A remarkable aspect of enzyme evolution is the portability of catalytic mechanisms for fundamentally different chemical reactions. For example, aspartyl proteases, which contain two active site carboxylic acid groups, catalyze the hydrolysis of amide bonds, while glycosyltransferases (and glycosyl hydrolases), which often also contain two active site carboxylates, have evolved to form (or break) glycosidic bonds. However, neither catalyst exhibits cross-reactivity in the intracellular environment. The large, macromolecular architectures of these biocatalysts tailor their active sites to their precise, divergent functions. The analogous portability of a small-molecule catalyst for truly orthogonal chemical reactivity is rare. Herein, we report aspartic acid containing peptides that can be directed to different sectors of a substrate for which the danger of cross-reactivity looms large. A transiently formed aspartyl peracid catalyst can participate either as an electrophilic oxidant to catalyze alkene epoxidation or as a nucleophilic oxidant to mediate the Baeyer-Villiger oxidation (BVO) of ketones. We show in this study that an appended peptide sequence can dictate the mode of reactivity for this conserved catalytic functional group within a substrate that has the potential to undergo both alkene epoxidation and BVO; in both cases the additional aspects of chemical selectivity (regio- and stereoselectivity) are high. This sequence-dependent tuning of a common catalytic moiety for functional group selective reactions constitutes a biomimetic strategy that may impact late-stage diversification of complex polyfunctional molecules.
A remarkable aspect of enzyme evolution is the portability of catalytic mechanisms for fundamentally different chemical reactions. For example, aspartyl proteases, which contain two active site carboxylic acid groups, catalyze the hydrolysis of amide bonds, while glycosyltransferases (and glycosyl hydrolases), which often also contain two active site carboxylates, have evolved to form (or break) glycosidic bonds. However, neither catalyst exhibits cross-reactivity in the intracellular environment. The large, macromolecular architectures of these biocatalysts tailor their active sites to their precise, divergent functions. The analogous portability of a small-molecule catalyst for truly orthogonal chemical reactivity is rare. Herein, we report aspartic acid containing peptides that can be directed to different sectors of a substrate for which the danger of cross-reactivity looms large. A transiently formed aspartyl peracid catalyst can participate either as an electrophilic oxidant to catalyze alkene epoxidation or as a nucleophilic oxidant to mediate the Baeyer-Villiger oxidation (BVO) of ketones. We show in this study that an appended peptide sequence can dictate the mode of reactivity for this conserved catalytic functional group within a substrate that has the potential to undergo both alkene epoxidation and BVO; in both cases the additional aspects of chemical selectivity (regio- and stereoselectivity) are high. This sequence-dependent tuning of a common catalytic moiety for functional group selective reactions constitutes a biomimetic strategy that may impact late-stage diversification of complex polyfunctional molecules.
The management of competing chemical reactivity
is a fundamental
marvel of biochemistry.[1−8] For synthetic chemists, however, it is a major challenge in complex
molecular environments. Most chemical reactions target a unique mechanistic
paradigm such that the pairing of one reactant’s potential
complements the reactivity of another.[9,10] Enzymes generally
abide by these rules, but in many cases they have evolved to exhibit
a higher level of selectivity, such that specific reactions can occur
in the presence of many competing reaction pathways involving functional
groups of similar reactivity. We posited that small-molecule catalysts
might also exhibit orthogonal reactivity as a result of rational modification
of the scaffolding in the vicinity of a catalytic moiety that would
dominate the reactive, bond-forming function of the catalyst.[11]We explored scenarios with the catalytic
potential presented by
the transient conversion of a terminal aspartyl residue to the corresponding
aspartyl peracid by reaction of an activated acid with hydrogen peroxide
(Figure a).[12] The ambiphilic aspartyl peracid can deliver
an O atom by one of two reaction pathways. In an
epoxidation pathway, the peracid moiety is electrophilic (Figure a, path A); in the
BVO pathway, the peracid is nucleophilic (Figure a, path B). Thus, the peracid moiety provides
an opportunity to probe how the molecular environment surrounding
a transiently generated reactive intermediate might fundamentally
dictate a divergent chemical outcome. Recent studies from our laboratory
have demonstrated the feasibility of each independent pathway (epoxidation
and BVO). For example, utilizing combinatorial techniques, we discovered
that peptide 1, Boc-Asp-Pro-Asn(Trt)-dPhe-Pro-Asn(Trt)-OMe,
could catalyze the asymmetric epoxidation of many allylic alcohols,
with enantioselectivities as high as 99:1 er (Figure a, path A).[13,14] In a separate
study, peptide 2, Boc-Asp-Pro-dLys(Boc)-dPro-Tyr(tBu)-OMe, was discovered to be an
effective catalyst for certain BVO reactions.[15] Perhaps most notably, catalyst 2 not only proved effective
for the ring expansion of cyclic ketones but also favored the product
of reversed migratory aptitude in a number of cases. For example,
with phenylacetamide 3 the conventional, stoichiometric
oxidant m-chloroperoxybenzoic acid (mCPBA) produces “normal” lactone 4 as the
major product (2.5:1), while catalyst 2 delivers lactone 5 (1:28 in the stereochemically matched series; Figure a, path B). These BVO reactions
also exhibit high levels of enantioselectivity and the hallmarks of
kinetic resolution when racemic starting materials are employed (e.g.,
lactone 5 observed with 97:3 er).[16]
Figure 1
Aspartyl oxidation catalysts with different functional group reaction
pathways: (a) catalytic cycles possible with aspartyl peptides under
similar reaction conditions; (b) aspartyl peptide catalysts used in
this study; (c) our proposed study featuring both a site of directed
epoxidation and Baeyer–Villiger oxidation; (d) computations
demonstrate the possibility of also examining the topological features
of the proposed substrates 6 and 7; DIC
= N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide,
H2O2 = hydrogen peroxide, Bn = benzyl, Boc = tert-butoxycarbonyl, Trt = trityl, mCPBA
= meta-chloroperoxybenzoic acid.
Aspartyl oxidation catalysts with different functional group reaction
pathways: (a) catalytic cycles possible with aspartyl peptides under
similar reaction conditions; (b) aspartyl peptide catalysts used in
this study; (c) our proposed study featuring both a site of directed
epoxidation and Baeyer–Villiger oxidation; (d) computations
demonstrate the possibility of also examining the topological features
of the proposed substrates 6 and 7; DIC
= N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide,
H2O2 = hydrogen peroxide, Bn = benzyl, Boc = tert-butoxycarbonyl, Trt = trityl, mCPBA
= meta-chloroperoxybenzoic acid.These results, while providing a certain set of chemical
validations
for these as yet unknown roles of aspartic acid in biochemistry, encouraged
us to investigate whether the specific function of the aspartyl catalysts
(epoxidation versus BVO) could be preserved, and in fact dictated
by the peptide sequence in the situation of an intramolecular competition
between multiple reactive sites in a single substrate.[17] Therefore, we designed substrates (6-cis and 7-trans; Figure c) to test the ideas.[18] These compounds were appealing since each (1)
possesses attributes for both independent oxidation reactions; (2)
could be compared as individual diastereomers; (3) could be obtained
in its corresponding enantiopure form, in anticipation of the high
degree of enantiospecificity exhibited in the reactions catalyzed
by 1 and 2.[19,20] Keto-olefins 6-cis and 7-trans are also intriguing in that each presents different topological
features in their oxidation reactions, in addition to different conformational
equilibria. Computations provided a quantitative description of these
geometrical features (Figure d), showing that 6-cis exhibits
an overwhelming preference for the mutually bis-equatorial conformation
(99:1). On the contrary, 7-trans was
found to display a 43:57 equilibrium distribution of conformers, suggesting
that both conformations are amply populated under the reaction conditions,
which adds an additional challenge for catalyst selectivity.[21] The intrinsic reactivity of these compounds
and their behavior in catalytic reactions are described below.
Results
and Discussion
Our initial studies focused on benchmarking
the intrinsic reactivity
of compounds like 6 and 7 toward the generic
oxidation reagent, m-chloroperoxybenzoic acid. To
probe the fundamental BVO tendencies, acetate analogues 8-cis and 9-trans were
examined (Scheme ),
expecting that acetylation of the hydroxyl group of 8/9 would effectively dampen the epoxidation pathway,
on the basis of well-known electronic effects in olefin epoxidation.[22] Under standard mCPBA conditions,[15] substrate 8-cis proceeds to partial conversion furnishing lactones 10-normal and 11-reversed, albeit in a modest 4.3:1 ratio (Scheme , entry 1), along with some degree of unselective
epoxidation. Under the same conditions, compound ent-9-trans was found to undergo a more
efficient BVO with 90% conversion, with ent-12-normal and ent-13-reversed formed in an attenuated ratio
of 2.3:1 (Scheme ,
entry 3).[23,24] In this case, epoxide formation is not observed
to an appreciable extent. Importantly, these findings suggest that
the bis(equatorial)-substituted ketone (8-cis) is substantially less reactive than the axial/equatorial-substituted
ketone (9-trans), likely due to intrinsic
ground state destabilization in 9-trans. When the reaction is catalyzed by previously discovered BVO catalyst 2, minimal reactivity is observed with ketone 8-cis (Scheme , entry 5). However, ketone ent-9-trans undergoes highly efficient BVO with enhanced
regioselectivity for ent-13-reversed over ent-12-normal, at a ratio of >99:1 (Scheme , entry 6). This excellent chemo- and regioselectivity
persists when the catalyst loading is reduced (Scheme , entry 7). These results reveal a high level
of reactivity between catalyst 2 and the ketone ent-9-trans, echoing the previously
observed high level of stereochemical matching between 2 and ketone 3, the topology of which is stereochemically
complementary. With these observations in hand, we thus proceeded
with the trans series (e.g., 7-trans-like compounds) for the critical assessment of functional
group selectivity under the influence of peptides 1 and 2.
Scheme 1
Examination of Substituent Orientation and Baeyer–Villiger
Oxidation Tendencies
Standard conditions
with mCPBA: substrate (1.0 equiv), mCPBA (1.0
equiv), chloroform, magnetic stirring. Standard conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(DMAP; 10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0
equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide
(DIC; 3.0 equiv), chloroform, 4 °C, 24 h, magnetic stirring. Average from two trials; determined by uncalibrated
HPLC integrations; value in parentheses refers to isolated yield (see Supporting Information for details). Other oxidation products were detected.
Examination of Substituent Orientation and Baeyer–Villiger
Oxidation Tendencies
Standard conditions
with mCPBA: substrate (1.0 equiv), mCPBA (1.0
equiv), chloroform, magnetic stirring. Standard conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(DMAP; 10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0
equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide
(DIC; 3.0 equiv), chloroform, 4 °C, 24 h, magnetic stirring. Average from two trials; determined by uncalibrated
HPLC integrations; value in parentheses refers to isolated yield (see Supporting Information for details). Other oxidation products were detected.To benchmark the intrinsic reactivity of keto-olefins
with the
requisite allylic alcohol14-trans (with
no artificially introduced attenuation of epoxidation reactivity),
we once again examined reactions with mCPBA as a
preamble to reactions with peptides 1 and 2 (Scheme , entry
1).[25] When a stoichiometric amount of mCPBA is used, the reaction proceeds unselectively with
respect to both functional group selectivity and regioselectivity,
producing a myriad of products (15–22). Notably, with octanoic acid as a catalyst under conditions analogous
to those employed for catalysts 1 and 2,
only trace reactivity is observed. Furthermore, the use of protected
aspartic acid as a catalyst (Boc-Asp(OH)-OMe) also resulted in low
catalytic activity, favoring primarily epoxide products 15 and 16 (Scheme , entry 3). Collectively, these results demonstrate the ineffectiveness
of the above catalysts in controlling the complex reaction coordinate
that substrate 14-trans presents.
Scheme 2
Chemoselectivity Evaluation and Optimization
Standard conditions with mCPBA: substrate (1.0
equiv), mCPBA (1.0
equiv), chloroform (0.05 M), 4 °C, magnetic stirring. Standard
conditions with peptide 1: substrate (1 equiv), 1 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10 mol %), 1-hydroxybenzotriazole
(10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0
equiv), chloroform (0.05 M), 4 °C, magnetic stirring. Standard
conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10 mol %), H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0 equiv), chloroform (0.1 M),
4 °C, magnetic stirring. Average
from two trials; determined by uncalibrated HPLC integrations of the
crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details). Mixing @ 30 rpm. 15 + 16 only.
Chemoselectivity Evaluation and Optimization
Standard conditions with mCPBA: substrate (1.0
equiv), mCPBA (1.0
equiv), chloroform (0.05 M), 4 °C, magnetic stirring. Standard
conditions with peptide 1: substrate (1 equiv), 1 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10 mol %), 1-hydroxybenzotriazole
(10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0
equiv), chloroform (0.05 M), 4 °C, magnetic stirring. Standard
conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10 mol %), H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0 equiv), chloroform (0.1 M),
4 °C, magnetic stirring. Average
from two trials; determined by uncalibrated HPLC integrations of the
crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details). Mixing @ 30 rpm. 15 + 16 only.However, when peptide 1 is used as a
catalyst in the
reaction, a strikingly different outcome is obtained. Under these
conditions, substrate 14-trans is consumed
quantitatively, and the major product is monoepoxide 15, formed with >99:1 diastereoselectivity over 16 (Scheme , entry 4). Thus,
peptide 1, as a function of its secondary structure,
has exerted near total control of the complex reaction coordinate
potential presented by multifunctional substrate 14,
showcasing highly unique functional group selectivity. Examination
of substrate 14-trans with the enantiomer
of this peptide, ent-1, reveals a configuration
mismatch of the olefinic side arm, resulting in lower levels of conversion
and erosion of the diastereoselectivity being observed (1:4.8; 15:16; Scheme , entry 5); interestingly, as with catalyst 1, products derived from the BVO reaction are not detected.We
then turned our attention to the question of whether or not
the previously discovered BVO catalyst 2 might exhibit
orthogonal reactivity. The first experiment provided a cautionary
tale. When substrate 14-trans is exposed
to peptide 2 under the original catalytic conditions,
the reaction proceeds to 38% conversion; however, instead of the anticipated
preference for BVO products, we observe 6:1 preference for epoxides 15 and 16 over lactones 17 and 18. The diastereoselectivity for the epoxidation is also poor
(1:1), and the regioisomeric preference among the lactones is discouraging,
at a level of 6:1 favoring the normal over the reversed isomers (Scheme , entry 6). Based
on these results, we speculated that the originally studied enantiomer
of peptide 2 was stereochemically mismatched with bifunctional
substrate 14-trans.[18] Therefore, we prepared ent-2 and re-examined its performance under the same conditions, and striking
differences were observed (Scheme , entries 7–10).Under these previously
established reaction conditions,[15] we now
observed an improvement in BVO selectivity
such that near parity between the epoxidation versus BVO pathways
was observed (Scheme , entry 7), with a 1.0:0.8 preference for epoxides 15 and 16 over lactones 17 and 18. Of particular note, the preference for the lactone derived from
reversed migratory aptitude was restored (1:26). Optimization of this
result was guided by analysis of 1H-1H NMR derived
structures of peptides 1 and 2 that rationalized
the observations in our initial studies of enantioselective epoxidation
and regio- and enantioselective BVO in our initial studies (Figure ). In the case of 1-catalyzed epoxidation, hydroxyl-directed epoxidation through
hydrogen bonding is consistent with previously reported enantioselectivity
in epoxidation reactions (Figure a).[14] In the case of 2-catalyzed BVO, a favorable interaction of the amido group
with catalyst 2 is consistent with our recent observations
(Figure b). This hypothesis
was stimulated by analysis of an experimentally derived (ROESY) solution
structure of 2,[26] along with
our study of catalyst analogues.[15] A critical
role for the lysine side chain, along with the schematic secondary
structure shown, contributes to a view of competing hydrogen bonding
networks as catalyst ent-2 operates
on substrate 14-trans (Figure c). One network promotes hydroxyl-directed
epoxidation (the blue arrow); the second network promotes amide-directed
BVO (the red arrow). Critically, the blue arrow implies an electrophilic
peracid; the red arrow implies a nucleophilic peracid. Our analysis
culminated in the hypothesis that disruption of the hydroxyl-directed
epoxidation pathway in blue might amplify selectivity for the BVO
pathway with catalyst ent-2, if the
red network could be preserved.
Figure 2
Representative models for the competing
reaction pathways: (a)
hypothetical model for hydroxyl-directed epoxidation; (b) hypothetical
model for amide-directed Baeyer–Villiger oxidation; (c) presentation
of a competing H-bonding network; (d) proposed water disruption of
the H-bonding network.
Representative models for the competing
reaction pathways: (a)
hypothetical model for hydroxyl-directed epoxidation; (b) hypothetical
model for amide-directed Baeyer–Villiger oxidation; (c) presentation
of a competing H-bonding network; (d) proposed water disruption of
the H-bonding network.To disrupt putative hydrogen bonds to the substrate hydroxyl
group,
we hypothesized that an increased concentration of H2O
might effectively compete with hydroxyl-directed epoxidation to a
greater extent than it would perturb the amide-directed BVO (Figure d). This speculation
is in keeping with theories about hydrogen bond strength that point
to the importance of complementarity of hydrogen bond donors and acceptors.[27] A systematic study with additional H2O content supports these notions (Figure ). Our findings reveal a linear relationship
between the overall water content of the reaction medium and BVO/epoxide
selectivity when using the BVOpeptide catalyst ent-2: the more H2O relative to H2O2, the higher the lactone/epoxide ratio. Unambiguously,
H2O plays an important role in these reactions, and the
outcome is consistent with our hypothesis. With modest increases in
H2O content (15–100 extra equivalents of H2O, relative to standard 30 wt % H2O2), overall
conversion of substrate 14-trans remains
high (70–75%) with a slight increase (2–3-fold, relative
to Scheme , entry
7) in selectivity increase toward BVO. Strikingly, further increasing
of the equivalents of H2O leads to even greater selectivity
for BVO (4–5-fold), albeit at some expense of overall conversion
(50–58%).[28] The erosion of conversion
may be due to consumption of the carbodiimide reagent, DIC, and its
adducts leading to a buildup of urea byproduct, 1,3-diisopropylurea,
a competent H-bond donor/acceptor group.[29]
Figure 3
Systematic
study with additional H2O added to the reaction
media. Standard conditions with peptide 2: 14 (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10
mol %), H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0 equiv total;
1 equiv @ 0 h, 4 h, 8 h), chloroform (0.1 M wrt 14),
water (n + 15 equiv starting at 30 equiv), 4 °C,
mixing @ 30 rpm, 24 h. Conversion and selectivity were determined
by uncalibrated HPLC integrations of the crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details).
Systematic
study with additional H2O added to the reaction
media. Standard conditions with peptide 2: 14 (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine (10
mol %), H2O2 (30 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0 equiv total;
1 equiv @ 0 h, 4 h, 8 h), chloroform (0.1 M wrt 14),
water (n + 15 equiv starting at 30 equiv), 4 °C,
mixing @ 30 rpm, 24 h. Conversion and selectivity were determined
by uncalibrated HPLC integrations of the crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details).These observations enabled further optimization
for the BVO pathway.
Thus, a transition from aqueous solutions of 30 wt % H2O2 to 3 wt % H2O2 in H2O, ensuring optimum mixing of the biphasic reaction mixture, lead
to rather dramatic results, such that substrate 14-trans is converted to the corresponding oxidation products
with total control over migratory aptitude (1:>50; Scheme , entry 8). Further dilution
of the reaction mixture further increases the functional group selectivity
leading to enhanced results, such that 53% conversion is observed,
with a 1:12.5 ratio of epoxide to BVO products, again with total reversal
of migratory aptitude (Scheme , entry 9). Finally, execution of these conditions with an
increase in catalyst loading provides a high converting reaction with
the desired functional group selectivity (Scheme , entry 10; see Supporting Information for complete screening of conditions). Under these
conditions, the BVO products 17 and 18 are
also observed to participate in overoxidation to a somewhat greater
extent (19–22), modifying the ratios
observed at lower conversion.[30] Overall,
the BVO selectivity reversal observed using catalyst ent-2 for the oxidation of 14-trans, under high-H2O conditions, appears to be due to a combination
of both the catalyst’s unique secondary structure and medium
effects where the epoxidation and BVO pathways are differentially
modulated by the demands of H2O in this situation of competing
hydrogen bond networks.The critical role of the secondary structure,
in light of the optimized
high-H2O reaction conditions, prompted us to evaluate several
truncated peptide-based analogues of catalyst ent-2 under the optimized reaction conditions. The sequential
deletion of amino acids from the C-terminal end of
the catalyst ent-2 delivers incrementally
inferior chemo- and regioselectivity along with reduced reaction efficiency.
As shown in Scheme , catalyst 24 wherein the C-terminal dTyr(tBu)-OMe of ent-2 is replaced with a methyl ester (Scheme , entry 2) results in both a significant
loss of functional group selectivity (1.3:1.0, epoxide:lactone) and
a decrease in control of the migratory aptitude of the BVO products
(1.0:14.1; 17:18) in addition to lower levels
of conversion. Reminiscent of an observation that emerged in our earlier
work that the dPro-Xaa-Pro motif is a crucial sequence element
for BVO, truncated peptide 25, which lacks the i + 3 Pro, leads to a further erosion in conversion and
chemoselectivity with epoxides 15 and 16 being favored over lactones 17 and 18 (3.3:1.0)
and a total loss of control in migratory aptitude with a slight preference
toward the “normal” lactone 17 (1.1:1.0; 17:18; Scheme , entry 3). Moreover, deletion of the i + 2 Lys(Boc) residue, where Boc = tert-butyloxycarbonyl,
results in further reduced reaction efficiency (Scheme , entry 4) on par with the results of the
monomer Boc-Asp(OH)-OMe (Scheme , entry 3). Collectively, these results demonstrate
that the selectivity for the BVO reaction and attendant regio- and
stereoselectivity are the unambiguous results of interaction of 14 with the peptide catalyst and its complete secondary structure.
Scheme 3
Selectivities Observed with Truncated Peptides
Standard conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (3 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0
equiv), chloroform (0.033 M), 4 °C, mixing @ 30 rpm, 24 h. Average from two trials; determined by uncalibrated
HPLC integrations of the crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details).
Selectivities Observed with Truncated Peptides
Standard conditions with peptide 2: substrate (1 equiv), 2 (10 mol %), 4-dimethylaminopyridine
(10 mol %), aqueous H2O2 (3 wt %; 2.0 equiv), N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide (3.0
equiv), chloroform (0.033 M), 4 °C, mixing @ 30 rpm, 24 h. Average from two trials; determined by uncalibrated
HPLC integrations of the crude reaction media (see Supporting Information for details).
Conclusion
It is thus established that aspartyl peptides can catalyze either
epoxidation reactions as electrophilic oxidants or BV oxidations as
nucleophilic oxidants, with accompanying diastereo- and regioselectivity,
when presented with an intramolecular choice. The molecular context
in which the aspartyl residue is placed—the peptide sequence
that defines the catalyst secondary structure—provides the
capacity to control orthogonal functional group selectivity in an
intramolecular competition experiment. The ability to dial in functional
group selectivity, while controlling attendant stereoselectivity issues,
is a dimension that may create new possibilities for orchestrating
the assembly of complex molecules, and for complex scaffold diversification.
Perhaps more fundamentally, the peptide-regulated selectivity for
specific functional groups within a multifunctional substrate signals
control over the mechanistic behavior of common catalytic machinery,
which at present seems to be known primarily only in the context of
enzymes.[31]
Authors: Jennifer M Crawford; Elizabeth A Stone; Anthony J Metrano; Scott J Miller; Matthew S Sigman Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Christopher R Shugrue; Aaron L Featherston; Rachel M Lackner; Angela Lin; Scott J Miller Journal: J Org Chem Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 4.354
Authors: Christopher R Shugrue; Bianca R Sculimbrene; Elizabeth R Jarvo; Brandon Q Mercado; Scott J Miller Journal: J Org Chem Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 4.354
Authors: Anthony J Metrano; Alex J Chinn; Christopher R Shugrue; Elizabeth A Stone; Byoungmoo Kim; Scott J Miller Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Xin Cindy Yan; Anthony J Metrano; Michael J Robertson; Nadia C Abascal; Julian Tirado-Rives; Scott J Miller; William L Jorgensen Journal: ACS Catal Date: 2018-09-13 Impact factor: 13.084