Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Feb 18.
Published in final edited form as: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2019 Jan 25;58(8):2371–2376. doi: 10.1002/anie.201813233

Table 1.

Reaction Optimization

graphic file with name nihms-1006456-t0002.jpg

Entry Variations from above % yield[a]
1 none 80
2 Li2CO3 / Na2CO3 / Cs2CO3 vs K2CO3 0 / 37 / 53
3 Et3N vs K2CO3 0
4 BINAP vs TrixiePhos 0
5 dppe vs TrixiePhos 0
6 dppf vs TrixiePhos 17
7 XPhos vs TrixiePhos 0
8 PPh3 vs TrixiePhos 67
9 4-OMe-PhBr vs PhBr 85[b]
10 4-OMe-PhBr vs PhBr, PPh3 vs TrixiePhos 22[b]
11 PhI vs PhBr 18
12 no Pd 0

graphic file with name nihms-1006456-t0003.jpg

[a]

0.1 mmol scale, yield determined by quantitative LCMS.

[b]

Ar = 4-OMe-Ph,1H NMR yield after 1 h.