Participants
| Role | Name | HCID | Charge |
|---|
| Reactant | 2-Methylindole | HCID 7224 | — |
| Reactant | 2,4-Dimethylphenol | HCID 7771 | — |
| Reactant | Pyrrole | HCID 8027 | — |
| Reactant | Triethylaluminum | HCID 16682930 | — |
| Reactant | Diethyl aluminum chloride | HCID 16686102 | — |
| Product | Indole | HCID 798 | — |
| Product | Pyrrole | HCID 8027 | — |
Reaction Steps
A catalyst solution was prepared using the standard procedure described here, in which the molar ratios of TEA (triethylaluminum) to DEAC (diethylaluminum chloride) to pyrrole compound to Cr were standardized to TEA:DEAC:pyrrole:Cr=11:8:3:1. Anhydrous, degassed ethylbenzene was added to a dry vial in a drybox. To this vial was added neat triethylaluminum (TEA) and neat diethylaluminum chloride (DEAC). The contents were mixed and allowed to stand for 15 minutes. The selected pyrrole was then slowly added, as gas evolution was observed in most cases. Chromium(III) 2-ethylhexanoate (7.25 wt % Cr in ethylbenzene) was used as the transition metal compound and was added slowly to the alkylaluminum/pyrrole solution with stirring. The catalyst solution was diluted to a concentration of 5.6 mg Cr/mL by adding an appropriate amount of ethylbenzene to constitute the active catalyst what was used as prepared. Orange colored solutions were observed for 2,4-DMP, 2-methylindole, and 2,5-DEP based catalyst, which are typical. 2,5-DBP initially produced an orange solution, but gradually precipitated a noticeable amount of grey solid over the course of 24 h. Both indole and pyrrole produced an orange solution with a white, fluffy solid which was removed by filtration. 2,5-DIP produced copious amounts of black precipitate suggesting that the catalyst solution was fairly unstable
Provenance & Evidence
| DOI | 10.6084/m9.figshare.5104873.v1 |
|---|
| Patent number | US09352309B2 |
|---|
| Source dataset | uspto-grants-2016_05 |
|---|
| ORD ID | ord-3b5f99bf2aec4cbe9e60b2459ed81fbd |
|---|
| Source note | uspto-grants-2016_05 |
|---|