4.8 Article

Bottom-Up Approach to Understand Chirality Transfer across Scales in Cellulose Assemblies

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 144, 期 27, 页码 12469-12475

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.2c04522

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a bottom-up approach to understand the transfer of chirality from single cellulose oligomers to supramolecular assemblies. It is found that cellulose oligomers self-assemble into bundles with controllable chirality, which is directly correlated to the stereochemistry of the oligomers. The chirality of the cellulose assemblies can be manipulated by altering the stereochemistry.
ABSTRACT: Cellulose is a polysaccharide that displays chirality across different scales, from the molecular to the supramolecular level. This feature has been exploited to generate chiral materials. To date, the mechanism of chirality transfer from the molecular level to higher-order assemblies has remained elusive, partially due to the heterogeneity of cellulose samples obtained via top-down approaches. Here, we present a bottom-up approach that uses well-defined cellulose oligomers as tools to understand the transfer of chirality from the single oligomer to supramolecular assemblies beyond the single cellulose crystal. Synthetic cellulose oligomers with defined sequences self-assembled into thin micrometer-sized platelets with controllable thicknesses. These platelets further assembled into bundles displaying intrinsic chiral features, directly correlated to the monosaccharide chirality. Altering the stereochemistry of the oligomer termini impacted the chirality of the self-assembled bundles and thus allowed for the manipulation of the cellulose assemblies at the molecular level. The molecular description of cellulose assemblies and their chirality will improve our ability to control and tune cellulose materials. The bottom-up approach could be expanded to other polysaccharides whose supramolecular chirality is less understood.

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

4.8
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