Two terphenyl‐based diol hosts and corresponding solvent inclusions with dimethylformamide and acetonitrile

Having reference to an elongated structural modification of 2,2′‐bis(hydroxydiphenylmethyl)biphenyl, (I), the two 1,1′:4′,1′′‐terphenyl‐based diol hosts 2,2′′‐bis(hydroxydiphenylmethyl)‐1,1′:4′,1′′‐terphenyl, C₄₄H₃₄O₂, (II), and 2,2′′‐bis[hydroxybis(4‐methylphenyl)methyl]‐1,1′:4′,1′′‐terphenyl, C₄₈H₄₂O₂, (III), have been synthesized and studied with regard to their crystal structures involving different inclusions, i.e. (II) with dimethylformamide (DMF), C₄₄H₃₄O₂·C₂H₆NO, denoted (IIa), (III) with DMF, C₄₈H₄₂O₂·C₂H₆NO, denoted (IIIa), and (III) with acetonitrile, C₄₈H₄₂O₂·CH₃CN, denoted (IIIb). In the solvent‐free crystals of (II) and (III), the hydroxy H atoms are involved in intramolecular O—H...π hydrogen bonding, with the central arene ring of the terphenyl unit acting as an acceptor. The corresponding crystal structures are stabilized by intermolecular C—H...π contacts. Due to the distinctive acceptor character of the included DMF solvent species in the crystal structures of (IIa) and (IIIa), the guest molecule is coordinated to the host via O—H...O=C hydrogen bonding. In both crystal structures, infinite strands composed of alternating host and guest molecules represent the basic supramolecular aggregates. Within a given strand, the O atom of the solvent molecule acts as a bifurcated acceptor. Similar to the solvent‐free cases, the hydroxy H atoms in inclusion structure (IIIb) are involved in intramolecular hydrogen bonding, and there is thus a lack of host–guest interaction. As a result, the solvent molecules are accommodated as C—H...N hydrogen‐bonded inversion‐symmetric dimers in the channel‐like voids of the host lattice.     

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.     

Structural effects on the solid‐state photodimerization of 2‐pyridone derivatives in inclusion compounds

The structures of six crystalline inclusion compounds between various host molecules and three guest molecules based on the 2‐pyridone skeleton are described. The six compounds are 1,1′‐biphenyl‐2,2′‐dicarboxylic acid–2‐pyridone (1/2), C₁₄H₁₀O₄·2C₅H₅NO, (I–a), 1,1′‐biphenyl‐2,2′‐dicarboxylic acid–4‐methyl‐2‐pyridone (1/2), C₁₄H₁₀O₄·2C₆H₇NO, (I–c), 1,1′‐biphenyl‐2,2′‐dicarboxylic acid–6‐methyl‐2‐pyridone (1/2), C₁₄H₁₀O₄·2C₆H₇NO, (I–d), 1,1,6,6‐tetraphenyl‐2,4‐hexadiyne‐1,6‐diol–1‐methyl‐2‐pyridone (1/2), C₃₀H₂₂O₂·2C₆H₇NO, (II–b), 1,1,6,6‐tetraphenyl‐2,4‐hexadiyne‐1,6‐diol–4‐methy‐2‐pyridone (1/2), C₃₀H₂₂O₂·2C₆H₇NO, (II–c), and 4,4′,4′′‐(ethane‐1,1,1‐triyl)triphenol–6‐methyl‐2‐pyridone–water (1/3/1), C₂₀H₁₈O₃·3C₆H₇NO·H₂O, (III–d). In two of the compounds, (I–a) and (I–d), the host molecules lie about crystallographic twofold axes. In two other compounds, (II–b) and (II–c), the host molecules lie across inversion centers. In all cases, the guest molecules are hydrogen bonded to the host molecules through O—H...O=C hydrogen bonds [the range of O...O distances is 2.543 (2)–2.843 (2) Å. The pyridone moieties form dimers through N—H...O=C hydrogen bonds in five of the compounds [the range of N...O distances is 2.763 (2)–2.968 (2) Å]. In four compounds, (I–a), (I–c), (I–d) and (II–c), the molecules are arranged in extended zigzag chains formed via host–guest hydrogen bonding. In five of the compounds, the guest molecules are arranged in parallel pairs on top of each other, related by inversion centers. However, none of these compounds underwent photodimerization in the solid state upon irradiation. In one of the crystalline compounds, (III–d), the guest molecules are arranged in stacks with one disordered molecule. The unsuccessful dimerization is attributed to the large interatomic distances between the potentially reactive atoms [the range of distances is 4.027 (4)–4.865 (4) Å] and to the bad overlap, expressed by the lateral shift between the orbitals of these atoms [the range of the shifts from perfect overlap is 1.727 (4)–3.324 (4) Å]. The bad overlap and large distances between potentially photoreactive atoms are attributed to the hydrogen‐bonding schemes, because the interactions involved in hydrogen bonding are stronger than those in π–π interactions.     

Hydrogen‐bonded dimers in 3‐amino‐4‐anilino‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐one and a hydrogen‐bonded sheet in 3‐amino‐4‐[methyl(phenyl)amino]‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐one

The molecules of 3‐amino‐4‐anilino‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐one, C₁₅H₁₂N₂O₂, (I), and 3‐amino‐4‐[methyl(phenyl)amino]‐1H‐isochromen‐1‐one, C₁₆H₁₄N₂O₂, (II), adopt very similar conformations, with the substituted amino group PhNR, where R = H in (I) and R = Me in (II), almost orthogonal to the adjacent heterocyclic ring. The molecules of (I) are linked into cyclic centrosymmetric dimers by pairs of N—H...O hydrogen bonds, while those of (II) are linked into complex sheets by a combination of one three‐centre N—H...(O)₂ hydrogen bond, one two‐centre C—H...O hydrogen bond and two C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds.     

1:1 Adducts of 2,2′‐[isopropylidenebis(p‐phenyleneoxy)]diacetic acid with dimethylammonium and 4,4′‐bipyridine

The title compounds, dimethylammonium 2‐{4‐[1‐(4‐carboxymethoxyphenyl)‐1‐methylethyl]phenoxy}acetate, C₂H₈N⁺·C₁₉H₁₉O₆⁻, (I), and 2,2′‐[isopropylidenebis(p‐phenyleneoxy)]diacetic acid–4,4′‐bipyridine (1/1), C₁₉H₂₀O₆·C₁₀H₈N₂, (II), are 1:1 adducts of 2,2′‐[isopropylidenebis(p‐phenyleneoxy)]diacetic acid (H₂L) with dimethylammonium or 4,4′‐bipyridine. The component ions in (I) are linked by N—H...O, O—H...O and C—H...O hydrogen bonds into continuous two‐dimensional layers parallel to the (001) plane. Adjacent layers are stacked via C—H...O hydrogen bonds into a three‐dimensional network with an –ABAB– alternation of the two‐dimensional layers. In (II), two H₂L molecules, one bipy molecule and two half bipy molecules are linked by O—H...N hydrogen bonds into one‐dimensional chains and rectanglar‐shaped rings. They are assembled viaπ–π stacking interactions and C—H...O hydrogen bonds into an intriguing zero‐dimensional plus one‐dimensional poly(pseudo)rotaxane motif.     

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.     

N—H...S and C—H...S hydrogen bonds in two tetraalkylammonium dithiobiurea(1–) inclusion compounds

Two inclusion compounds of dithiobiurea and tetrapropylammonium and tetrabutylammonium are characterized and reported, namely tetrapropylammonium carbamothioyl(carbamothioylamino)azanide, C₁₂H₂₈N⁺·C₂H₅N₄S₂⁻, (1), and tetrabutylammonium carbamothioyl(carbamothioylamino)azanide, C₁₆H₃₆N⁺·C₂H₅N₄S₂⁻, (2). The results show that in (1), the dithiobiurea anion forms a dimer via N—H...N hydrogen bonds and the dimers are connected into wide hydrogen‐bonded ribbons. The guest tetrapropylammonium cation changes its character to become the host molecule, generating pseudo‐channels containing the aforementioned ribbons by C—H...S contacts, yielding the three‐dimensional network structure. In comparison, in (2), the dithiobiurea anions are linked via N—H...S interactions, producing one‐dimensional chains which pack to generate two‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded layers. These layers accommodate the guest tetrabutylammonium cations, resulting in a sandwich‐like layer structure with host–guest C—H...S contacts.     

A hydrogen‐bonded chain of rings in 5‐amino‐1‐(4‐methoxybenzoyl)‐3‐methylpyrazole and a three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded framework in 5‐amino‐3‐methyl‐1‐(2‐nitrobenzoyl)pyrazole

The molecules of 5‐amino‐1‐(4‐methoxybenzoyl)‐3‐methylpyrazole, C₁₂H₁₃N₃O₂, (I), and 5‐amino‐3‐methyl‐1‐(2‐nitrobenzoyl)pyrazole, C₁₁H₁₀N₄O₃, (II), both contain intramolecular N—H...O hydrogen bonds. The molecules of (I) are linked into a chain of rings by a combination of N—H...N and N—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds, while those of (II) are linked into a three‐dimensional framework structure by N—H...N and C—H...O hydrogen bonds.     

5:1 and 2:1 cocrystals of 2,3,4,5,6‐pentafluorophenol with phenazine

2,3,4,5,6‐Pentafluorophenol (pFp), unlike phenol, forms cocrystals with the weak heteroaromatic base phenazine (phz). Two types of cocrystals were prepared, (I) with a high content of pFp, 2,3,4,5,6‐pentafluorophenol–phenazine (5/1), 5C₆HF₅O·C₁₂H₈N₂, and (II) with a 2:1 pFp–phz molar ratio, 2,3,4,5,6‐pentafluorophenol–phenazine (2/1), 2C₆HF₅O·C₁₂H₈N₂. In both forms, homostacks are formed by the heterocyclic base and phenol molecules and no aryl–perfluoroaryl stacking interactions occur. The arrangement of the molecules in the crystal of (I) is determined by strong O—H...N and O—H...O hydrogen bonds, weak O—H...F, C—H...F and C—H...O interactions, π–π stacking interactions between the phz molecules and C—F...π_F interactions within the pFp stacks. Among the specific interactions in (II) are a strong O—H...N hydrogen bond, weak C—H...F interactions and π–π stacking interactions between the phz molecules. In (I) and (II), the heterocyclic molecules are located around inversion centres and one of the symmetry‐independent pFp molecules in (I) is disordered about an inversion centre. Remarkably, similar structural fragments consisting of six pFp stacks can be identified in cocrystal (I) and in the known orthorhombic polymorph of pFp with Z′ = 3 [Gdaniec (2007). CrystEngComm, 9 , 286–288].     

Hydrogen‐bonded sheet structures in methyl 4‐(4‐chloroanilino)‐3‐nitrobenzoate and methyl 1‐benzyl‐2‐(4‐chlorophenyl)‐1H‐benzimidazole‐5‐carboxylate

In methyl 4‐(4‐chloroanilino)‐3‐nitrobenzoate, C₁₄H₁₁ClN₂O₄, (I), there is an intramolecular N—H...O hydrogen bond and the intramolecular distances provide evidence for electronic polarization of the o‐quinonoid type. The molecules are linked into sheets built from N—H...O, C—H...O and C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds, together with an aromatic π–π stacking interaction. The molecules of methyl 1‐benzyl‐2‐(4‐chlorophenyl)‐1H‐benzimidazole‐5‐carboxylate, C₂₂H₁₇ClN₂O₂, (II), are also linked into sheets, this time by a combination of C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds and aromatic π–π stacking interactions.     

A three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded framework in 2‐amino‐6‐(N‐methylanilino)pyrimidin‐4(3H)‐one and a ribbon of fused hydrogen‐bonded rings in 2‐amino‐6‐(N‐methylanilino)‐5‐nitropyrimidin‐4(3H)‐one

The molecular dimensions of both 2‐amino‐6‐(N‐methylanilino)pyrimidin‐4(3H)‐one, C₁₁H₁₂N₄O, (I), and 2‐amino‐6‐(N‐methylanilino)‐5‐nitropyrimidin‐4(3H)‐one, C₁₁H₁₁N₅O₃, (II), are consistent with considerable polarization of the molecular–electronic structures. The molecules of (I) are linked into a three‐dimensional framework by a combination of one N—H...N hydrogen bond, two independent N—H...O hydrogen bonds and one C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bond. The molecules of (II) are linked into ribbons containing three types of edge‐fused ring by the combination of two independent three‐centre N—H...(O)₂ hydrogen bonds.     

Water‐induced pseudo‐quadruple hydrogen‐bonding motifs in xanthine–inorganic acid complexes

In xanthinium nitrate hydrate [systematic name: 2,6‐dioxo‐1,2,3,6‐tetrahydro‐9H‐purin‐7‐ium nitrate monohydrate], C₅H₅N₄O₂⁺·NO₃⁻·H₂O, (I), and xanthinium hydrogen sulfate hydrate [systematic name: 2,6‐dioxo‐1,2,3,6‐tetrahydro‐9H‐purin‐7‐ium hydrogen sulfate monohydrate], C₅H₅N₄O₂⁺·HSO₄⁻·H₂O, (II), the xanthine molecules are protonated at the imine N atom with the transfer of an H atom from the inorganic acid. The asymmetric unit of (I) contains a xanthinium cation, a nitrate anion and one water molecule, while that of (II) contains two crystallographically independent xanthinium cations, two hydrogen sulfate anions and two water molecules. A pseudo‐quadruple hydrogen‐bonding motif is formed between the xanthinium cations and the water molecules via N—H...O and O—H...O hydrogen bonds in both structures, and leads to the formation of one‐dimensional polymeric tapes. These cation–water tapes are further connected by the respective anions and aggregate into two‐dimensional hydrogen‐bonded sheets in (I) and three‐dimensional arrangements in (II).     

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.     

Geometry and bond‐length alternation in nonlinear optical materials. II. Effects of donor strength in two push–pull molecules

The compounds N‐[2‐(4‐cyano‐5‐dicyanomethylene‐2,2‐dimethyl‐2,5‐dihydrofuran‐3‐yl)vinyl]‐N‐phenylacetamide, C₂₀H₁₆N₄O₂,(I), and 2‐{3‐cyano‐5,5‐dimethyl‐4‐[2‐(piperidin‐1‐yl)vinyl]‐2,5‐dihydrofuran‐2‐ylidene}malononitrile 0.376‐hydrate, C₁₇H₁₈N₄O·0.376H₂O, (II), are novel push–pull molecules. The significant bonding changes in the polyene chain compared with the parent molecule 2‐dicyanomethylene‐4,5,5‐trimethyl‐2,5‐dihyrofuran‐3‐carbonitrile are consistent with the relative electron‐donating properties of the acetanilido and piperidine groups. The packing of (I) utilizes one phenyl–cyano C—H...N and two phenyl–carbonyl C—H...O hydrogen bonds. Compound (II) crystallizes with a partial water molecule (0.376H₂O), consistent with cell packing that is dominated by attractive C—H...N(cyano) interactions. These compounds are precursors to novel nonlinear optical chromophores, studied to assess the impact of donor strength and the extent of conjugation on bond‐length alternation, crystal packing and aggregation.     

Two polymorphs of bis(2‐carbamoylguanidinium) fluorophosphonate dihydrate

Two polymorphs of bis(2‐carbamoylguanidinium) fluorophosphonate dihydrate, 2C₂H₇N₄O⁺·FO₃P²⁻·2H₂O, are presented. Polymorph (I), crystallizing in the space group Pnma, is slightly less densely packed than polymorph (II), which crystallizes in Pbca. In (I), the fluorophosphonate anion is situated on a crystallographic mirror plane and the O atom of the water molecule is disordered over two positions, in contrast with its H atoms. The hydrogen‐bond patterns in both polymorphs share similar features. There are O—H...O and N—H...O hydrogen bonds in both structures. The water molecules donate their H atoms to the O atoms of the fluorophosphonates exclusively. The water molecules and the fluorophosphonates participate in the formation of R⁴₄(10) graph‐set motifs. These motifs extend along the a axis in each structure. The water molecules are also acceptors of either one [in (I) and (II)] or two [in (II)] N—H...O hydrogen bonds. The water molecules are significant building elements in the formation of a three‐dimensional hydrogen‐bond network in both structures. Despite these similarities, there are substantial differences between the hydrogen‐bond networks of (I) and (II). The N—H...O and O—H...O hydrogen bonds in (I) are stronger and weaker, respectively, than those in (II). Moreover, in (I), the shortest N—H...O hydrogen bonds are shorter than the shortest O—H...O hydrogen bonds, which is an unusual feature. The properties of the hydrogen‐bond network in (II) can be related to an unusually long P—O bond length for an unhydrogenated fluorophosphonate anion that is present in this structure. In both structures, the N—H...F interactions are far weaker than the N—H...O hydrogen bonds. It follows from the structure analysis that (II) seems to be thermodynamically more stable than (I).     

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.     

Five 2‐aryl‐substituted tetrahydro‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepines: isolated molecules and hydrogen‐bonded chains and sheets

(2SR,4RS)‐2‐exo‐Phenyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepine, C₁₆H₁₅NO, (I), (2SR,4RS)‐2‐exo‐(4‐chlorophenyl)‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepine, C₁₆H₁₄ClNO, (II), and (2SR,4RS)‐2‐exo‐(3‐methylphenyl)‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepine, C₁₇H₁₇NO, (III), all crystallize with Z′ = 2, in the space groups Cc, P2₁/n and P2₁/c, respectively. In each of (II) and (III), the conformations of the two independent molecules are significantly different. The molecules in (I) are linked by C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds to form two independent chains, each containing only one type of molecule. The molecules in (II) are linked into sheets by a combination of C—H...O, C—H...(N,O) and C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds, all of which link pairs of molecules related by inversion, while in (III), the molecules are linked into sheets by a combination of C—H...N, C—H...O and C—H...π(arene) hydrogen bonds. There are no direction‐specific intermolecular interactions of any kind in the structure of (2SR,4RS)‐7‐bromo‐2‐exo‐phenyl‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepine, C₁₆H₁₄BrNO, (IV), but in the structure of (2SR,4RS)‐2‐exo‐(4‐bromophenyl)‐7‐chloro‐2,3,4,5‐tetrahydro‐1H‐1,4‐epoxy‐1‐benzazepine, C₁₆H₁₃BrClNO, (V), a combination of one C—H...N hydrogen bond and one C—H...O hydrogen bond links the molecules into sheets of alternating centrosymmetric R²₂(14) and R⁶₆(22) rings. Comparisons are made with the structures of a number of related compounds.     

Hydrogen‐bonded frameworks of bis(2‐carboxypyridinium) hexafluorosilicate and bis(2‐carboxyquinolinium) hexafluorosilicate dihydrate

In bis(2‐carboxypyridinium) hexafluorosilicate, 2C₆H₆NO₂⁺·SiF₆²⁻, (I), and bis(2‐carboxyquinolinium) hexafluorosilicate dihydrate, 2C₁₀H₈NO₂⁺·SiF₆²⁻·2H₂O, (II), the Si atoms of the anions reside on crystallographic centres of inversion. Primary inter‐ion interactions in (I) occur via strong N—H...F and O—H...F hydrogen bonds, generating corrugated layers incorporating [SiF₆]²⁻ anions as four‐connected net nodes and organic cations as simple links in between. In (II), a set of strong N—H...F, O—H...O and O—H...F hydrogen bonds, involving water molecules, gives a three‐dimensional heterocoordinated rutile‐like framework that integrates [SiF₆]²⁻ anions as six‐connected and water molecules as three‐connected nodes. The carboxyl groups of the cation are hydrogen bonded to the water molecule [O...O = 2.5533 (13) Å], while the N—H group supports direct bonding to the anion [N...F = 2.7061 (12) Å].     

Two seven‐membered heterocycles with 1,2‐diaza ring N atoms: 3,5,7‐triphenyl‐1,2‐diazacyclohepta‐1(7),2‐diene and 3,7‐bis(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐5‐phenyl‐1,2‐diazacyclohepta‐1(7),2‐diene

The title compounds, 3,5,7‐triphenyl‐1,2‐diazacyclohepta‐1(7),2‐diene, C₂₃H₂₀N₂, (I), and 3,7‐bis(2‐hydroxyphenyl)‐5‐phenyl‐1,2‐diazacyclohepta‐1(7),2‐diene, C₂₃H₂₀N₂O₂, (II), constitute the first structurally characterized examples of seven‐membered heterocycles with 1,2‐diaza ring N atoms. Compound (I) crystallizes in the space group P, with two independent molecules in the asymmetric unit that differ in the conformation of one of the phenyl rings, while (II) crystallizes in the space group C2/c. The C₅N₂ ring in each of (I) and (II) adopts a twist‐boat conformation. Compound (I) exhibits neither C—H...π interactions nor π–π stacking interactions, whereas (II) shows both intramolecular O—H...N hydrogen bonds and a C—H...π interaction that joins the molecules into an infinite chain in the [010] direction.     

Cocrystals of 2,3,5,6‐tetrafluorobenzene‐1,4‐diol with diaza aromatic compounds

2,3,5,6‐Tetrafluorobenzene‐1,4‐diol easily forms cocrystals with heteroaromatic bases containing the pyrazine unit. In the 1:1 complexes with pyrazine, C₆H₂F₄O₂·C₄H₄N₂, (I), and quinoxaline, C₆H₂F₄O₂·C₈H₆N₂, (II), the crystal components are linked via O—H...N hydrogen bonds into one‐dimensional chains. With the largest base, phenazine, the 1:2 benzenediol–phenazine complex, C₆H₂F₄O₂·2C₁₂H₈N₂, (III), was obtained, with the molecules linked via O—H...N interactions into a discrete heterotrimer. In all three cocrystals, the two types of molecules are organized into layers via softer C—H...O and C—H...F interactions and π–π stacking interactions, with stronger hydrogen bonds linking molecules of adjacent layers. In (II) and (III), molecules are arranged into heterostacks, whereas in (I) separate stacks are formed by the heterocyclic base and the benzenediol molecule.