↓ Skip to main content

American Chemical Society

Article Metrics

Isotope Effects Reveal the Mechanism of Enamine Formation in l-Proline-Catalyzed α-Amination of Aldehydes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Chemical Society, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Isotope Effects Reveal the Mechanism of Enamine Formation in l-Proline-Catalyzed α-Amination of Aldehydes
Published in
Journal of the American Chemical Society, February 2016
DOI 10.1021/jacs.5b10876
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa A. Ashley, Jennifer S. Hirschi, Joseph A. Izzo, Mathew J. Vetticatt

Abstract

The mechanism of L-proline catalyzed α-amination of 3-phenylpropionaldehyde was studied using a combination of experimental kinetic isotope effects (KIEs) and theoretical calculations. Observation of a significant carbonyl 13C KIE and a large primary (1°) α-deuterium KIE support rate-determining enamine formation. Theoretical predictions of KIEs exclude the widely accepted mechanism - enamine formation via intramolecular deprotonation of an iminium carboxylate intermediate (7). An E2-elimination mechanism catalyzed by a bifunctional base, that directly forms an N-protonated enamine species (12•H+) from an oxazolidinone (11) intermediate, accounts for the experimental KIEs. These findings provide the first experimental picture of the transition state geometry of enamine formation and clarify the role of oxazolidinones as non-parasitic intermediates in proline catalysis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
France 1 1%
Unknown 73 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 59 78%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Physics and Astronomy 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 10 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2016.
All research outputs
#3,203,323
of 20,995,223 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Chemical Society
#11,352
of 59,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,491
of 368,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Chemical Society
#111
of 445 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,995,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 59,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,603 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 445 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.