Specific Rotation of 4-Methoxy-d-Mannose in Tetrasaccharide Hydrolysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter amit25
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rotation Specific
AI Thread Summary
The specific rotation of a tetrasaccharide was measured at -20.5°, and after hydrolysis, the optical rotation was -36.9°. The calculation for the specific rotation of 4-methoxy-d-mannose was attempted using the formula involving the specific rotations of other monosaccharides, resulting in an estimate of 14.2°. However, concerns were raised about the assumptions made regarding the concentrations of the monosaccharides after hydrolysis, as the mass of products is typically higher than the original reactant. The wording of the question was criticized for lacking clarity on the conditions of the hydrolyzed solution, leading to potential inaccuracies in the calculations.
amit25
Messages
28
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement

The specific rotation of a tetrasaccharide was measured to be -20.5°. Upon complete hydrolysis in acid the optical rotation of the solution was found to be -36.9°. Knowing that the specific rotations of n-acetylgalacosamine,3-deoxy-l-fucose and 2-deoxy-D-ribose are -105°,-75.7° and 18.7°. What is the specific rotation of 4-methoxy-d-mannose?
b]2. Homework Equations [/b]

The Attempt at a Solution



1/4(-105)+1/4(-75.5)+1/4(18.7)+1/4x=-36.9

and solve for x=14.2 for 4-methoxy-d-mannose

Can anyone tell me If I am doing this correctly? It seems too simple...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Close, but not necessarily correct. You can't assume hydrolyzing tetrasaccharide solution that is 1 g/mL of the original compound you will get 0.25 g/mL of each produced monosaccharide, their concentrations will be in general higher (hydrolysis consumes water, so the mass of products is higher than the mass of the main reactant). To find exact concentrations you need to follow the reaction stoichiometry and molar masses.

I don't like the question. It says "optical rotation of the solution was found", not defining the solution. Either we are expected to do some unlikely assumptions, or whoever worded the question didn't think about it for long enough. We can assume it is a hydrolyzed solution that was used for the specific rotation measurement (so it was initially 1 g/mL of tetrasaccharide) but I find it hard to believe in practice nothing has changed - hydrolysis requires adding of an acid, heating and so on - final solution is definitely different, unless we did some unmentioned extra tricks.
 
Thanks, hmmm..im not sure if we're expected to make some assumptions but that's how the Question was worded exactly.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top