Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-11-2007, 02:27 PM
BevillTheDevil BevillTheDevil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,342
Default IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE



How is this numbered (where to start numbering)?? what do the beta/alpha stand for?? I know the 6 memeberd ring is the galactopyranoside, is the 5 membered the fructo??
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-11-2007, 02:36 PM
qwnu qwnu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 229
Default Re: IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE

IUPAC Nomenclature of Organic Chemistry
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-11-2007, 04:01 PM
TomCowley TomCowley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 354
Default Re: IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE

Assuming you have some carbohydrate knowledge here-

The blue ring would be galactose (if Cl were replaced by OH), hence galactopyranoside. The red ring would be fructose.

In a normal aldose, carbon 1 is the aldehyde carbon. In a normal ketose, carbon 1 is the carbon on the end nearest the carbonyl carbon. In this disaccharide, each sugar unit is numbered individually. So on the blue ring, carbon 1 is the rightmost carbon, since it's the one that started as an aldehyde (and is now an acetal). Counting around, the Cl is obviously on carbon 4. Alpha means that the acetal linkage (the bond to the red O) is on the opposite side of the ring as Carbon 6. Since Carbon 6 is in the equatorial position, it's "on top" of the ring (the H there is axial-down), and the acetal linkage is on the bottom.

Looking at the red ring, the linked formerly-carbonyl carbon is C2, so the topmost carbon is C1, and the other Cl is on C6. This ring is beta because the ketal linkage is on the bottom of the ring, as is C6 (on the far right). Same side = beta.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-11-2007, 05:58 PM
BevillTheDevil BevillTheDevil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,342
Default Re: IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE

ty tom!! i was lookin particularly at the wikipedia picture for sucralose and they are missing a carbon...i was gettin really confused lol. The only thing im still somewhat confused w/ is the 4-deoxy, and the 1,6 dideoxy parts...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-11-2007, 07:07 PM
TomCowley TomCowley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 354
Default Re: IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE

The deoxy is because the OHs that would be there in the sugar (galactose or fructose) aren't because they have been replaced by Cl. Deoxy: De - minus Oxy - Oxygen.

And yeah, the galactose ring is missing carbon 6 in the wikipedia structure, although the molecular model version appears correct at first glance.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-11-2007, 08:47 PM
thesnowman22 thesnowman22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 108
Default Re: IUPAC Nomenclature: SUCRALOSE

Threads like these make me glad I underacheived and became a PE teacher and basketball coach.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.