Comparison of the hydrogen‐bond patterns in 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazolium hydrogen oxalate, 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–succinic acid (1/2), 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–glutaric acid (1/1) and 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–adipic acid (1/1)

The X‐ray single‐crystal structure determinations of the chemically related compounds 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazolium hydrogen oxalate, C₂H₄N₃S⁺·C₂HO₄⁻, (I), 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–succinic acid (1/2), C₂H₃N₃S·2C₄H₆O₄, (II), 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–glutaric acid (1/1), C₂H₃N₃S·C₅H₈O₄, (III), and 2‐amino‐1,3,4‐thiadiazole–adipic acid (1/1), C₂H₃N₃S·C₆H₁₀O₄, (IV), are reported and their hydrogen‐bonding patterns are compared. The hydrogen bonds are of the types N—H...O or O—H...N and are of moderate strength. In some cases, weak C—H...O interactions are also present. Compound (II) differs from the others not only in the molar ratio of base and acid (1:2), but also in its hydrogen‐bonding pattern, which is based on chain motifs. In (I), (III) and (IV), the most prominent feature is the presence of an R₂²(8) graph‐set motif formed by N—H...O and O—H...N hydrogen bonds, which are present in all structures except for (I), where only a pair of N—H...O hydrogen bonds is present, in agreement with the greater acidity of oxalic acid. There are nonbonding S...O interactions present in all four structures. The difference electron‐density maps show a lack of electron density about the S atom along the S...O vector. In all four structures, the carboxylic acid H atoms are present in a rare configuration with a C—C—O—H torsion angle of ∼0°. In the structures of (II)–(IV), the C—C—O—H torsion angle of the second carboxylic acid group has the more common value of ∼|180|°. The dicarboxylic acid molecules are situated on crystallographic inversion centres in (II). The Raman and IR spectra of the title compounds are presented and analysed.     

Supramolecular hydrogen‐bonding patterns in two cocrystals of the N(7)–H tautomeric form of N6‐benzoyladenine: N6‐benzoyladenine–3‐hydroxypyridinium‐2‐carboxylate (1/1) and N6‐benzoyladenine–DL‐tartaric acid (1/1)

Two novel cocrystals of the N(7)—H tautomeric form of N⁶‐benzoyladenine (BA), namely N⁶‐benzoyladenine–3‐hydroxypyridinium‐2‐carboxylate (3HPA) (1/1), C₁₂H₉N₅O·C₆H₅NO₃, (I), and N⁶‐benzoyladenine–DL‐tartaric acid (TA) (1/1), C₁₂H₉N₅O·C₄H₆O₆, (II), are reported. In both cocrystals, the N⁶‐benzoyladenine molecule exists as the N(7)—H tautomer, and this tautomeric form is stabilized by intramolecular N—H...O hydrogen bonding between the benzoyl C=O group and the N(7)—H hydrogen on the Hoogsteen site of the purine ring, forming an S(7) motif. The dihedral angle between the adenine and phenyl planes is 0.94 (8)° in (I) and 9.77 (8)° in (II). In (I), the Watson–Crick face of BA (N6—H and N1; purine numbering) interacts with the carboxylate and phenol groups of 3HPA through N—H...O and O—H...N hydrogen bonds, generating a ring‐motif heterosynthon [graph set R₂²(6)]. However, in (II), the Hoogsteen face of BA (benzoyl O atom and N7; purine numbering) interacts with TA (hydroxy and carbonyl O atoms) through N—H...O and O—H...O hydrogen bonds, generating a different heterosynthon [graph set R₂²(4)]. Both crystal structures are further stabilized by π–π stacking interactions.     

Hydrogen bonding in two benzene‐1,2‐diaminium pyridine‐2‐carboxylate salts and a cocrystal of benzene‐1,2‐diamine and benzoic acid

The isostructural salts benzene‐1,2‐diaminium bis(pyridine‐2‐carboxylate), 0.5C₆H₁₀N₂²⁺·C₆H₄NO₂^?, (1), and 4,5‐dimethylbenzene‐1,2‐diaminium bis(pyridine‐2‐carboxylate), 0.5C₈H₁₄N₂²⁺·C₆H₄NO₂^?, (2), and the 1:2 benzene‐1,2‐diamine–benzoic acid cocrystal, 0.5C₆H₈N₂·C₇H₆O₂, (3), are reported. All of the compounds exhibit extensive N—H…O hydrogen bonding that results in interconnected rings. O—H…N hydrogen bonding is observed in (3). Additional π–π and C—H…π interactions are found in each compound. Hirshfeld and fingerprint plot analyses reveal the primary intermolecular interactions and density functional theory was used to calculate their strengths. Salt formation by (1) and (2), and cocrystallization by (3) are rationalized by examining pK_a differences. The R₂²(9) hydrogen‐bonding motif is common to each of these structures.     

A supramolecular ladder‐like network from trimesic acid and pyrazine N,N′‐dioxide

In the title complex, benzene‐1,3,5‐tricarboxylic acid–pyrazine N,N′‐dioxide (2/1), C₉H₆O₆·0.5C₄H₄N₂O₂, cocrystallized trimesic acid (TMA) and pyrazine N,N′‐dioxide (PNO) molecules form strong O—H...O hydrogen bonds, but also important weak C—H...O and dipole–dipole intermolecular interactions, to generate a densely packed three‐dimensional network. PNO molecules lie on inversion centres where they connect pairs of TMA sheets into distinct two‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded layers perpendicular to the crystallographic ab diagonal.     

Hydrogen‐bonded bilayers in 7‐benzyl‐3‐tert‐butyl‐1‐phenyl‐4,5,6,7‐tetrahydro‐1H‐spiro[pyrazolo[3,4‐b]pyridine‐5,2′‐indan]‐1′,3′‐dione

In the title compound, C₃₁H₂₉N₃O₂, the reduced pyridine ring adopts a conformation intermediate between the envelope and half‐chair forms. The aryl rings of the benzyl and phenyl substituents are nearly parallel and overlap, indicative of an intramolecular π–π stacking interaction. A combination of two C—H...O hydrogen bonds and one C—H...N hydrogen bond links the molecules into a bilayer having tert‐butyl groups on both faces.<!?tpb=19.5pt>     

6‐Propyl‐2‐thiouracil versus 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil: enhancing the hydrogen‐bonded synthon motif by replacement of a methylene group with an O atom

The understanding of intermolecular interactions is a key objective of crystal engineering in order to exploit the derived knowledge for the rational design of new molecular solids with tailored physical and chemical properties. The tools and theories of crystal engineering are indispensable for the rational design of (pharmaceutical) cocrystals. The results of cocrystallization experiments of the antithyroid drug 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil (PTU) with 2,4‐diaminopyrimidine (DAPY), and of 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil (MOMTU) with DAPY and 2,4,6‐triaminopyrimidine (TAPY), respectively, are reported. PTU and MOMTU show a high structural similarity and differ only in the replacement of a methylene group (–CH₂–) with an O atom in the side chain, thus introducing an additional hydrogen‐bond acceptor in MOMTU. Both molecules contain an ADA hydrogen‐bonding site (A = acceptor and D = donor), while the coformers DAPY and TAPY both show complementary DAD sites and therefore should be capable of forming a mixed ADA/DAD synthon with each other, i.e. N—H…O, N—H…N and N—H…S hydrogen bonds. The experiments yielded one solvated cocrystal salt of PTU with DAPY, four different solvates of MOMTU, one ionic cocrystal of MOMTU with DAPY and one cocrystal salt of MOMTU with TAPY, namely 2,4‐diaminopyrimidinium 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracilate–2,4‐diaminopyrimidine–N,N‐dimethylacetamide–water (1/1/1/1) (the systematic name for 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracilate is 6‐oxo‐4‐propyl‐2‐sulfanylidene‐1,2,3,6‐tetrahydropyrimidin‐1‐ide), C₄H₇N₄⁺·C₇H₉N₂OS⁻·C₄H₆N₄·C₄H₉NO·H₂O, (I), 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil–N,N‐dimethylformamide (1/1), C₆H₈N₂O₂S·C₃H₇NO, (II), 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil–N,N‐dimethylacetamide (1/1), C₆H₈N₂O₂S·C₄H₉NO, (III), 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil–dimethyl sulfoxide (1/1), C₆H₈N₂O₂S·C₂H₆OS, (IV), 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil–1‐methylpyrrolidin‐2‐one (1/1), C₆H₈N₂O₂S·C₅H₉NO, (V), 2,4‐diaminopyrimidinium 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracilate (the systematic name for 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracilate is 4‐methoxymethyl‐6‐oxo‐2‐sulfanylidene‐1,2,3,6‐tetrahydropyrimidin‐1‐ide), C₄H₇N₄⁺·C₆H₇N₂O₂S⁻, (VI), and 2,4,6‐triaminopyrimidinium 6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracilate–6‐methoxymethyl‐2‐thiouracil (1/1), C₄H₈N₅⁺·C₆H₇N₂O₂S⁻·C₆H₈N₂O₂S, (VII). Whereas in (I) only an AA/DD hydrogen‐bonding interaction was formed, the structures of (VI) and (VII) both display the desired ADA/DAD synthon. Conformational studies on the side chains of PTU and MOMTU also revealed a significant deviation for cocrystals (VI) and (VII), leading to the desired enhancement of the hydrogen‐bond pattern within the crystal.     

Cocrystals of 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil: presence of the acceptor–donor–acceptor/donor–acceptor–donor synthon

The results of seven cocrystallization experiments of the antithyroid drug 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil (MTU), C₅H₆N₂OS, with 2,4‐diaminopyrimidine, 2,4,6‐triaminopyrimidine and 6‐amino‐3H‐isocytosine (viz. 2,6‐diamino‐3H‐pyrimidin‐4‐one) are reported. MTU features an ADA (A = acceptor and D = donor) hydrogen‐bonding site, while the three coformers show complementary DAD hydrogen‐bonding sites and therefore should be capable of forming an ADA/DAD N—H...O/N—H...N/N—H...S synthon with MTU. The experiments yielded one cocrystal and six cocrystal solvates, namely 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–2,4‐diaminopyrimidine–1‐methylpyrrolidin‐2‐one (1/1/2), C₅H₆N₂OS·C₄H₆N₄·2C₅H₉NO, (I), 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–2,4‐diaminopyrimidine (1/1), C₅H₆N₂OS·C₄H₆N₄, (II), 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–2,4‐diaminopyrimidine–N,N‐dimethylacetamide (2/1/2), 2C₅H₆N₂OS·C₄H₆N₄·2C₄H₉NO, (III), 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–2,4‐diaminopyrimidine–N,N‐dimethylformamide (2/1/2), C₅H₆N₂OS·0.5C₄H₆N₄·C₃H₇NO, (IV), 2,4,6‐triaminopyrimidinium 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracilate–6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–N,N‐dimethylformamide (1/1/2), C₄H₈N₅⁺·C₅H₅N₂OS⁻·C₅H₆N₂OS·2C₃H₇NO, (V), 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–6‐amino‐3H‐isocytosine–N,N‐dimethylformamide (1/1/1), C₅H₆N₂OS·C₄H₆N₄O·C₃H₇NO, (VI), and 6‐methyl‐2‐thiouracil–6‐amino‐3H‐isocytosine–dimethyl sulfoxide (1/1/1), C₅H₆N₂OS·C₄H₆N₄O·C₂H₆OS, (VII). Whereas in cocrystal (I) an R₂²(8) interaction similar to the Watson–Crick adenine/uracil base pair is formed and a two‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonding network is observed, the cocrystals (II)–(VII) contain the triply hydrogen‐bonded ADA/DAD N—H...O/N—H...N/N—H...S synthon and show a one‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonding network. Although 2,4‐diaminopyrimidine possesses only one DAD hydrogen‐bonding site, it is, due to orientational disorder, triply connected to two MTU molecules in (III) and (IV).     

Covalent‐assisted supramolecular synthesis: the effect of hydrogen bonding in cocrystals of 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid with isoniazid and its derivatized forms

A series of cocrystals of isoniazid and four of its derivatives have been produced with the cocrystal former 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid via a one‐pot covalent and supramolecular synthesis, namely 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid–isoniazid, C₆H₇N₃O·C₁₁H₁₄O₂, 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid–N′‐(propan‐2‐ylidene)isonicotinohydrazide, C₉H₁₁N₃O·C₁₁H₁₄O₂, 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid–N′‐(butan‐2‐ylidene)isonicotinohydrazide, C₁₀H₁₃N₃O·C₁₁H₁₄O₂, 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid–N′‐(diphenylmethylidene)isonicotinohydrazide, C₁₉H₁₅N₃O·C₁₁H₁₄O₂, and 4‐tert‐butylbenzoic acid–N′‐(4‐hydroxy‐4‐methylpentan‐2‐ylidene)isonicotinohydrazide, C₁₂H₁₇N₃O₂·C₁₁H₁₄O₂. The co‐former falls under the classification of a `generally regarded as safe' compound. The four derivatizing ketones used are propan‐2‐one, butan‐2‐one, benzophenone and 3‐hydroxy‐3‐methylbutan‐2‐one. Hydrogen bonds involving the carboxylic acid occur consistently with the pyridine ring N atom of the isoniazid and all of its derivatives. The remaining hydrogen‐bonding sites on the isoniazid backbone vary based on the steric influences of the derivative group. These are contrasted in each of the molecular systems.     

Zero‐, one‐ and two‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded structures in the 1:1 proton‐transfer compounds of 4,5‐dichlorophthalic acid with the monocyclic heteroaromatic Lewis bases 2‐aminopyrimidine,nicotinamide and isonicotinamide

The structures of the anhydrous 1:1 proton‐transfer compounds of 4,5‐dichlorophthalic acid (DCPA) with the monocyclic heteroaromatic Lewis bases 2‐aminopyrimidine, 3‐(aminocarbonyl)pyridine (nicotinamide) and 4‐(aminocarbonyl)pyridine (isonicotinamide), namely 2‐aminopyrimidinium 2‐carboxy‐4,5‐dichlorobenzoate, C₄H₆N₃⁺·C₈H₃Cl₂O₄⁻, (I), 3‐(aminocarbonyl)pyridinium 2‐carboxy‐4,5‐dichlorobenzoate, C₆H₇N₂O⁺·C₈H₃Cl₂O₄⁻, (II), and the unusual salt adduct 4‐(aminocarbonyl)pyridinium 2‐carboxy‐4,5‐dichlorobenzoate–methyl 2‐carboxy‐4,5‐dichlorobenzoate (1/1), C₆H₇N₂O⁺·C₈H₃Cl₂O₄⁻·C₉H₆Cl₂O₄, (III), have been determined at 130 K. Compound (I) forms discrete centrosymmetric hydrogen‐bonded cyclic bis(cation–anion) units having both R₂²(8) and R₁²(4) N—H...O interactions. In (II), the primary N—H...O‐linked cation–anion units are extended into a two‐dimensional sheet structure via amide–carboxyl and amide–carbonyl N—H...O interactions. The structure of (III) reveals the presence of an unusual and unexpected self‐synthesized methyl monoester of the acid as an adduct molecule, giving one‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded chains. In all three structures, the hydrogen phthalate anions are essentially planar with short intramolecular carboxyl–carboxylate O—H...O hydrogen bonds [O...O = 2.393 (8)–2.410 (2) Å]. This work provides examples of low‐dimensional 1:1 hydrogen‐bonded DCPA structure types, and includes the first example of a discrete cyclic `heterotetramer.' This low dimensionality in the structures of the 1:1 aromatic Lewis base salts of the parent acid is generally associated with the planar DCPA anion species.     

An unusual conformation of gabapentin (Gpn) in Pyr‐Gpn‐NH‐NH‐Pyr stabilized by weak interactions

The crystal structure of N‐[(1‐{2‐oxo‐2‐[2‐(pyrazin‐2‐ylcarbonyl)hydrazin‐1‐yl]ethyl}cyclohexyl)methyl]pyrazine‐2‐carboxamide monohydrate (Pyr‐Gpn‐NN‐NH‐Pyr·H₂O), C₁₉H₂₃N₇O₃·H₂O, reveals an unusual trans–gauche (tg⁻) conformation for the gabapentin (Gpn) residue around the C^γ—C^β (θ₁) and C^β—C^α (θ₂) bonds. The molecular conformation is stabilized by intramolecular N—H...N hydrogen bonds and weak C—H...O interactions. The packing of the molecules in the crystal lattice shows a network of strong N—H...O and O—H...O hydrogen bonds together with weak C—H...O and π–π inteactions.     

Supramolecular aggregation in three 4‐aryl‐6‐(1H‐indol‐3‐yl)‐3‐methyl‐1‐phenyl‐1H‐pyrazolo[3,4‐b]pyridine‐5‐carbonitriles

Both 6‐(1H‐indol‐3‐yl)‐3‐methyl‐4‐(4‐methylphenyl)‐1‐phenyl‐1H‐pyrazolo[3,4‐b]pyridine‐5‐carbonitrile and 6‐(1H‐indol‐3‐yl)‐3‐methyl‐4‐(4‐methoxyphenyl)‐1‐phenyl‐1H‐pyrazolo[3,4‐b]pyridine‐5‐carbonitrile crystallize from dimethylformamide solutions as stoichiometric 1:1 solvates, viz. C₂₉H₂₁N₅·C₃H₇NO, (I), and C₂₉H₂₁N₅O·C₃H₇NO, (II), respectively; however, 6‐(1H‐indol‐3‐yl)‐3‐methyl‐1‐phenyl‐4‐(3,4,5‐trimethoxyphenyl)‐1H‐pyrazolo[3,4‐b]pyridine‐5‐carbonitrile, C₃₁H₂₅N₅O₃, (III), crystallizes in the unsolvated form. The heterocyclic components of (I) are linked by C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds to form cyclic centrosymmetric dimers, from which the solvent molecules are pendent, linked by N—H...O hydrogen bonds. In (II), the heterocyclic components are linked by a combination of C—H...N and C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds into chains containing two types of centrosymmetric ring, and the pendent solvent molecules are linked to these chains by N—H...O hydrogen bonds. Molecules of (III) are linked into simple C(12) chains by an N—H...O hydrogen bond, and these chains are weakly linked into pairs by an aromatic π–π stacking interaction.     

Three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded structures in the hydrated proton‐transfer salts of isonipecotamide with the dicarboxylic oxalic and adipic acid homologues

The structures of the 1:1 hydrated proton‐transfer compounds of isonipecotamide (piperidine‐4‐carboxamide) with oxalic acid, 4‐carbamoylpiperidinium hydrogen oxalate dihydrate, C₆H₁₃N₂O⁺·C₂HO₄⁻·2H₂O, (I), and with adipic acid, bis(4‐carbamoylpiperidinium) adipate dihydrate, 2C₆H₁₃N₂O⁺·C₆H₈O₄²⁻·2H₂O, (II), are three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded constructs involving several different types of enlarged water‐bridged cyclic associations. In the structure of (I), the oxalate monoanions give head‐to‐tail carboxylic acid O—H...O_carboxyl hydrogen‐bonding interactions, forming C(5) chain substructures which extend along a. The isonipecotamide cations also give parallel chain substructures through amide N—H...O hydrogen bonds, the chains being linked across b and down c by alternating water bridges involving both carboxyl and amide O‐atom acceptors and amide and piperidinium N—H...O_carboxyl hydrogen bonds, generating cyclic R₄³(10) and R₃²(11) motifs. In the structure of (II), the asymmetric unit comprises a piperidinium cation, half an adipate dianion, which lies across a crystallographic inversion centre, and a solvent water molecule. In the crystal structure, the two inversion‐related cations are interlinked through the two water molecules, which act as acceptors in dual amide N—H...O_water hydrogen bonds, to give a cyclic R₄²(8) association which is conjoined with an R₄⁴(12) motif. Further N—H...O_water, water O—H...O_amide and piperidinium N—H...O_carboxyl hydrogen bonds give the overall three‐dimensional structure. The structures reported here further demonstrate the utility of the isonipecotamide cation as a synthon for the generation of stable hydrogen‐bonded structures. The presence of solvent water molecules in these structures is largely responsible for the non‐occurrence of the common hydrogen‐bonded amide–amide dimer, promoting instead various expanded cyclic hydrogen‐bonding motifs.     

Hydrogen bonding in polyamino‐polyalcohols: a monohydrated cocrystal of 1,3‐diamino‐5‐azaniumyl‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol iodide and 1,3,5‐triamino‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol

In the title monohydrated cocrystal, namely 1,3‐diamino‐5‐azaniumyl‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol iodide–1,3,5‐triamino‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol–water (1/1/1), C₆H₁₆N₃O₃⁺·I⁻·C₆H₁₅N₃O₃·H₂O, the neutral 1,3,5‐triamino‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol (taci) molecule and the monoprotonated 1,3‐diamino‐5‐azaniumyl‐1,3,5‐trideoxy‐cis‐inositol cation (Htaci⁺) both adopt a chair conformation, with the three O atoms in axial and the three N atoms in equatorial positions. The cation, but not the neutral taci unit, exhibits intramolecular O—H...O hydrogen bonding. The entire structure is stabilized by a complex three‐dimensional network of intermolecular hydrogen bonds. The neutral taci entities and the Htaci⁺ cations are each aligned into chains along [001]. In these chains, two O—H...N interactions generate a ten‐membered ring as the predominant structural motif. The rings consist of vicinal 2‐amino‐1‐hydroxyethylene units of neighbouring molecules, which are paired via centres of inversion. The chains are interconnected into undulating layers parallel to the ac plane, and the layers are further held together by O—H...N hydrogen bonds and additional interactions with the iodide counter‐anions and solvent water molecules.     

Three new quinuclidine‐based structures: second harmonic generation response for 1,2‐bis(1‐azoniabicyclo[2.2.2]octan‐3‐ylidene)hydrazine dichloride

The crystal structures of three quinuclidine‐based compounds, namely (1‐azabicyclo[2.2.2]octan‐3‐ylidene)hydrazine monohydrate, C₇H₁₃N₃·H₂O ( 1 ), 1,2‐bis(1‐azabicyclo[2.2.2]octan‐3‐ylidene)hydrazine, C₁₄H₂₂N₄ ( 2 ), and 1,2‐bis(1‐azoniabicyclo[2.2.2]octan‐3‐ylidene)hydrazine dichloride, C₁₄H₂₄N₄²⁺·2Cl^? ( 3 ), are reported. In the crystal structure of 1 , the quinuclidine‐substituted hydrazine and water molecules are linked through N—H…O and O—H…N hydrogen bonds, forming a two‐dimensional array. The compound crystallizes in the centrosymmetric space group P2₁/c. Compound 2 was refined in the space group Pccn and exhibits no hydrogen bonding. However, its hydrochloride form 3 crystallizes in the noncentrosymmetric space group Pc. It shows a three‐dimensional network structure via intermolecular hydrogen bonding (N—H…C and N/C—H…Cl). Compound 3 , with its acentric structure, shows strong second harmonic activity.     

Eight new crystal structures of 5‐(hydroxymethyl)uracil, 5‐carboxyuracil and 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil: insights into the hydrogen‐bonded networks and the predominant conformations of the C5‐bound residues

In order to examine the preferred hydrogen‐bonding pattern of various uracil derivatives, namely 5‐(hydroxymethyl)uracil, 5‐carboxyuracil and 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil, and for a conformational study, crystallization experiments yielded eight different structures: 5‐(hydroxymethyl)uracil, C₅H₆N₂O₃, (I), 5‐carboxyuracil–N,N‐dimethylformamide (1/1), C₅H₄N₂O₄·C₃H₇NO, (II), 5‐carboxyuracil–dimethyl sulfoxide (1/1), C₅H₄N₂O₄·C₂H₆OS, (III), 5‐carboxyuracil–N,N‐dimethylacetamide (1/1), C₅H₄N₂O₄·C₄H₉NO, (IV), 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil–N,N‐dimethylformamide (1/1), C₅H₄N₂O₃S·C₃H₇NO, (V), 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil–dimethyl sulfoxide (1/1), C₅H₄N₂O₃S·C₂H₆OS, (VI), 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil–1,4‐dioxane (2/3), 2C₅H₄N₂O₃S·3C₆H₁₂O₃, (VII), and 5‐carboxy‐2‐thiouracil, C₁₀H₈N₄O₆S₂, (VIII). While the six solvated structures, i.e. (II)–(VII), contain intramolecular S(6) O—H…O hydrogen‐bond motifs between the carboxy and carbonyl groups, the usually favoured R₂²(8) pattern between two carboxy groups is formed in the solvent‐free structure, i.e. (VIII). Further R₂²(8) hydrogen‐bond motifs involving either two N—H…O or two N—H…S hydrogen bonds were observed in three crystal structures, namely (I), (IV) and (VIII). In all eight structures, the residue at the ring 5‐position shows a coplanar arrangement with respect to the pyrimidine ring which is in agreement with a search of the Cambridge Structural Database for six‐membered cyclic compounds containing a carboxy group. The search confirmed that coplanarity between the carboxy group and the cyclic residue is strongly favoured.     

trans‐Di­aqua­bis(5‐carboxy‐1H‐imidazole‐4‐carboxyl­ato‐κ2N3,O4)­cobalt(II) 4,4′‐bi­pyridine solvate

In the title compound, [Co(C₅H₃N₂O₄)₂(H₂O)₂]·C₁₀H₈N₂, the Co atom is trans‐coordinated by two pairs of N and O atoms from two monoanionic 4,5‐di­carboxy­imidazole ligands, and by two O atoms from two coordinated water mol­ecules, in a distorted octahedral geometry. The 4,4′‐bi­pyridine solvent molecule is not involved in coordination but is linked by an N—H⋯N hydrogen bond to the neutral [Co(C₅H₃N₂O₄)₂(H₂O)₂] mol­ecule. Both mol­ecules are located on inversion centers. The crystal packing is stabilized by N—H⋯N and O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds, which produce a three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded network. Offset π–π stacking interactions between the pyridine rings of adjacent 4,4′‐bi­pyridine molecules were observed, with a face‐to‐face distance of 3.345 (1) Å.     

Cocrystals of 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil: N—H...O versus N—H...S hydrogen bonds

In order to investigate the relative stability of N—H...O and N—H...S hydrogen bonds, we cocrystallized the antithyroid drug 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil with two complementary heterocycles. In the cocrystal pyrimidin‐2‐amine–6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil (1/2), C₄H₅N₃·2C₇H₁₀N₂OS, (I), the `base pair' is connected by one N—H...S and one N—H...N hydrogen bond. Homodimers of 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil linked by two N—H...S hydrogen bonds are observed in the cocrystal N‐(6‐acetamidopyridin‐2‐yl)acetamide–6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil (1/2), C₉H₁₁N₃O₂·2C₇H₁₀N₂OS, (II). The crystal structure of 6‐propyl‐2‐thiouracil itself, C₇H₁₀N₂OS, (III), is stabilized by pairwise N—H...O and N—H...S hydrogen bonds. In all three structures, N—H...S hydrogen bonds occur only within R₂²(8) patterns, whereas N—H...O hydrogen bonds tend to connect the homo‐ and heterodimers into extended networks. In agreement with related structures, the hydrogen‐bonding capability of C=O and C=S groups seems to be comparable.     

Conversion of 3‐amino‐4‐arylamino‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐ones to 1‐arylisochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐ones: synthesis,spectroscopic characterization and the structures of four products and one ring‐opened derivative

An efficient synthesis of 1‐arylisochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐ones, involving the diazotization of 3‐amino‐4‐arylamino‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐ones in weakly acidic solution, has been developed and the spectroscopic characterization and crystal structures of four examples are reported. The molecules of 1‐phenylisochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐one, C₁₅H₉N₃O₂, (I), are linked into sheets by a combination of C—H…N and C—H…O hydrogen bonds, while the structures of 1‐(2‐methylphenyl)isochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐one, C₁₆H₁₁N₃O₂, (II), and 1‐(3‐chlorophenyl)isochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐one, C₁₅H₈ClN₃O₂, (III), each contain just one hydrogen bond which links the molecules into simple chains, which are further linked into sheets by π‐stacking interactions in (II) but not in (III). In the structure of 1‐(4‐chlorophenyl)isochromeno[3,4‐d][1,2,3]triazol‐5(1H)‐one, (IV), isomeric with (III), a combination of C—H…O and C—H…π(arene) hydrogen bonds links the molecules into sheets. When compound (II) was exposed to a strong acid in methanol, quantitative conversion occurred to give the ring‐opened transesterification product methyl 2‐[4‐hydroxy‐1‐(2‐methylphenyl)‐1H‐1,2,3‐triazol‐5‐yl]benzoate, C₁₇H₁₅N₃O₃, (V), where the molecules are linked by paired O—H…O hydrogen bonds to form centrosymmetric dimers.     

Hydro­gen‐bonded supramolecular motifs in 4,4′‐bipyridinium 8‐hydroxy‐7‐iodo­quinoline‐5‐sulfonate dihydrate

In the title compound, C₁₀H₉N₂⁺·C₉H₅INO₄S⁻·2H₂O, the 4,4′‐bi­pyridine mol­ecule is protonated at one of the pyridine N atoms. These moieties self‐assemble into a supramolecular chain along the a axis through N—H⋯N hydrogen bonds. The quinolinol OH group acts as a donor with respect to a sulfonate O atom [O—H⋯O(sulfonate)] and acts as an acceptor with respect to a C—H group of ferron [C—H⋯O(hydroxy)], forming a supramolecular chain along the b axis. These two types of supramolecular chains (one type made up of bi­pyridine motifs and the other made up of sulfoxine motifs) interact viaπ–π stacking, generating a three‐dimensional framework. These chains are further crosslinked by C—­H⋯O hydrogen bonds and O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds involving water mol­ecules.     

Hydrogen‐bonded one‐dimensional networks in 1:1 complexes of N,N′‐bis(2‐pyridyl)aryldiamines with anilic acid

The 1:1 complexes N,N′‐bis(2‐pyridyl)­benzene‐1,4‐di­amine–anilic acid (2,5‐di­hydroxy‐1,4‐benzo­quinone) (1/1), C₁₆H₁₄N₄·C₆H₄O₄, (I), and N,N′‐bis(2‐pyridyl)­bi­phenyl‐4,4′‐di­amine–anilic acid (1/1), C₂₂H₁₈N₄·C₆H₄O₄, (II), have been prepared and their solid‐state structures investigated. The component mol­ecules of these complexes are connected via conventional N—H?O and O—H?N hydrogen bonds, leading to the formation of an infinite one‐dimensional network generated by the cyclic motif R(9). The anilic acid molecules in both crystal structures lie around inversion centres and the observed bond lengths are typical for the neutral mol­ecule. Nevertheless, the pyridine C—N—C angles [120.9 (2) and 120.13 (17)° for complexes (I) and (II), respectively] point to a partial H‐atom transfer from anilic aicd to the bispyridyl­amine, and hence to H‐atom disorder in the OHN bridge. The bispyridyl­amine mol­ecules of (I) and (II) also lie around inversion centres and exhibit disorder of their central phenyl rings over two positions.