MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341479357 · doi:10.1021/acs.accounts.5b00306

Decarboxylation, CO<sub>2</sub> and the Reversion Problem

2015· article· en· W2341479357 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounts of Chemical Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical Acid Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCarbanionDecarboxylationChemistryElectrophileProtonationComputational chemistryPhotochemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decarboxylation reactions occur rapidly in enzymes but usually are many orders of magnitude slower in solution, if the reaction occurs at all. Where the reaction produces a carbanion and CO2, we would expect that the high energy of the carbanion causes the transition state for C-C bond cleavage also to be high in energy. Since the energy of the carbanion is a thermodynamic property, an enzyme obviously cannot change that property. Yet, enzymes overcome the barrier to forming the carbanion. In thinking about decarboxylation, we had assumed that CO2 is well behaved and forms without its own barriers. However, we analyzed reactions in solution of compounds that resemble intermediates in enzymic reaction and found some of them to be subject to unexpected forms of catalysis. Those results caused us to discard the usual assumptions about CO2 and carbanions. We learned that CO2 can be a very reactive electrophile. In decarboxylation reactions, where CO2 forms in the same step as a carbanion, separation of the products might be the main problem preventing the forward reaction because the carbanion can add readily to CO2 in competition with their separation and solvation. The basicity of the carbanion also might be overestimated because when we see that the decarboxylation is slow, we assume that it is because the carbanion is high in energy. We found reactions where the carbanion is protonated internally; CO2 appears to be able to depart without reversion more rapidly. We tested these ideas using kinetic analysis of catalytic reactions, carbon kinetic isotope effects, and synthesis of predecarboxylation intermediates. In another case, we observed that the decarboxylation is subject to general base catalysis while producing a significant carbon kinetic isotope effect. This requires both a proton transfer from an intermediate and C-C bond-breaking in the rate-determining step. This would occur if the route involves the surprising initial addition of water to the carboxyl, with the cleavage step producing bicarbonate. Interestingly, some enzyme-catalyzed reactions also appear to produce intermediates formed by the initial addition of water or a nucleophile to the carboxyl or to nascent CO2. We conclude that decarboxylation is not necessarily a problem that results from the energy of the carbanionic products alone but from their formation in the presence of CO2. Catalysts that facilitate the separation of the species on either side of the C-C bond that cleaves could solve the problem using catalytic principles that we find in many enzymes that promote hydrolytic processes, suggesting linkages in catalysis through evolution of activity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it