Abstract
The authors of a recent paper (J. Mol Struc. 1202 (2020) 127237) claim to have grown a so-called ‘urea hexanedioic acid’ (UHA) cocrystal by the slow evaporation of an aqueous solution containing equimolar amounts of urea and hexanedioic acid. In this comment, many points of criticism, concerning the crystal growth, single crystal data, IR spectrum and theoretical study of the so called UHA crystal are highlighted to prove that the title paper is completely erroneous.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
