Publications in the field of organocatalysis range over a wide range from the very concept-to-application publications of some of the founders of the field, (MacMillan, List, Jorgenson, etc.) to me-too chemistry where a known catalysts is applied to previously un-organocatalyzed systems or a small change is made to a know catalyst without any hypothesis development that moves the field forward. It's a newer hot field so this range of application will work it self out.
Unfortunately, as in the case of other "buzzword" fields a lot of shaky stuff appears to be slipping through the cracks. In the last couple of days I have seen two papers, one in Org. Lett. and one in Syn. Lett., that have such problems that I can't see how the reviewers did not send them back to the authors for at least a rewrite. An example problem from one the papers is:
Sure organocatalysis has yet not matured enough to work out a consistent terminology (ie. what does "bifunctional catalysis" mean) but the basics of the science of organic chemistry must still apply.
T.S. Hall
No comments:
Post a Comment