Synthesis and antifungal properties of benzylamines containing boronate esters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Addition of 3-H2NC6H4Bpin (pin = 1,2-O2C2Me4) to a series of aldehydes and 4-(4,4,5,5-tetramethyl-1,3,2-dioxaborolan-2-yl)acetophenone afforded the corresponding benzylideneamines in moderate to high yields. Hydroboration of these imines with catecholborane (HBcat, cat = 1,2-O2C6H4) at room temperature gives, upon aqueous workup, the corresponding borylamines. An X-ray diffraction study was carried out on imine 1h derived from 9-anthraldehyde and 3-H2NC6H4Bpin. Crystals of1h were triclinic, a = 9.6793(4) Å, b = 10.7397(4) Å, c = 11.5353(4) Å, α = 105.1890(10)o, β = 97.3030(10)o, γ = 102.1480(10)o, Z = 2 with space group P[Formula: see text] and crystals of N-[3-(4,4,5,5-tetramethyl-1,3,2-dioxaborolan-2-yl)phenyl]-4-methoxybenzylamine 2c were orthorhombic, a = 8.6612(4) Å, b = 10.3794(4) Å, c = 20.6033(9) Å, Z = 4 with space group P212121. Amines have been tested for their antifungal properties against Aspergillus niger and Aspergillus flavus.Key words: benzylamines, boronate esters, aminoboron, hydroboration, antifungal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".