Takron
Harmless
Posts: 47
Registered: 19-5-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Types of Glucose?
I was looking into purchasing some glucose to do some reduction experiments and to make some Tollens Reagent. But when I went to purchase some I got
hit with a bit of a quandary. I was not aware there were different kinds of glucose?
There were three different kinds offered and non were mentioned in the processes of the reactions I wanted to do.
D-(+)-Glucose, anhydrous
D-(+)-Glucose monohydrate
L-(-)-Glucose, anhydrous
I know what the anhydrous and monohydrate means but what one would be best for using the the aforementioned reactions?
|
|
|
Magpie
lab constructor
Posts: 5939
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.
|
|
Those must be reagent grade and are enantiomers. For a reducing sugar I would not waste my money on reagents, but instead just buy some fructose at
the health food store. 
The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
|
|
|
Ozone
International Hazard
Posts: 1269
Registered: 28-7-2005
Location: Good Olde USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Integrated
|
|
D or L nomenclature refers to the hydroxyl connected to the penultimate carbon in the chain. When laid out in a Fischer projection, this hydroxyl will
be right (D) or left (L). The consequences are real as your enzymes can't work with L sugars. In general, in nature we see D-sugars and L-amino acids.
Despite the names, D = dextrorotatory or L = laevorotatory, the designation in no way predicts optical rotation. For example, D-glucose rotates light
by about +53° and D-fructose by -92°. The designation was made originally for glyceraldehyde, for which it is accurate (eg. D = clockwise and L =
counterclockwise). These must also not be confused with R or S designations.
L-glucose is just as reductive (the aldehyde group is the same) it's just VERY much more expensive (and completely unnecessary).
I'd go with the anhydrous D-form (to make everything simple and more compatable with organic solvents/reagents). As a simple reducing agent, the
monohydrate is just as good, just be sure to account for the water to keep your stoichiometry straight.
When making aqueous solutions, be sure to stir rigorously and made small additions--otherwise, the anhydrous material will make a brick as it
hydrates. Saturation at rt is ~50 g solids/100g (aq).
O3
-Anyone who never made a mistake never tried anything new.
--Albert Einstein
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5104
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Magpie  | | Those must be reagent grade and are enantiomers. For a reducing sugar I would not waste my money on reagents, but instead just buy some fructose at
the health food store. |
And what would you use the fructose for? It's not a reducing sugar. Glucose is cheap and works. I agree that buying reagent grade stuff would be a
waste of money but fructose would be an even bigger waste
|
|
|
ScienceSquirrel
International Hazard
Posts: 1863
Registered: 18-6-2008
Location: Brittany
Member Is Offline
Mood: Dogs are pets but cats are little furry humans with four feet and self determination! 
|
|
Glucose monohydrate is cheaply and readily available at most pharmacies, supermarkets and home brew shops.
It will be food or pharmacopia grade so will be pure enough for almoat all purposes. The monohydrate does not clump so much when added to water.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
