Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Oct 17.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Chem Soc. 2015 Aug 13;137(33):10480–10483. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b06466

Table 1.

Optimization of reaction conditions.a

graphic file with name nihms821011u3.jpg
Entrya Ligand Deviation from Standard Conditions Yield 3
(%)b
Yield 4
(%)b
ee 3
(%)c
1 L6 None 78 20 84
2 L1 DMA instead of dioxane 0 62
3 L1 <5 32 38
4 L2 17 22 9
5 L3 25 40 83
6 L4 0 32
7 L5 52 35 77
8 L6 No Ni 0 0
9 L6 No Mn0 0 0
10 L6 No TMSCl <5 <5 82
11 No Ligand 4 23 0
12 L6 Zn0 instead of Mn0 25 32 10
13 L6 TFA (0.4 equiv) 48 37 78
14 L6 NaBF4 (1.0 equiv) 76 24 90
15 L6 NaI (0.25 equiv) 71 29 84
16 L6 RBrCN (5) instead of 1 9 36 84
a

Reactions conducted under inert atmosphere on 0.1 mmol scale for 14 h.

b

Determined by 1H NMR versus an internal standard.

c

Determined by SFC using chiral stationary phase.