Cargando…

In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates

We discuss herein the problems associated with using melting points to characterize multicomponent reactions’ (MCRs) products and intermediates. Although surprising, it is not rare to find articles in which these MCRs final adducts (or their intermediates) are characterized solely by comparing melti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Neto, Brenno A. D., Beck, Pedro S., Sorto, Jenny E. P., Eberlin, Marcos N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9656178/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36364380
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules27217552
_version_ 1784829369328336896
author Neto, Brenno A. D.
Beck, Pedro S.
Sorto, Jenny E. P.
Eberlin, Marcos N.
author_facet Neto, Brenno A. D.
Beck, Pedro S.
Sorto, Jenny E. P.
Eberlin, Marcos N.
author_sort Neto, Brenno A. D.
collection PubMed
description We discuss herein the problems associated with using melting points to characterize multicomponent reactions’ (MCRs) products and intermediates. Although surprising, it is not rare to find articles in which these MCRs final adducts (or their intermediates) are characterized solely by comparing melting points with those available from other reports. A brief survey among specialized articles highlights serious and obvious problems with this practice since, for instance, cases are found in which as many as 25 quite contrasting melting points have been attributed to the very same MCR adduct. Indeed, it seems logical to assume that the inherent non-confirmatory nature of melting points could be vastly misleading as a protocol for structural confirmation, but still many publications (also in the Q1 and Q2 quartiles) insist on using it. This procedure contradicts best practices in organic synthesis, and articles fraught with limitations and misleading conclusions have been published in the MCRs field. The drawbacks inherent to this practice are indeed serious and have misguided MCRs advances. We therefore suggest some precautions aimed at avoiding future confusions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9656178
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96561782022-11-15 In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates Neto, Brenno A. D. Beck, Pedro S. Sorto, Jenny E. P. Eberlin, Marcos N. Molecules Review We discuss herein the problems associated with using melting points to characterize multicomponent reactions’ (MCRs) products and intermediates. Although surprising, it is not rare to find articles in which these MCRs final adducts (or their intermediates) are characterized solely by comparing melting points with those available from other reports. A brief survey among specialized articles highlights serious and obvious problems with this practice since, for instance, cases are found in which as many as 25 quite contrasting melting points have been attributed to the very same MCR adduct. Indeed, it seems logical to assume that the inherent non-confirmatory nature of melting points could be vastly misleading as a protocol for structural confirmation, but still many publications (also in the Q1 and Q2 quartiles) insist on using it. This procedure contradicts best practices in organic synthesis, and articles fraught with limitations and misleading conclusions have been published in the MCRs field. The drawbacks inherent to this practice are indeed serious and have misguided MCRs advances. We therefore suggest some precautions aimed at avoiding future confusions. MDPI 2022-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9656178/ /pubmed/36364380 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules27217552 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Neto, Brenno A. D.
Beck, Pedro S.
Sorto, Jenny E. P.
Eberlin, Marcos N.
In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title_full In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title_fullStr In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title_full_unstemmed In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title_short In Melting Points We Trust: A Review on the Misguiding Characterization of Multicomponent Reactions Adducts and Intermediates
title_sort in melting points we trust: a review on the misguiding characterization of multicomponent reactions adducts and intermediates
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9656178/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36364380
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules27217552
work_keys_str_mv AT netobrennoad inmeltingpointswetrustareviewonthemisguidingcharacterizationofmulticomponentreactionsadductsandintermediates
AT beckpedros inmeltingpointswetrustareviewonthemisguidingcharacterizationofmulticomponentreactionsadductsandintermediates
AT sortojennyep inmeltingpointswetrustareviewonthemisguidingcharacterizationofmulticomponentreactionsadductsandintermediates
AT eberlinmarcosn inmeltingpointswetrustareviewonthemisguidingcharacterizationofmulticomponentreactionsadductsandintermediates