Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Both the CS and CC functionalities of N‐arylmonothiomaleimides readily undergo a [4 + 2] cycloaddition reaction at ambient temperatures with both electron‐donating and ‐withdrawing dienes. The CS groups of N‐arylmonothiomaleimides are generally more reactive than the CC groups, especially toward dienes bearing conjugation and electron‐attracting groups, and provide mixtures of ortho,endo products 3 and ortho,exo products 4 with complete regioselectivity (100% ortho) and with high stereoselectivity (more than 86% endo). The CC groups, on the other hand, display a high stereoselectivity (100% endo) but a low regioselectivity, providing ortho,endo adducts 5 and meta,endo adducts 6 in ratios ranging from 1:1 to 6:1. Compared with N‐phenylmonothiomaleimide (1). N‐p‐nitrophenylmonothiomaleimide (11a) is more reactive and displays a higher CS vs. CC chemoselectivity in favor of CS, while N‐p‐anisyl (11b) and N‐benzyl (11c) derivatives display quite the reverse reactivity and selectivity. N‐Phenylmonothiocitraconimide (11d) serves as a CS specific dienophile and reacts with dienes to furnish ortho,endo adducts 12 with excellent regio‐ and stereoselectivities (100% ortho,endo). Both hard (BF3 · OEt2, TiCl4) and soft (CuBr · SMe2) Lewis acids enhance the reaction rate enormously and increase chemoselectivity in favor of CS. The chemo‐ (CS/CC), regio‐ (ortho/meta) and stereochemical outcomes (endo/exo) are rationalized by transition structure analysis based on AM1 calculation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tamaru et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: