Alternative Links zum Volltext:
Zusammenfassung
cf. CA 52, 18274h; 60, 4033c. dl-(BuNHCHPh)2.2HCl (I.2HCl) and meso-I.2HCl showed different distribution behavior under certain conditions. Thus, in the system 10:1:9 CHCl3-MeOH-buffer at 22 Deg, the compds. showed the following solubilities [compd., g. salt in 100 ml. aq. phase (pH 1), and g. salt in 100 ml. org. phase given]: meso-I, 9.8, 1.3; dl-I, 9.2, 38.2. While, in the distribution of ...
Zusammenfassung
cf. CA 52, 18274h; 60, 4033c. dl-(BuNHCHPh)2.2HCl (I.2HCl) and meso-I.2HCl showed different distribution behavior under certain conditions. Thus, in the system 10:1:9 CHCl3-MeOH-buffer at 22 Deg, the compds. showed the following solubilities [compd., g. salt in 100 ml. aq. phase (pH 1), and g. salt in 100 ml. org. phase given]: meso-I, 9.8, 1.3; dl-I, 9.2, 38.2. While, in the distribution of amines between buffer solns. and org. solvents, as a rule only the undissocd. bases enter into the distribution equil. and the dissocd. fraction is found solely in the aq. phase, dl-I and meso-I were distributed as salts under certain conditions. This deviating behavior was the reason for very large sepn. effects. This could be attributed to conformational differences and to easier formation of a hydrate shell with meso-I than with dl-I.