Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov 17;11:5857. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-19717-6

Table 1.

Evaluation of reaction conditions for reductive hydroalkylation.

graphic file with name 41467_2020_19717_Figa_HTML.gif
Entry Deviation from standard conditions Yield (%) 9a:10aa
1 None 90(88)(81b) >95:5
2 NiCl2, NiCl2·DME, NiCl2(Py)4, NiI2 or Ni(COD)2 instead of NiCl2(PPh3)2 50–74 92:8–>95:5
3 DMF, DMA, DMPU or MeCN instead of NMP 70–92 92:8–94:6
4 DMSO, THF or toluene instead of NMP Trace–10 ND
5 No Mn Trace ND
6 Mn (1 equiv.) instead of Mn (1.5 equiv.) 70 >95:5
7 Mn (2 equiv.) instead of Mn (1.5 equiv.) 90 >95:5
8 Zn instead of Mn 44 80:20
9 8 (1.5 equiv.) instead of 8 (2 equiv.) 70 >95:5
10 8 (2.5 equiv.) instead of 8 (2 equiv.) 91 >95:5
11 40 °C instead of RT 90 >95:5
12 10 mol % NiCl2(PPh3)2 instead of 15 mol % 92 92:8

Reactions were carried out on 0.1 mmol scale.

DMA N,N-dimethylacetamide, DMF N,N-dimethylformamide, NMP N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone, DMPU N,N′-dimethylpropyleneurea, DMSO dimethyl sulfoxide, THF tetrahydrofuran, DME 1,2-dimethoxyethane, Py pyridine, COD 1,5-cyclooctadiene, RT room temperature, ND not determined.

aYields and regioisomeric ratios were determined by GC analysis with n-tridecane as internal standard. Values in parentheses denote yields for isolated and purified products.

bThe reaction was conducted on 2 mmol scale.