Talk:Enantioselective synthesis

message: I propose that this article be renamed asymmetric synthesis, which is (in my experience) the more usual term.  Are the two terms completely synonymous, as I believe, or is there some subtle difference I'm unaware of?  A Google search gives around 400,000 hits for "asymmetric synthesis", which is ten times the number found for "chiral synthesis".  Comments, anyone? Walkerma 05:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Asymmetric synthesis is by far a more common term than chiral synthesis (and more precise too) among those that actually do asymmetric synthesis.  As to Eugene's comments, they all sound like great suggestions to me.  They should be incorporated into the article. Edgar181 18:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll request a move (can't move because of the redirect) --Rifleman 82 03:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Page moved.  Cheers. -GTBacchus(talk) 04:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm guessing you are quoting from this Eliel, is that right?  While I can see his points, we all know that chemistry in general (and organic chemistry in particular) has the most confusing naming systems and cunventions.  I have always taken the term "asymmetric synthesis" to be shorthand for "the synthesis of an asymmetric product in enantiomerically pure or enriched form."  OK, maybe we should say dissymmetric to be precise, but we're stuck with the rather sloppy term that is widely used.  Wikipedia follows the name that is widely used, not the one we might like to have instead! Walkerma 05:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to rename

message: There is a serious mistake in the reaction scheme of the L-DOPA synthesis. DiPAMP is a diphosphine, in which the chirality is actually born by the Phosphorus atoms. In the current drawing, the chirality was mistakenly drawn as born by a supplementary neighbouring atom. I enclose a new PNG drawing, send me your suggestions.
comment was added by AlChimini (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I'm on holiday and can't check the literature, but I'm pretty sure you're right.  I'll let V8rik know, to confirm it.  Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 23:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  see  in  which seems at least to be now the correct structure of the ligand -- Quantockgoblin (talk) 00:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your feedback, guys. What do You think of the idea of creating a new category "chiral ligands", probably as a subcategory of "organometallic chemistry" and starting a series of short pages on the most important chiral ligands for this subcategory, with their enantioselective synthesis and a list of references for some examples of their uses (pages for BINAP, BINOL, BOX already exist. In my opinion, deeply missed are the oxaborolidine ligands for CBS reduction, TADDOL, DIOP, DIAB, DuPhos, the Solvias MandyPhos and TaniaPhos, Buchwald's X-Phos, Helmchen's ligands, the Bolm ferrocenyl ligands... and probably many more). Do You think there is an audience for this? Anyway, I'd like to try and start working on it anytime soon. If anybody wants to collaborate, let me know... comment added by AlChimini (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Sounds like a great idea, it would be great to cover these ligands, in fact I'm a little surprised there is such a gap on wiki in this regard ... sounds like you're the chap to get the ball rolling on this! Thanks and happy editing -- Quantockgoblin (talk) 10:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it sounds good to me. Walkerma (talk) 20:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake in the structure of DiPAMP, in Knowles' L-DOPA Synthesis 

message: The following paragraph is confusing:
For example, a SN1 substitution reaction converts a molecule that is chiral by merit of non-planarity into a planar molecule, which has no handedness. (To visualise, draw the outlines of both of your hands on paper, and cut the images out. You can now superimpose the images, even if the hands themselves do not superimpose.) In a SN2 substitution reaction on the other hand the chirality inverts, i.e. when you start with a right-handed mixture, you'll end up with left-handed one. (A visualization could be inverting an umbrella. The mechanism looks just the same.)
Explanation:
SN1 generates a racemate (mixture of chiral, *nonplanar* molecules), and the "planar molecule" (carbocation) is only a transient species. The word "mixture" in the following sentence about SN2 should rather be replaced with "molecule"/"system"/"compound". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.105.129.208 (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusing paragraph 

message: What is meant by "trajectory" in the second paragraph?
Asymmetric induction can also occur intramolecularly when given a chiral starting material. This chirality transfer can be exploited, especially when the goal is to make several consecutive chiral centers to give a specific enantiomer of a specific diastereomer. Aldol reaction, for example, is inherently diastereoselective; if the aldehyde is enantiopure, the resulting aldol adduct is diastereomerically and enantiomerically pure.
One such strategy is the use of a chiral auxiliary which forms an adduct to the starting materials and physically blocks the other trajectory for attack, leaving only the desired trajectory open. Assuming the chiral auxiliary is enantiopure, the different trajectories are not equivalent, but diastereomeric.
77.98.79.252 02:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing fancy here, just the usual meaning of trajectory: the direction or path of motion. DMacks 02:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garbled English 

message: According to the Nobel info Knowles was the first with chiral ligands in 1968. I have also been reading other articles completely ignoring Knowles so I am wondering what is going on. The article
Design of chiral ligands for asymmetric catalysis: From C2-symmetric P,P- and N,N-ligands to sterically and electronically nonsymmetrical P,N-ligands Andreas Pfaltz and William J. Drury III PNAS, April 20, 2004 vol. 101 no. 16 5723-5726 
credits Kagan (1972) as the originator and continues
The design principles that led Dang and Kagan to this ligand had a marked influence on the course of research in asymmetric catalysis, and many diphosphine ligands that were introduced subsequently were patterned after DIOP. Knowles (7), for example, prepared a dimeric analogue of one of his previously synthesized monophosphines, which he termed DiPAMP
with a reference (7) from 2003 (!). Is this a falsification of history? V8rik 22:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  William S. Knowles 

message: There is an article on asymmetric ester hydrolysis with pig-liver esterase. It's an orphan article. I'm a high school dropout and can understand basically nothing in either articles, but does someone know of a place to mention asymmetric ester hydrolysis with pig-liver esterase in this article so that it is no longer an orphan? Thank you.
Ceaseless (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asymmetric ester hydrolysis with pig-liver esterase