Sandrogreco The Hard Soft Acids Bases (Hsab) Principle And Organic Chemistry
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Sandrogreco The Hard Soft Acids Bases (Hsab) Principle And Organic Chemistry






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 5 4 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Sandrogreco The Hard Soft Acids Bases (Hsab) Principle And Organic Chemistry Sandrogreco The Hard Soft Acids Bases (Hsab) Principle And Organic Chemistry Presentation Transcript

  • Chemical Reviews Volume 75, Number 1 February 1975 The Hard Soft Acids Bases (HSAB) Principle and Organic Chemistry TSE-LOK HO Department of Chemistry, University of Manitoba. Winnipeg. Manitoba. Canada ReceivedAugust 30. 7973 (RevlsedManuscript Received December 78. 7973) Contents data, the quot;hard and soft acids and bases (HSAB) princi- plequot; was formulated. This principle states that acids I. Introduction 1 show greater affinity for bases of the same class and II,Softness (Hardness) Scales vice versa. Thus hard acids (acceptors) tend to form Ill.Stability of Compounds and Complexes strong bonds with hard bases (donors), but bind reluc- IV. Reaction Selectivity tantly or weakly to soft bases. The latter class of com- A . Alkylation vs.'Acylation pounds interacts preferably with soft acids. In other 6. C- vs. 0-Alkylation words, a hard-soft combination is destabilized. C. Reactions Organosulfur Compounds Classification of acids and bases according to their D. Reactions of Organophosphorus Compounds a softness is summarized in Tables I and I I . Reviews of the E. Elimination and Substitution 9 HSAB principle in general as well as its applica- F. Addition to Double Bonds 10 tion to multicenter reactions6 and organic c h e m i ~ t r y ' . ~ G. Addition to Carbonyl Compounds 10 have appeared. In this article, a more extensive survey of H. Miscellaneous 11 organic reactions in the light of the HSAB theory is pre- V . Addendum 17 sented. This encompasses the intriguing classical prob- VI. References ia lem of C- vs. 0-alkylations, the dichotomy of S N and E2 ~ reactions, the striking new findings in the domains of or- ganosulfur and phosphorus chemistry, and many other aspects. Explanation of solvation phenomena has been 1. Introduction omitted, and the discussion of free radical reactions is Interpretation and prediction of organic reactions are avoided simply because the latter are less well defined in often complicated by the entanglement of electronic. ste- acid-base terms. A consistent picture may be drawn ric, and a variety of other effects. In 1963, Pearson' from these, however. brought forth a unifying concept by which chemical reac- The reader is referred to Pearson's excellent papers for tivities, selectivities, and stabilities of compounds may be background materials and to Klopmang for theoretical readily rationalized. Chemical entities including atoms, considerations. A brief outline of Klopman's perturbation molecules, ions, and free radicals are categorized as treatment of two reactants R and S is described here. quot;hardquot; and quot;softquot; Lewis acids or bases. The quot;hardquot; The perturbation energy of the approaching R, S may be species in general have small atomic radius, high effec- approximated as tive nuclear charge, and low polarizability, whereas quot;softquot; ones possess the opposite characteristics. r = -clf%~ + -ISOlquot; + E ', - E,' We know from classical theory that a strong acid and a occ unocc strong base form a stable complex, and a weaker acid and base will form a less stable one. The strength of where q r , qs = total initial charges, i = Coulomb repul- - Lewis acids and bases is heightened by increased charge sion term, t = local dielectric constant of solvent, . I s o l v and decreased radius of cations and anions. The com- = solvation energy. c y m ,csn = frontier orbital electron plex stability, however, cannot be adequately estimated densities, p = extent of bonding in transition state, and by considering the intrinsic strengths (S) alone; softness Em* - En* = energy difference of frontier orbitals. parameters (a) have to be introduced. Thus the reaction When [ E m * - E n * / is large, very little charge transfer occurs: the reaction is primarily determined by the total A + :B =+= A:B (1) charges on the reactants (charge-controlled reaction). is characterized by the equilibrium constant k . where Ogk=S,SB + O A O ~ nearly degenerate, i.e.. (E,* - €,,*I - On the other hand, when the two frontier orbitals are 0, their interac- tion (electron transfer) becomes significant, and E = From this consideration and collation of experimental 2crmcSnp. This frontier-controlled reaction is enhanced 1
  • 2 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho TABLE I. Classification of Lewis Acids' TABLE II. Classification of Bases7 Hard Soft Hard Soft H+, Li+, Na+, K + Cu+, Ag+, Au+, TI', Hg+ Be?+,Mgz+,Caz+, Sr*-, Mn2+ Pd2+,Cd2+, Pt?', Hg*+, CH3Hg+, CO(CN)~*-, Pt4+,Te4+ AI,+, Sc3+,Ga3+, Ins+, La3+, TI3', TI(CH&, BH3, Ga(CH&, N3+, CP+, GdS', Lua' GaCI,, Gal,, Inch Cr3+, Co3+,Fe3+, Ass++, CH3Sn3+ RS+, RSe+, RTeT Si'+, Ti4--,Zr4', Th4+, U4', I+, Br+, HOC,RO+ Puquot;, Ce3+, Hf4+, W 0 4 + I?, Br,, ICN, etc. UO??+,(CH3)nSn2c, V02+, Trinitrobenzene, etc. ~003+ Choranil, quinones etc., hydrogen sulfide. The validity need not be restricted to Be(CH3)2,BF3, B(OR), Tetracyanoethylene, etc. free cations, but it is understood that the more carbonium AI(CHa)a, AICI3, AlHB 0, CI, Br, I, N, RO., RO,. character a center attains during a reaction, the harder it RP02+, ROPOg' M (metal atoms) O will be. The increasing stabilities of isomeric butyl alco- RSO?+, ROSO?', so3 Bulk metals hols: n < is0 < sec < tert, parallel the trend of hardness I;+, P+, CV+, Cr6+ CH?, carbenes exhibited by the carbonium ion R + , which is to combine RCO', COP, NC+ with the hard hydroxide ion. HX (H-bonding molecules) Replacement of hydrogen atoms in CH3+ by electro- Borderline: Fe?+, Co*+, Ni2+, CIA?', Znquot;, pb2+, Snz+, Sb3+, Bi3+, negative groups certainly would harden the cation. Since Rh3+,lr3+, B(CH&, SO?, NO', Ru*+, Osz+, R,C+, C6HS+,GaH, H - is the softest base, CH3+ represents the extreme case in the softness scale of carbon acids bearing a pos- by high polarizability and low solvation energies, and it itive charge. The only way to improve upon its softness is leads to a covalent bonding and can be associated with to remove a proton; thereby a carbene :CH2 is created. A soft-soft interaction. carbon radical is soft both as an acceptor or donor. Ole- By setting r = 0 for all acids and bases, Klopman has fins act as soft bases. defined an intrinsic character (softness) Ef. A hard base Ni(0) [as in N i ( C 0 ) 4 ] is soft, N i ( l l ) is borderline, but is characterized by a low value for the occupied frontier Ni(IV) is hard. The sulfur atom o f RS+ is a soft Lewis orbital; a hard acid is characterized by a high value for acid, but it becomes hard in RS02*. Exceptions to this the energy of the empty frontier orbital. general trend have been found in TI and Hg ions, those in Before going into discussion of the various organic as- the higher valence states being softer acids.' pects, it should be emphasized that HSAB does not ex- plain chemical facts, but correlates most of them very 111. Stability of Compounds and Complexes nicely. It does not concern itself with detailed mecha- Substitution of an atom by another may confer great nism of reactions and is applicable to many transforma- stability to a molecule or ion, or render it unstable or tions which can be regarded, in a broad sense, as involv- even nonexistent. The effect of substitution can often be ing acid-base pairings. Current theories remain valid for predicted using the HSAB principle as a guide. Thus di- explanation of these facts. sulfides RSSR' are stable, while sulfenyl esters RSOR' A further reminder pertains to the importance of intrin- are quite labile. The former class of compounds is com- sic strength of acids and bases which partake the reac- posed of a soft-soft makeup and the latter, a soft-hard tions, in comparison with their hardness. A case in point one. An interesting structural problem concerning the na- is the combination of an extremely hard Lewis acid H + ture of photoisomers of thiathiophthene analogs has been with an extremely soft Lewis base H - which results in a resolved recently.'' Cis-trans isomerization is involved highly stable hydrogen molecule. This reaction proceeds instead of bond switching as previously p0stu1ated.l~ The in fast rates and is highly exothermic. bond switching process would involve breaking of a S-S bond and formation of a S-0 bond and is unfavorable. 11. Softness (Hardness) Scales X X The important factors governing the softness of a species are its size, charge or oxidation state, electronic structure, and the other attached groups. As anticipated, a group having a heavier or more electropositive central atom is the softer base within a congeneric series, e.g. The acyl group RCO+ is a hard Lewis acid; hence its RS ,b > > > R,N R ~ A s R3P combination with hard bases forms very stable mole- cules. These include carboxylic acids RCOOH, esters C, H- > NH2- > OH- > F- RCOOR', and amides RCONR'2. In contrast, its union with soft bases results in highly reactive or labile speci- I- > Br- > CI- > F- mens such as thioesters RCOSR' and acyl iodides RCOl, Leonard and coworkers have thoroughly investigated s2- > so,2- the transannular interactions between a carbonyl group I t may be compared with the electronegativity scale for and a heteroatom diametrically situated in a mesocycle these donor atoms. ( 1 ) . Infrared, uv,14 ORD,15 dipole moment,16 and other Organic bases in which the donor atom is a carbon are physical data indicate the existence of strong interaction soft. Carbon acids are comparatively soft also. Owing to N...C=O as in 2; the corresponding sulfur analogs17 the fact that hydrogen is more electropositive than car- show weaker interactions. Where the hetero group is a bon,1° the hardness sequence of several carbonium ions sulfoxide, participation through its oxygen atom ( 3 ) is ob- follows the order of C6H5+ > (CH3)3Ct > (CH3)2CHC The sulfoxide ammonium salt 4 has been > C2Hs+ > CH3+. This scale was supported by thermo- shown1s to assume a conformation in which hydrogen dynamic data deduced from the reaction of alcohols with bonding between NH and the sulfoxide oxygen prevails.
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 3 R t b C - A RC=N Ethers form very good complexes with boron trifluoride (4) through a hard-hard 0 - F interaction. It has been pointed out that a maximal number of the same or similar groups flocked to a central atom tends to stabilize the final 1 2 species, and the phenomenon is called “symbiosis.” 2 7 Since both F and 0 are hard, it is not surprising that BF3-ORz are stable. On the other hand, ethers are readi- ly cleaved by boron t r i b r ~ m i d e . ~ ~ . ~ ~ The weaker B-Br bond as well as the 0-C bond of the ethers are further enfeebled through complexation, which itself is a favor- able event because two hard atoms form a dative bond. 3 4 Collapse of the complexes by dissociating a bromide ion Thus the preference for hard-hard interaction is apparent ensues which is followed by bromide attack (soft-soft) from this study. on carbon next to the oxonium center. These are very Lewis acid coordination with carbonyl compounds low- propitious processes. ers the uco absorption in the infrared. Since the donor Because boron ( B 3 + ) is a hard Lewis acid, trimethyl atom is the hard oxygen, tighter and more stable com- borate B(OCH3)s is more stable than B ( S C H S ) ~ . recent A thioacetalization procedure30 employing trialkyl thiobor- - plexes are formed between carbonyl compounds and hard Lewis acids which may be detected by infrared ate without catalyst has been achieved. spectroscopy.zo The following shifts exhibited by aceto- R,C=O + B(SR’)3 R,C(SR’), (5) phenone are typical. This reaction parallels that of the BBr3 cleavage of ethers Fe- AI- Ti- Zn- Cd- Hg- in reasoning. cI3 Cl3 cI4 BF3 Cl2 CI2 Cl2 Borane, BH3, also has a formal B 3 - oxidation state. v g = ~ , c m - ’ 130 120 118 107 47 38 31 However, the hydride ions render the molecule sufficient- ly soft as manifested by the properties of 3-(methyl- thio)propylborane ( 9 ) which is more stable than the te- The substituent effect on the enolization phenomenon trahydrofuran complex 10, and is d i ~ t i l l a b l e . ~ ’ of carbonyl compounds may be analyzed in the HSAB context. When X of 5 is a hydrogen, C-1 is softened and enolization is favored. The C-1 of the enol form 6 is likely to be softer since it is doubly bonded to another carbon instead of oxygen as in the keto form. Aldol condensa- tionzl proceeds much more readily with aldehydes than with ketones. When X = CI, OH, OR, and other electro- negative functions, C-1 becomes harder, and enolization 9 10 is discouraged. The extent of interaction between phenol and dialkyl chalcogenides R2X falls off as X = 0 > S > SeS3’and is > in line with relative compatibility in hardness between proton and the hydrogen bond acceptor. 2-Pyridones and the corresponding thiones and selenones are highly po- larized. Although dipole moments increase in the direc- tion of 0 < S < Se compounds, S and Se analogs exhibit 5 6 weak ability to participate in hydrogen bonding.33 Evidence has been adduced for the following rapid a-Substituents (Z) affect the ease of enolization ac- equilibria34which involve soft-soft acid base interactions. cordingly. Electronegative groups such as halogens, car- bonyl, etc., prefer direct bonding to a harder center + + which is available in the enol form (sp’ vs. s p 3 ) . Facilita- Me,S-SMe BF4- + Me,S, === Me,S F + (MeS),SMe B ; tion of enolization by these substituents is observed. (6) The fascinating cycloheptatriene-norcaradiene tautom- + erismz2 has now been largely clarified. There is a definite (CH,),SSCH,BF,- + Me,S === (CH,),S + Me,SSCH,BF,- tendency for fluorine atoms to attach to the harder sp’ (7) carbonz3 of 7 rather than to the cyclopropane ring of a tautomer similar to the hydrogen analog 8.24.‘5 The tricy- Mixed soft-hard interactions are so unfavorable that ei- clic tautomer of 7 cannot be isolated. ther the equilibria are biased completely on one side or are immeasurably slow by nmr standards. Me,SSMe + Me20 += Me,S + Me20SMe (8) slow (CH,),SOCH, + Me,S T_ (CH,),S + CH36SMe2 (9) Studies such as shown below yield data of hard-soft characteristics of donors and acceptors.35 7 8 20:80 (CH,),NBH, + ( H)P C ,, (CH,),PBH, + (CH,),N (10) Thermal reorganization of isonitriles to nitriles26 is ex- pected o n the basis of HSAB concept. Another case in point concerns with equilibrium be-
  • 4 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho tween aminophosphines and d i p h o ~ p h i n e s ~ ~ at room tem- perature. 1 1 89 (CH,)$'N(CH& + (CH&PH i - - = (CH3)2PP(CH3)2 + (CH3)ZNH ( l Pearson has shown that the following reactions would I CH-CEN I be favored thermodynamically. (CH,),N + ZH3 - (CH,),Z + NH, (12) N-C-CH I---Fe-C=O -/ - - CH2 Z = P , As (CH,),O + H2S (CH&S + H2O (13) 0 JL 0 The relative inertness of divalent sulfur and trivalent 11 phosphorus compounds toward proton but their aggres- siveness in reactions with soft alkyl halides are well doc- reaction intermediate^.^^ These are soft acid-soft base umented. Competition for alkyl halides among nitrogen pairs. and phosphorus atoms in a m i n o p h o ~ p h i n e s serves to ~~ illustrate HSAB theory. :+M(CO), :+M(CO)&,H, R,NPR', + Rquot;X + R2N6Rquot;R', X- (14) C, HO CH30 R3M=X (M = P, As; X = S, Se) complexes easily M = Cr, Mo, W M = M n , Re with soft metal ions but not with hard acceptors.38 This 12 13 behavior is in direct contrast to R3M=O. Lanthanide shift reagents39 have found wide applica- tions in nuclear magnetic resonance studies of organic molecules. Specific coordination of the transition metal ions with functional groups is the prerequisite and basis for the observed spectral shifts. I t is now established that thiols, thioethers, and phosphines (soft donors) form much weaker complexes with the metal ions in reagents which happen to be hard Lewis acids than do ethers and amines (hard donors), by correlation with the magnitude of proton resonance shifts in the proximal methylene or methyl groups. Quantitative measurements indicate the relative abilities of various groups as listed: Decomposition of diazo compounds to carbenes is strongly catalyzed by heavy metals (e.g., Ag, Cu, Pd) and their cations, by a soft-soft coordination which weakens the C-N The phosphorus and sulfur ylides are more stable than the nitrogen and oxygen analogs,53 the former being Ro composed formally of carbenes complexed to soft do- C=O > -CN (ref 41) / nors. The high stability of CH21- compared with that of CH2F- is in conflict with classic theory of inductive stabi- lization, but it i s predicted on the basis of HSAB princi- ple.7 As mentioned before, the symbiotic effect has pro- found influence on stability of chemical entities. A few More recent data suggest the preference complexation more examples are discussed here. Ordinary hemiacetals by Eu(dpm)3 at carbonyl rather than sulfur.43 are less stable than acetals; even less so are hemithioa- Ions such as I s - , Br3 - , charge-transfer complexes, cetals in comparison with hemiacetals and with thioace- and numerous organometallic compounds owe their sta- tals. Disproportionation of difluoromethane, and of form- bility to soft-soft interactions. Olefinic ligands, isonitriles, aldehyde, and the halogen exchange between iodotrifluo- carbon monoxide, phosphines, sulfides, etc., are soft do- romethane and fluoromethane are assisted by symbi- nors while zerovalent heavy metals are soft acceptors. - 0~i.s.~ In the complex di-p-acrylonitrile-bis(tricarbony1iron) (11) - the acrylonitrile molecule uses both its Ir-bond and nitro- gen as donors.44 As expected, the nitrogen occupies an 2CH2F2 CH, + CF, (15) axial position which is preferred by harder ligands. I t 2CH2O CH4 + CO, (16) should also be noted that the CN-Fe bond is nonlinear; perhaps the nitrogen is softer in such a particular hybrid- CF3I + CH3F --t CF4 + CH,I (1 7) ization. In recent years, several stable metal-carbene com- The partial rearrangement observed during methylation plexes ( e . g . . 12, 13) have been s y n t h e s i ~ e d . Many ~ of N . N ' - b i ~ ( t r i r n e t h y l s i l y l ) h y d r a z i n emay be explained ~~.~ ~~ carbenoids ( e . g . . 14, 1 5 ) 4 7 . 4 8 have been postulated as by invoking the symbiotic effect (cf. 16).
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 7 5 , No. 1 5 ~-C,HSLI mote cleavage of the Cq-0 bond of p-propiolactone ex- (CH,),SiNH- NHSi(CH,), clusively.7' Some enlightening results have emerged from studies CH, of nucleophilic attack on acyl oxy silane^.^^ I t has been I I (CH,),SiN-NSi(CH,), + [(CH,),Si],N -N(CH,), (18) RCOOSi(CH,),R' + Nu: -+ (CH,),SiR' + RCOO- I I CH, - (CH,),SiR' I 0- + RCONu (CH,),Si-N -NH demonstrated that organometallic reagents prefer reac- 16 tion at the carbonyl function, whereas alcohols, alkox- ides, and amines are mainly silicophilic. These observa- I V. Reaction Selecfivity tions are fully in accord with the hard nature of silicon: A. Alkylation vs. Acylation furthermore, they indicate the degree of hardness is high- er than that of the ester carbonyl. Saponification of carboxylic esters and amides is ini- tiated by the addition of hydroxide ion to the acyl carbon to form a tetrahedral intermediate. The reaction is there- B. C- YS. 0-Alkylation fore subject to steric control. Hindered esters which are The dichotomy of C- vs. 0-alkylation and acylation of difficult to hydrolyze by standard techniques may be enolates has intrigued organic chemists for a long time. cleaved employing soft nucleophiles which attack specifi- The nature of cation, alkylating agent, solvent, reaction cally the alkyl carbon atom. Alkanethiolates are very effi- temperature, and medium homogeneity or heterogeneity cient agents for the hydrolysis of phenacyl esters55 and play important The enolate ion is ambident; it methyl esters56 including mesitoate, podocarpate, and possesses a hard oxygen and a soft carbon end. The trisisopropylacetate. The method of potassium tert-butox- O/C ratio often reflects the softness of the alkylating ide in dimethyl sulfoxide57 might involve the soft dimsyl agent: the harder the reagent, the higher proportion of anion as the reactive specie^.^^.^^ The Taschner-Es- 0-alkylated product results. Acetophenone gives O/C ra- chenmoser procedure (Lil-alkylpyridine)60~61 and its vari- tios of 0.1, 3.5, and 4.9 on reaction with ethyl iodide, di- ous modification^^'.^^ consist of nucleophilic attack on methyl sulfate, and triethyloxonium fluoroborate, respec- the methyl group by iodide ion. t i ~ e l y . 'A change in alkylation pattern of ketone enolates ~ in dimethyl sulfoxide on varying the halogen atom in n- RCOOCH, + Lil As expected, the harder the acyl carbon, the more susceptible it is to hydrolysis with hard bases. Trifluoro- ~~ and t r i c h l o r ~ a c e t a t e sare readily hydrolyzed by aqueous --+ RCOO-Lit + CH,I (19) - pentyl halides75has been observed, e.g.. eq 26. C6H5C=CHCzH5 I n-C5Hl1X or alcoholic ammonia at room temperature. It should be O- Na' 0 noted, however. that thiolates undergo S-alkylation on I1 reaction with trichloroacetates. CI,CCOOCH,R + R'S- - CI3CCOO- + R'SCHZR (20) Even the extremely reactive P-propiolactone shows CGH,C=CHCZH, I 0C5H1 1 + CGH5CCHC2H5 I C5H11 (26) discrimination in its reactions with nucleophiles. x = CI 1.2 Br 0.64 Ro- t OCH2CHzCOOR (21)65 I 0.23 V - - CN- 1,3-Dicarbonyl compounds also exhibit the same selectivities, as represented by eq 27.76 Progressive in- c -' h NCCHZCH2COO- (22)66 RS- RSCHZCHZCOO- (23)67 68 CHBX P77 . - acetone CHZCHZCOOH O+' 0 (24)69 H Reaction of P-propiolactone with trimethyltin methoxide and diethylamide gives respectively the methyl ester and CH3 diethylamide in which the stannyl group becomes bonded to the ethereal oxygen. Contrariwise, the corresponding tin halides and sulfides afford adducts via alkyl oxygen cleavage. Diethylaminotrimethylsilane and -germane also yield 3-diethylaminopropanoyloxy derivatives owing to - softening of the nitrogen by virtue of p r - d r i n t e r a c t i 0 r - 1 . ~ ~ 70'0 The diethylphosphino analogs ( C H ~ ) S M P ( C ~[ H ~= ~ M ) 26'0 31'0 Sn, Si, Gel, in which the phosphorus atom is soft, pro- 30'0 3640
  • 6 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho crease in O-alkylation7’ in the series of RI, RBr, RCI was sists of weakening the C-S bond by coordinating the sul- also revealed. fur atom with the soft silver ion (eq 30 and 3 1 ) . In the Systematic investigations have demonstrated that, in alkylation by n-alkyl halides or tosylates, the controlling factor is the.hardness of the leaving group. With secon- dary halides or tosylates, the symbiotic effect of the leav- R R - R‘NH, R‘NHCH,CR,OH (30) ing group is also important. I n extreme cases where the alkylator is composed of a supersoft Lewis acid and a hard base (e.g.. allyl tosylate), or hard acid and soft base (e.g.. halomethyl methyl ether), the determining factor rests in the nature of the alkyl group.78 Of special interest is the reaction between benzophe- none dianion (CsH5)2C-0- and C H S X . ’ ~Even though the two negative charges are in adjacent atoms, no ex- ception to the general rule is noted. The C/O ratios are former reaction, the transition state is undoubtedly stabi- and 0 (CH30Ts). 7.7 ( C H B I ) , . 2 (CHsBr), 2 . 7 ( M e 2 S 0 4 ) , 4 lized by both the incoming nitrogen and the departing C-Allylation of sodium phenoxides0 becomes prevalent oxygen atom. Operation of transition state symbiosis was as hydrogen bonding ability of the solvent augments. Sol- first authenticated by Pearson and Songstadgl who mea- vation deactivates the hard oxygen atom and thereby fa- sured and analyzed the rates of the following displace- vors C-substitution. Solvent effects are important in alkyl- ation of 9-benzoylfluorene,s1 for in protic solvents C-al- kylation predominates, but 0-alkylation is observed in hexamethylphosphoric triamide, presumably due to poor ment reactions in methanol. B- + C H ~ O T S B- + C , HI - - BCH, + TsO- BCH, + I- (32) solvation of the oxygen by the aprotic solvent molecules. (33) More recently, it has been demonstrated thatg2 symbiotic effect is even larger i n aprotic solvents such as acetoni- trile. Deoxygenation of oxiranes by the agency of trivalent C6H5 * O phosphorus proceeds in low yields of olefin mixture and CsH5 sp3 requires high temperatures. On the other hand, extrusion of sulfur from thiiranes is stereospecific and occurs at relatively low temperature^.^^ The results indicate that (28) the thiophilic process is favorable as expected. Soft Lewis acids (e.g., 12) also effect the stereospecific desul- furizati~n.~~ The divalent sulfur atom is softer than olefin as a Alkylation of enolates with hard chloromethyl alkyl donor; hence peracids (soft) oxidize the sulfur much etherssz takes place exclusively at oxygen. Acylation also more rapidly.95 Carbenes and nitrenes are soft electro- favors this hard site.83 The hypothetical siliconium ions philes; they are trapped mainly by the sulfur of vinyl SUI- are harder than the corresponding carbonium ions; there- fides.96 Methyl crotyl sulfide affords an insertion product fore only 0-trimethylsilyl derivatives can be prepared by of d i c h l o r ~ c a r b e n eprobably via the Stevens rearrange- ,~~ - reaction of enolates with t r i m e t h y l ~ h l o r o s i l a n e.85 ~ .~ ment of an ylide. Imine anions, being isoelectronic with enolates, re- - spond in the same fashion to variation of leaving groups CH,SCH,CH=CHCH, + :CCI, in alkylating agents (eq 29).86 Dianions of the phenylhy- drazones and oximes undergo selective C-alkylation with CH,S-CCI, CH,SCCI,CH,CH=CHCH3 the first equivalent of alkyl h a l i d e s s 7 I CH,CH=CHCH, (34) Internal competition between sulfur and an olefin link- age for a carbene leads to reaction at sulfur only, even though addition to the double bond is sterically favored, whereas attack on sulfur gives strained intermediates or products (eq 35).98 Acetals are very labile to aqueous acids, but thioace- Carboxylate anions can be converted into methyl es- tals are remarkably stable. All the direct hydrolytic meth- terss8 efficiently by reacting with dimethyl sulfate. Methyl ods available for thioacetals to date involve coordination halides are not effective, as anticipated from the HSAB to the sulfur a soft or borderline acceptor such as view point . Hg2+,99-101 Ce4+,102 T13+,103 Ag+,104.105 Cuz- 1 0 6 R+,lo7-llo Half,”’ NH2+.l12 Chloramine T113 may be C. Reactions of Organosulfur Compounds considered as a nitrene complex, hence a soft Lewis acid. As a result of their soft nature, divalent sulfur com- pounds undergo many reactions radically different from those of the oxygen analogs. I n the least, enormous dis- parity in reactivities are often noted. Aminolysis of oxiranessg is rapid; however, ring open- ing of thiiranes by amines is much more sluggish. A rem- edy for the latter process has been found,g0 and this con- 17 18
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 7 Alkylation of sodium p-toluenesulfinatel’O affords pre- dominantly a sulfinate ester with CHsX when X is a hard leaving group such as tosylate; methyl tolyl sulfone re- sults in cases where X is soft (e.g.. I , OSOAr). 0 II Ar -S-OCH, ArS0,- Na’ / o (38) II Ar-S-CH, II 0 Copper-catalyzed decomposition of p-toluenesulfonyl 125 3‘0 133 2°C (35) azide or chloramine T in the presence of dimethyl sulfox- ide constitutes a method for preparation of N-tosylsulfoxi- mineslZ1 l Z z , which are useful synthetic reagents. i “, R,SO + TsNXY % R,S H0 XNT~ + XY (39) The nitrenoid intermediates are trapped by the softer SUI- fur of sulfoxides. Similar interception of nitrenes has also been reported. l Z 3 x = o , s Kinetically controlled reactions of thiophosphates give two different types of products’24 depending on the reac- Secondary isotope effects :learly manifest that C - 0 tion partners. The following example124a illustrates the bond scission occurs subsequent to protonation (neces- relative softness of sulfur and selenium. sarily at 0) during acid hydrolysis of oxathiolanes 17 and 18.’14 Direct observation of C - 0 bond cleavage has also been recorded (eq 3 6 ) . R,PHSe Na’ S- 3-Chloro-l,2-benzisothiazoles undergo normal substitu- tion at C-3 by ethoxide and amines,’16 but suffer ring cleavage when exposed to soft nucleophiles (eq 37).’ l 7 + Optically active phosphine sulfides may be desulfurized to the corresponding phosphines with retention of config- uration by lithium aluminum h ~ d r i d e . ’ ’ The soft hydride ~ ion chooses to attack the soft divalent sulfur instead of CCN the relatively hard pentavalent phosphorus. The harder and softer methylating agent. dimethyl SUI- SCN N@ fate and methyl iodide, respectively, react on N and S ends of thiopurines.lZ6 in accordance with prediction based on Pearson’s principle (eq 4 2 ) , Sulfoxides are ambident nucleophiles which can be al- Thiocyanate anion is S,N-ambident. Since the terminal kylated at either S or 0. Dimethyl sulfoxide gives 0- atoms belong to different categories according to the methylsulfonium brosylate’ and S-methylsulfonium io- softness scale, each would display opposite affinity for a dide1lg on treatment with the respective alkylators. The particular electrophile, e.g., e q 43. salt formation process is an s N 2 whose transition state A rigorous investigation of aromatic and nucleophilic can be regarded as an acid-base complex. 0-Methyl- substitution of polynitrophenyl derivatives (ArX) by thio- ation of dimethyl sulfoxide is kinetically controlled; its cyanate ion has demonstrated that the nature of X has transition state is symbiotically stabilized by S - 0 and profound influence on reaction rates. The rate ratio BsO groups. k s / k h spreads over a l o 5 range from X = py+ to X =
  • 8 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho center, at methylene carbons with soft donors (e.g.. RS-) resulting in ring 0 ~ e n i n g . l ~ ~ CH3 CH, (42) 19 20 Displacement of sulfite from trithionate ion S ( S O 3 ) Z 2 - occurs at the divalent sulfur with decreasing effective- ness as: CzH5S- > CsH5S- > ( C ~ H S ) > PC N - . The ~ transition state resembles that of the S N process on ~ CH3 carbon.134 The anion of monothiomalonate [SCNI- > CH3SCN CH3CONCS (43) - S C~H50COCH-~’C-OC2H5 1.l” The iodo derivative favors attack by the soft S end alkylates 1.7 times more readily at S than at C with ethyl of thiocyanate so tremendously that these authors con- iodide in e t h a n 0 1 . l ~ ~ ~ cluded that transition state symbiosis is much more rea- sonable (pronounced ?) in SNAr reactions because the entering and leaving groups are bonded to tetrahedral D. Reactions of Organophosphorus Compounds carbon and much closer to each other than they are in a Phosphines are exceptionally powerful nucleophiles for S Ntransition state. ~ soft acceptors. In a peptide synthesis based on redox Direction of cleavage of 2,4-dinitrophenyl tosylate is condensation, triphenylphosphine forms salts with disul- dictated by the bases used.lZ8Methoxide binds selective- fides which serve to activate the carboxylic acid for the ly (88%) to the sulfonyl sulfur whereas thiophenoxide re- coupling r e a ~ t i 0 n . The overall transformation involves l~~ leases the tosylate anion by first attaching itself to the sequential soft-soft, hard-hard, and hard-hard interac- soft aromatic carbon atom. Similar results are found in the aliphatic series. tions (eq 46). ( , ,, CH)P + RS , - (C6H,),k3?RS- - - R‘COO-. Cu2’ R“NH, R’COO~(C,H5)3 RS- R’CONHR” (46) a-Bromocyclohexanone reacts with triphenylphosphine The studies of Kice and coworkers have established at O”, while a-chlorocyclohexanone is inert even at that hardness of the sulfur atom falls off gradually in the 100°.’36 Direct attack of the a-halogen by phosphine is order: . sulfonyl > sulfinyl > s ~ l f e n y 1 . To-~ ~ implied.~ Further studies on the enol phosphonium salt ~ ~ ~ ~ ward ArS02+ reactivities of nucleophiles are F - > AcO- formation’37 sustantiate this contention (eq 47). How- >> CI-, suggesting that the sulfur is comparable to a sp3 carbon. That ArSO’ is medium soft has been deduced r- - from the CI- > AcO- > F - scale. Thus the following e q ~ i l i b r i u m ’ is ~understandable on the ground that bor- ~ derline CI- is preferable to hard R O - in combination with S. 0 0 1 (471 CI ever, enol phosphates are not generated in exactly the same manner.138 The harder phosphites prefer adding to It should be remembered that for the carbon counterpart the carbonyl, and the ensuing betaines rearrange to only the phthalide structure exists. phosphoranes which fragment subsequently to the prod- A report describing the behavior of tris(methylthi0)- ucts (eq 48). methyl cation (CH3S) 3CC toward various nucleophiles132 4-Bromocyclohexadienones undergo debromoaromati- supports the HSAB concept. Water neutralizes the carbo- ~ a t i o n readily (eq 49). ’~~ nium center, whereas soft ions ( B r - , I - , C N - ) attack ‘By virtue of their softness, phosphines are excellent the methyl group. Methanethiol adds to the central car- carbene traps. 140 Wittig reagents can thus be prepared, bon, presumably because of the symbiotic effect. Tri- e.g., eq 50. phenylphosphine attacks the sulfur atom. The 1,2,4,6-tetraphenylphosphabenzene an- Similarly, 2-dialkylamino-1.3-dithiolinium salts 19 react alkylates kinetically on phosphorus with alkyl ha- with hard bases ( e . g . , OH-, ArNH2) at the carbonium lides, but acylation takes place at the harder c - 4 (eq 5 1 ) .
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 9 A mixture of dialkyl hydrogen phosphonate, triethyl- amine, and carbon tetrachloride is very effective for de- hydration of a l d ~ x i m e s . A~ proposed mechanism for the ' ~ generation of the true reagent involves deprotonation of the phosphonate by the hard amine, and then the remov- al of a soft CI+ from carbon tetrachloride by the phos- phorus of the ambident phosphite-phosphonate anion (eq 55). OPO(ORquot;), 0 II (R0)zP-H + (C,H5)3N - (C,H&$JH * 1CCI.4 0 II _P(OR), (55) (RO),POCI + CHCI, + (C,H,),N Teichmann and Hilgetag145have summarized and dis- cussed nucleophilicities of phosphoryl oxygen and thiophosphoryl sulfur in terms of the HSAB principle. Dealkylation of trialkyl phosphate^'^^.'^^ using soft and hard ions appears to follow divergent mechanisms OH (eq 56). For instance, thiocyanate ion attacks the soft RSCN + (RO),P=O s c y I 0- (RO),P=O (C6H5),P + CH,CI, + n-C,H,Li - (C6H5),P=CHCI (50) ROH + (RO),P=O 0'- carbon atom of the alkoxy groups with its soft sulfur end, and hydroxide initiates the hydrolysis by adding to the hard pentavalent phosphorus atom, analogous to the common saponification of carboxylic esters. C6H5 I E. Elimination and Substitution Dehalogenation by iodide, 1 4 8 similar to that induced by zinc dust, proceeds stereospecifically. Undoubtedly it is a C6H5COCI concerted elimination initiated by interaction between io- dide and the electrophilic bromine. Selectivity is illustrated in alkylation and acylation of - phosphino alcohols.142 RCOCl (CH,),PCH,O- Na' (CH,),PCH,OCOR (52) RX Halophilicity of trivalent phosphorus compounds, n- C2H5P(CH,0H), C,H5b(CH,0H), X- (53) (C4H9)3P > (C6H5)3P > (C2H50)3P, has been revealed _ _ f I I by studying the debromination of vic-dibromides. 1 4 9 Their R reactivities parallel the relative softness of the phospho- Sodium diethyl phosphite reacts with w-chloroalkanols rus atom. in such a manner that the process can be rationalized Debromination and dehydrobromination of meso- and within the HSAB f r a m e ~ 0 r k . l ~ ~ first step is a soft- The dl-stilbene d i b r ~ m i d e s ' ~ ~ dimethylformamide have in soft and ring closure is hard-hard combination. This last been scrutinized. Protophilicity and bromophilicity are F - step is, of course. subject to steric control (see eq 54). > CI- > DMF and I - > B r - > C I ~> S n z - > DMF, respectively. 0 In other cases. variation of the base can often change the pathway from @-elimination to 8 ~ substitution and 2 1 vice versa. Soft bases favor displacement whereas hard - -C,H,OH bases generally promote elimination. n = 3,4, 5 C6H5S CICH,CH,CI C6H,SCH,CH2SC6H, (59) CH=CHCIz
  • 10 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho Halide ions, especially F-., are very weak bases. How- F. Addition to Double Bonds ever, tetraethylammonium fluoride effectively induces Olefins are essentially soft donors. Similar to acetyl- elimination of hydrogen bromide from 2-phenethyl bro- enes, n-complexation with heavy (soft) metal ions such mide while the quaternary ammonium chloride and bro- as Ag+, Pt4+, Pd”, are well known. Addition of halo- mide give halogen exchange products only.151 The fluo- gens, pseudohalogens, etc., is commonly considered as ride ion chooses to abstract the hard proton. to proceed via n-complex formation. Ethoxide and malonate anion have virtually identical S b l v a t o m e r ~ u r a t i o n is ~a polar addition which obeys ~ ~ proton b a ~ i c i t i e s , ’ ~but are different significantly in hard- ’ the Markovnikov rule. Owing to the fact that the acetoxy- ness, and react in a different manner with 2-bromopro- mercuric ion is soft, the reaction is much faster than or- pane. dinary polar additions. In h y d r o b ~ r a t i o n ,the ~ ~ ~ situation is somewhat differ- ent. Borane is a soft Lewis acid; complexation with ole- fins is also very favorable. However, this complex rapidly collapses to a four-center transition state en route to the product without participation of external nucleophiles. A s regards the B-H bond, boron is evidently a hard acceptor and hydrogen as H - a soft donor. Boron attacks mainly the central carbon of the allenic linkage which is harder Change of leaving group in the substrate also affects than the terminal spz atoms.157 the reaction course owing to symbiosis in the transition state. C y c l o p r ~ p a n a t i o n ’ ~ ~ alkenes with carbenes has of been developed into a useful synthetic method. The soft- er an olefin is, the more efficient carbene trap it will be. The dependence of SNAr reaction site upon choice of Benzynes and arynes are very electrophilic and soft bases is known.153 species. 3,4-Dehydropyridine (pyridyne) generated by elimination of hydrogen halides from 3- or 4-halopyridine gives equimolar amounts of 3- and 4-methiopyridines in the presence of m e t h a n e t h i ~ l . ’ The strong hard base ~~ ( e . g . . N H 2 - ) cannot compete with the thiolate ion for py- r ridyne (eq 66). Similarly, benzyne affords thioethers as major products under these conditions.lGO YN. . R = H, CH, SCH, X I In the 1,3-elimination of bis(a-bromobenzyl) SUI- f ~ n e s , ’soft bases ( C G H ~ S - , - , H - , (CsH5)3P, Mg, ~~ I Zn) attack the bromine atom to give stilbenes as final G. Addition to Carbonyl Compounds products, whereas hard bases (CHSO-, R3N, DMF, Hydrazones, oximes, and semicarbazones are conden- DMA) abstract an a-hydrogen and lead to bromostil- sation products of ketones and aldehydes with hard benes. The reactions are stereospecific; thus the meso bases. Soft bases such as alkylphosphines do not attack isomer affords cis-stil bene, dl isomer gives trans-stilbene the carbonyl group. predominantly, meso sulfone leads to trans-bromostil- /%Tetralone gives mainly an acetylene alcohol on treat- bene, and dl-sulfone leads to cis-bromostilbene (eq 64). ment with ethynylmagnesium bromide. A significant meso ‘ 0 ‘ 0 111
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1 9 7 5 , Vol. 75, No. 1 11 amount of starting material has been recovered after its exposure to vinylmagnesium chloride, and even more from the reaction with ethylmagnesium bromide.16’ The (70) hardness of RMgX decreases in the order of R as acety- lene > vinyl > ethyl; therefore it may be concluded that I SR the hardest reagent prefers reaction at carbonyl and soft- est reagent tends to abstract the highly acidic proton, 22 dride17z and diisobutylaluminum hydride’ 7 3 attack almost exclusively at the enone carbonyl. 21 Organotin hydrides are soft reducers; 1,4-addition The P-carbon of an enone system is softer than the across enone systems”4 represents the major reaction carbonyl carbon;16zit is therefore not surprising that soft pathway. anions pursue a major or exclusive conjugate addition course. H. Miscellaneous mobo Cyclopropane rings protonate much faster than the - KCN (67)‘63 softer olefinic linkage^;quot;^ the reverse is true when inter- actions involve the soft Lewis acid I Br. Halogen exchange of 3,3-difluorotetrachloropropene by Lewis acids has been studied.176 With aluminum bro- 0 mide, an unexpected disproportionation product, 1- bromo-1,2-dichloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropane, is obtained. The proposed mechanism invokes specific attack of soft ( B r - ) and hard ( F - ) ions at softer and harder carbonium centers, respectively (eq 71). The source of fluoride ion CI Hydride reduction of enones’66 has been discussed from the HSAB viewpoint. Replacement of some of the AIX3 + hydride ions by electron-withdrawing alkoxy groups hard- BrCI,C CFCl ens the reagents and thereby suppresses conjugate re- duction. The ratio of 1,2 vs. 1,4 reduction of cyclopenten- one varies from 14:86 by lithium aluminum hydride to a dramatic 90:9.5 by LiAIH(OCH3)3. a,P-Unsaturated es- ters can be converted to allylic alcohols167with LiAIH4 in BrClC 1 - CF,CI AIX, CF, - the presence of ethanol. Cholestenone gives 1,2 and 1,4 F- 9 products in the proportion of 74:26 (NaBH4) and 98:2 (NaBH (OCH3)3). ClBrC= CCICF, (71) Since boron is more electronegative than aluminum, the B-H bond is more covalent than AI-H and therefore is from other concurrent processes, for aluminum fluoride borohydrides are softer than aluminum hydrides. This ex- is formed. Titanium tetrachloride is effective to catalyze plains why borohydrides are relatively inert to protic sol- these other reactions but not the one which generates vents (hard H + sources), and they tend to produce more the trifluoro compound. Both AI3+ and Ti4’ are hard and conjugate reduction products. The harder Lii counterion they combine preferentially with F - . The difference in in- favors 1,2-reduction16* (LiBH4 vs. NaBH4). trinsic strengths of AIF3 and TiF4 is the cause for diver- Addition of an amine to the reducing system limits the gence. transfer of only one hydride ion to the substrate: forma- Halogen metathesis in other systems has been dis- tion of alkoxyborohydrides is also inhibited. Thus one cussed in the light of HSAB principle. The exclusive pro- equivalent of pyridine changes the 1,2/1,4 ratio in carve- duction of 3,3-difluoro-l,2-dichlorocyclopropene’77 is a none reduction169 from 36:64 to 0:lOO. consequence of symbiotic effect. The original authors The enone structure is of tremendous importance in considered this in terms of double-bond-no-bond reso- determining its reduction mode: N - and 0-alkyl substitu- nance. The two different terminologies may represent the ents generally discourage conjugate reduction. 1 7 0 Thus it same phenomenon here (eq 72). is of particular interest to note that reduction of cu-alkyl- Allylic rearrangement of 3-chloropentafluoropropene thiocyclohexenones17’ with sodium borohydride leads to goes through an unsymmetrical cation, in contrast to the saturated alcohols. I t is proposed that intramolecular hy- expectation that the softer CI- be abstracted. Symbiosis dride delivery is facilitated by sulfur participation (eq 70). indicates, however, that formation of SbF4CIz- is better Aluminum hydrides in which the metal atom does not than SbF3C13-. The intrinsic strength of the cation may carry a formal negative charge are harder. Aluminum hy- also determine the reaction pathway (eq 73).
  • 12 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho A- CI CI F- A since the predominant mode of charge neutralization in- volves the soft carbon end of the cyanide ion. ( , ,, X CH)C + (CeH5)dAS'CN- + (C,H5)&CN 90% + (C,H&,CNC 10% (77) CI F F F F X = CI, CIO, The hardness of silicon must be responsible for the un- usual transformation depicted in eq 78.1E3 C6H5 I C,H,ONa (CH,),Si-Si-CH,X (CH,),SiOC,H, + CF,=CFCF,CI SbF,CI, i L CF,=CF=CFCI Sbi4Clz- -I CF,CF=CFCI - (73) I CH, Sodium hydride generated by the radical-anion method reacts with benzyl chloride at room t e m p e r a t ~ r e . ' ~Stil- ' bene derived by the carbene route is stable and hence Reaction rates of phenyl chlorosulfate with various an- not the precursor of bibenzyl. This latter product must be ions follow the order of S Z O - > CN- > I - > SO3'- > ~ ~ generated along with toluene v/aa dechlorination process SCN- > B r - > CI . , F - , CH3COO-: thus it likely in- as shown in eq 74. volves displacement at the soft chlorine rather than the hard sulfur of the sulfonyl group.la4 0 f CHO ,,- + HS03- Debromination of gem-dibromocyclopropanes by dim- N-Chlorosulfonylazetidones185possess three different syl anion again involves the removal of a soft halogen by electrophilic sites. Soft bases ( e . g . , I - ) pick out the a soft carbon base.179 chlorine: hard bases (alkoxides, amines) attack the lac- tam carbonyl and the sulfonyl sulfur, both being hard centers. The reaction with borderline azide ion gives rise to a mixture of a diazide from hard-type attack, and a cy- clic urea which must involve hydrolysis of the chlorosul- fonamide through chlorine abstraction by the azide ion, simultaneous to the addition of a second azide to the carbonyl prior to the Schmidt rearrangement. I t is appar- r67;': ent that the fate (ring opening vs. rearrangement) of the Halogenation of sulfides proceeds via the Pummerer rearrangement. The mechanism has been further exam- ined with the aid of kinetic isotope effects extracted from chlorination and bromination of thiophane. 180 Solvent and + l2 + CI- reagent effects are interpreted in terms of HSAB theory. 0 Conversion of isonitriles to carbamates by thallium{ I I I ) s0,- nitrate in the presence of an alcohol18' is initiated by the - soft-soft interaction between C and TI (eq 7 6 ) . RNC + TI(NO& - R-kCTI(NO,), R'OH - RN-C ,R O' bINO3 - NO3- R ~ C O R ! - RNHCOOR' (76) CON, + h NO3 Both triphenylmethyl chloride and perchlorate furnish AR the same product ratio on reaction with tetraphenylarson- ium cyanide. The electrophilic species must be the tri- phenylmethyl cation, and this carbonium ion is fairly soft quot;Kquot; 0
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 13 tetrahedral intermediate 23 depends on the nature of 2. reaction. The fact that F + binds tightly to RSO2- forces - When Z is a sulfinate anion or a negative charge, the the nucleophilic attack on S. ring-opening process becomes electronically unfavorable. RS0,F + CHz=P(C,Hj), RS0,CH26(C,H5), F- r 31 C%=P(C6H& (83) RSOzCH=P(C,H5)3 + (C,H5),kH3 F- A similar reaction between sulfonyl fluorides with di- 23 methyloxosulfonium methylides has been reported.1g0 Based on HSAB concept, the failure in preparation of sulfonylnitriles, RSOzCN, through reaction of sulfonyl chlorides with alkali cyanides is not surprising and actu- RS02F + CH,&CH,), It 0 - RSO,CH&(CH,), 0 II (84) ally expected.lE6 The reduction of benzenesulfonyl chlo- ride by t r i p h e n y l p h ~ s p h i n e ’ must be initiated by chlo- ~~ rine abstraction. Lithium aluminum hydride is known to reduce the car- bonyl of N-acylaziridines;lg’ the softer sodium borohy- dride delivers a hydride ion to a ring carbon of N-car- bethoxyaziridine. 1 9 * c N-C-OCZH, - NaBH, CH3CHZNHCOOC2H5 (86) N-Alkoxypyridinium salts possess several centers open to attack by nucleophiles. Results of a study’g3 generally bear out the validity of HSAB to these systems. Hard al- koxides remove an @-hydrogen from the side chain, soft anions ( I - , SCN-, S2032-)displace pyridine oxide from the carbon chain, whereas cyanide adds to C-2 of the On treatment with thionyl chloride, triphenylamine pyridinium ring with ensuing elimination of the molecule undergoes ring substitution. On the other hand, triphenyl of alcohol and rearomatization. Ring cleavage may follow derivatives of other group VA elements (P, As, Sb, Bi) the addition of a soft species to C-2, but these secondary effect reduction of thionyl chloride.188Analysis of the tri- reactions depend highly on the entering group (see eq - phenylphosphine reaction suggests formation of inter- mediate 25 by P 0; the oxygen atom is soft as an elec- trophile. The antimony and bismuth compounds attack the 87). chlorine which is even softer. +n (C6H5)3P-o-s-cI t ? CI- 0 tJ+ + NuCH2R 187) 25 Wittig reagents have strongly nucleophilic soft carbon ends. I t has been demonstrated that the chlorine atom of I 1 O- I A sulfonyl chlorides is removable by alkylidenephospho- OCH2R ranes.lg9 For example, see eq 82. However, sulfonyl fluo- + + RCHZOH RSO2CI + CH,=P(C,H,), -----t RSOf (C,H,),PCH,CI ‘H N“ JCH,=P(C,H,) (82) ring-opening products + Reactions of nonaromatic ambident cations have been RSO2- (C,H j),PCH, + (C6Hj),P=CHCI extensively investigated. 9 4 Representative cases are rides react quite differently (eq 83),although the order of shown in eq 88 and 89. Softness is C l f > F+ > ROS2+. This is a case in > Carbamates undergo complete 0-protonation with which intrinsic strength is the dominating factor of the acids. With the softer CH3+ electrophile in methyl fluoro-
  • 14 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho Recently it has been demonstrated that thiolates are oxidized by cyanogen bromide to disulfideszo4 in good RS- RS- + BrCN 3 [RSBr] q RSSR (93) yields. Carboxylic acids are dehydrated to anhydrideszo5 with cyanogen bromide. To clarify these results, one must recognize the soft- ness trend of Br’ > CN- > CI+. The polarizabilities of the pseudohalogens have been established which can be :H, represented as CIh-CN + and Br ’CN - . 2 0 6 , 2 0 7 In cyanogen iodide, the iodine atom is softer and more electrophilic. sulfonate, N-alkylation is favored under equilibrium condi- Thus the anomalous patterns of cr-cyanationZo8 with - tions. l g 5 ClCN and c u - b r o m i n a t i ~ n with BrCN emerged from ~~~ CH,OSO,F enamine reactions are understandable from the preced- (CH,),NCOOCH3 (CH3)3kOOCH3 Fso3- (90) ing analysis. The 0-carbon of an enamine system acts as a soft donor (eq 9 4 ) . Similarly, the results of Grignard Alkylation of sodium 9-fluorenone oximatelg6 has been reactions2l0can be rationalized (eq 95). studied under special conditions in which dissociated ions or aggregates prevail. In the presence of a crown L C N ether which occludes completely the cation, oximate undergoes almost exclusive (95-99%) 0-methylation with methyl tosylate and 65% 0-, 35% N-methylation with methyl iodide. Addition of sodium tetraphenylborate which suppresses dissociation of the sodium oximate re- (94) duces the alkylation of both methyl tosylate and methyl iodide to nearly the same rate and gives essentially the same ratio of 0,” (ca. 43/57) alkylation. Alkylation of 2-pyridone saltslg7 is subject to cation control. Thus, the sodium salt gives essentially N-alkyl products with n-alkyl halides, whereas silver salts furnish exclusively 0-alkylation in nonpolar solvents. The silver ion promotes carbonium character of, hence hardens, the alkylating agents thereby favoring attack by the harder oxygen of the ambident anion. The ambident behavior of nitrite ion is well docu- (95) mented (eq 91 ) . l g 8 2,4-Dinitrohalobenzenes react very In a synthesis of sulfonylnitriles211from sodium sulfi- nates, the soft sulfur acts as a nucleophile to bond to the cyano group of cyanogen chloride. - discriminately with nitrite anion’99 according to the soft- 0 ness of their halogen. The harder they are, the higher RS02- Na’ ClCN I1 RS-CN NaCl proportion of 0-attack appears, as exemplified by exclu- + + 196) sive formation of dinitrophenol (after hydrolysis of the ni- II 0 trite ester) in the case where fluorine is the leaving group, I n the other extreme, dinitroiodobenzene gives The anhydride formation mentioned further above pre- trinitrobenzene. Clearly this is another manifestation of sumably involves reactive intermediates of type 27, which transition state symbiosis. are generated from a union of hard oxygen base with the Reaction of nitramine anions RNN02- with benzyl ha- harder electrophile CN + from cyanogen bromide. lides occurs predominantly at nitrogen. With harder alk- ylator, e , g . . CICH20C2H5,the 0, ” ratio is enhanced to RCOOCN approximately 1 . 2 0 0 27 Typical soft bases such as dimethyl sulfide201 and io- dide ion2OZattack the soft carbon of the 0-alkyl group in The classical von Braun degradation212 of tertiary amines to give bromocyanamides further provides unam- - alkoxydiazenium ions. biguous information in connection with the present dis- cussion. In these cases, the hard amino nitrogen atom R,NN=OR’ tf R,N=NOR’ R2NNOR’ 26 Cyanogen halides are intriguing molecules which can react in many different ways. I t has been known that thiocyanates are formed by combining thiols with cyano- U CN gen chloride.z03 RSH + ClCN - RSCN + HCI (92) adheres itself to the harder CN+ prior to C-N bond fis- sion. Formally it is a four-centered exchange reaction,
  • Hard Soft Acids Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 15 completely in accordance with HSAB principle in the re- grouping of partners. At this point the Saville rules6 pertaining to multicenter reactions should be explicitly introduced. These rules 00 Rquot;S-H Jr R-s- NR,' - RSSRquot; + R2'NH (102) specify ideal catalytic conditions for bond cleavage pro- cesses, provided that the substrate has a hard-soft com- 00 bination. Rule 1 N: A-B E h h s s Rule2 N: A-B E S s h h Cleavage of organoboranes is frequently accomplished Compatibility of the nucleophile and electrophile with the by alkaline hydrogen peroxide.216The effectiveness of soft-hard nature of the groupings A and B is instrumental this reagent is believed to stem from ideal complemen- in facilitating the scission of A-B bond. Many of the reac- tarity with the substrate. tions discussed involve such combinations. Oxidation of aldehydes by silver oxide conforms to rule 00 RZByc 1. 0 , -+ RzBO + ROH (1041 0- OH 00 Degradation of benzeneboronic acid by bromine is greatly facilitated by added hard bases such as water.quot;' This fact suggests the intervention of a four-centered The Baeyer-Villiger reaction of aldehydes with alkaline transition state. The hard base activates the aromatic hydrogen peroxide and the decomposition of tetrahedral ring indirectly by bonding with boron and is indispensable intermediates from peracid oxidation may be illustrated to eventual expulsion of the boron containing moiety. as shown in eq 99 and 100. - t - ~ B z i o H ) z Br - D B r + ZB(OH), (105) OH I2 R-C-R~ - t - 2-Bromo-5-nitro-1,3,4-thiadiazole undergoes interesting SNAr processes. Two different quot;monosubstitutedquot; prod- ucts are isolated from reactions with sodium and silver 0 thiophenoxides, respectively (eq 106) The sulfide 0 N-N II RO-C-R' + Rquot;C0OH + H' (100) Hydrolysis of nitriles to arnides2l3 by alkaline hydrogen peroxide proceeds very readily. A reasonable mechanism has been formulated. anion interacts with either of the two ring carbons in the transition state; however, the counterion dictates actual site by selective complexing with the grouping of its like. Thus ( s : s ) silver-bromine or (h:h) sodium-oxygen (of the nitro group) pairing i s responsible for the outcome of these displacements. 1 WP. I t is satisfying to note that a debromination procedure utilizes sodium borohydride and heavy metal salts:219an- OH-O-O other requires the cooperativity of lithium iodide and Sulfenamides react with thiols to furnish disulfide^,^'^ boron trifluoride.z20The rules derived from HSAB con- perhaps via a four-centered transition state (eq 1 0 2 ) . cept indicate such are the correct combinations to be Similar cleavage of the N-S bond can be performed by effective. mixing with carbon disulfide (eq 103).*15 Deb ro mi nat io n of CY -bromo a Ik a no p he no ne s o c c u r s with
  • 16 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho k /A A‘ H 1‘ + fi + R’CONR, + R”OH &y6,-- 02 0 @BF3 (1 08) R’ triphenylphosphine in ethanol and is both acid and alco- hol catalyzed.z21a-Chloro I. etones fail to undergo analo- or gous reaction. Trialkyl phosphites cannot be used as de- brominating agent. 28 Saville’s rules serve to indicate optimal catalytic condi- tions. However, it should be borne in mind that there exist many facile multicenter reactions which do not fall into the two categories. The hydrolysis rates of acetylim- idazolez2* elevate with increasing imidazole buffer con- centration (at constant p H ) . One of the most plausible mechanisms (eq 109) involves a h h-h h transition state. mechanism can be expressed as s s-(s) s four-centered substitution. This soft pattern appears again in couplings between organocopper reagents and alkyl or aryl halides,23z the Ullmann reaction,233 and the decomposition of mercu- riodiazo ester by iodine (see eq 114 and 11 5) . 2 3 4 - 0- HN, m + ,NH + CH3-C-N I FNproducts (109) y I OH Hydrolysis of methyl ethylene phosphatezz3 has been I similarly interpreted (eq 1 1 0 ) . 29226 OH 302,’ 0- $E -3 : I CH,OPCH,CH,OH Y / II 0 0’‘ ‘0 u 2-Hydroxypyridine is a very useful catalyst to promote 31 220 aminolysis of esters (eq 11 1 ) . 2 2 4 A less clear-cut case is the mutarotationzz5of a-D-te- tramethylglucose in benzene, catalyzed by the same bi- functional reagent (eq l l 2 ) . A host of general acid-base catalyzed reactions belong to the same class. The transition states of some of these are depicted in structures 29-33. CH3 I The rate law for anisole brominationz3’ contains a term H 3222g 33’30 which is second order with respect to bromine. The
  • H a r d Soft Acids B a s e s Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 17 - CH30 I Br-p Br, CH 0' S B r + Br3- products FS03- 0 0 COOCZH, I N, I- ' I 0 0 cability of Pearson's principle to a whole range of diverse subjects. To be realistic, the principle is an empirical one, and there are observation^^^^^^^^ not yet reconcila- A very interesting and biochemically significant reac- ble with the theory. These minor inconsistencies are due tion is the dihydrolipoic acid reduction of riboflavin235 to the present imperfect understanding of certain subtle which is subject to general base catalysis (eq 116). aspects of bonding or other unaccounted factors. - The principle is extremely simple to apply, and enor- @ @n@ @ a mously useful for rationalization of reaction site selectivi- B:~~H-Y S-H flavin BH+ ty, for correlation of rates, and prediction of product a + R Ivl + flavin-H (1 16) structures and stabilities in a comparative sense. Finally, it should b e stressed that application of HSAB requires correct assignment of the acid and base compo- nents of a molecule which engages in a particular reac- R tion. Furthermore, it is not possible, at the present stage of development to translate the principle into a quantita- The regiospecificity of Diels-Alder reactions between tive tpol, as the terms quot;softnessquot; or quot;hardnessquot; represent dissymmetrical addends236 arises from preferential for- the collective property of a chemical entity which em- mation of the first bond between the softest centers of bodies such fundamental and diverse aspects as electro- the partners. negativity, electron affinity, ionization potential, bond In aromatic Claisen rearrangement^,'^' the oxygen strength, nonbonding repulsion. London dispersion forc- version ( ccurs at about 200quot;; S-C allyl shifts are more a es, solvation, etc. difficult to achieve (eq 117).238Formation of the interme- ox>- - H V. Addendum A monograph244 dealing with HSAB has been pub- lished. I t has been shown that the soft dichlorocarbene does not coordinate with the hard oxygen atoms of the dioxo- diate dienone is the rate-determining : tep. Analysis of lane group,245 just as anticipated. perturbance around the heteroatom X should furnish The symbiotic effect has been observed in gas-phase clues to relative reaction rates, as changes are the same s N 2 reactions.246The same effect appears to dictate a elsewhere. Thus the problem is narrowed down to con- rapid disproportionation of the initial 1 : l adduct of methyl sidering the net change of C(sp3)-X to a C(sp2)-X bond. o-phenylene phosphite with C ~ H ~ O S C ~ H S . ~ ~ ~ Such a change is more favorable with X ' = 0 than that The carbonyl group of choline selenol esters RCO- with X = S , because C(sp2) is harder. SeCH2CH2Nf(CH3)3X- is susceptible to attack by thiols, Amino-Claisen rearrangements are facilitated by Lewis yet stable to amines.248 I t is to be contrasted with the acids.z3g I t is therefore conceivable that sulfonium salts facile aminolysis of the corresponding thiol esters. derived from a lyl aryl sulfides would undergo rearrange- Anthrone also shows great selectivity in its alkyla- ment at lower temperatures. Such an effect due to sulfur tion.z49~250 Thus 9-al koxy-anthracenes are obtained with atom hardening has been observed (eq 1 1 8 ) . 2 4 0 alkyl sulfonates, and 10-alkyl- and 10,lO-dialkylanthrones An interesting retro-thio-Claisen rearrangement241 has are produced when alkyl halides are used. C-Alkylation of been reported (eq 1 19). benzoin by alkyl halides251is again in concordance with The discussions of organic reactions in the light of the HSAB. a-Cyano carbanions undergo C-alkylation with HSAB theory are by no means exhaustive. Rather, this is alkyl halides but give ketenimine derivatives exclusively an article intended to illustrate and emphasize the appli- on reaction with trialkylsilyl chlorides.252
  • 18 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 7 5 , No. 1 Tse-Lok HO Thiol dimerization can best be achieved by exposure to (27) C. K. Jorgensen. lnorg. Chem.. 3, 1201 (1964). (28) F. L. Benton and T. E. Dillon, J. Amer. Chem. SOC., 64, 1128 soft oxidants. 2,4,4,6-Tetrabromocyclohexa-2,5-dienone (1942). is very effective owing to the availability of soft Br+ at (29) J. F. W. McOmie and M. L. Watts, Chem. Ind. (London). 1658 C-4 which serves to activate the thiols specifically.253 (1963). (30) J. M. Lalancette and A. Lachance, Can. J. Chem.. 47, 859 The postulate of internal displacement on S by carboxyl- (1969). ate in the disproportionation of 2-(phenyldithio) benzoic (31) R. A. Braun. D. C. Brown, and R. M. Adams. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.,93, 2823 (1971). finds no support in a more thorough study.255 (32) R . West, D. L. Powell, M . K. T. Lee, and L. S. Whatley. J. Amer. Such a pathway would be disfavored on HSAB ground. Chem. SOC.. 86, 3227 (1964). The methanesulfinate ion attacks disulfides with its soft S (33) M. H. Krackov, C. M. Lee, and H . G. Mautner, J. Amer. Chem. SOC.,87, 892 (1965). terminus to afford thiosulfonate esters.256Perfluorothioa- (34) S. H. Smallcombe and M. C. Caserio. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 93. cetone forms a Bunte salt (CF3)2CHS-S03- with bisulfite, 5826 (1971) (35) D E. Young, G E McAchran. and S. G Shore, J Amer Chem whereas a ( 2 i- 1 ) adduct, ( C F ~ ) ~ C H S - S C ( C F J ) ~is I , C SOC.,88, 4390 (1966) obtained on its treatment with HC1.257In both reactions a (36) A . H. Cowley, Chem. Rev.. 65, 617 (1965). soft-soft S-S bond is formed. (37) N. L. Smith and H. H. Sisler. J , Org. Chem., 28, 272 (1963). 1381 P. Nicoon and D. W. Meek. Chem. Commun.. 398 119661. - - Diazo compounds having a 0-hetero substituent, - 7 - ~ I ~ ~ - I i39j B. C. Mayo, Chem. Soc.-Rev., 2, 49 (1973); M.-D. McCreary, etal. ArC(=N2)CH2Z (Z = OR, NMe2, SR), decompose via J. Amer. Chem. SOC., 96, 1038 (1974). carbenic rearrangement to afford olefinic products. Only (40) T. M. Ward, I. L. Allcox, and G. H. Wahl. Jr.. Tetrahedron Lett.. 4421 (1971). hydrogen shift occurs in cases where 2 = OR, NMe2; on (41) J. K. M. Sanders and D. H. Williams, J. Amer. Chem. SOC..93, the other hand, thioether rearrangement predominates 641 (1971). (42) H. Hart and G. M. Love, Tetrahedron Lett., 625 (1971). when Z = SR.258 Specific soft-soft > S :C< interac- -+ (43) A. vanBruijnsvoort. C. Kruk, E. R. dewaard. and H. 0. Huisman. tion accounts for the marked difference. Benzohydroxam- Tetrahedron Lett.. 1737 (1972). (44) M. L. Ziegler, Angew. Chem.. lnt. Ed. Engl.. 7, 222 (1968). ic acid is less reactive than its N-methyl derivative (45) E. 0. Fischer and A. Maasbol. Chem. Ber.. 100. 2445 (1967). toward aryl t o s y l a t e ~because C ~ H S C O(CH3)O- is ~~~ N (46) E. 0. Fischer and A. Riedel, Chem. Ber., 101, 156 (1968). harder than C ~ H S(O-)=NOH. C (47) P. W. Jolly and R . Pettit. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..88, 5044 (1966). (48) F. D. Mango and I . Dvoretzky. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 88, 1654 The dramatic increase in E ~ / S N ~ in the reactions ratio (1966), of tosylates with oxalate vs. formate ions has been as- (49) D . J. Cardtn, B. Cetinkaya, M. J. Doyle, and M. F. Lappert. Chem. SOC.Rev.. 2, 99 (1973). cribed to a possible bidenate attack on hydrogen by the (50) P. Yates, J. Amer. Chem. SOC.,74, 5376 (1952). former.260 I t should be noted that oxalate is a harder (51) E. Muller, B. Zech. and H. Kessler, Fortsch. Chem. Forsch. 7, base than formate. Hard nucleophiles ( F - , RO-) dis- 128 (1966). (52) R. Paulissen, H. Reimlinger. E. Hayez. A. J. Hubert. and P. place the methylsulfonyl groups of 3,5-dichloro-2,6- Tevssie.. Tetrahedron Lett.. 2233 11973). -,-- - bis(methylsulfonyl)pyridine, whereas the softer CN- and (53) A. W. Johnson, quot;Ylid Chemistry,quot; Academic Press, New York. N.Y., 1966. R2NH species displace the chlorine(s).261 (54) R. E. Bailey and R. West, J. Amer. Chem. SOC., 86. 5369 (1964). 1 , l -Dichloroallyllithium adds to ordinary ketones with ( 5 5 ) J. C. Sheehan and G. D. Daves, Jr., J . Org. Chem., 29, 2006 its softer CCI2 terminus, to aryl ketones and hexafluo- (19641, (56) P. A. Bartlettand W. S. Johnson, Tetrahedron Lett.. 4459 (1970). roacetone with the harder CH2 end.262 (57) F. C. Chang and N. F. Wood. Tetrahedron Lett.. 2969 (1964). Marked increase in 1,4-reduction of enones by (58) However, cf. G. Price and M. C. Whiting, Chem. lnd. (London), 775 (1963). LiAIH(SR)3 has been observed ( v s . LiAIH4).263The trend (59) W. Roberts and M. C. Whiting, J . Chem. Soc.. 1290 (1965). is in direct contrast to the behavior of the hardened al- (60) E. Taschner and B. Liberek. Rocz. Chem.. 30, 323 (1956). koxyalum inum hydrides. (61) F. Elsinger. J. Schreiber. and A. Eschenmoser. Helv. Chim. Acta., 43, 113 (1960). (62) P. D. G. Dean, J . Chem. SOC.,6655 (1965). V. References (63) J. E. McMurry and G. 8 . Wong. Syn. Commun., 2. 389 (1972). (64) A. C. Pierce and M. M. Joullie, J. Org. Chem.. 27, 3968 (1962). (1) R. G. Pearson. J , Amer. Chem. SOC..85, 3533 (1963). (65) T. L. Gresham, J. E. Jansen, F. W. Shaver, J. T. Gregory, and W. (2) R. G. Pearson, Science. 151, 172 (1966). L. Beears. J . Amer. Chem. SOC..70, 1004 (1948). (3) R. G. Pearson, Chem. Brit.. 3 , 103 (1967). (66) T. L. Gresham, J. E. Jansen. F. W. Shaver, M. R. Frederick, F. T. (4) R. G. Pearson, J . Chem. Educ.. 45, 581, 643 (1968). Fiedorek. R. A. Bankert, J. T. Gregory, and W. L. Beears. J. (5) R . G Pearson. in quot;Survey of Progress in Chemistry,quot; Vol. 5 , A. F. Amer. Chem. SOC.,74, 1323 (1952). Scott, Ed., Academic Press, New York. N.Y.. 1969, pp 1-52. (67) T. L. Gresham, J. E. Jansen. F. W. Shaver, and J. T. Gregory, J. (6) 6.Saville. Angew. Chem.. int. Ed. Engl., 6 , 928 (1967). Amer. Chem. SOC..70, 999 (1948). (7) R. G Pearson and J. Songstad, J . Amer. Chem. SOC.. 89. 1827 (68) T. L. Gresham, J. E. Jansen. F. W. Shaver, R. A. Bankert. W. L. (1967). Beears. and M . G. Prendergast. J. Amer. Chem. SOC., 71, 661 (8) J Seyden-Penne. Bull. SOC.Chim. Fr.. 3871 (1968). (1949). (9) G. Klopman, J Amer. Chem. SOC..90, 223 (1968). (69) J. Harley-Mason, J. Chem. SOC..2433 (1952). (10) L. Pauling. quot;The Nature of the Chemical Bond,quot; 3rd ed. Cornell (70) K. Itoh, Y. Kato, and Y. Ishii. J . Org. Chem., 34, 459 (1969). University Press, Ithaca. N.Y., 1960, p 9 3 . (71) C. Couret, J. Escudie, and J. Satge. R e d Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas. (11) S. Ahriand. Struct. Bonding (Berlin), 1, 207 (1966). 9 1 , 429 (1972). (12) G. Calzaferri, R. Gleiter. K.-H. Knauer. E. Rommel, E. Schmidt. (72) P. F. Hudrlik and R. Feasley. Tetrahedron Lett.. 1781 (1972). and H. Behringer. Helv. Chim. Acta. 56, 597 (1973): C. T. Peder- (73) See, for example, R. Gompper, Angew. Chem. In!. Ed. Engl.. 3, sen and C. Lohse. J . Chem. SOC..Chem. Commun.. 123 (1973). 560 (1964) (13) R. Gleiter. D . Werthemann, and H. Behringer, J. Amer. Chem. (74) G. J. Heiszwolf and H. Kloosterziel. Recl. Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas, SOC.. 651 (1972). 94, 89. 1153 (1970). (14) N. J. Leonard, Rec. Chem. Progr.. 17, 243 (1956). (75) H. D. Zookand J. A. Miller, J. Org. Chem.. 36, 1112 (1971). (15) N J Leonard, J A. Adamcik. C. Djerassi, and 0. Halpern. J . (76) R. Chong and P. S.Clezy, Tetrahedron Lett.. 741 (1965). Amer. Chem. SOC..80, 4858 (1958). (77) G. Brieger and W. M. Pelletier. Tetrahedron Lett.. 3555 (1965) (16) N J, Leonard, D . F. Morrow, and M. T. Rogers, J. Amer. Chem. (78) A. L. Kurts. N. K . Genkina, A. Macias, I. P. Beletskaya. and 0. A. Soc.. 79, 5476 (1957). Reutov. Tetrahedron, 27, 4777 (1971); W. J. LeNoble and ti. F. (17) N J. Leonard. T. W Milligan. and T. L. Brown, J. Amer. Chem. Morris, J. Org. Chem.. 34, 1969 (1969). S o c , 82, 4075 (1960). (79) W. S. Murphy and D. J. Buckley. Tetrahedron Lett., 2975 (1969); (18) N J. Leonard and C. R. Johnson, J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 84. 3701 see also J. A. Campbell and J. F. Wolfe, Org. Prep. R o c . lnt., 3, ( 1 562). 303 (1971). (15) N . J. Leonard and A. E. Yethon. Tetrahedron Lett.. 4259 (1965); 1801 N. Kornblum. P. J. Berriaan, and W. J. LeNoble. J. Amer. Chem. ~~ I K. T. Go and I C. Paul, ibid.. 4265 (1965). SOC..85. 1141 (1963). (201 B. P. Susz Bull. SOC.Chim. Fr.. 2671 (1965). (81) J. P. Boisset. J. Boyer, and J. Rouzaud. C. R. Acad. Sci.. Ser. C. (21) A . T Nielsen and W. J. Houlihan. Org. React., 16, 1 (1968). 263, 1253 (1966). (22) G Maier. Angew. Chem. lnt. Ed. Engl.. 6, 402 (1967). (82) K. Schank. H. Hasenfratz. and A. Weber, Chem. Ber.. 106, 1107 (23) M Jones. Jr., J. Org. Chem.. 33, 2538 (1968). (1973): R. M. Coates and J. E. Shaw, J. Org. Chem.. 35, 2601 (24) D Schonleber, Angew. Chem.. lnt. Ed. Engl.. 8, 76 (1969). (1970). (25) M.Jones. Jr.. Angew. Chem.. lnt. Ed. Engl.. 8 , 76 (1969). (83) K. Yoshida and Y. Yamashita, Tetrahedron Lett.. 693 (1966); R. (261 G . W VanDine and R . Hoffmann. J . Amer. Chem. SOC..90, 3227 E. Davis, ibid.. 5021 (1966); cf. W. M. Muir, P. D. Ritchie. and D. (1968). J. Lyman, J. Org. C h e m . , 3 1 , 3790 (1966); J. L. Wong and C. H.
  • H a r d Soft A c i d s Bases Principle Chemical Reviews, 1975. Vol. 75, No. 1 19 Savells, Jr., Org. Prep. Proc. lnt., 3, 269 (1971). (139) E. Miller, J. Org. Chem.. 28. 345 (1963). (84) G. Stork and P. F. Hudrlik, J. Amer. Chem. SOC., 90, 4462 (1401 D. Seyferth. S. 0. Grim, and T. 0. Read. J . Amer. Chem SOC., (1968). 82, 1510 (1960). (85) H. 0. House, L. J. Czuba. M . Gall, and H. D . Olmstead, J. Org. (141) G. Mark1 and A. Merz. Tetrahedron Lett.. 3611 (1968). Chem.. 34, 2324 (1969). (142) E. I . Grinstein, A. B. Bruker, and L. Z. Soborowskii, Z. Obshch. (86) G. J. Heiszwolf and H. Kloosterziel, Recl. Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas. Khim.. 36, 302 (1966). 89, 1217 (1970). (143) J. Songstad. Acta Chem. Scand. 21, 1681 (1967) (87) F. E. Henoch. K. G. Hampton, and C. R. Hauser, J. Amer. Chem. (144) P. J. Foley. Jr.. J . Org. Chem.. 34, 2805 (1969). SOC..91, 676 (1969). (145) H. Teichmann and G. Hilgetag. Angew. Chem., lnt. Ed. Engl., 6, (88) J. Grundy, 6. G. James, and G. Pattenden. Tetrahedron Lett.. 157 1013 (1967). (1972). (146) R. F. Hudsonand D. C. Harper. J. Chem. SOC.. 1356 (1958). (89) A. Rosowsky in quot;Heterocyclic Compounds with Three- and Four- (147) J. R. Cox. Jr.. and 0. B. Ramsay, Chem. Rev.. 64, 343 (1964). Membered Rings,quot; Part 1, A . Weissberger. Ed., Interscience, New (148) S. Winstein. D. Pressman, and W. G. Young, J. Amer. Chem York, N.Y.. 1964, pp316-327. SOC..61, 1645 (1939). (90) R. Luhowyand F. Meneghini, J. Org. Chem.. 38, 2405 (1973). (149) I . J. Borowitz. D. Weiss. and R . K Crouch, J. Org. Chem.. 36, (91) R. G. Pearson and J. Songstad, J. Org. Chem.. 32, 2899 (1967). 2377 (1971). (92) L. E. Engemyr and J. Songstad. Acta Chem. Scand.. 26. 4179 (150) W. K . Kwok and S. I . Miller. J . Org. Chem.. 35, 4034 (1970). (1972). (151) J Hayami. N. Ono, and A Kagi. Tetrahedron Lett.. 1385 (1968); (93) N. P. Neureiter and F. G. Eordwell. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..81, 578 Buil. Chem. SOC.Jap.. 44, 1628 (1971) (1959). (152) R. G. Pearson. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..71, 2212 (1949). (94) G. K. Helmkamp and 0. J . Pettitt, J . Org. Chem.. 27. 2942 (153) J. H. Davies. E. Haddock, P. Kirbv, and S. E. Webb, J. Chem. (1962). SOC C 2843 (1971) (95) J. M . McIntosh and H . B. Goodbrand, Tetrahedron Lett., 3147 . . (154) F G Bordwell and B B Jarvis J Amer Chem SOC 95, 3585 (1973). 1 i l c- 7 R ) -, (96) W. Ando, H. Fujii, T. Takeuchi, H. Higuchi, Y. Saiki, and T. Migita. (155) H C . Erown and P. J. Geoghegan. Jr., J. Org. Chem.. 35, 1844 Tetrahedron Lett., 2117 (1973). (1970) (97) W. E. Parham and S. H. Groen, J. Org. Chem.. 31, 1694 (1966). (156) H C. Brown. quot;Hydroboration.quot; W. A. Benjamin, New York, N.Y , (98) K. Kondo and I. Ojima. J. Chem. SOC., Chem. Commun.. 62 1962. 119721. (157) D. Devaprabhakara and P. D. Gardner. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..85, (99) M.-L. Wolfrom, J. Amer. Chem. SOC..51, 2188 (1929). 1458 (1963) 100) D. Seebach, Synthesis, 17 (1969). (158) W. Kirmse. quot;Carbene Chemistry.quot; 2nd ed. Academic Press, New 101) E. Vedejsand P. L. Fuchs, J. Org. Chem.. 36, 366 (1971). York, N . Y . , 1971. 102) T. L. Ho. H. C. Ho, and C. M. Wong, J. Chem. Soc.. Chem. Com- (159) J. A. Zoltewicz and C Nisi, J Org. Chem.. 34, 765 (1969). mun.. 791 (1972). (160) J F. Bunnett and T. K. Brotherton. J Org. Chem.. 23, 904 (103) T. L. Ho and C. M . Wong. Can. J. Chem.. 5 0 , 3740 (1972). (1958). (104) D. Gravel, C. Vaziri, and S. Rahal. J . Chem. SOC.. Chem. Com- (161) T. L Ho. unpublished results. mun., 1323 (1972). (162) 0. Eisenstein. J. M. Lefour. C. Minot, Nguyen Trong Anh, and G. (105) T. Mukaivarna, K. Maekawa, and K. Narasaka, Chem. Lett.. 273 Soussan. C. R . Acad. Sci.. Ser. C. 274, 1310 (1972). (1972). (163) 0. R. Rodig and N J. Johnston. J. Org. Chem.. 34, 1942 (1969), K. Narasaka, T. Sakashita, and T. Mukaiyama. Bull. Chem. SOC. and references therein. ,.- yap.. .C 07-* *a, 0 , L . t , ,,r,7-, I J I L , . (107) T. Oishi, K . Kamemoto, and Y. Ban. Tetrahedron Lett.. 1085 (164) P. D. Eartlett and G. F. Woods, J . Amer. Chem. SOC.. 62, 2933 ( 1940) (1972). (165) A. McCoubrey. J. Chem. SOC..2931 (1951). (108) M. Fetizon and M . Jurton, J. Chem. Soc.. Chem. Commun.. 382 (166) J. Bottin, 0. Eisenstein. C. Minot, and Nguyen Trong Anh, Tetra- (1972). hedron Left.. 3015 (1972). (109) T. L. Ho and C. M . Wong. Synthesis. 561 (1972) (167) R. S. Davidson. W . H . H. Gunther. S. M. Waddington-Feather, and (110) H.-L. W. Chang, Tetrahedron Lett.. 1989 (1972). B. Lythgoe. J. Chem. Soc.. 4907 (1964). (111) E. J. Coreyand E. W. Erickson. J Org. Chem., 36, 3553 (1971) (168) J. W. Wheeler and R . H. Chung, J. Org. Chem.. 34. 1149 (1969). (112) Y . Tamura. K. Surnoto. S. Fujii. H. Satoh. and M. Ikeda. Synthe- (169) W . R. Jackson, and A. Zurqiyah. J . Chem. SOC..5280 (1965). sis. 312 (1973). (170) M R Johnson and B. Rickborn. J . Org. Chem.. 35, 1041 (1970) (113) W. F. J. Huurdeman, H. Wynberg, and D W. Emerson. Tetrahe- (171) J. W. deleeuw. E R deWaard, P. F. Foeken. and H. 0 . Huisman. dron Lett.. 3449 (1971). Tetrahedron Lett.. 2191 (1973) (114) F. Guinot and G. Lamaty. Tetrahedron Lett.. 2569 (1972). (172) H . C Brown and H. M . Hess. J , Org. Chem.. 34, 2206 (1969). (115) F. Guinot, G. Lamaty, and H. Munsch, Bull. SOC. Chim. Fr.. 541 (173) K. E. Wilson. R. T Seidner. and S. Masamune, Chem. Commun.. (1971), 213 (1970). (116) F. Eecke and H. Hagen, Justus Liebigs Ann. Chem.. 729, 146 (174) M. Pereyreand J. Valade. Buli. SOC.Chim. Fr.. 1928 (1967). (1969). (175) P. E. Peterson and G Thompson, J. Org. Chem.. 33. 968 (1968). (117) 6. E. L. Carrington, K . Clarke, and R. M. Scrowston, J. Chem. (176) D. J. Burtop and G. C. Briney, J . Org. Chem.. 35, 3036 (1970). SOC.C. 3262,3903 (1971). (177) S. W. Tobey and R. West, J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 88. 2481 (1986). (118) S. G. Smith and S. Winstein, Tetrahedron. 3, 317 (1958) (178) S Bank and M. C. Prislopski, Chem. Commun.. 1624 (1970). (119) R. Kuhn and H. Trischmann. Justus Liebigs Ann. Chem.. 611, 117 (179) C. L Osborn, T. C. Shields, 8 . A. Shoulders. C. G. Cardenas. and 119581. P. D Gardner. Chem. lnd. (London), 766 (1965). (120) J . S. Meek and J. S. Fowler, J . Org. Chem.. 33, 3422 (1968). (180) G E. Wilsonand R. Albert. J. Org Chem.. 38. 2160 (1973). (121) H . Kwart and A. A. Kahn, J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 89, 1950 (1967). (181) F. Kienzle, Tetrahedron Lett.. 1771 (1972). (122) C. R. Johnson, R. A. Kirchhoft, R. J . Reischer. and G. F. Katekar. (182) T. Austad. J. Songstad. and L J. Strangeland. Acta Chem. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..95, 4287 (1973). Scand.. 25, 2327 (1971). (123) J . Sauer and K. K. Mayer, Tetrahedron Lett.. 319 (1968) (183) M Kumada. K. Tamao. M. Ishikawa, and M. Matsuno, Chem. (124) J. I . G. Cadogan. J. Chem. Soc.. 3067 (1961). and references Commun.. 614 (1968). therein. (184) E. Euncel and A Raoult. Chem. Commun.. 210 (1973). (124a) J. Michalski and 2 . Tulimowski, Buli. Acad. Pol. Sci.. Ser. SCI. (185) R. Graf, Justus iieb/gsAnn. Chem.. 661, 111 (1963) Chim.. 14, 217 (1966). (186) F. P. Corson and R. G. Pews, J . Org. Chem.. 36. 1654 (1971) (125) R. Luckenbach, Tetrahedron Lett.. 2177 (1971). (187) L Horner and H. Nickel. Justus Liebigs Ann. Chem.. 597. 20 (126) K. R. H. Wooldridge and R. SlacK, J. Chem. Soc.. 1863 (1962). (1955). (127) D. E. Giles and A. J. Parker, Aust. J. Chem.. 26, 273 (1973). (188) B C. Smith and M. E. Sobeir. Chem. Ind. (London). 621 (1969). (128) J. F. Eunnett and J. Y. Bassett. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 81. 2104 (189) A . M van Leusen. E. A . Reith, A. J. W. ledema. and J. Strating. (1959). Recl. Trav. Chini. Pays-Bas. 91, 37 (1972) (129) J. L. Kice and G. E. Large, J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 90, 4069 (190) W. E. Truceand G. D. Madding, Tetrahedron Lett.. 3681 (1966). (1968). (191) H. C. Brown and A. Tsukamoto. J . Amer. Chem. SOC.. 83. 4549 (130) J. L. Kice and G. Guaraldi, J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 90, 4076 (1961) . (1968). (192) A. Hassner and A. Kascheres. Tetrahedron Lett.. 4623 (1970) (131) J. F. KtnQ, A. Hawson, E. L. Huston. L. J . Danks, and J. Komery. (193) A. R . Katritzky and E. Lunt. Tetrahedron. 25, 4291 (1969). Can. J. Chem.. 49,943 (1971). (194) S. Hunig. Angew. Chem.. In? Ed. Engl.. 3, 548 (1964) (132) W. P. Tucker and G. L. Roof, Tetrahedron Lett.. 2747 (1967). (195) M G. Ahmed and R. W. Alder, Chem. Commun.. 1389 (1969). (133) T. Nakai and M. Okawara, Bull. Chem. SOC. Jap.. 43, 1864 (196) S. G Smith and M. P. Hanson, J. Org. Chem.. 36, 1931 (1971) (1970). (197) G. C. Hopkins. J. P. Jonak, H. J. Minnemeyer. and H. Tieckel- (134) k. D.'Ritter and J. H. Krueger. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 92, 2316 mann. i.Org. Chem.. 32, 4040 (1967) (1970). (198) N. Kornblum, R. A. Smiley. R. K. Blackwood. and D. C. Iffland. J. (134a) G. Barnikow and G. Strickmann. Chem. Ber.. 100, 1428 (1967). Amer Chem. SOC..77, 6269 (1955) (135) R. Matsueda, H. Maruyama. M. Ueki, and T Mukaiyama, BuIl. (199) D. H. Rosenblatt. W. H. Dennis. Jr., and R . D. Goodin. J , Amer. Chem. SOC.Jap.. 44, 1373 (1971). Chem. SOC.. 95, 2133 (1973) (136) P. A. Chopard, R. F. Hudson, and G. Klopman, J. Chem. Soc.. (200) E. Unterhalt and D.Thamer, Tetrahedron Lett.. 4905 (1971). 1379 (1965) (201) A. Schmidpeter. Tetrahedron Lett.. 1421 (1963). (137) I J Borowitz K C Kirby Jr P E Rusek. and E W R Casper (202) S. Hunig and H. Hansen Chem. Ber.. 102. 2109 (1969) J Or0 Chem 36. 88 119711 (203) S R . Sandier and W. Karo. quot;Organic Functional Group Prepara- (138) I . J. korowitz, S. Firstenberg. G. E. Borowitz, and D . Schuessler, tions,quot;Academic Press, New Y o r k , N.Y., 1968. p 310. J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 94, 1623 (1972). (204) T. L. Ho and C. M. Wong, Syn. Commun., 3, 317 (1973).
  • 20 Chemical Reviews, 1975, Vol. 75, No. 1 Tse-Lok Ho (205) T. L. Ho and C. M . Wong, Syn. Commun.. 3, 63 (1973). Soc.. Chem. Commun., 969 (1971) (206) F. Fairbrother, J. Chem. SOC., 180 (1950). (237) A. Jefferson and F. Scheinmann. Quart. Rev.. Chem. Soc., 22, (207) G. Lord and A. A. Wolf. J. Chem. S o c . . 2546 (1954). 391 (1968). (208) M . Kuehne. J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 81. 5400 (1959). (238) H. Kwart and J. L. Schwartz. Chem. Commun.. 44 (1969).and (209) R. Fusco, S. Rossi. and G. Bianchettl, Gazz. Chim. /tal.. 91, 841 references cited therein. ( 1 961). (239) C. D . Hurd and W. D. Jenkins, J , Org. Chem.. 22, 1418 (1957); (210) V . Grignard. E. Bellet, and C. H. Courtot. Ann. Chim. (Paris). 4 M . Elliot and N. F. James, J. Chem. SOC.. 1780 (1967). (9). (1915). 28 (240) B. W. Bycroft and W. Landon. Chem. Commun.. 967 (1970). (211) J . M . Cox and R. Ghosh. Tetrahedron Lett.. 3351 (1969) (241) Y. Makisumi and T. Sasatani. Tetrahedron Lett.. 1975 (1969). (212) H. A. Hagernan, Org. React.. 7. 198 (1953). (242) R. F. Hudson, Chem. Eng. News. 43 (22), (1965). 102 (213) K. 8 . Wiberg. J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 75, 3961 (1953). (243) W. S. Trahanovsky and M. P. Doyle, Chem. Commun.. 1021 1214) P. L. Hu and W. Scheele, Kaut. Gummi. 18. 290 (1965); D. N.ct. 11967). Harppand T. G. Back. J, Org. Chem.. 36, 3828 (1971). (244) R. G . Pearson, Ed., quot;Hard & Soft Acids & Bases,quot; Dowden, (215) J E. Dunbar and J . H. Rogers, J. Org. Chem.. 35, 279 (1970). Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsburg, Pa., 1973. (216) H. C. Brown and B . C. Subba Rao. J. Amer. Chem. SOC..78, 5694 (245) R. A. Moss and C. B. Mallon. Tetrahedron Lett.. 4481 (1973). (1956). (246) J. I . Brauman, W. N . Olmstead. and C. A. Lieder. J, Amer. Chem. (217) H. G. Kuivila and E . K . Easterbrook. J, Amer. Chem. SOC.. 73, Soc., 96, 4030 (1974) 4629 119511. (247.) L. L. Chang and D. 8. Denney. J. Chem. SOC., Chem. Commun.. (218) H Newman. E L Evans, and R 8. Angler Tetrahedron Lett 84 (1974). 5829 119681 (248) A. Makriyannis, W. H. H. Gunther, and H. G. Mautner, J. Amer. (219) T. Goto and Y. Kishi, Tetrahedron. Lett.. 513 (1961). Chem. SOC.,95, 8403 (1973) (220) J, M . Townsend and T. A. Spencer. Tetrahedron Lett.. 137 (1971). (249) K. H. Meyer and H. Schlosser, Justus Lieb/gs Ann. Chem., 420, (221) I . J . Borowitz. H. Parnes. E. Lord. and K. C. Yee, J. Amer. Chem. 126 (1920). SOC.. 94, 6817 (1972). (250) E. deB. Barnett. J. W. Cook, and M . A. Matthews. J. Chem. Soc., (222) W. P. Jencks and J. Carriuolo, J . Bioi. Chem.. 234, 1272, 1280 123, 1994 (1923). 119591. (251) J. H. van de Sande and K. R. Kopecky, Can. J. Chem., 47, 163 (223) F . Covitz and F. H. Westheimer. J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 85. 1773 (1969). (1 963). (252) D. S. Watt, Syn. Commun., 4, 127 (1974). (224) H . T. Openshaw and N. Whittaker. J. Chem. SOC.C. 89, (1969). (253) T. L. Ho, T. W. Hall, and C. M. Wong, Synthesis, in press. (225) C. G. Swain and J. F. Brown. Jr., J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 74, 2538 (254) L. Field, P. M . Giles, Jr., and D . L. Tuleen. J . Org. Chem.. 36, 623 (1962): R. Rony, {bid.. 91. 6090 (1969). P. (1971). (226) A. R . Fersht and A. J . KirbK J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 89, 4857 (255) L. E. Overman, D. Matzinger, E. M . O'Connor. and J. D. Overman, 90. (1967): 5826,5833 (1968). J. Amer. Chem. SOC.,96, 6081 (1974). (227) B. Capon and B. C Ghosh. J. Chem. SOC.6 . 472 (1966) (256) M . D . Bentley, I . B. Douglass. and J. A. Lacadie, J. Org. Chem., 37, (228) S. M. Kupchan. S. P. Eriksen, and M. Friedman. J. Amer. Chem. 333 (1972) SOC..84. 4159 (1962): 343 (1966). 88. (257) W. J. Middleton, E. G. Howard, and W. H. Sharkey, J. Amer. Chem. (229) L. Larsson, Ark. Kemi. 13, 259 (1958). SOC..83, 2589 (1961) (230) F. M . Menger. J . Amer. Chem. Soc.. 88. 3081 (1966). (258) J. H . Robson and H. Shechter, J. Amer. Chem. SOC.. 89, 7112 (231) P. B. D. de la Mare and J. H. Ridd. quot;Aromatic Substitution,quot; Aca- (1 967). demic Press, New York, N.Y.. 1959,p 116. (259) M . Dessolin, M. Laloi-Diard, and M . Vilkas. Tetrahedron Lett., (232) E. J. Corey and G. H. Posner. J. Amer. Chem. Soc.. 89, 3911 2405 (1974). (1967) (260) E. J. Corey and S. Terashima, Tetrahedron Lett., 1 1 1 (1972); cf. (233) P G. Stecher. Ed. quot;The Merck Index,quot; 8th ed, Merck 8 Co., Rah- R. A. Bartsch, K. E. Wiegers, and D. M . Guritz. J. Amer Chem. way. N.J., 1968,p 1222. SOC..96, 430 (1974) (234) F. Gerhart. U . Scholikopf. and H. Schumacher. Angew. Chem.. (261) T. J. Giacobbe and S. D McGregor, J. Org. Chem., 39, 1685 Int. Ed. Engi.. 6, 74 (1967) . ,, quot; . 114741 (235) I . M . Gascoigne and G. K. Radda, Biochrm. Biophys Acta. 131, (262) D . Seyferth, G. J. Murphy, and R. A. Woodruff, J. Amer. Chem. 498 (1967) SOC..96, 5011 (1974). (236) 0. Eisenstein. J. M. Lefour, and Nguyen Trong Anh, J. Chem. (263) J. Duran. N. T. Anh. and J. Huet, Tetrahedron Lett.. 2397 (1974).