-
1
-
-
28844471349
-
-
P. Vishweshwar, J. A. McMahon, M. Oliveira, M. L. Peterson, M. J. Zaworotko, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16 802.
-
(2005)
J. Am. Chem. Soc
, vol.127
, pp. 16-802
-
-
Vishweshwar, P.1
McMahon, J.A.2
Oliveira, M.3
Peterson, M.L.4
Zaworotko, M.J.5
-
2
-
-
33846470644
-
-
a) R. K. R. Jetti, P. K. Thallapally, A. K. Katz, H. L. Carrell, K. Singh, K. Lahiri, S. Kotha, R. Boese, G. R. Desiraju, Angew. Chem. 2004, 116, 1169;
-
(2004)
Angew. Chem
, vol.116
, pp. 1169
-
-
Jetti, R.K.R.1
Thallapally, P.K.2
Katz, A.K.3
Carrell, H.L.4
Singh, K.5
Lahiri, K.6
Kotha, S.7
Boese, R.8
Desiraju, G.R.9
-
3
-
-
4544359331
-
-
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 1149;
-
(2004)
Chem. Int. Ed
, vol.43
, pp. 1149
-
-
Angew1
-
4
-
-
33646500695
-
-
b) K. Shankland, W. I. F. David, C. R. Pulham, N. Blagden, R. J. Davey, M. Song, Angew. Chem. 2005, 117, 7194;
-
(2005)
Angew. Chem
, vol.117
, pp. 7194
-
-
Shankland, K.1
David, W.I.F.2
Pulham, C.R.3
Blagden, N.4
Davey, R.J.5
Song, M.6
-
5
-
-
27744503994
-
-
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 7032;
-
(2005)
Chem. Int. Ed
, vol.44
, pp. 7032
-
-
Angew1
-
6
-
-
33846480065
-
-
c) A. V. Trask, G. M. Day, W. D. S. Motherwell, W. Jones, Chem. Commun. 2006, 54.
-
(2006)
Chem. Commun
, pp. 54
-
-
Trask, A.V.1
Day, G.M.2
Motherwell, W.D.S.3
Jones, W.4
-
7
-
-
0004284003
-
-
Ed, H. G. Brittain, Marcel Dekker, New York
-
a) Polymorphism in Pharmaceutical Solids (Ed.: H. G. Brittain), Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999;
-
(1999)
Polymorphism in Pharmaceutical Solids
-
-
-
8
-
-
33646363206
-
-
and references therein
-
b) A. Nangia, Cryst. Growth Des. 2006, 6, 1 and references therein.
-
(2006)
Cryst. Growth Des
, vol.6
, pp. 1
-
-
Nangia, A.1
-
10
-
-
0022219887
-
-
Y. Kim, K. Machida, T. Taga, K. Osaki, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1985, 33, 2641.
-
(1985)
Chem. Pharm. Bull
, vol.33
, pp. 2641
-
-
Kim, Y.1
Machida, K.2
Taga, T.3
Osaki, K.4
-
12
-
-
33846466105
-
-
int = 0.0255), 1756 observed reflections, R1-[I > 2σ(I)] = 0.0330, wR2(all data) = 0.0925, S = 1.08. CCDC 610952 contains the supplementary crystallographic data for this paper. These data can be obtained free of charge from The Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre via www.ccdc.cam.a-c.uk/data_request/cif.
-
int = 0.0255), 1756 observed reflections, R1-[I > 2σ(I)] = 0.0330, wR2(all data) = 0.0925, S = 1.08. CCDC 610952 contains the supplementary crystallographic data for this paper. These data can be obtained free of charge from The Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre via www.ccdc.cam.a-c.uk/data_request/cif.
-
-
-
-
13
-
-
33846496887
-
-
Full details of our experimental procedures are available in the Supporting Information. To put aside any question of experimental issues, crystal quality, etc. we note that the PZ result can be obtained purely by manipulation of data simulated from the form I structure. If the simulated single-crystal data set is subjected to the transformation [1 0 1/2 0 -1 0 0 0 -1], the form II structure can be refined against the transformed data to emulate the PZ result.
-
Full details of our experimental procedures are available in the Supporting Information. To put aside any question of experimental issues, crystal quality, etc. we note that the PZ result can be obtained purely by manipulation of data simulated from the form I structure. If the simulated single-crystal data set is subjected to the transformation [1 0 1/2 0 -1 0 0 0 -1], the form II structure can be refined against the transformed data to emulate the PZ result.
-
-
-
-
14
-
-
0004150157
-
-
University of Göttingen, Germany
-
G. M. Sheldrick, SHELXS-97. University of Göttingen, Germany, 1997.
-
(1997)
SHELXS-97
-
-
Sheldrick, G.M.1
-
15
-
-
33846490893
-
-
Comprehensive details of the relationship between the structures are available in the Supporting Information. The appearance of the form II structure from the form I data set is not a case of a false solution from direct methods. It is the wrong choice of unit cell (and indeed the wrong crystal lattice) that results in a false arrangement of symmetry elements. We further add that since the transformation [1 0 1/2 0 -1 0 0 0 -1] is not a genuine crystallographic one, the resulting form II unit cell does not account for all reflections in the form I diffraction pattern. Specifically, all reflections hkl with odd l are omitted and therefore the simulated transformed data set is only 50% complete. For the experimental data, all reflections with odd l appear unobserved. Remarkably, even this does not prohibit stable (isotropic) refinement of the form II structure: standard F2 refinement against all data produces a model with reasonable geometry and
-
iso values. Of course, the R-factors are high. Acceptable R-factors can be obtained by application of a 2σ(I) cut-off. The fact that PZ did not report this issue suggests that some of their odd l reflections were non-zero at the 2σ(I) level.
-
-
-
-
16
-
-
33846523042
-
-
It is very difficult to assess just how unusual this is. We note only that in our combined experience of many crystal-structure analyses, this is the first such example that we have identified
-
It is very difficult to assess just how unusual this is. We note only that in our combined experience of many crystal-structure analyses, this is the first such example that we have identified.
-
-
-
-
18
-
-
33846522467
-
-
iso values, and the (supposed) necessity for an unacceptable 2θ cutoff. All these indicators are flagged as suspicious within an automated checking system such as checkCIF/PLATON.
-
iso values, and the (supposed) necessity for an unacceptable 2θ cutoff. All these indicators are flagged as suspicious within an automated checking system such as checkCIF/PLATON.
-
-
-
|