2,3‐Dihydro‐1,3‐benzothiazol‐2‐iminium monohydrogen sulfate and 2‐iminio‐2,3‐dihydro‐1,3‐benzothiazole‐6‐sulfonate: a combined structural and theoretical study

The 2‐aminobenzothiazole sulfonation intermediate 2,3‐dihydro‐1,3‐benzothiazol‐2‐iminium monohydrogen sulfate, C₇H₇N₂S⁺·HSO₄⁻, (I), and the final product 2‐iminio‐2,3‐dihydro‐1,3‐benzothiazole‐6‐sulfonate, C₇H₆N₂O₃S₂, (II), both have the endocyclic N atom protonated; compound (I) exists as an ion pair and (II) forms a zwitterion. Intermolecular N—H...O and O—H...O hydrogen bonds are seen in both structures, with bonding energy (calculated on the basis of density functional theory) ranging from 1.06 to 14.15 kcal mol⁻¹. Hydrogen bonding in (I) and (II) creates DDDD and C(8)C(9)C(9) first‐level graph sets, respectively. Face‐to‐face stacking interactions are observed in both (I) and (II), but they are extremely weak.     

Conformational Study of Heteropentapeptides Containing an α‐Ethylated α,α‐Disubstituted Amino Acid: (S)‐Butylethylglycine (=2‐Amino‐2‐ethylhexanoic Acid) within a Sequence of Dimethylglycine (=2‐Aminoisobutyric Acid) Residues

Heteropentapeptides containing the α‐ethylated α,α‐disubstituted amino acid (S)‐butylethylglycine and four dimethylglycine residues, i.e., CF₃CO‐[(S)‐Beg]‐(Aib)₄‐OEt ( 4 ) and CF₃CO‐(Aib)₂‐[(S)‐Beg]‐(Aib)₂‐OEt ( 7 ), were synthesized by conventional solution methods. In the solid state, the preferred conformation of 4 was shown to be both a right‐handed (P) and a left‐handed (M) 3₁₀‐helical structure, and that of 7 was a right‐handed (P) 3₁₀‐helical structure. IR, CD, and ¹H‐NMR spectra revealed that the dominant conformation of both 4 and 7 in solution was the 3₁₀‐helical structure. These conformations were also supported by molecular‐mechanics calculations.     

Synthesis and crystal structures of two structurally related kryptoracemates

Kryptoracemates are racemic compounds (pairs of enantiomers) that crystallize in Sohnke space groups (space groups that contain neither inversion centres nor mirror or glide planes nor rotoinversion axes). Thus, the two symmetry‐independent molecules cannot be transformed into one another by any symmetry element present in the crystal structure. Usually, the conformation of the two enantiomers is rather similar if not identical. Sometimes, the two enantiomers are related by a pseudosymmetry element, which is often a pseudocentre of inversion, because inversion symmetry is thought to be favourable for crystal packing. We obtained crystals of two kryptoracemates of two very similar compounds differing in just one residue, namely rac‐N‐[(1S ,2R ,3S )‐2‐methyl‐3‐(5‐methylfuran‐2‐yl)‐1‐phenyl‐3‐(pivalamido)propyl]benzamide, C₂₇H₃₂N₂O₃, (I), and rac‐N‐[(1S ,2S ,3R )‐2‐methyl‐3‐(5‐methylfuran‐2‐yl)‐1‐phenyl‐3‐(propionamido)propyl]benzamide dichloromethane hemisolvate, C₂₅H₂₈N₂O₃·0.5CH₂Cl₂, (II). The crystals of both compounds contain both enantiomers of these chiral molecules. However, since the space groups [P 2₁2₁2₁ for (I) and P 1 for (II)] contain neither inversion centres nor mirror or glide planes nor rotoinversion axes, there are both enantiomers in the asymmetric unit, which is a rather uncommon phenomenon. In addition, it is remarkable that (II) contains two pairs of enantiomers in the asymmetric unit. In the crystal, molecules are connected by intermolecular N—H…O hydrogen bonds to form chains or layered structures.     

Decoupled Spin Crossover and Structural Phase Transition in a Molecular Iron(II) Complex

Crystalline [Fe(bppSMe)₂][BF₄]₂ ( 1 ; bppSMe=4‐(methylsulfanyl)‐2,6‐di(pyrazol‐1‐yl)pyridine) undergoes an abrupt spin‐crossover (SCO) event at 265±5 K. The crystals also undergo a separate phase transition near 205 K, involving a contraction of the unit‐cell a axis to one‐third of its original value (high‐temperature phase 1; Pbcn, Z=12; low‐temperature phase 2; Pbcn, Z=4). The SCO‐active phase 1 contains two unique molecular environments, one of which appears to undergo SCO more gradually than the other. In contrast, powder samples of 1 retain phase 1 between 140–300 K, although their SCO behaviour is essentially identical to the single crystals. The compounds [Fe(bppBr)₂][BF₄]₂ ( 2 ; bppBr=4‐bromo‐2,6‐di(pyrazol‐1‐yl)pyridine) and [Fe(bppI)₂][BF₄]₂ ( 3 ; bppI=4‐iodo‐2,6‐di(pyrazol‐1‐yl)‐pyridine) exhibit more gradual SCO near room temperature, and adopt phase 2 in both spin states. Comparison of 1 – 3 reveals that the more cooperative spin transition in 1 , and its separate crystallographic phase transition, can both be attributed to an intermolecular steric interaction involving the methylsulfanyl substituents. All three compounds exhibit the light‐induced excited‐spin‐state trapping (LIESST) effect with T(LIESST=70–80 K), but show complicated LIESST relaxation kinetics involving both weakly cooperative (exponential) and strongly cooperative (sigmoidal) components.     

Eight Schiff bases derived from various salicylaldehydes: phenol–imine and keto–amine forms,conformational disorder,and supramolecular assembly in one and two dimensions

Structures are reported for eight Schiff bases derived from various salicylaldehydes: five are newly synthesized and re‐investigations are reported for three previously reported structures, leading, in each case, to some revision of previous conclusions. In (E)‐N‐(3,4‐dimethylisoxazol‐5‐yl)‐4‐[(2‐hydroxybenzylidene)amino]benzenesulfonamide, C₁₈H₁₇N₃O₄S, (I), and (E)‐4‐[(5‐bromo‐2‐hydroxy‐3‐methoxybenzylidene)amino]‐N‐(3,4‐dimethylisoxazol‐5‐yl)benzenesulfonamide. C₁₉H₁₈BrN₃O₅S, (II), the isoxazole rings adopt different orientations relative to the rest of the molecules, despite the additional substituents in (II) being in the aryl ring remote from the isoxazole unit. The molecules of both (E)‐4‐bromo‐2‐[(2‐hydroxyphenylimino)methyl]‐6‐methoxyphenol, C₁₄H₁₂BrNO₃, (III), and (E)‐4‐bromo‐2‐methoxy‐6‐[(2‐methoxyphenylimino)methyl]phenol, C₁₅H₁₄BrNO₃, (IV), are both effectively planar; while (III) adopts the phenol–imine constitution, (IV) adopts the keto–amine constitution. (E)‐2‐Methoxy‐6‐[(2‐methoxyphenylimino)methyl]phenol, C₁₅H₁₅NO₃, (V), which was determined previously using powder X‐ray data assuming the phenol–imine constitution, has now been refined from single‐crystal X‐ray data, confirming the phenol–imine constitution. In (E)‐3‐benzoyl‐2‐[(5‐fluoro‐2‐hydroxybenzylidene)amino]‐4,5,6,7‐tetrahydrobenzo[b]thiophene, C₂₂H₁₈FNO₂S, (VI), the fused carbocyclic ring exhibits conformational disorder; both disorder components, having populations of 0.705 (4) and 0.295 (4), adopt half‐chair conformations. The isostructural (E)‐3‐benzoyl‐2‐[(2‐hydroxybenzylidene)amino)]‐4,5,6,7‐tetrahydrobenzo[b]thiophene, C₂₂H₁₉NO₂S, (VII), which was originally reported as having a fully ordered structure [Kaur et al. (2014). Acta Cryst. E 70 , o476–o477], has been rerefined using the original data set and found to exhibit the same type of disorder as found in (VI), with disordered populations having occupancies of 0.851 (3) and 0.149 (3). The triclinic polymorph of (E)‐[(2‐hydroxyphenylimino)methyl]phenol, C₁₃H₁₁NO₂, (VIII), which crystallizes with Z′ = 2 in the space group P, has been described variously as occurring as the keto–amine tautomer [Maciejewska et al. (1999). J. Phys. Org. Chem. 12 , 875–880] and as the phenol–imine tautomer [Tunç et al. (2009). J. Chem. Crystallogr. 39 , 672–676]. Rerefinement of this structure using one of the original data sets shows that both of the independent molecules exist in the keto–amine form. In the structures of compounds (I), (VI), (VII) and (VIII), hydrogen bonds generate simple chains, while a chain of rings is formed in (V). Sheets are formed by hydrogen bonds in both (II) and (III), while in (IV), the sheet structure is built from aromatic π–π stacking interactions.     

[Cu(bpp)2(bpdc)(H2O)2]×2H2O and [Cu(bpp)2](tdc)×7.5H2O的合成、晶体结构和热稳定性

在室温下, 由Cu(NO3)2 、1,3 -二（4 -吡啶基）丙烷(bpp)、4,4 ’ -联苯二甲酸(H2bpdc)和2,5-噻吩二甲酸(H2tdc)制备出两种新型铜( II)配位聚合物[Cu(bpp)2(bpdc)(H2O)2]n·2nH2O, 1 和[Cu(bpp)2]n·n(tdc) 7.5nH2O, 2。两个配位聚合物均为一维线型结构,铜原子均采取变形的八面体结构,在轴线方向上的两个水分子与铜原子存在较弱的配位作用。在配合物1中,两个bpdc羧酸根离子与铜原子配位,而2中的tdc羧酸离子没有与铜原子键合,只是作为反离子平衡电荷。在两个产物中, 配体bpp具有不同的构象。热重分析表明配合物1与2分别在110°C和160°C以下是稳定的。     

Synthesis,characterization, effect of architecture on crystallization,and spherulitic growth of poly(L‐lactide)‐b‐poly(ethylene oxide) copolymers with different branch arms

Well‐defined poly(L ‐lactide)‐b‐poly(ethylene oxide) (PLLA‐b‐PEO) copolymers with different branch arms were synthesized via the controlled ring‐opening polymerization of L ‐lactide followed by a coupling reaction with carboxyl‐terminated poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO); these copolymers included both star‐shaped copolymers having four arms (4sPLLA‐b‐PEO) and six arms (6sPLLA‐b‐PEO) and linear analogues having one arm (LPLLA‐b‐PEO) and two arms (2LPLLA‐b‐PEO). The maximal melting point, cold‐crystallization temperature, and degree of crystallinity (X_c) of the poly(L ‐lactide) (PLLA) block within PLLA‐b‐PEO decreased as the branch arm number increased, whereas X_c of the PEO block within the copolymers inversely increased. This was mainly attributed to the relatively decreasing arm length ratio of PLLA to PEO, which resulted in various PLLA crystallization effects restricting the PEO block. These results indicated that both the PLLA and PEO blocks within the block copolymers mutually influenced each other, and the crystallization of both the PLLA and PEO blocks within the PLLA‐b‐PEO copolymers could be adjusted through both the branch arm number and the arm length of each block. Moreover, the spherulitic growth rate (G) decreased as the branch arm number increased: G_{6sPLLA‐b‐PEO} < G_{4sPLLA‐b‐PEO} < G_{2LPLLA‐b‐PEO} < G_{LPLLA‐b‐PEO}. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem 44: 2034–2044, 2006     

Palladium‐MOP Chemistry: Pseudo‐cis‐Allyl MOP Complexes and Flexible Olefin Bonding. Preliminary Communication

We show that both palladium(0) and palladium(II) metal centers are capable of coordinating two monodentate MOP (=(R)‐2‐(diarylphosphino)‐1,1′‐binaphthalene) ligands in a pseudo‐cis orientation, despite published statements to the contrary. In addition to [Pd(η³‐C₃H₅)(MeO? MOP)₂]BF₄ (MeO? MOP=(R)‐2‐(diphenylphosphino)‐2′‐methoxy‐1,1′‐binaphthalene), the first examples of chiral bis κC¹‐prop‐2‐enyl (η¹‐CH₂CH?CH₂) complexes [cis‐Pd(κC¹‐C₃H₅)₂(MeO? MOP or MOP)₂], are shown to be relatively stable. Further, coordinated MOP and MeO? MOP both show stronger propensity towards novel intramolecular π‐olefin complexation than the CN? MOP analogue. The solid‐state structure of [Pd(fumaronitrile)(MOP)₂] is reported.     

Exo conformers of N‐(pyridin‐2‐yl)‐ and N‐(pyridin‐3‐yl)norbornene‐5,6‐dicarboximide crystals

Two isomeric pyridine‐substituted norbornenedicarboximide derivatives, namely N‐(pyridin‐2‐yl)‐exo‐norbornene‐5,6‐dicarboximide, (I), and N‐(pyridin‐3‐yl)‐exo‐norbornene‐5,6‐dicarboximide, (II), both C₁₄H₁₂N₂O₄, have been crystallized and their structures unequivocally determined by single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction. The molecules consist of norbornene moieties fused to a dicarboximide ring substituted at the N atom by either pyridin‐2‐yl or pyridin‐3‐yl in an anti configuration with respect to the double bond, thus affording exo isomers. In both compounds, the asymmetric unit consists of two independent molecules (Z′ = 2). In compound (I), the pyridine rings of the two independent molecules adopt different conformations, i.e. syn and anti, with respect to the methylene bridge. The intermolecular contacts of (I) are dominated by C—H...O interactions. In contrast, in compound (II), the pyridine rings of both molecules have an anti conformation and the two independent molecules are linked by carbonyl–carbonyl interactions, as well as by C—H...O and C—H...N contacts.     

2,6‐Di­benzyl‐1,2,3,5,6,7‐hexa­hydro‐2,4,6,8‐tetra­aza‐s‐indacene and 2,6‐bis(4‐methoxy­benzyl)‐1,2,3,5,6,7‐hexa­hydro‐2,4,6,8‐tetra­aza‐s‐indacene

The title compounds, C₂₂H₂₂N₄ and C₂₄H₂₆N₄O₂ [alternative names: 2,6‐dibenzyl‐2,3,6,7‐tetrahydro‐1H,5H‐dipyrrolo[3,4‐b; 3′,4′‐e]pyrazine and 2,6‐bis(4‐methoxybenzyl)‐2,3,6,7‐tetrahydro‐1H,5H‐dipyrolo[3,4‐b;3′,4′‐e]pyrazine], two 1,2,3,5,6,7‐hexa­hydro‐2,4,6,8‐tetra­aza‐s‐indacene derivatives, are both centrosymmetric and have similar S‐shaped structures. In the former, there are two independent mol­ecules (A and B), both of which possess C_i symmetry. These two mol­ecules are arranged such that the benzene ring substituent of mol­ecule B is directed towards the plane of the benzene ring substituent of mol­ecule A, with a dihedral angle of 55.4 (2)° between their planes. The shortest C—H⋯C distance is, however, only 3.21 (1) Å. In both compounds, the benzene ring substituents are almost perpendicular to the plane of the central pyrazine ring, and the pyrrolidine rings have perfect envelope conformations. In the crystal structures of both compounds, the mol­ecules pack in a herring‐bone arrangement.     

5‐Ethynyl‐2′‐deoxycytidine: a DNA building block with a `clickable' side chain

The title compound [systematic name: 4‐amino‐1‐(2‐deoxy‐β‐d ‐erythro‐pentofuranosyl)‐5‐ethynylpyrimidin‐2(1H)‐one], C₁₁H₁₃N₃O₄, shows two conformations in the crystalline state. The N‐glycosylic bonds of both conformers adopt similar conformations, with χ = −149.2 (1)° for conformer (I‐1) and −151.4 (1)° for conformer (I‐2), both in the anti range. The sugar residue of (I‐1) shows a C2′‐endo envelope conformation (²E, S‐type), with P = 164.7 (1)° and τ_m = 36.9 (1)°, while (I‐2) shows a major C3′‐exo sugar pucker (C3′‐exo‐C2′‐endo, ₃T², S‐type), with P = 189.2 (1)° and τ_m = 33.3 (1)°. Both conformers participate in the formation of a layered three‐dimensional crystal structure with a chain‐like arrangement of the conformers. The ethynyl groups do not participate in hydrogen bonding, but are arranged in proximal positions.     

Two methyl 3‐(1H‐pyrazol‐4‐yl)octahydropyrrolo[3,4‐c]pyrrole‐1‐carboxylates form different hydrogen‐bonded sheets

In the molecules of both methyl (1RS,3SR,3aRS,6aSR)‐1‐methyl‐3‐(3‐methyl‐1‐phenyl‐1H‐pyrazol‐4‐yl)‐4,6‐dioxo‐5‐phenyloctahydropyrrolo[3,4‐c]pyrrole‐1‐carboxylate, C₂₅H₂₄N₄O₄, (I), and methyl (1RS,3SR,3aRS,6aSR)‐5‐(4‐chlorophenyl)‐1‐methyl‐3‐(3‐methyl‐1‐phenyl‐1H‐pyrazol‐4‐yl)‐4,6‐dioxooctahydropyrrolo[3,4‐c]pyrrole‐1‐carboxylate, C₂₅H₂₃ClN₄O₄, (II), the two rings of the pyrrolopyrrole fragment are both nonplanar, with conformations close to half‐chair forms. The overall conformations of the molecules of (I) and (II) are very similar, apart from the orientation of the ester function. The molecules of (I) are linked into sheets by a combination of an N—H...π(pyrrole) hydrogen bond and three independent C—H...O hydrogen bonds. The molecules of (II) are also linked into sheets, which are generated by a combination of an N—H...N hydrogen bond and two independent C—H...O hydrogen bonds, weakly augmented by a C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bond.     

A structural study of (1RS,2SR,3RS,4SR,5RS)‐2,4‐dibenzoyl‐1,3,5‐triphenylcyclohexan‐1‐ol chloroform hemisolvate and (1RS,2SR,3RS,4SR,5RS)‐2,4‐dibenzoyl‐1‐phenyl‐3,5‐bis(2‐methoxyphenyl)cyclohexan‐1‐ol

(1RS,2SR,3RS,4SR,5RS)‐2,4‐Dibenzoyl‐1,3,5‐triphenylcyclohexan‐1‐ol or (4‐hydroxy‐2,4,6‐triphenylcyclohexane‐1,3‐diyl)bis(phenylmethanone), C₃₈H₃₂O₃, (1), is formed as a by‐product in the NaOH‐catalyzed synthesis of 1,3,5‐triphenylpentane‐1,5‐dione from acetophenone and benzaldehyde. Single crystals of the chloroform hemisolvate, C₃₈H₃₂O₃·0.5CHCl₃, were grown from chloroform. The structure has triclinic (P) symmetry. One diastereomer [as a pair of (1RS,2SR,3RS,4SR,5RS)‐enantiomers] of (1) has been found in the crystal structure and confirmed by NMR studies. The dichoromethane hemisolvate has been reported previously [Zhang et al. (2007). Acta Cryst. E 63 , o4652]. (1RS,2SR,3RS,4SR,5RS)‐2,4‐Dibenzoyl‐3,5‐bis(2‐methoxyphenyl)‐1‐phenylcyclohexan‐1‐ol or [4‐hydroxy‐2,6‐bis(2‐methoxyphenyl)‐4‐phenylcyclohexane‐1,3‐diyl]bis(phenylmethanone), C₄₀H₃₆O₅, (2), is also formed as a by‐product, under the same conditions, from acetophenone and 2‐methoxybenzaldehyde. Crystals of (2) have been grown from chloroform. The structure has orthorhombic (Pca2₁) symmetry. A diastereomer of (2) possesses the same configuration as (1). In both structures, the cyclohexane ring adopts a chair conformation with all bulky groups (benzoyl, phenyl and 2‐methoxyphenyl) in equatorial positions. The molecules of (1) and (2) both display one intramolecular O—H...O hydrogen bond.     

π‐Stacked dimers in 6‐methoxy‐3,3‐dimethyl‐3H‐benzo[f]chromene,and centrosymmetric dimers containing C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds in racemic 3‐bromo‐2,2,6,6‐tetramethyl‐3,4‐dihydro‐2H,6H‐1,5‐dioxatriphenylene

The title compounds, namely 6‐methoxy‐3,3‐dimethyl‐3H‐benzo[f]chromene, C₁₆H₁₆O₂, (III), and racemic 3‐bromo‐2,2,6,6‐tetramethyl‐3,4‐dihydro‐2H,6H‐1,5‐dioxatriphenylene, C₂₀H₂₁BrO₂, (IV), were both synthesized in one‐step regioselective Wittig reactions from substituted 1,2‐naphthoquinones. The new ring in both compounds adopts a screw‐boat conformation. A single π–π stacking interaction links the molecules of (III) into centrosymmetric dimeric aggregates, and a single C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bond links the molecules of (IV) into centrosymmetric dimers.     

Four related benzazepine derivatives in a reaction pathway leading to a benzazepine carboxylic acid: hydrogen‐bonded assembly in zero,one, two and three dimensions

(2R*,4S*)‐Methyl 2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1,4‐epoxy‐1H‐benz[b]azepine‐2‐carboxylate, C₁₂H₁₃NO₃, (I), and its reduction product (2R*,4S*)‐methyl 4‐hydroxy‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐benz[b]azepine‐2‐carboxylate, C₁₂H₁₅NO₃, (II), both crystallize as single enantiomers in the space group P2₁2₁2₁, while the hydrolysis product (2RS,4SR)‐4‐hydroxy‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐benz[b]azepine‐2‐carboxylic acid, C₁₁H₁₃NO₃, (III), and the lactone (2RS,5SR)‐8‐(trifluoromethoxy)‐5,6‐dihydro‐1H‐2,5‐methanobenz[e][1,4]oxazocin‐3(2H)‐one, C₁₂H₁₀F₃NO₃, (IV), both crystallize as racemic mixtures in the space group P2₁/c. The molecules of compound (IV) are linked into centrosymmetric R₂²(10) dimers by N—H...O hydrogen bonds, and those of compound (I) are linked into chains by C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds. A combination of O—H...O and O—H...N hydrogen bonds links the molecules of compound (III) into sheets containing equal numbers of R₄⁴(14) and R₄⁴(26) rings, and a combination of C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds and three‐centre O—H...(N,O) hydrogen bonds links the molecules of compound (II) into a three‐dimensional framework structure. Comparisons are made with some related compounds.     

Two 18ē TiIVη5‐Cp‐tris(sec‐amido)‐type complexes derived from 1H‐imidazol‐2‐yl side‐chain functionalized cyclopentadienes

Achiral {2‐[2‐(η⁵‐cyclopentadienyl)‐2‐methylpropyl]‐1H‐imidazolyl‐κN¹}bis(N,N‐diethylamido‐κN)titanium(IV), [Ti(C₄H₁₀N)₂(C₁₂H₁₄N₂)], (I), and closely related racemic (SR)‐{2‐[(η⁵‐cyclopentadienyl)(phenyl)methyl]‐1H‐imidazolyl‐κN¹}bis(N,N‐diethylamido‐κN)titanium(IV), [Ti(C₄H₁₀N)₂(C₁₅H₁₂N₂)], (II), have been prepared by direct reactions of Ti(NEt₂)₄ and the corresponding 1H‐imidazol‐2‐yl side‐chain functionalized cyclopentadienes. In compound (II), there are two crystallographically independent molecules of very similar geometries connected by a noncrystallographic pseudosymmetry operation akin to a 2₁ screw axis. All Ti‐ligating N atoms in both (I) and (II) are in planar environments, which is indicative of an additional N→Ti pπ–dπ donation. This fact and the 18ē nature of both (I) and (II) are additionally supported by quantum chemical single‐point density functional theory (DFT) computations.     

Chiral one‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded architectures constructed from single‐enantiomer phosphoric triamides

The two single‐enantiomer phosphoric triamides N‐(2,6‐difluorobenzoyl)‐N′,N′′‐bis[(S)‐(−)‐α‐methylbenzyl]phosphoric triamide, [2,6‐F₂‐C₆H₃C(O)NH][(S)‐(−)‐(C₆H₅)CH(CH₃)NH]₂P(O), denoted L‐1 , and N‐(2,6‐difluorobenzoyl)‐N′,N′′‐bis[(R)‐(+)‐α‐methylbenzyl]phosphoric triamide, [2,6‐F₂‐C₆H₃C(O)NH][(R)‐(+)‐(C₆H₅)CH(CH₃)NH]₂P(O), denoted D‐1 , both C₂₃H₂₄F₂N₃O₂P, have been investigated. In their structures, chiral one‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded architectures are formed along [100], mediated by relatively strong N—H…O(P) and N—H…O(C) hydrogen bonds. Both assemblies include the noncentrosymmetric graph‐set motifs R₂²(10), R₂¹(6) and C₂²(8), and the compounds crystallize in the chiral space group P1. Due to the data collection of L‐1 at 120 K and of D‐1 at 95 K, the unit‐cell dimensions and volume show a slight difference; the contraction in the volume of D‐1 with respect to that in L‐1 is about 0.3%. The asymmetric units of both structures consist of two independent phosphoric triamide molecules, with the main difference being seen in one of the torsion angles in the OPNHCH(CH₃)(C₆H₅) part. The Hirshfeld surface maps of these levo and dextro isomers are very similar; however, they are near mirror images of each other. For both structures, the full fingerprint plot of each symmetry‐independent molecule shows an almost asymmetric shape as a result of its different environment in the crystal packing. It is notable that NMR spectroscopy could distinguish between compounds L‐1 and D‐1 that have different relative stereocentres; however, the differences in chemical shifts between them were found to be about 0.02 to 0.001 ppm under calibrated temperature conditions. In each molecule, the two chiral parts are also different in NMR media, in which chemical shifts and P–H and P–C couplings have been studied.     

Synthesis,crystal structures and anti‐inflammatory activity of four 3,5‐bis(arylidene)‐N‐benzenesulfonyl‐4‐piperidone derivatives

3,5‐Bis(arylidene)‐4‐piperidone (BAP) derivatives display good antitumour and anti‐inflammatory activities because of their double α,β‐unsaturated ketone structural characteristics. If N‐benzenesulfonyl substituents are introduced into BAPs, the configuration of the BAPs would change significantly and their anti‐inflammatory activities should improve. Four N‐benzenesulfonyl BAPs, namely (3E,5E)‐1‐(4‐methylbenzenesulfonyl)‐3,5‐bis[4‐(trifluoromethyl)benzylidene]piperidin‐4‐one dichloromethane monosolvate, C₂₈H₂₁F₆NO₃S·CH₂Cl₂, ( 4 ), (3E,5E)‐1‐(4‐fluorobenzenesulfonyl)‐3,5‐bis[4‐(trifluoromethyl)benzylidene]piperidin‐4‐one, C₂₇H₁₈F₇NO₃S, ( 5 ), (3E,5E)‐1‐(4‐nitrobenzenesulfonyl)‐3,5‐bis[4‐(trifluoromethyl)benzylidene]piperidin‐4‐one, C₂₇H₁₈F₆N₂O₅S, ( 6 ), and (3E,5E)‐1‐(4‐cyanobenzenesulfonyl)‐3,5‐bis[4‐(trifluoromethyl)benzylidene]piperidin‐4‐one dichloromethane monosolvate, C₂₈H₁₈F₆N₂O₃S·CH₂Cl₂, ( 7 ), were prepared by Claisen–Schmidt condensation and N‐sulfonylation. They were characterized by NMR, FT–IR and HRMS (high resolution mass spectrometry). Single‐crystal structure analysis reveals that the two 4‐(trifluoromethyl)phenyl rings on both sides of the piperidone ring in ( 4 )–( 7 ) adopt an E stereochemistry of the olefinic double bonds. Molecules of both ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) are connected by hydrogen bonds into one‐dimensional chains. In ( 5 ) and ( 7 ), pairs of adjacent molecules embrace through intermolecular hydrogen bonds to form a bimolecular combination, which are further extended into a two‐dimensional sheet. The anti‐inflammatory activity data reveal that ( 4 )–( 7 ) significantly inhibit LPS‐induced interleukin (IL‐6) and tumour necrosis factor (TNF‐α) secretion. Most importantly, ( 6 ) and ( 7 ), with strong electron‐withdrawing substituents, display more potential inhibitory effects than ( 4 ) and ( 5 ).     

Syntheses and Crystal Structures of Brominated Polyhedral Arsa‐ and Phosphaboranes

The synthesis of the perbrominated arsaboranes closo‐1,2‐As₂B₄Br₄ ( 1 ) and closo‐1,2‐As₂B₁₀Br₁₀ ( 2 ) occurs by co‐pyrolysis of B₂Br₄ and AsBr₃ at 500 °C. Repeated fractionation of the sublimable products in vacuo yields both compounds in pure form. The X‐ray structure determination for orthorhombic closo‐1,2‐As₂B₄Br₄ ( 1 ) [space group: Pbcn, a = 2345.48(17) pm, b = 627.31(4) pm, c = 1294.02(9) pm for Z = 8] and the corresponding phosphorus compound, monoclinic closo‐1,2‐P₂B₄Br₄ ( 3 ) [space group: P2₁/n, a = 806.84(6) pm, b = 1247.96(9) pm, c = 974.91(7) pm, β = 90.493(3)° and Z = 4] confirmed that both 1 and 3 , consistent with their 14‐skeletal electron counts, adopt octahedral structures distorted from regular by two arsenic or phosphorus atoms in the 1,2‐positions. The shortest boron–boron bonds within the cluster frameworks are located between the boron atoms antipodal to the heteroatoms.     

Hydrogen‐bonded ribbons in ethyl (E)‐3‐[2‐amino‐4,6‐bis(dimethylamino)pyrimidin‐5‐yl]‐2‐cyanoacrylate and 2‐[(2‐amino‐4,6‐di‐1‐piperidylpyrimidin‐5‐yl)methylene]malononitrile

The pyrimidine rings in ethyl (E)‐3‐[2‐amino‐4,6‐bis(dimethylamino)pyrimidin‐5‐yl]‐2‐cyanoacrylate, C₁₄H₂₀N₆O₂, (I), and 2‐[(2‐amino‐4,6‐di‐1‐piperidylpyrimidin‐5‐yl)methylene]malononitrile, C₁₈H₂₃N₇, (II), which crystallizes with Z′ = 2 in the space group, are both nonplanar with boat conformations. The molecules of (I) are linked by a combination of N—H...N and N—H...O hydrogen bonds into chains of edge‐fused R₂²(8) and R₄⁴(20) rings, while the two independent molecules in (II) are linked by four N—H...N hydrogen bonds into chains of edge‐fused R₂²(8) and R₂²(20) rings. This study illustrates both the readiness with which highly‐substituted pyrimidine rings can be distorted from planarity and the significant differences between the supramolecular aggregation in two rather similar compounds.