New domino‐reaction for the synthesis of N4‐(5‐aryl‐1,3‐oxathiol‐2‐yliden)‐2‐phenylquinazolin‐4‐amines and 4‐[4‐aryl‐5‐(2‐phenylquinazolin‐4‐yl)‐1,3‐thiazol‐2‐yl]morpholine

The model morpholine‐1‐carbothioic acid (2‐phenyl‐3H‐quinazolin‐4‐ylidene) amide (1) reacts with phenacyl bromides to afford N⁴‐(5‐aryl‐1,3‐oxathiol‐2‐yliden)‐2‐phenylquinazolin‐4‐amines (4) or N⁴‐(4,5‐diphenyl‐1,3‐oxathiol‐2‐yliden)‐2‐phenyl‐4‐aminoquinazoline ( 5 ) by a thermodynamically controlled reversible reaction favoring the enolate intermediate, while the 4‐[4‐aryl‐5‐(2‐phenylquinazolin‐4‐yl)‐1,3‐thiazol‐2‐yl]morpholine ( 8 ) was produced by a kinetically controlled reaction favoring the C‐anion intermediate. ¹H nmr, ¹³C nmr, ir, mass spectroscopy and x‐ray identified compounds ( 4 ), ( 5 ) and ( 8 ).     

Similarities and differences in the structures of 5‐bromo‐6‐hydroxy‐7,8‐dimethylchroman‐2‐one and 6‐hydroxy‐7,8‐dimethyl‐5‐nitrochroman‐2‐one

The title compounds, C₁₁H₁₁BrO₃, (I), and C₁₁H₁₁NO₅, (II), respectively, are derivatives of 6‐hydroxy‐5,7,8‐trimethylchroman‐2‐one substituted at the 5‐position by a Br atom in (I) and by a nitro group in (II). The pyranone rings in both molecules adopt half‐chair conformations, and intramolecular O—H...Br [in (I)] and O—H...O_nitro [in (II)] hydrogen bonds affect the dispositions of the hydroxy groups. Classical intermolecular O—H...O hydrogen bonds are found in both molecules but play quite dissimilar roles in the crystal structures. In (I), O—H...O hydrogen bonds form zigzag C(9) chains of molecules along the a axis. Because of the tetragonal symmetry, similar chains also form along b. In (II), however, similar contacts involving an O atom of the nitro group form inversion dimers and generate R₂²(12) rings. These also result in a close intermolecular O...O contact of 2.686 (4) Å. For (I), four additional C—H...O hydrogen bonds combine with π–π stacking interactions between the benzene rings to build an extensive three‐dimensional network with molecules stacked along the c axis. The packing in (II) is much simpler and centres on the inversion dimers formed through O—H...O contacts. These dimers are stacked through additional C—H...O hydrogen bonds, and further weak C—H...O interactions generate a three‐dimensional network of dimer stacks.     

4‐(2‐Hydroxyphenyl)‐2‐phenyl‐2,3‐dihydro‐1H‐1,5‐benzodiazepine and the 2‐(2,3‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐, 2‐(3,4‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐ and 2‐(2,5‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐substituted derivatives

The 1,5‐benzodiazepine ring system exhibits a puckered boat‐like conformation for all four title compounds [4‐(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐2‐phenyl‐2,3‐dihydro‐1H‐1,5‐benzodiazepine, C₂₁H₁₈N₂O, (I), 2‐(2,3‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐4‐(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐2,3‐dihydro‐1H‐1,5‐benzodiazepine, C₂₃H₂₂N₂O₃, (II), 2‐(3,4‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐4‐(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐2,3‐dihydro‐1H‐1,5‐benzodiazepine, C₂₃H₂₂N₂O₃, (III), and 2‐(2,5‐dimethoxyphenyl)‐4‐(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐2,3‐dihydro‐1H‐1,5‐benzodiazepine, C₂₃H₂₂N₂O₃, (IV)]. The stereochemical correlation of the two C₆ aromatic groups with respect to the benzodiazepine ring system is pseudo‐equatorial–equatorial for compounds (I) (the phenyl group), (II) (the 2,3‐dimethoxyphenyl group) and (III) (the 3,4‐dimethoxyphenyl group), while for (IV) (the 2,5‐dimethoxyphenyl group) the system is pseudo‐axial–equatorial. An intramolecular hydrogen bond between the hydroxyl OH group and a benzodiazepine N atom is present for all four compounds and defines a six‐membered ring, whose geometry is constant across the series. Although the molecular structures are similar, the supramolecular packing is different; compounds (I) and (IV) form chains, while (II) forms dimeric units and (III) displays a layered structure. The packing seems to depend on at least two factors: (i) the nature of the atoms defining the hydrogen bond and (ii) the number of intermolecular interactions of the types O—H...O, N—H...O, N—H...π(arene) or C—H...π(arene).     

Synthesis of 15‐Cyano‐12‐oxopentadecano‐15‐lactone and 15‐Cyano‐ 12‐oxopentadecano‐15‐lactam

15‐Cyano‐12‐oxopentadecano‐15‐lactone was synthesized in 59% total yield starting from 2‐nitrocyclododecanone by Michael addition to acrylaldehyde, followed by reaction with trimethylsilylcyanide, hydrolysis, ring‐expansion, and Nef reaction. A two‐step, one‐pot synthesis of intermediate 2‐hydroxy‐4‐(1‐nitro‐2‐oxycyclododecyl)butanenitrile from 3‐(1‐nitro‐2‐oxocyclododecyl)propanal was developed and the conditions for the Nef reaction were studied. 15‐Cyano‐12‐oxopentadecano‐15‐lactam was synthesized in 40% total yield starting from 2‐nitrocyclododecanone by Michael addition to acrylaldehyde, followed by Strecker reaction, ring‐expansion, and Nef reaction. The conditions for the Strecker and Nef reactions were studied. The structures of the target compounds, intermediates, and by‐product were characterized by IR, ¹H‐ and ¹³C‐NMR, and elemental analysis or MS.     

4‐Ethynyl‐4‐hydroxycyclohexan‐1‐one and 4‐ethynyl‐4‐hydroxy‐2,3,5,6‐tetramethylcyclohexa‐2,5‐dien‐1‐one

The title compounds, C₈H₁₀O₂, (I), and C₁₂H₁₄O₂, (II), occurred as by‐products in the controlled synthesis of a series of bis­(gem‐alkynols), prepared as part of an extensive study of synthon formation in simple gem‐alkynol derivatives. The two 4‐(gem‐alkynol)‐1‐ones crystallize in space group P2₁/c, (I) with Z′ = 1 and (II) with Z′ = 2. Both structures are dominated by O—H?O=C hydrogen bonds, which form simple chains in the cyclo­hexane derivative, (I), and centrosymmetric dimers, of both symmetry‐independent mol­ecules, in the cyclo­hexa‐2,5‐diene, (II). These strong synthons are further stabilized by C[triple‐bond]C—H?O=C, C_methylene—H?O(H) and C_methyl—H?O(H) interactions. The direct intermolecular interactions between donors and acceptors in the gem‐alkynol group, which characterize the bis­(gem‐alkynol) analogues of (I) and (II), are not present in the ketone derivatives studied here.     

rac‐5‐Diphenylacetyl‐2,2,4‐trimethyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1,5‐benzothiazepine and rac‐5‐formyl‐2,2,4‐trimethyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1,5‐benzothiazepine

rac‐5‐Diphenylacetyl‐2,2,4‐trimethyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1,5‐benzothiazepine, C₂₆H₂₇NOS, (I), and rac‐5‐formyl‐2,2,4‐trimethyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1,5‐benzothiazepine, C₁₃H₁₇NOS, (II), are both characterized by a planar configuration around the heterocyclic N atom. In contrast with the chair conformation of the parent benzothiazepine, which has no substituents at the heterocyclic N atom, the seven‐membered ring adopts a boat conformation in (I) and a conformation intermediate between boat and twist‐boat in (II). The molecules lack a symmetry plane, indicating distortions from the perfect boat or twist‐boat conformations. The supramolecular architectures are significantly different, depending in (I) on C—H...O interactions and intermolecular S...S contacts, and in (II) on a single aromatic π–π stacking interaction.     

4‐(4‐Fluoro‐3‐phenoxy­phen­yl)‐6‐(4‐fluoro­phen­yl)‐2‐oxo‐1,2‐dihydro­pyridine‐3‐carbonitrile and the 6‐(4‐methyl­phen­yl)‐ analogue

The crystal structures of the title compounds, viz. C₂₄H₁₄F₂N₂O₂, (I), and C₂₅H₁₇FN₂O₂, (II), respectively, have been determined in order to unravel the role of an ordered F atom in generating stable supra­molecular assemblies. On changing the substitution from fluorine to a methyl group, C—H⋯F inter­actions are replaced by C—H⋯π inter­actions, revealing the importance of such weak inter­actions when present alongside N—H⋯O and C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds. The dihedral angle between the planes of the 4‐fluoro­phenyl ring and the pyridine ring is 26.8 (1)° in (I), while that between the planes of the 4‐methyl­phenyl and pyridine rings is 29.5 (1)° in (II).     

Polymorphism of 3‐(5‐phenyl‐1,3,4‐oxadiazol‐2‐yl)‐ and 3‐[5‐(pyridin‐4‐yl)‐1,3,4‐oxadiazol‐2‐yl]‐2H‐chromen‐2‐ones

This study of 3‐(5‐phenyl‐1,3,4‐oxadiazol‐2‐yl)‐2H‐chromen‐2‐one, C₁₇H₁₀N₂O₃, 1 , and 3‐[5‐(pyridin‐4‐yl)‐1,3,4‐oxadiazol‐2‐yl]‐2H‐chromen‐2‐one, C₁₆H₉N₃O₃, 2 , was performed on the assumption of the potential anticancer activity of the compounds. Three polymorphic structures for 1 and two polymorphic structures for 2 have been studied thoroughly. The strongest intermolecular interaction is stacking of the `head‐to‐head' type in all the studied crystals. The polymorphic structures of 1 differ with respect to the intermolecular interactions between stacked columns. Two of the polymorphs have a columnar or double columnar type of crystal organization, while the third polymorphic structure can be classified as columnar‐layered. The difference between the two structures of 2 is less pronounced. Both crystals can be considered as having very similar arrangements of neighbouring columns. The formation of polymorphic modifications is caused by a subtle balance of very weak intermolecular interactions and packing differences can be identified only using an analysis based on a study of the pairwise interaction energies.     

An Innovative Protocol for the Synthesis of 3‐(Pyridin‐2‐yl)‐5‐sec‐aminobiphenyl‐4‐carbonitriles and 9,10‐Dihydro‐3‐(pyridine‐2‐yl)‐1‐sec‐aminophenanthrene‐2‐carbonitriles

Herein, we present an innovative, novel, and highly convenient protocol for the synthesis of 3‐(pyridin‐2‐yl)‐5‐sec‐aminobiphenyl‐4‐carbonitriles ( 6a , 6b , 6c , 6d , 6e , 6f , 6g ) and 9,10‐dihydro‐3‐(pyridine‐2‐yl)‐1‐sec‐aminophenanthrene‐2‐carbonitriles ( 10a , 10b , 10c , 10d , 10e ), which have been delineated from the reaction of 4‐sec‐amino‐2‐oxo‐6‐aryl‐2H‐pyran‐3‐carbonitrile ( 4a , 4b , 4c , 4d , 4e , 4f , 4g ) and 4‐sec‐amino‐2‐oxo‐5,6‐dihydro‐2H‐benzo[h]chromene‐3‐carbonitriles ( 9a , 9b , 9c , 9d , 9e ) with 2‐acetylpyridine ( 5 ) through the ring transformation reaction by using KOH/DMF system at RT. The salient feature of this procedure is to provide a transition metal‐free route for the synthesis of asymmetrical 1,3‐teraryls like 3‐(pyridin‐2‐yl)‐5‐sec‐aminobiphenyl‐4‐carbonitriles ( 6a , 6b , 6c , 6d , 6e , 6f , 6g ) and 9,10‐dihydro‐3‐(pyridine‐2‐yl)‐1‐sec‐aminophenanthrene‐2‐carbonitriles ( 10a , 10b , 10c , 10d , 10e ). The novelty of the reaction lies in the creation of an aromatic ring from 2H‐pyran‐2‐ones and 2H‐benzo[h]chromene‐3‐carbonitriles via two‐carbon insertion from 2‐acetylpyridine ( 5 ) used as a source of carbanion.     

6,6‐Diphenyl‐6,7‐dihydro‐5H‐1,3,4,8‐tetrathia‐6‐stannazulene‐2‐thione and 6,6′‐spirobi[6,7‐dihydro‐5H‐1,3,4,8‐tetrathia‐6‐stannazulene]‐2,2′‐dithione

The title compounds, [Sn(C₆H₅)₂(C₅H₄S₅)] and [Sn(C₅H₄S₅)₂], respectively, are of interest because they can be regarded as intermediate in nature between chelates and heterocyclic compounds containing the C₃S₅ fragment. In contrast with the essentially normal bond lengths and angles within the mol­ecules, the molecular conformations are somewhat unexpected, as are the intermolecular contacts found in the case of the latter compound.     

7‐Iodo‐8‐aza‐7‐deaza‐2′‐deoxy­adenosine and 7‐bromo‐8‐aza‐7‐deaza‐2′‐deoxyadenosine

The isomorphous structures of the title molecules, 4‐amino‐1‐(2‐deoxy‐β‐d ‐erythro‐pento­furan­osyl)‐3‐iodo‐1H‐pyrazolo‐[3,4‐d]pyrimidine, (I), C₁₀H₁₂IN₅O₃, and 4‐amino‐3‐bromo‐1‐(2‐deoxy‐β‐d ‐erythro‐pento­furan­osyl)‐1H‐pyrazolo[3,4‐d]­pyrimidine, (II), C₁₀H₁₂BrN₅O₃, have been determined. The sugar puckering of both compounds is C1′‐endo (^1′E). The N‐­glycosidic bond torsion angle χ¹ is in the high‐anti range [?73.2 (4)° for (I) and ?74.1 (4)° for (II)] and the crystal structure is stabilized by hydrogen bonds.     

Synthesis and Solid‐state Reaction of 1‐[3′‐(Benzotriazol‐2″‐yl)‐4′ ‐hydroxybenzoyl]‐3‐methyl‐5‐pyrazolones

A new kind of UV stabilizers, 1‐(3′‐(benzotriazol‐2″‐yl)‐4′‐hydroxy‐benzoyl)‐3‐methyl‐5‐pyrazolones (1a‐d), was synthesized with the aim to bind them chemically to certain polymers. The reaction of 1d with substituted benzaldehydes 4 in the molten state at 150°C and in the solid state at room temperature produced the condensation products l‐(3′‐(5″‐chlorobenzotriazol‐2″‐yl)‐4′‐hydroxyl‐5′‐chlorobenzoyl)‐3‐methyl‐4‐arylmethylene‐5‐pyrazolones (2) and 4,4′‐arylmethylene‐bis [1‐(3′‐(5″‐chloro‐benzotriazol‐2″‐yl)‐4′‐hydroxy‐5′‐chloro‐benzoyl)‐3‐methyl‐5‐pyrazolone] s (3), respectively, as the major product. On the other hand, the reaction of 1d with 4 at 50°C in chloroform solution proceeded non‐selectively to give a mixture of 2 and 3.     

5‐Acetyl‐2‐amino‐6‐methyl‐4‐(3‐nitrophenyl)‐4H‐pyran‐3‐carbonitrile and 2‐amino‐5‐ethoxycarbonyl‐6‐methyl‐4‐(3‐nitrophenyl)‐4H‐pyrano‐3‐carbonitrile

The structures of the title compounds, C₁₅H₁₃N₃O₄, (I), and C₁₆H₁₅N₃O₅ [IUPAC name: ethyl 6‐amino‐5‐cyano‐2‐methyl‐4‐(3‐nitro­phenyl)‐4H‐pyrano‐3‐carboxyl­ate], (II), are very similar, with the heterocyclic rings adopting boat conformations. The pseudo‐axial m‐nitro­phenyl substituents are rotated by 84.0 (1) and 98.7 (1)° in (I) and (II), respectively, with respect to the four coplanar atoms of the boat. The dihedral angles between the phenyl rings and nitro groups are 12.1 (2) and 8.4 (2)° in (I) and (II), respectively. The two compounds have similar patterns of intermolecular N—H?O and N—H?N hydrogen bonding, which link mol­ecules into infinite tapes along b .     

Syntheses of 1‐(4‐methylsulfonylphenyl)‐5‐aryl‐1,2,3‐triazoles and ‐(4‐aminosulfonylphenyl)‐5‐aryl‐1,2,3‐triazoles

Condensation of 4‐methylsulfonylaniline with aryl aldehyde in ethanol‐tetrahydrofuran afforded the imino compound 3 . 1,3‐Cycloaddtion of diazomethane with compound 3 followed by oxidazation of the triazoline 4 with potassium permanganate gave 1‐(4‐methylsulfonylphenyl)‐5‐aryl‐1,2,3‐triazoles 5 . Similarly, condensation of 4‐(N,N‐dibenzylaminosulfonyl)aniline with aryl aldehyde followed by 1,3‐cycloaddition of diazomethane with the imino compound 11 and the subsequent oxidation of triazoline 12 with potassium permanganate yielded the triazole 13 . Debenzylation of compound 13 with sulfuric acid gave the desired compound 1‐(4‐aminosulfonylphenyl)5‐aryl‐1,2,3‐triazoles 14 .     

Synthesis and antimicrobial activity of novel 2‐(aryl)‐3‐[5‐(2‐oxo‐2H‐3‐chromenyl)‐1,3‐oxazol‐2‐yl]‐1,3‐thiazolan‐4‐ones

A series of novel 2‐(aryl)‐3‐[5‐(2‐oxo‐2H‐3‐chromenyl)‐1,3‐oxazol‐2‐yl]‐1,3‐thiazolan‐4‐ones 4a , 4b , 4c , 4e , 4f , 4g , 4h , 4i , 4j have been synthesized and assayed for their antibacterial activity against Gram‐positive bacteria viz. Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6633), Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 6538p), Micrococcus luteus (IFC 12708), and Gram‐negative bacteria viz. Proteus vulgaris (ATCC 3851), Salmonella typhimurium (ATCC 14028), Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922), and also antifungal activity against Candida albicans (ATCC 10231), Aspergillus fumigatus (HIC 6094), Trichophyton rubrum (IFO 9185), and Trichophyton mentagrophytes (IFO 40996). Among the screened compounds, 4d , 4e , 4f , 4g , and 4j exhibited potent inhibitory activity compared with the standard drug at the tested concentrations. The results reveal that, the presence of difluorophenyl in 4f and pipernyl ring in 4j at 2‐position of thiazolidine‐4‐one ring show significant inhibitory activity. The other compounds also showed appreciable activity against the test bacteria and fungi and emerged as potential molecules for further development. J. Heterocyclic Chem., 2011.     

Synthesis and characterization of 4‐aryl‐5‐(1‐aryl‐2‐methyl‐2‐nitropropyl)‐1,2,3‐selenadiazoles

The synthesis of a new set of selenadiazoles, 4‐aryl‐5‐(1‐aryl‐2‐methyl‐2‐nitropropyl)‐1,2,3‐selenadiazoles ( 4 ) derived from 2‐[4‐methyl‐4‐nitro‐1,3‐diarylpentylidene]‐1‐hydrazinecarboxamide ( 3 ) has been reported. THF has been found to be the solvent of choice for this reaction. Structural features of 3 and 4 have been analyzed by NMR and X‐ray techniques.