4.6 Article

Recyclable and reusable chiral α, α-L-diaryl prolinol heterogeneous catalyst grafting to UiO-67 for enantioselective hydration/aldol/oxa-Diels Alder domino reaction

期刊

CATALYSIS COMMUNICATIONS
卷 149, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.catcom.2020.106249

关键词

alpha,alpha-L-Diaryl prolinol; UiO-67; Chiral MOFs; Asymmetric domino reactions; Heterogeneous catalysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21001024, 21471031]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK2011587, BK20131289]
  3. Teaching and Research Program for the Excellent Young Teachers of Southeast University [2242015R30026]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  5. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, alpha, alpha-L-Diaryl prolinol was immobilized into a highly stable porous MOF, UiO-67, via a five-step process to construct a chiral heterogeneous catalyst. The catalyst exhibited high yield (up to 88%) and excellent stereoselectivities (up to >4:1 dr, > 80% ee) for enantioselective reactions, as well as good reusability with recycle use for three times without significant loss of activity. This research represents the first report of chiral MOFs as heterogeneous catalysts for asymmetric domino reactions.
alpha, alpha-L-Diaryl prolinol was first introduced into a highly stable porous MOF, UiO-67, via the immobilization of a chiral prolinol side chain into 4,4'-biphenyldicarboxylic acid through a five-step process, to construct a chiral heterogeneous catalyst. The catalyst exhibited high yield (up to 88%) and excellent stereoselectivities (up to >4:1 dr, > 80% ee) for the enantioselective hydration/aldol/oxa-Diels Alder domino reactions, as well as good reusability with recycle use for three times without significant loss of activity. To our knowledge, this is the first report of chiral MOFs as heterogeneous catalysts for asymmetric domino reactions.

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

4.6
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