| Literature DB >> 32120991 |
Aleksandra Leśniarek1, Anna Chojnacka1, Radosław Drozd2, Magdalena Szymańska2, Witold Gładkowski1.
Abstract
The influence of buffer type, co-solvent type, and acyl chain length was investigated for the enantioselective hydrolysis of racemic 4-arylbut-3-en-2-yl esters using Lecitase™ Ultra (LU). Immobilized preparations of the Lecitase™ Ultra enzyme had significantly higher activity and enantioselectivity than the free enzyme, particularly for 4-phenylbut-3-en-2-yl butyrate as the substrate. Moreover, the kinetic resolution with the immobilized enzyme was achieved in a much shorter time (24-48 h). Lecitase™ Ultra, immobilized on cyanogen bromide-activated agarose, was particularly effective, producing, after 24 h of reaction time in phosphate buffer (pH 7.2) with acetone as co-solvent, both (R)-alcohols and unreacted (S)-esters with good to excellent enantiomeric excesses (ee 90-99%). These conditions and enzyme were also suitable for the kinetic separation of racemic (E)-4-phenylbut-3-en-2-yl butyrate analogs containing methyl substituents on the benzene ring (4b,4c), but they did not show any enantioselectivity toward (E)-4-(4'-methoxyphenyl)but-3-en-2-yl butyrate (4d).Entities:
Keywords: (E)-4-arylbut-3-en-2-ols; Lecitase™ Ultra; cyanogen bromide-activated agarose; enantioselective hydrolysis; immobilization; kinetic resolution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32120991 PMCID: PMC7179117 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25051067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Scheme 1General scheme for the synthesis of racemic esters 2a–d, 3a–d and 4a–d.
Free Lecitase™ Ultra-catalyzed hydrolysis of racemic esters 2a–4a.
| Entry | Substrate | R | Co-Solvent | Buffer | t [h] | c [%]1 | ees [%] | eep [%] |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| Me | acetone | Tris/HCl3 | 120 | 46 | 25 | 29 | 2 |
| 2 |
| Et | acetone | Tris/HCl | 120 | 42 | 52 | 71 | 10 |
| 3 |
| Pr | acetone | Tris/HCl | 168 | 47 | 77 | 88 | 36 |
| 4 |
| Me | acetone | phosphate4 | 168 | 51 | 50 | 49 | 5 |
| 5 |
| Et | acetone | phosphate | 144 | 45 | 70 | 84 | 24 |
| 6 |
| Pr | acetone | phosphate | 96 | 28 | 39 | >99 | >200 |
| 7 |
| Me | DMF | phosphate | 168 | 49 | 28 | 29 | 2 |
| 8 |
| Et | DMF | phosphate | 144 | 46 | 68 | 80 | 18 |
| 9 |
| Pr | DMF | phosphate | 96 | 52 | 39 | 88 | 23 |
| 10 |
| Me | DMSO | phosphate | 168 | 42 | 30 | 41 | 3 |
| 11 |
| Et | DMSO | phosphate | 144 | 27 | 22 | 59 | 5 |
| 12 |
| Pr | DMSO | phosphate | 96 | 53 | 69 | 87 | 30 |
1 Conversion, c = ees/(ees + eep). 2 The enantiomeric ratio calculated at the highest conversion rate according to the following equation: E = ln[(1 − ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]/ln[(1 + ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]; ees = enantiomeric excess of unreacted ester, eep = enantiomeric excess of alcohol. 3 pH 8.2. 4 pH 7.2.
Hydrolysis of allyl esters with different phenyl ring substituents 2b–d, 3b–d, and 4b–d catalyzed by free Lecitase™ Ultra.
| Entry | Substrate | Ar | R | t [h] | c [%]1 | ees [%] | eep [%] |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
| Me | 72 | 43 | 9 | 12 | 1 |
| 2 |
|
| Et | 96 | 30 | 28 | 64 | 6 |
| 3 |
|
| Pr | 120 | 30 | 37 | 85 | 18 |
| 4 |
|
| Me | 144 | 41 | 42 | 61 | 6 |
| 5 |
|
| Et | 144 | 45 | 65 | 80 | 18 |
| 6 |
|
| Pr | 96 | 32 | 36 | 77 | 11 |
| 7 |
|
| Me | 6 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 8 |
|
| Et | 6 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 9 |
|
| Pr | 96 | 65 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 Conversion, c = ees/(ees + eep). 2 The enantiomeric ratio calculated at the highest conversion rate according to the following equation: E = ln[(1 − ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]/ln[(1 + ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]; ees = enantiomeric excess of unreacted ester, eep = enantiomeric excess of alcohol.
Activity of Lecitase™ Ultra (LU) preparations.
| Entry | Carrier | Biocatalyst | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| LU-DAX | 0.06 |
| 2 |
| LU-ALG | 0.04 |
| 3 |
| LU-MBC | 0.045 |
| 4 |
| LU-CNBr | 0.06 |
Figure 1The effect of enzyme immobilization on the conversion, enantioselectivity, and enantiopurity of the products of Lecitase™ Ultra-catalyzed hydrolysis of racemic acetate 2a (reaction scheme presented above)
Figure 2The effect of enzyme immobilization on the conversion, enantioselectivity, and enantiopurity of the products of Lecitase™ Ultra-catalyzed hydrolysis of racemic propionate 3a (reaction scheme presented above).
Figure 3The effect of enzyme immobilization on the conversion, enantioselectivity, and enantiopurity of the products of Lecitase™ Ultra-catalyzed hydrolysis of racemic butyrate 4a (reaction scheme presented above)
Hydrolysis of butyrates 4b–d with different substituents on a benzene ring catalyzed by Lecitase™ Ultra immobilized on cyanogen bromide-activated agarose (LU-CNBr).
| Entry | Substrate | Ar | t [h] | c [%]1 | ees [%] | eep [%] |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
| 24 | 48 | 89 | 98 | >200 |
| 2 |
|
| 48 | 50 | 99 | 99 | >200 |
| 3 |
|
| 72 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 Conversion, c = ees/(ees + eep). 2 The enantiomeric ratio calculated at the highest conversion rate according to the following equation: E = ln[(1 − ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]/ln[(1 + ees)/(1 + (ees/eep)]; ees = enantiomeric excess of unreacted ester, eep = enantiomeric excess of alcohol.
Figure 4The effect of the dose of Lecitase Ultra immobilized on cyanogen bromide-activated agarose (LU-CNBr) on the conversion and enantiopurity of the products after 24 h of hydrolysis of racemic acetate 2a in phosphate buffer (pH 7.2) and acetone as the co-solvent.