4.5 Article

Synthesis of the Diverse Glycosides in Traditional Chinese Medicine

期刊

CHINESE JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 36, 期 8, 页码 681-691

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cjoc.201800156

关键词

synthesis; glycoside; traditional Chinese medicine; glycosylation; saponin; flavonoid

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21432012, 21621002]
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB20020000]
  3. K. C. Wong Education Foundation [E09013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is a huge treasure trove for the discovery and development of modern pharmaceuticals. Indeed, numerous biologically and pharmacologically significant molecules have been identified from TCM; among them, a considerable portion belongs to glycosides. These glycosides are extremely diverse in structures, consisting of a large variety of aglycones, glycans, as well as glycosidic linkages. In addition, these glycosides occur frequently as a complicated mixture of congeners in the nature sources. This micro-heterogeneity leads to the isolation of a homogeneous glycoside in an appreciable amount a formidable task. Therefore, development of synthetic approaches toward these nature glycosides has received great attention. In this account, we summarize our twenty-year efforts spent on this topic. Fifty five representative TCM-relevant glycosides synthesized by our group are highlighted. Based on the aglycone structure, these glycosides are categorized into three groups, i.e., steroid glycosides, triterpene glycosides, and flavonoid and phenolic glycosides. Typical synthetic approaches are discussed, showing the demanding tactics for regio- and stereo-controlled installation of glycans and overall manipulation of protecting groups. These expedient and scalable synthetic approaches have provided practical alternatives to the accessibility of these TCM components and thus opportunities for their in depth biological and pharmacological studies.

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

4.5
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