4.7 Article

Synthesis of polysaccharide-based block copolymers via olefin cross-metathesis

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 229, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.115530

关键词

Cellulose; Block copolymer; Cross-metathesis; Solvolysis; Regioselective; Methyl cellulose

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DMR-1308276]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polysaccharide-based copolymers with brush-like, graft architectures have been prepared by many investigators. In contrast, it is challenging to prepare linear polysaccharide-based block copolymers. Only a few approaches have been reported for preparation of such architectures, despite the clear application potential of renewable-based, linear block copolymers. The challenging nature of regioselective polysaccharide end-group functionalization has impeded their preparation. Herein we report a different, flexible approach to linear block copolymers, demonstrated for derivatives of renewable, natural cellulose. To illustrate this approach, trimethyl cellulose-b-poly(ethylene glycol), trimethyl cellulose-b-poly(tetrahydrofuran) and trimethyl cellulose-b-poly(lactic acid) were synthesized by a coupling strategy. Trimethyl cellulose was functionalized regiospecifically at the reducing end anomeric carbon to create an.-unsaturated alkyl acetal by solvolysis of trimethyl cellulose with an.-unsaturated alcohol. Subsequently, mild and versatile olefin cross-metathesis was used to couple efficiently (100% conversion) the trimethyl cellulose block with a series of acrylate derivatives, including acrylated polymer blocks. The targeted block co-polymeric structures were confirmed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, and the degree of polymerization was relatively well-preserved during the coupling step, as shown by size exclusion chromatography (SEC). The results confirm that this new solvolysis/cross-metathesis method is a promising approach to polysaccharide-based linear AB, and likely ABC, block copolymers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据