MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386869477 · doi:10.1039/d3ob01229h

Macrocyclization strategies for the total synthesis of cyclic depsipeptides

2023· review· en· W4386869477 on OpenAlexafffund
André R. Paquette, Christopher N. Boddy

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic & Biomolecular Chemistry · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryDepsipeptideTotal synthesisCombinatorial chemistryStereochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclic depsipeptides are an important class of peptide natural products that are defined by the presence of ester and amide bonds within the macrocycle. The structural diversity of depsipeptides has required the development of a broad range of synthetic strategies to access these biologically active compounds. Solid phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) strategies have been an invaluable tool in their synthesis. The key aspect of their synthesis is the macrocyclization strategy. Three main strategies are used, solution phase macrolactamization of acyclic ester containing peptide, on-resin macrolactamization of a sidechain-anchored peptide, and the solution phase macrolactonization of a linear peptide. Additionally, biocatalysts have been used to produce these compounds in a regio- and chemo-selective manner. Each compound offers unique challenges, requiring careful synthetic design to avoid undesirable side reactivity or unwanted epimerization during the esterification and macrocyclizing steps. This focused review analyzes these three strategies for cyclic depsipeptide natural product total synthesis with selected examples from the literature between 2001-2023.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic & Biomolecular ChemistrySame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207