Search for: All records

The cross-coupling of aryl esters has emerged as a powerful platform for the functionalization of otherwise inert acyl C–O bonds in chemical synthesis and catalysis. Herein, we report a combined experimental and computational study on the acyl Suzuki–Miyaura cross-coupling of aryl esters mediated by well-defined, air- and moisture-stable Pd( ii )–NHC precatalysts [Pd(NHC)(μ-Cl)Cl] 2 . We present a comprehensive evaluation of [Pd(NHC)(μ-Cl)Cl] 2 precatalysts and compare them with the present state-of-the-art [(Pd(NHC)allyl] precatalysts bearing allyl-type throw-away ligands. Most importantly, the study reveals [Pd(NHC)(μ-Cl)Cl] 2 as the most reactive precatalysts discovered to date in this reactivity manifold. The unique synthetic utility of this unconventional O–C(O) cross-coupling is highlighted in the late-stage functionalization of pharmaceuticals and sequential chemoselective cross-coupling, providing access to valuable ketone products by a catalytic mechanism involving Pd insertion into the aryl ester bond. Furthermore, we present a comprehensive study of the catalytic cycle by DFT methods. Considering the clear advantages of [Pd(NHC)(μ-Cl)Cl] 2 precatalysts on several levels, including facile one-pot synthesis, superior atom-economic profile to all other Pd( ii )–NHC catalysts, and versatile reactivity, these should be considered as the ‘first-choice’ catalysts for all routine applications in ester O–C(O) bond activation. 

The Pd–NHC-catalyzed acyl-type Buchwald–Hartwig cross-coupling of amides by N–C(O) cleavage (transamidation) provides a valuable alternative to the classical methods for amide synthesis. Herein, we report a combined experimental and computational study of the Buchwald–Hartwig cross-coupling of amides using well-defined, air- and moisture-stable [Pd(NHC)(allyl)Cl] precatalysts. Most crucially, we present a comprehensive evaluation of a series of distinct Pd( ii )–NHC precatalysts featuring different NHC scaffolds and throw-away ligands for the synthesis of functionalized amides that are not compatible with stoichiometric transition-metal-free transamidation methods. Furthermore, we present evaluation of the catalytic cycle by DFT methods for a series of different Pd( ii )–NHC precatalysts. The viability of accessing NHC-supported acyl-palladium( ii ) amido complexes will have implications for the design and development of cross-coupling methods involving stable amide electrophiles. 

We present the results for CAPRI Round 54, the 5th joint CASP‐CAPRI protein assembly prediction challenge. The Round offered 37 targets, including 14 homodimers, 3 homo‐trimers, 13 heterodimers including 3 antibody–antigen complexes, and 7 large assemblies. On average ~70 CASP and CAPRI predictor groups, including more than 20 automatics servers, submitted models for each target. A total of 21 941 models submitted by these groups and by 15 CAPRI scorer groups were evaluated using the CAPRI model quality measures and the DockQ score consolidating these measures. The prediction performance was quantified by a weighted score based on the number of models of acceptable quality or higher submitted by each group among their five best models. Results show substantial progress achieved across a significant fraction of the 60+ participating groups. High‐quality models were produced for about 40% of the targets compared to 8% two years earlier. This remarkable improvement is due to the wide use of the AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold2‐Multimer software and the confidence metrics they provide. Notably, expanded sampling of candidate solutions by manipulating these deep learning inference engines, enriching multiple sequence alignments, or integration of advanced modeling tools, enabled top performing groups to exceed the performance of a standard AlphaFold2‐Multimer version used as a yard stick. This notwithstanding, performance remained poor for complexes with antibodies and nanobodies, where evolutionary relationships between the binding partners are lacking, and for complexes featuring conformational flexibility, clearly indicating that the prediction of protein complexes remains a challenging problem.

 

In typical cyclic polymer synthesis via ring‐closure, chain growth and cyclization events are competing with each other, thus affording cyclic polymers with uncontrolled molecular weight or ring size and high dispersity. Here we uncover a mechanism by which Lewis pair polymerization (LPP) operates on polar vinyl monomers that allows the control of where and when cyclization takes place, thereby achieving spatial and temporal control to afford precision cyclic vinyl polymers or block copolymers with predictable molecular weight and low dispersity (≈1.03). A combined experimental and theoretical study demonstrates that cyclization occurs only after all monomers have been consumed (when) via conjugate addition of the propagating chain end to the specific site of the initiating chain end (where), allowing the cyclic polymer formation steps to be regulated and executed with precision in space and time.

 

In typical cyclic polymer synthesis via ring‐closure, chain growth and cyclization events are competing with each other, thus affording cyclic polymers with uncontrolled molecular weight or ring size and high dispersity. Here we uncover a mechanism by which Lewis pair polymerization (LPP) operates on polar vinyl monomers that allows the control of where and when cyclization takes place, thereby achieving spatial and temporal control to afford precision cyclic vinyl polymers or block copolymers with predictable molecular weight and low dispersity (≈1.03). A combined experimental and theoretical study demonstrates that cyclization occurs only after all monomers have been consumed (when) via conjugate addition of the propagating chain end to the specific site of the initiating chain end (where), allowing the cyclic polymer formation steps to be regulated and executed with precision in space and time.