Skip to main content
. 2014 Jul 10;33(20):5874–5881. doi: 10.1021/om5004682

Table 4. Optimization and Controlsa.

graphic file with name om-2014-004682_0014.jpg

entry notes X Y 22 20 21
1   0.35 2.50 69 5 4
2   0.35 2.25 72 (60) 6 6
3   0.35 2.0 56 7 8
4   0.35 1.5 50 9 15
5b   0.40 2.0 51 7 8
6c   0.45 2.0 42 3 5
7c   0.50 2.0 32 3 4
8d no NaI 0.35 2.0 0 0 0
9 LiI for NaI 0.35 2.0 49 7 7
10 KI for NaI 0.35 2.0 48 4 8
11 5 mol % catalyst 0.35 2.0 42 6 9
12e no dtbbpy 0.35 2.25 0 0 2
13e,f no Ni or Zn 0.35 2.0 0 0 1
14e,g no Ni 0.35 2.0 <1 <1 0
15c,g no Zn 0.35 2.25 25 <1 4
16 6/1 DMA/THF 0.35 2.25 76 7 0
17 1/1 DMA/THF 0.35 2.25 52 7 3
18e,g 1/2 DMA/THF 0.35 2.25 <1 0 1
a

Reactions were run on a 0.75 mmol scale in 3 mL of DMA. Yields are uncorrected GC yields vs dodecane. The yield in parentheses is an isolated yield of purified product.

b

PhBr (8%) remained.

c

PhBr (27%–47%) remained.

d

Starting materials were unchanged after 40 h, except for a 13% yield of hydrodehalogenated 19.

e

PhBr (75%) remained.

f

Alkyl-Br 19 not consumed.

g

Dialkyl ketone (12–23%) was formed.