A case study on the effect of the employment of two different NHC ligands in complexes [Ni(NHC)\(_{2}\)] (NHC=\(^{i}\)Pr\(_{2}\)Im\(^{Me}\) 1\(^{Me}\), Mes\(_{2}\)Im 2) and their behavior towards alkynes is reported. The reaction of a mixture of [Ni\(_{2}\)(\(^{i}\)Pr\(_{2}\)Im\(^{Me}\))\(_{4}\)(μ-(η\(^{2}\) : η\(^{2}\))-COD)] B/ [Ni(\(^{i}\)Pr\(_{2}\)Im\(^{Me}\))\(_{2}\)(η\(^{4}\)-COD)] B’ or [Ni(Mes\(_{2}\)Im)\(_{2}\)] 2, respectively, with alkynes afforded complexes [Ni(NHC)\(_{2}\)(η\(^{2}\)-alkyne)] (NHC=\(^{i}\)Pr\(_{2}\)Im\(^{Me}\): alkyne=MeC≡CMe 3, H\(_{7}\)C\(_{3}\)C≡CC\(_{3}\)H\(_{7}\) 4, PhC≡CPh 5, MeOOCC≡CCOOMe 6, Me\(_{3}\)SiC≡CSiMe\(_{3}\) 7, PhC≡CMe 8, HC≡CC\(_{3}\)H\(_{7}\) 9, HC≡CPh 10, HC≡C(p-Tol) 11, HC≡C(4-\(^{t}\)Bu-C\(_{6}\)H\(_{4}\)) 12, HC≡CCOOMe 13; NHC=Mes\(_{2}\)Im: alkyne=MeC≡CMe 14, MeOOCC≡CCOOMe 15, PhC≡CMe 16, HC≡C(4-\(^{t}\)Bu-C\(_{6}\)H\(_{4}\)) 17, HC≡CCOOMe 18). Unusual rearrangement products 11 a and 12 a were identified for the complexes of the terminal alkynes HC≡C(p-Tol) and HC≡C(4-\(^{t}\)Bu-C\(_{6}\)H\(_{4}\)), 11 and 12, which were formed by addition of a C−H bond of one of the NHC N-\(^{i}\)Pr methyl groups to the C≡C triple bond of the coordinated alkyne. Complex 2 catalyzes the cyclotrimerization of 2-butyne, 4-octyne, diphenylacetylene, dimethyl acetylendicarboxylate, 1-pentyne, phenylacetylene and methyl propiolate at ambient conditions, whereas 1\(^{Me}\) is not a good catalyst. The reaction of 2 with 2-butyne was monitored in some detail, which led to a mechanistic proposal for the cyclotrimerization at [Ni(NHC)\(_{2}\)]. DFT calculations reveal that the differences between 1\(^{Me}\) and 2 for alkyne cyclotrimerization lie in the energy profile of the initiation steps, which is very shallow for 2, and each step is associated with only a moderate energy change. The higher stability of 3 compared to 14 is attributed to a better electron transfer from the NHC to the metal to the alkyne ligand for the N-alkyl substituted NHC, to enhanced Ni-alkyne backbonding due to a smaller C\(_{NHC}\)−Ni−C\(_{NHC}\) bite angle, and to less steric repulsion of the smaller NHC \(^{i}\)Pr\(_{2}\)Im\(^{Me}\).

We report herein a mild procedure for the copper‐catalyzed oxidative cross‐coupling of electron‐deficient polyfluorophenylboronate esters with terminal alkynes. This method displays good functional group tolerance and broad substrate scope, generating cross‐coupled alkynyl(fluoro)arene products in moderate to excellent yields. Thus, it represents a simple alternative to the conventional Sonogashira reaction.

Organoboron compounds are well known building blocks for many organic reactions. However, under basic conditions, polyfluorinated aryl boronic acid derivatives suffer from instability issues that are accelerated in compounds containing an ortho‐fluorine group, which result in the formation of the corresponding protodeboronation products. Therefore, a considerable amount of research has focused on novel methodologies to synthesize these valuable compounds while avoiding the protodeboronation issue. This review summarizes the latest developments in the synthesis of fluorinated aryl boronic acid derivatives and their applications in cross‐coupling reactions and other transformations. image

Cyclic (amino)(aryl)carbenes (cAArCs) based on the isoindoline core were successfully generated in situ by α‐elimination of 3‐alkoxyisoindolines at high temperatures or by deprotonation of isoindol‐2‐ium chlorides with sodium or copper(I) acetates at low temperatures. 3‐Alkoxy‐isoindolines 2 a ,b‐OR (R=Me, Et, i Pr) have been prepared in high yields by the addition of a solution of 2‐aryl‐1,1‐diphenylisoindol‐2‐ium triflate (1 a ,b‐OTf ; a : aryl=Dipp=2,6‐diisopropylphenyl; b : Mesityl‐, Mes=2,4,6‐trimethylphenyl) to the corresponding alcohol (ROH) with NEt3 at room temperature. Furthermore, the reaction of 2 a ,b‐OMe in diethyl ether with a tenfold excess of hydrochloric acid led to the isolation of the isoindol‐2‐ium chlorides 1 a ,b‐Cl in high yields. The thermally generated cAArC reacts with sulfur to form the thioamide 3 a . Without any additional trapping reagent, in situ generation of 1,1‐diphenylisoidolin‐3‐ylidenes does not lead to the isolation of these compounds, but to the reaction products of the insertion of the carbene carbon atom into an ortho C−H bond of a phenyl substituent, followed by ring‐expansion reaction; namely, anthracene derivatives 9‐N(H)aryl‐10‐Ph‐C14H8 4 a ,b (a : Dipp; b : Mes). These compounds are conveniently synthesized by deprotonation of the isoindol‐2‐ium chlorides with sodium acetate in high yields. Deprotonation of 1 a‐Cl with copper(I) acetate at low temperatures afforded a mixture of 4 a and the corresponding cAArC copper(I) chloride 5 a , and allowed the isolation and structural characterization of the first example of a cAArC copper complex of general formula [(cAArC)CuCl].

The NaOtBu‐catalyzed mixed 1,1‐diboration of terminal alkynes using the unsymmetrical diboron reagent BpinBdan (pin = pinacolato; dan = 1,8‐diaminonaphthalene) proceeds in a regio‐ and stereoselective fashion affording moderate to high yields of 1,1‐diborylalkenes bearing orthogonal boron protecting groups. It is applicable to gram‐scale synthesis without loss of yield or selectivity. The mixed 1,1‐diborylalkene products can be utilized in Suzuki–Miyaura cross‐coupling reactions which take place selectivly at the C–B site. DFT calculations suggest the NaOtBu‐catalyzed mixed 1,1‐diboration of alkynes occurs through deprotonation of the terminal alkyne, stepwise addition of BpinBdan to the terminal carbon followed by protonation with tBuOH. Experimentally observed selective formation of (Z)‐diborylalkenes is supported by our theoretical studies.