Catalytic Asymmetric Conjugate Reactions 2010
DOI: 10.1002/9783527630578.ch6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Iminium Activation in Catalytic Enantioselective Conjugate Additions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 235 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Iminium species are able to be attacked by nucleophiles at C-1 and C-3 whereas dienamines react with electrophiles at C-2 and C-4 (Scheme ). As the result of this dual reactivity and the ambivalent character of the formed species, it has been possible to get the α-, β-, and γ-functionalization of the enals, as well as the attack to their carbonyl carbons (C-1) . The regioselectivity control difficulties derived from the ambivalent character of the iminium species have been overcome by the well-defined tendencies of the nucleophiles to attack on C-3 or C-1, , whereas for dienamines this problem was solved modulating the steric hindrance at C-2 and C-4 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Iminium species are able to be attacked by nucleophiles at C-1 and C-3 whereas dienamines react with electrophiles at C-2 and C-4 (Scheme ). As the result of this dual reactivity and the ambivalent character of the formed species, it has been possible to get the α-, β-, and γ-functionalization of the enals, as well as the attack to their carbonyl carbons (C-1) . The regioselectivity control difficulties derived from the ambivalent character of the iminium species have been overcome by the well-defined tendencies of the nucleophiles to attack on C-3 or C-1, , whereas for dienamines this problem was solved modulating the steric hindrance at C-2 and C-4 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the result of this dual reactivity and the ambivalent character of the formed species, it has been possible to get the α-, β-, and γ-functionalization of the enals, as well as the attack to their carbonyl carbons (C-1) . The regioselectivity control difficulties derived from the ambivalent character of the iminium species have been overcome by the well-defined tendencies of the nucleophiles to attack on C-3 or C-1, , whereas for dienamines this problem was solved modulating the steric hindrance at C-2 and C-4 . On the other hand, chemoselectivity control difficulties derived from the dual reactivity (iminium vs dienamine) were obviated by using reagents without dual reactivity (nucleophiles or electrophiles).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Enantioselective Michael addition is one of the most powerful reactions in organic synthesis that forms a carbon–carbon bond, thereby affording synthetically valuable chiral building blocks . One of the most common strategies to enable such reactions includes the organocatalytic activation of electrophiles via iminium catalysis .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the pioneer work by Cozzy and co-workers, on the organocatalyzed asymmetric α-alkylation of aldehydes using such alcohols through an enamine activation mode, 2 several examples have recently appeared, the majority following a similar strategy. 3 Despite the versatility of activated methylene compounds, such as dicarbonyl compounds, β-keto esters, α-cyanoacetates, α-nitroacetates, β-keto sulfones, etc., as building blocks which are easily transformed into other functionalities and the multiple strategies reported for their activation employing chiral catalysts, 4 reported methodologies for their use as prochiral nucleophiles in asymmetric alkylations with benzylic alcohols remain rare. To the best of our knowledge, there are only two reports in this regard recently reported by Nishibayashi and our group, disclosing the asymmetric alkylation of β-keto phosphonates 5 and β-keto esters 6 respectively, catalyzed by BOX-Cu(OTf) 2 -type complexes (Scheme 1).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%