Why isn't the glycosidic bond in sucrose! named alpha and beta since it is between two anomeric Cs? (still an open question) Most sources refer to it as being an alpha 1,2 linkage. Also, is it fair to assume that if the higher priority substituents on the anomeric and configurational Cs are cis (as represented on a Haworth projection) the molecule will always be beta and vice versa? (I figured this one out)
Thanks!
Edit: Another quick question. I know that we're effectively flipping the Haworth projection for fructose when we draw sucrose and that this changes the numbering and orientation of the substituents. Will there ever be an instance in which the Haworth projection for glucose is similarly manipulated? I feel like that would be harder to do because the Haworth projection for glucose is less symmetric. (I figured this one out as well)
Thanks!
Edit: Another quick question. I know that we're effectively flipping the Haworth projection for fructose when we draw sucrose and that this changes the numbering and orientation of the substituents. Will there ever be an instance in which the Haworth projection for glucose is similarly manipulated? I feel like that would be harder to do because the Haworth projection for glucose is less symmetric. (I figured this one out as well)
Last edited: