Skip to main content
. 2019 May 7;10(22):5837–5842. doi: 10.1039/c9sc01711a

Table 1. Optimization of the reaction conditions a .

Inline graphic
Entry LAG Milling frequency (Hz) Time (min) NMR yield b (%)
1 None 30 30 40
2 None 30 60 43
3 THF 30 30 71
4 Toluene 30 30 61
5 CH3CN 30 30 71
6 Dioxane 30 30 64
7 DMF 30 30 64
8 Et2O 30 30 66
9 DMSO 30 30 55
10 Pentane 30 30 58
11 Cyclohexane 30 30 47
12 MeOH 30 30 48
13 THF 25 30 78 e
14 c THF 25 30 55
15 d THF 25 30 67
16 THF 25 10 71

aConditions: 1 (0.05 mmol), 2a (0.05 mmol), RuPhos (0.05 mmol), and the LAG additive (0.2 μL mg–1) in a stainless-steel ball-milling jar (1.5 mL) with a stainless-steel ball (3 mm).

bDetermined by 1H NMR analysis of the crude reaction mixture using an internal standard.

cTwo stainless-steel balls (3 mm) were used.

dThree stainless-steel balls (3 mm) were used.

eIsolated yield.