scholarly journals Radical-Type Difunctionalization of Alkenes with CO2

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (9) ◽  
pp. 783 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Zhang ◽  
Li Gong ◽  
Xiao-Yu Zhou ◽  
Si-Shun Yan ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 1051-1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Satsuma ◽  
Naruaki Sugiyama ◽  
Yuichi Kamiya ◽  
Tadashi Hattori

Author(s):  
Edurne Loyarte ◽  
Olga Rivera

Communities of practice (CoPs) have been taken into account by both practitioners and academics during the last ten years. From a strategic point of view, CoPs have shown their importance for the management of organizational knowledge by offering repositories of knowledge, improved capacity of making knowledge actionable and operational (Brown & Duguid, 1998) and by facilitating maintenance, reproduction, and extension of knowledge (Brown and Durguid, 2001). CoPs are also reported to achieve value creation and competitive advantages (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), learning at work (Swan et alt., 2002) that promotes organizational competitiveness (Furlong and Johnson, 2003), innovation, even a radical type (Swan et alt., 2002), responsiveness, improved staff skills and reduced duplication (du Plessis, 2008). This impressive list of achievements is not for free; some authors have pointed out the limits of CoP’s (Duguid, 2005; Roberts, 2006; Amin & Roberts, 2008) from diverse points of view, including diversity of working environments, size, spatial or relational proximity, but mainly emphasizing the specificity of CoPs as a social practice paradigm, as it was defined by Wenger (1999, 2000) credited as the “inventor” of the term “CoP” (Lave and Wenger, 1991). This chapter focuses on the consideration of CoPs as an organizational reality than can be managed (Thompson, 2005), the contradictions that the idea of managing them generates, and how these controversial points can be overcome in a sound and honest way. To do so, we review different cases of CoP’s within organizations intended for the managerial team to achieve important organizational goals. Our analysis provides: (a) a reflection regarding the Key Success Factors in the process of integrating communities of practice, (b) insight to the structure of a model of cultivation, intended as a guideline for new experiences in this area, and (c) an informative account of this model’s adaptation to the studied organizations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (26) ◽  
pp. 4290-4296
Author(s):  
Daisuke Aoki ◽  
Moeko Yanagisawa ◽  
Hideyuki Otsuka

Synthesis of mechanochromic polymers based on a radical-type mechanochromophore by RAFT polymerization: living radical polymerization from a polymerization inhibitor.


Author(s):  
Edurne Loyarte ◽  
Olga Rivera

Communities of practice (CoPs) have been taken into account by both practitioners and academics during the last ten years. From a strategic point of view, CoPs have shown their importance for the management of organizational knowledge by offering repositories of knowledge, improved capacity of making knowledge actionable and operational (Brown & Duguid, 1998) and by facilitating maintenance, reproduction, and extension of knowledge (Brown and Durguid, 2001). CoPs are also reported to achieve value creation and competitive advantages (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), learning at work (Swan et alt., 2002) that promotes organizational competitiveness (Furlong and Johnson, 2003), innovation, even a radical type (Swan et alt., 2002), responsiveness, improved staff skills and reduced duplication (du Plessis, 2008). This impressive list of achievements is not for free; some authors have pointed out the limits of CoP’s (Duguid, 2005; Roberts, 2006; Amin & Roberts, 2008) from diverse points of view, including diversity of working environments, size, spatial or relational proximity, but mainly emphasizing the specificity of CoPs as a social practice paradigm, as it was defined by Wenger (1999, 2000) credited as the “inventor” of the term “CoP” (Lave and Wenger, 1991). This chapter focuses on the consideration of CoPs as an organizational reality than can be managed (Thompson, 2005), the contradictions that the idea of managing them generates, and how these controversial points can be overcome in a sound and honest way. To do so, we review different cases of CoP’s within organizations intended for the managerial team to achieve important organizational goals. Our analysis provides: (a) a reflection regarding the Key Success Factors in the process of integrating communities of practice, (b) insight to the structure of a model of cultivation, intended as a guideline for new experiences in this area, and (c) an informative account of this model’s adaptation to the studied organizations.


Synlett ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuan Wang ◽  
Zhiyang Lin ◽  
Yun Lan

We report a reductive allylic defluorinative reaction of α-trifluoromethyl alkenes with terminal epoxides, which consists of an iodide-mediated regioselective ring opening and a nickel-catalyzed radical-type cross-coupling, providing diverse tertiary gem-difluorobishomoallylic alcohols in moderate to high yields. Notably, this reaction is conducted under mild conditions and requires no external ligand or proton donor.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
FL Cordeiro ◽  
KAS Almeida ◽  
FB Russomano ◽  
D Salles ◽  
FAR Fleming ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 54 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 438-445
Author(s):  
Matthias Elstner ◽  
Andrea Denke ◽  
Wieland Gsell ◽  
Erich F. Elstner ◽  
Peter Riederer ◽  
...  

Abstract The effects of cortical tissue preparations (CTP) from human brain on the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) has been investigated with several biochemical model reactions. As indicators for ROS, fragmentation of the methionine derivatives, α-keto-γ-methyl-thiobutyric acid (KMB) or 1-amino-cyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC), yielding ethene have been used. With these systems we have shown that production of OH-radical-type oxidants by the xanthine oxidase (XOD)-system is strongly stimulated by CTP. This activity is due to intrinsic iron ions since ethene formation from KMB is stimulated by EDTA , inhibited by desferrioxamine (DesferalR) and also visible with heat-denatured CTP. CTP by themselves have no XOD activity. 3-Hydroxykynurenine (3HK) is another possible substrate for XOD but produces H2O2 without XOD-catalysis, whereas allopurinol is not inhibiting. CTP contain measurable NAD(P)H oxidoreductase activity, producing OH-radical-type oxidants at the expense of NADPH and (to a lesser extent) NADH as electron donors , shown as redox-cycling of 2-methyl-5-hydroxy-1.4-naphthoquinone, plumbagin. Ethene formation from KMB is also driven by both morpholinosydnonimine (SIN) or ONOOH. The reaction driven by SIN is stimulated by CTP and inhibited by catalase, SOD and hemoglobin. Since ethene release from KMB driven by ONOOH is inhibited by CTP the mechanisms driving KMB fragmentation are different for SIN and ONOOH. Furthermore CTP contain approx. 4 U catalase activity per mg protein and very weak peroxidase (POD) activity shown as ACC fragmentation yielding ethene in the presence of both H2O2 and KBr or NaCl. Since ACC binds to CTP and both compounds, ACC and KMB are natural products, present in food (ACC) or synthesized from methionine in vivo (KMB), these compounds may represent protecting agents in systems where reactive oxygen species are formed. One might even speculate that the production of ethene at these membrane receptor sites may have biological functions, since ethene is known to possess anaesthetic activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document