(
E)-1-Benzylidene-2-methylhydrazine (
1a) was chosen as the model substrates for the optimization of the reaction conditions, which include the nitro source, cosolvent, amount of raw materials, temperature and atmosphere. The optimization results showed that the reaction is very sensitive to nitro source effects (
Table 1, entries 1−7), and the best result was obtained by using NaNO
2 as nitro source (
Table 1, entry 6). Next, cosolvents were screened, EtOH gave a better yield than other cosolvents including MeOH,
n-butanol, isobutanol, octanol, 2-propanol, DMSO and DMF (
Table 1, entries 8−14). Considering the influence of the reaction temperature, we observed that the yield was slightly decreased when decreasing to 80 ℃ or increasing to 120 ℃ (
Table 1, entries 15 and 16). As nitrate can improve the reaction and the NaNO
2 evidently facilitate the transformation, different amount of the NaNO
2 were examined (
Table 1, entry 17). Further investigations on the reaction did not improve the yield of product (
Table 1, entries 18–20). With the optimized conditions in hand, we investigated the substrate scope of this reaction, various substituents on the benzene ring of the aromatic aldehyde were examined and the results are summarized in
Scheme 2. Substrates with
para substituents such as 4-Me(
2b), 4-CH
2CH
3 (
2c), 4-F (
2d), 4-Cl (
2e), 4-Br (
2f), 4-CF
3 (
2g) afforded the corresponding products in good yields. Furthermore
ortho-substituents bearing electron donating (
2i and
2j) and halogen substituents (
2k–2m) were well tolerated, but withdrawing character (
2n and
2o) could not be converted into corresponding products.
Meta substituents with diverse electronics also worked well, with electron-donating groups (
2p and
2q), halogens (
2r–2t) and electron-withdrawing groups (
2u) all providing the pyrazole in good yields. What we regret is that the target compound cannot be obtained when using alkyl aldehydes (
2w). Similarly, many disubstituted compounds such as
2aa-2af also afforded the corresponding products in synthetically useful yields (58%–68%). In addition, 2-furaldehyde (
2ag) gave a 56% yield. Unfortunately, the methodology failed to produce any products when bearing 2-OCH
3 (
2h) and 3-NO
2 (
2v) group.
t-Butylhydrazine replaced of methylhydrazine, we failed to produce the requisite pyrazole. Unfortunately, under standard conditions, when 1, 2-dichloropropane was used instead of 1, 2-dichloroethane, we did not get the expected compound.