data. The 70-VSE mass spectrometer (UIUC) was purchased in part with a grant from the Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health (RR 04648).

Footnotes

BRIEFS. The mechanism of dirhodium(II)-catalyzed C—H bond amination was examined using intramolecular competition reactions of triaryl azides.

Supporting Information Available: Complete experimental procedures, spectroscopic and analytical data for the products (PDF) is available free of charge via the Internet at pubs.acs.org.

REFERENCES

1. Reviews, see: (a) Shilov AE, Shul'pin GB. Chem. Rev. 1997;97:2879. [PubMed] (b) Miura M, Nomura M. Top. Curr. Chem. 2002;219:211. (c) Labinger JA, Bercaw JE. Nature. 2002;417:507. [PubMed] (d) Ritleng V, Sirlin C, Pfeffer M. Chem. Rev. 2002;102:1731. [PubMed] (e) Davies HML, Beckwith REJ. Chem. Rev. 2003;103:2861. [PubMed] (f) Godula K, Sames D. Science. 2006;312:67. [PubMed] (g) Dick AR, Sanford MS. Tetrahedron. 2006;62:2439. (h) Davies HML. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006;45:6422. [PubMed] (i) Alberico D, Scott ME, Lautens M. Chem. Rev. 2007;107:174. [PubMed]
2. Wender PA, Verma VA, Paxton TJ, Pillow TH. Acc. Chem. Res. 2008;41:40. [PubMed]
3. For recent examples, see: (a) Fraunhoffer KJ, Bachovchin DA, White MC. Org. Lett. 2005;7:223. [PubMed] (b) Fraunhoffer KJ, White MC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:7274. [PubMed] (b) Reed SA, White MC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:3316. [PubMed]
4. Reviews:(a) Padwa A, Austin D. J. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 1994;33:1797. (b) Miller DJ, Moody CJ. Tetrahedron. 1995;51:10811. (c) Doyle MP, Ren T. Prog. Inorg. Chem. 2001;49:113. (d) Timmons DJ, Doyle MP. J. Organomet. Chem. 2001;617–618:98. (e) Davies HML, Beckwith RE. J. Chem. Rev. 2003;103:2861. [PubMed] (f) Müller P, Fruit C. Chem. Rev. 2003;103:2905. [PubMed] (g) Müller P. Acc. Chem. Res. 2004;37:243. [PubMed] (h) Du Bois J. Chemtracts. 2005;18:1. (i) Doyle MP. J. Org. Chem. 2006;71:9253. [PubMed] (j) Davies HML. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006;45:6422. [PubMed] (k) Davies HML, Hedley SJ. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2007;36:1109. [PubMed] (l) Moody CJ. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007;46:9148. [PubMed] (m) Davies HML, Manning JR. Nature. 2008;451:417. [PubMed]
5. (a) Fruit C, Müller P. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry. 2004;15:1019. (b) Espino CG, Fiori KW, Du Bois J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004;126:15278. [PubMed] (c) Lebel H, Huard K, Lectard S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:14198. [PubMed] (d) Liang C, Robert-Peillard F, Fruit C, Müller P, Dodd RH, Dauban P. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006;45:4641. [PubMed] (e) Fiori KW, Du Bois J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:562. [PubMed] (f) Lebel H, Huard K. Org. Lett. 2007;9:639. [PubMed] (g) Wolckenhauer SA, Devlin AS, DuBois J. Org. Lett. 2007;9:4363. [PubMed] (h) Fleming JJ, McReynolds MD, Du Bois J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:9964. [PubMed] (i) Liang C, Collet F, Robert-Peillard F, Müller P, Dodd RH, Dauban P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:343. [PubMed] (j) Zalatan DN, Du Bois J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:9220. [PubMed] (k) Olson DE, Du Bois J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:11248. [PubMed] (l) Thornton AR, Blakey SB. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:5020. [PubMed]
6. (a) Breslow R, Gellman SH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1983;105:6728. (b) Mansuy D, Mahy JP, Durçault A, Bedi G, Battioni P. Chem. Commun. 1984:1161.
7. Generated in situ, see: (a) Espino CG, Du Bois. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001;40:598. [PubMed] (b) Dauban P, Saniçre L, Tarrade A, Dodd RH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001;123:7707. [PubMed]
8. For leading reports see: (a) Díaz-Requejo MM, Belderraín TR, Nicasio MC, Trofimenko S, P÷rez PJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:12078. [PubMed] (b) Hamilton CW, Laitar DS, Sadighi JP. Chem. Commun. 2004:1628. [PubMed] (c) Tsang WCP, Zheng N, Buchwald SL. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:14560. [PubMed] (d) Uemura T, Imoto S, Chatani N. Chem. Lett. 2006;35:842. (e) Chen X, Hao X-S, Goodhue CE, Yu J-Q. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006;128:6790. [PubMed] (f) Thu H-Y, Yu W-Y, Che C-M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006;128:9048. [PubMed] (g) Dick AR, Remy MS, Kampf JW, Sanford MS. Organometallics. 2007;26:1365. (h) Li Z, Capretto DA, Rahaman RO, He C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:12058. [PubMed]
9. For leading reports employingPd-complexes see: (a) Åkermark B, Eberson L, Jonsson E, Pettersson E. J. Org. Chem. 1975;40:1365. (b) Tsang WCP, Zheng N, Buchwald SL. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:14560. [PubMed] (c) Ackermann L, Althammer A. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007;46:1627. [PubMed] (d) St. Jean DJ, Poon SF, Schwarzbach JL. Org. Lett. 2007;9:4893. [PubMed] (e) Li B-J, Tian S-L, Fang Z, Shi Z-J. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008;47:1115. [PubMed] (f) Tsang WCP, Munday RH, Brasche G, Zheng N, Buchwald SL. J. Org. Chem. 2008;73:7603. [PubMed] (g) Jordan-Hore JA, Johansson CCC, Gulias M, Beck EM, Gaunt MJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130:16184. [PubMed]
10. (a) Stokes BJ, Dong H, Leslie BE, Pumphrey AL, Driver TG. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:7500. [PubMed] (b) Dong H, Shen M, Redford JE, Stokes BJ, Pumphrey AL, Driver TG. Org. Lett. 2007;9:5191. [PubMed] (c) Shen M, Leslie BE, Driver TG. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008;47:5056. [PubMed] (d) Stokes BJ, Jovanovic B, Dong H, Richert KJ, Riell RD, Driver TG. J. Org. Chem. 2009;74:3225. [PubMed]
11. (a) Smith PAS, Brown BB. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1951;73:2435. (b) Huisgen R. Angew. Chem. 1955;67:749. (c) Smith PAS, Hall JH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1962;84:480. (d) von E Doering W, Odum RA. Tetrahedron. 1966;22:81. (e) Swenton JS, Ikeler TJ, Williams BH. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1970;92:3103. (f) Sundberg RJ, Russell HF, Ligon WV, Lin L-S. J. Org. Chem. 1972;37:719. (g) Sundberg RJ, Gillespie DW, DeGraff BA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975;97:6193.
12. For more recent discussions on the electronic configuration phenylnitrene of see: (a) Borden WT, Gritsan NP, Hadad CM, Karney WL, Kemnitz CR, Platz MS. Acc. Chem. Res. 2000;33:765. [PubMed] (b) Burdzinski GT, Gustafson TL, Hackett JC, Hadad CM, Platz MS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:13764. [PubMed] (c) Burdzinski G, Hackett JC, Wang J, Gustafson TL, Hadad CM, Platz MS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006;128:13402. [PubMed] (d) Burdzinski GT, Middleton CT, Gustafson TL, Platz MS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006;128:14804. [PubMed] (e) Wang J, Kubicki J, Platz MS. Org. Lett. 2007;9:3973. [PubMed]
13. (a) Sundberg RJ, Brenner M, Suter SR, Das BP. Tetrahedron Lett. 1970;11:2715. (b) Lehman PA, Berry RS. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973;95:8614. (c) Sundberg RJ, Heintzelman RW. J. Org. Chem. 1974;39:2546. (d) Sundberg RJ, Gillespie DW, DeGraff BA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975;97:6193. (e) Tsao M-L, Gritsan N, James TR, Platz MS, Hrovat DA, Borden WT. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:9343. [PubMed]
14. For leading studies, see: (a) Proulx G, Bergman RG. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995;117:6382. (b) Proulx G, Bergman RG. Organometallics. 1996;15:684. (c) Mueller P, Baud C, Naegeli I. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1998;11:597. (d) Ragaini F, Penoni A, Gallo E, Tollari S, Gotti CL, Lapadula M, Mangioni E, Cenini S. Chem—EurJ. 2003;9:249. [PubMed] (e) Abu-Omar MM, Shields CE, Edwards NY, Eikey RA. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005;44:6203. [PubMed] (f) Caselli A, Gallo E, Fantauzzi S, Morlacchi S, Ragaini F, Cenini S. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 2008:3009.
15. Smith PAS, Rowe CD, Hansen DW. Tetrahedron Lett. 1983;24:5169.
16. For reviews see: (a) Gassman PG. Acc. Chem. Res. 1970;3:26. (b) Abramovitch RA, Jeyaraman R. In: Azides and Nitrenes. Scriven EFV, editor. Orlando: Academic Press; 1984. p. 297. (c) McClelland RA. Tetrahedron. 1996;52:6823. (d) Falvey DE. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 1999;12:589. (e) Novak M, Rajagopal S. Adv. Phys. Org. Chem. 2001;36:167. (f) Falvey DE. In: Reactive Intermediate Chemistry. Moss RA, Platz MS, Jones M Jr, editors. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience; 2004. p. 593.
17. (a) Falvey DE, Cramer CJ. Tetrahedron Lett. 1992;33:1705. (b) Cramer CJ, Dulles FJ, Falvey DE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994;116:9787. (c) Sullivan MB, Brown K, Cramer CJ, Truhlar DG. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998;120:11778. (d) Srivastava S, Ruane PH, Toscano JP, Sullivan MB, Cramer CJ, Chiapperino D, Reed EC, Falvey DE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000;122:8271.
18. McClelland RA, Kahley MJ, Davidse PA, Hadzialic G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996;118:4794.
19. Cf. (a) Gassman PG, Campbell GAJAmChem. Soc. 1971;93:2567. (b) Gassman PG, Campbell GA, Frederick RC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972;94:3884. (c) Novak M, Kahley MJ, Lin J, Kennedy SA, Swanegan LA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994;116:11626. (d) Robbins RJ, Yang LL-N, Anderson GB, Falvey DE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995;117:6544. (e) Sukhai P, McClelland RA. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1996;2:1529. (f) Robbins RJ, Laman DM, Falvey DE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996;118:8127. (g) Ren D, McClelland RA. Can. J. Chem. 1998;76:78.
20. For mechanistic and computational studes of Rh(II)-mediated carbene transfer reactions, see: (a) Taber DF, Ruckle RE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986;108:7686. [PubMed] (b) Doyle MP, Westrum LJ, Wolthuis WNE, See MM, Boone WP, Bagheri V, Pearson MM. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993;115:958. (c) Pirrung MC, Li H, Morehead ATJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:1014. [PubMed] (computational) (d) Nakamura E, Yochikai N, Yamanaka M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:7181. [PubMed] (e) Wong FM, Wang J, Hengge AC, Wu W. Org. Lett. 2007;9:1663. [PubMed]
21. The rate-limiting step for Rh(II)-mediated decomposition of a-diazoesters is believed to be carbenoid generation, see: ref. 20.
22. For recent examples of anilines employed as substrates in the Suzuki reaction, see: (a) Miura Y, Nishi T, Teki YJ. Org. Chem. 2003;68:10158. [PubMed] (b) Camacho DH, Salo EV, Guan Z. Org. Lett. 2004;6:865. [PubMed] (c) Wu Y, Li J, Fu Y, Bo Z. Org. Lett. 2004;6:3485. [PubMed] (d) Miura Y, Muranaka Y, Teki Y. J. Org. Chem. 2006;71:4786. [PubMed] (e) Arnold LA, Kiplin Guy R. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2006;16:5360. [PubMed]
23. The identity of an intramolecular isotope effect can enable insight into the mechanism of the product-determining step if it occurs after the rate-determining step. For a general discussion of the use of product isotope effects in mechanism determination, see: Carpenter BK. Determination of Organic Reaction Mechanisms. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1984. pp. 101–104.
24. For leading examples of the use of product isotope effect in mechanism determination, see:(a) Dai S-H, Dolbier WR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972;94:3946. (b) Beak P, Berger KR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980;102:3848. (c) Song Z, Chrisope DR, Beak P. J. Org. Chem. 1987;52:3938. (c) Nesheim JC, Lipscomb JD. Biochemistry. 1996;35:10240. [PubMed] (d) Newcomb M, Aebisher D, Shen R, Chandrasena REP, Hollenberg PF, Coon MJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:6064. [PubMed] (e) Singleton DA, Hang C, Szymanski MJ, Greenwald EE. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:1176. [PubMed]
25. For related isotope studies of C–H bond functionalization by rhodium carbenoids, see: (a) Wang P, Adams J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994;116:3296. (b) Sulikowski GA, Lee S. Tetrahedron Lett. 1999;40:8035. (c) Clark JS, Wong Y-S, Townsend RJ. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001;42:6187.
26. For KIE data of related rhodium(II) carbenoid processes see: (a) Nowlan DTI, Gregg TM, Davies HML, Singleton DA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003;125:15902. [PubMed] (b) Nowlan DTI, Singleton DA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005;127:6190. [PubMed]
27. A similar kinetic isotope effect (1.13) was observed in the thermolysis of 15a-d5. This secondary kinetic isotope effect indicates that C–N bond formation and C–H bond cleavage are not concerted in the thermal reaction as well.
28. A modest kinetic isotope effect (KIE = 1.9; cyclohexane solvent) was observed in the photolysis of 2-azidobiphenyl by Sundberg and co-workers (ref. 13d). They imply that this result suggests that the singlet nitrene does not insert directly into the ortho-C–H bond, but rather adds to the carbon.
29. For leading discussions of the the correlation of the rate of the electrophilic aromatic substitution reaction with the Hammett equation, see: (a) Jaffé HH. Chem. Rev. 1953;53:191. (b) Brown HC, Okamoto Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1957;79:1913. (c) Brown HC, Okamoto Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1958;80:4979. (d) Stock LM, Brown HC. Adv. Phys. Org. Chem. 1963;1:35. (d) Charton M. J. Org. Chem. 1969;34:278. (e) Gawley RE. J. Org. Chem. 1981;46:4595.
30. Hansch C, Leo A, Taft RW. Chem. Rev. 1991;91:165.
31. For other Hammett correlation diagrams, please refer to the Supporting Information.
32. Caution should be exercised in drawing firm conclusions from the non-linearity of the Hammett correlation using σ-values for electrophilic reactions. Refer to ref. 29 for a detailed discussion.
33. Erker G, Frömberg W, Atwood JL, Hunter WE. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1984;23:68. Cf. Review: (b) Cainelli G, Panuzio M, Andreoli P, Martelli G, Spunta G, Giacomini D, Bandini E. Pure & Appl. Chem. 1990;62:605. (c) Gilbertson RD, Haley MM, Weakley TJR, Weiss H-C, Boese R. Organometallics. 1998;17:3105. (d) Hevia E, Pérez J, Riera V, Miguel D. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2002;41:3858. [PubMed]
34. While 29 and 30 could interconvert, N-metalloimine isomerization would be slow in comparison to the subsequent C–N bond forming step. Z/E Thermal isomerization of imines was measured to be approximately 15 – 25 kcal/mol. See: (a) Roberts JD, Hall GE, Middleton WJ. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1971;93:4778. (b) Boyd DR, Jennings WB, Waring LC. J. Org. Chem. 1986;51:992. (c) Asano T, Furuta H, Hofmann HJ, Cimiraglia R, Tsuno Y, Fujio M. J. Org. Chem. 1993;58:4418. (d) Yamataka H, Ammal SC, Asano T, Ohga Y. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2005;78:1851.
35. For a general discussion of the uses of σ+-values in the Hammett reaction, see: (a) Lowry TH, Richardson KS. Mechanism and Theory in Organic Chemistry. New York: Harper-Collins; 1987. pp. 149–151. (b) Carpenter BK. Determination of Organic Reaction Mechanisms. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1984. pp. 144–148.
36. While a better linear correlation was obtained using σp-values, the lines did not pass through the origin. Please refer to the Supporting Information for additional Hammett correlation plots.
37. U- or V-shaped Hammett plots have been interpreted as evidence for dual reaction mechanisms. For leading reports, see: (a) Fuchs R, Carlton DM. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963;85:104. (b) Buckley N, Oppenheimer NJ. J. Org. Chem. 1996;61:7360. [PubMed] (c) Tanner DD, Koppula S, Kandanarachchi P. J. Org. Chem. 1997;62:4210. [PubMed] (d) Huang R, Espenson JH. J. Org. Chem. 1999;64:6374. (e) Swansburg S, Buncel E, Lemieux RP. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000;122:6594. (f) Ohshiro H, Mitsui K, Ando N, Ohsawa Y, Koinuma W, Takahashi H, Kondo Si, Nabeshima T, Yano Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001;123:2478. [PubMed] (g) Moss RA, Ma Y, Sauers RR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:13968. [PubMed] (h) Zdilla MJ, Dexheimer JL, Abu-Omar MM. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:11505. [PubMed]
38. Smith and co-workers did not observe any linear correlation with Hammett substituent constants in the decomposition of 2-azidobiaryls. The reaction rate depended only on the arene bearing the azide group. See: ref. 11c.
39. The error in slope and intercept was determined using least squares analysis.
40. When N-aryl N-methyl nitrenium ions were substituted with electron-donating groups, higher frequency aromatic C=C bond stretches were observed using time-resolved infared spectroscopy. Falvey and co-workers attributed the longer bond stretch to represent substantial charge delocalization in the aromatic system to favor a quinoid structure. See: ref. 17d.
41. For recent reviews of 4π-electron-5-atom-electrocyclizations, see: (a) Harmata M. Chemtracts. 2005;17:416. (b) Tius MA. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2005:2193. (c) Pellissier H. Tetrahedron. 2005;61:6479. (d) Frontier AJ, Collison C. Tetrahedron. 2005;61:7577.
42. Electrocyclization mechanisms have been suggested for the pyrolyses of 2-azidobenzophenones and 2-nitroazidobenzenes. For mechanistic studies, including Hammett correlations, see: (a) Dyall LK. The Chemistry of Functional Groups. Supplement D: The Chemistry of Halides, Pseudo-Halides, and Azides Chapter 7. In: Patai S, Rappoport Z, editors. New York: Wiley; 1968. (b) Dyall LK. Aust. J. Chem. 1986;39:89. (c) Dyall LK, Karpa GJ. Aust. J. Chem. 1988;41:1231.
43. A 6π-electron-5-atom electrocyclization was posited as a potential mechanism in the related deoxygenation of nitroaromatics, see: (a) Davies IW, Guner VA, Houk KN. Org. Lett. 2004;6:743. [PubMed] (b) Davies IW, Smitrovich JH, Sidler R, Qu C, Gresham V, Bazaral C. Tetrahedron. 2005;61:6425. (c) Leach AG, Houk KN, Davies IW. Synthesis. 2005:3463.
44. In the related thermal nitrene C–H amination reaction, C–N bond formation is believed to precede N–H bond formation. See: (a) ref. 15. (b) Smith PAS. “Aryl and heteroaryl azides and nitrenes.” In: Scriven EFV, editor. Azides and Nitrenes, Reactivity and Utility. London: Academic Press; 1984. p. 95. (mechanistic discussion pp 175–182)
45. A related diradical mechanism was proposed for the isomerization of aryl-substituted azirines to indoles. See Taber DF, Tian W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006;128:1058. [PubMed]
46. In triaryl substrates, planarization of the more electron-rich ring should increase the rate of N2-extrusion. We expect that the resulting nitrenoid to react faster with this ring than with the more electron-deficient ring, which is not necessarily in the plane.
47. For discussions on the electronic nature of rhodium(II) nitrenoids, see: ref. 5e, ref. 14c, Espino, C. G.; Du Bois, J. In Modern Rhodium-Catalyzed Organic Reactions; Evans PA, editor. Wiley; 2005. p. 379. (discussion on pp 402–405).
48. Some nucleophilic group 8 metal nitrenoid complexes have been reported. For leading examples, see: (a) Ir Glueck DS, Hollander FJ, Bergman RG. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989;111:2719. (b) RhGe YW, Sharp PR. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990;112:3667. (c) Ir Glueck DS, Wu J, Hollander FJ, Bergman RG. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991;113:2041. (d) Co Jenkins DM, Betley TA, Peters JC. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:11238. [PubMed]
49. While nitrenes and nitrenoids are generally assumed to be electrophilic (see ref. 5e for a discussion of ρ-values), the pKb of singlet phenyl nitrene was measured to be −2 . See: (a) ref. 18. (b) Wang J, Burdzinski G, Platz MS. Org. Lett. 2007;9:5211. [PubMed]
50. For the use of dirhodium(II) complexes as Lewis acids, see: (a) Doyle MP, Phillips IM, Hu W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001;123:5366. [PubMed] (b) Anada M, Washio T, Shimada N, Kitagaki S, Nakajima M, Shiro M, Hashimoto S. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2004;43:2665. [PubMed] (c) Doyle MP, Valenzuela M, Huang P. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA) 2004;101:5391. [PubMed] (d) Wang Y, Wolf J, Zavalij P, Doyle MP. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008;47:1439. [PubMed]
51. For leading reports of rhodium(II) η2-π complexes, see: (a) Doyle MP, Colsman MR, Chinn MS. Inorg. Chem. 1984;23:3684. (b) Cotton FA, Falvello LR, Gerards M, Snatzke G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990;112:8979. (c) Cotton FA, Dikarev EV, Stiriba SE. Organometallics. 1999;18:2724. (d) Cotton FA, Dikarev EV, Petrukhina MA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001;123:11655. [PubMed]