Molecular self-assembly: 4-formylcoumarins as versatile skeletons for complementary multipoint association via weak (C-H ⋯O, C-H⋯F and C-X⋯O=C) interactions

CrystEngComm

Volumn 5, Issue , 2003, Pages 507-513

  Moorthy, J Narasimha ^a   Venkatakrishnan, P ^a   Singh, Ashutosh S ^a  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COUMARIN DERIVATIVE; HALOGEN;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL BOND; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; DNA MICROARRAY; HYDROGEN BOND; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; SUBSTITUTION REACTION; X RAY ANALYSIS;

EID: 15944391772     PISSN: 14668033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1039/b315065h     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. G. A. Jeffrey, An introduction to hydrogen bonding, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997.
2. (a) G. R. Desiraju, Crystal Engineering. The Design of Organic Solids, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1989;
3. (b) D. S. Lawrence, T. Jiang and M. Levitt, Chem. Rev., 1995, 95, 2229;
4. J.-M. Lehn, Supramolecular Chemistry: Concepts and Perspectives, VCH Verlag, Weinheim, Germany, 1995.
5. A. El-Ghayoury, E. Peeters, A. P. H. J. Schenning and E. W. Meijer, Chem. Commun., 2000, 1969.
6. (a) T. W. Bell and Z. Hou, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 1997, 36, 1536;
7. (b) S. K. Chang, D. Van Engen, E. Fan and A. D. Hamilton, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 7640.
8. 5 (a) J. Rebek, Jr., Chem. Soc. Rev., 1996, 25, 255;
9. (b) M. M. Conn and J. Rebek, Jr., Chem. Rev., 1997, 97, 1647;
10. F. Hof, S. L. Craig, C. Nuckolls and J. Rebek, Jr., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2002, 41, 1488.
11. D. T. Bong, T. D. Clark, J. R. Granja and M. R. Ghadiri, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2001, 40, 988.
12. D. C. Sherrington and K. A. Taskinen, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2001, 30, 83.
13. S. C. Zimmerman and F. S. Corbin, Struct. Bond., 2000, 96, 63.
14. G. R. Desiraju and T. Steiner, The Weak Hydrogen Bond: In Structural Chemistry and Biology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999.
15. V. R. Thalladi, K. Panneerselvam, C. J. Carrell, H. L. Carrell and G. R. Desiraju, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun., 1995, 341.
16. K. Biradha, A. Nangia, G. R. Desiraju, C. J. Carrell and H. L. Carrell, J. Mater. Chem., 1997, 1111.
17. (a) J. N. Moorthy, P. Mal, R. Natarajan and P. Venugopalan, Org. Lett., 2001, 3, 1579;
18. (b) J. N. Moorthy, P. Mal, R. Natarajan and P. Venugopalan, J. Org. Chem., 2001, 66, 7013;
19. P. Mal, U. Lourderaj, Parveen, P. Venugopalan, J. N. Moorthy and N. Sathyamurthy, J. Org. Chem., 2003, 68, 3446;
20. J. N. Moorthy, P. Venkatakrishnan, P. Mal and P. Venugopalan, J. Org. Chem., 2003, 68, 327.
21. J. N. Moorthy, P. Venkatakrishnan, P. Mal, S. Dixit and P. Venugopalan, Cryst. Growth Des., 2003, 3, 581.
22. P. W. Baures, J. R. Rush, S. D. Schroeder and A. M. Beatty, Cryst. Growth Des., 2002, 2, 107 and references therein.
23. J. N. Moorthy and K. Venkatesan, J. Mater. Chem., 1992, 2, 675.
24. V. Ramamurthy and K. Venkatesan, in Photochemistry in an Organized and Constrained Media, ed. V. Ramamurthy, VCH Publishers: New York, 1991.
25. E. V. Garcia-Baez, F. J. Martinez-Martinez, H. Hopf and I. I. Padilla-Martinez, Cryst. Growth Des., 2003, 3, 35.
26. K. Ito and K. Nakajima, J. Heterocycl. Chem., 1988, 25, 511.
27. We have treated all the contacts with dH O 3.0 Å (0.3 Å greater than the sum of the van der Waals radii of hydrogen and oxygen atoms) and C-H O > 120° as hydrogen bonds. Further, the contacts for which the C O distances fall in the range 3.0-4.0 Å are also accepted; of course, the C-H O angle must be near linear for contacts with longer C O distances. The C-H O hydrogen bonds encompass a wide range of energies, with the interaction energies being highest for contacts with short O H distances and near-linear (180°) C-H O angles and vice versa. The limits set above for an interaction to be termed a C-H O hydrogen bond were justified from the following considerations: (i) the contacts with C-H O distances larger than the sum of the van der Waals radii are treated (subject to linearity) as hydrogen bonds owing to the weak, but highly directional nature of the C-H O bonds. It has been shown that the assessment of the strength of an interaction based on distance criterion alone can be misleading. Incidentally, the position of minimum in the intermolecular potential is ca. 0.4 Å larger than the van der Waals distance, see I. Dance, New J. Chem., 2003, 27, 22. (ii) The C-H O interaction fall-off with deviation from linearity (180°) is unlike that for O-H O hydrogen bonds because of the soft nature. It has been shown from statistical database analysis that the mean C-H O angle, for example C-H O hydrogen bonds involving methyl hydrogen and carbonyl oxygen is 137.1° while it is 154.0° for analogous O-H O C contacts, see T. Steiner and G. R. Desiraju, Chem. Commun., 1998, 891. Thus we believe that the contacts with poor geometric angles (<120°) may merely constitute van der Waals contacts. In a similar vein, the contacts that are near linear and longer should be considered weak, yet significant (cf. ref. 9).
28. We have treated all the contacts with dH O 3.0 Å (0.3 Å greater than the sum of the van der Waals radii of hydrogen and oxygen atoms) and C-H O > 120° as hydrogen bonds. Further, the contacts for which the C O distances fall in the range 3.0-4.0 Å are also accepted; of course, the C-H O angle must be near linear for contacts with longer C O distances. The C-H O hydrogen bonds encompass a wide range of energies, with the interaction energies being highest for contacts with short O H distances and near-linear (180°) C-H O angles and vice versa. The limits set above for an interaction to be termed a C-H O hydrogen bond were justified from the following considerations: (i) the contacts with C-H O distances larger than the sum of the van der Waals radii are treated (subject to linearity) as hydrogen bonds owing to the weak, but highly directional nature of the C-H O bonds. It has been shown that the assessment of the strength of an interaction based on distance criterion alone can be misleading. Incidentally, the position of minimum in the intermolecular potential is ca. 0.4 Å larger than the van der Waals distance, see I. Dance, New J. Chem., 2003, 27, 22. (ii) The C-H O interaction fall-off with deviation from linearity (180°) is unlike that for O-H O hydrogen bonds because of the soft nature. It has been shown from statistical database analysis that the mean C-H O angle, for example C-H O hydrogen bonds involving methyl hydrogen and carbonyl oxygen is 137.1° while it is 154.0° for analogous O-H O C contacts, see T. Steiner and G. R. Desiraju, Chem. Commun., 1998, 891. Thus we believe that the contacts with poor geometric angles (<120°) may merely constitute van der Waals contacts. In a similar vein, the contacts that are near linear and longer should be considered weak, yet significant (cf. ref. 9).
29. P. Metrangolo and G. Resnati, Chem. Eur. J., 2001, 7, 2511.
30. For example, see ref. 13 and references therein.
31. The van der Waals radii of various atoms are as follows (see: A.Bondi, J. Phy.Chem.,1964, 68, 441): C: 1.70; H: 1.2; O: 1.52; F: 1.47; Cl: 1.75; Br: 1.85 Å.
32. Although the distance is larger than the sum of the van der Waals radii (3.27 Å), the observed angle is strongly indicative of the halogen bond, see ref. 22.
33. (a) P. Murray-Rust, W. C. Stallings, C. T. Monti, R. K. Preston and J. P. Glusker, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1983, 105, 3206;
34. (b) L. Shimoni, H. L. Carrell, J. P. Glusker and M. M. Coombs, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1994, 116, 8162.
35. V. R. Thalladi, H.-C. Weiss, D. Blaser, R. Boese, A. Nangia and G. R. Desiraju, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1998, 120, 8702.
36. The van der Waals sum of H and F is 2.67 Å. The experimentally observed distances and angles in Table 2 are undoubtedly suggestive of the hydrogen bonding character.
37. J. D. Dunitz and R. Taylor, Chem. Eur. J., 1997, 3, 89.
38. E. H. Woodruff, Org. Synth., Coll. Vol. III, 1955, 581.
39. A. Clayton, J. Chem. Soc., 1908, 93, 2016.
40. K. Gnanaguru, K. Ramasubbu, K. Venkatesan and V. Ramamurthy, J. Org. Chem., 1985, 50, 2337.
41. K. Vishnumurthy, T. N. Guru Row and K. Venkatesan, Tetrahedron, 1998, 54, 11235.
42. K. Ito and J. Maruyama, Chem. Pharm. Bull., 1983, 31, 3014.
43. G. M. Sheldrick, SHELX-97: Package for Crystal Structure Solution and Refinement, University of Göttingen, Germany, 1997.