2008
Y. Hisamatsu et al. / Tetrahedron Letters 49 (2008) 2005–2009
2.0 Â 103 MÀ1. Thus, these five-membered heterocyclic
ureas were capable of forming both the unfolded and
folded conformers at each ratio, and suitable for the
DDA hydrogen-bonding modules.
CHcÁ Á ÁO intramolecular hydrogen bond influenced confor-
mational stabilization, the conformational preference of
uf-2 for the unfolded conformer would be higher than that
of oxazol-4-yl urea 3.
From these results, it was suggested that the difference in
ring size (six- or five-membered ring) was a predominant
factor in the conformational equilibrium of the heterocyclic
ureas. Although the strength of the intramolecular hydro-
gen bond in the folded conformer affected the equilibrium,
it would not be the predominant factor. Indeed, the ratios
between the unfolded and the folded conformers in the het-
erocyclic ureas were not in accord with the order of the pKa
values of conjugated acid in each heteroaromatic ring.9,14
Thus, we focused on the heterocyclic urea structures of
the unfolded conformer optimized by computational study
In conclusion, it was demonstrated that the new five-
membered heterocyclic ureas 3–7 were capable of forming
both the unfolded and the folded conformers at each ratio,
and suitable for the DDA hydrogen-bonding modules.17 In
this case, the greater usefulness of the five-membered ring
as the hydrogen-bonding acceptor is clearly shown, com-
pared with the six-membered ring. Additionally, we pro-
pose that the distance between CHcÁ Á ÁO in the unfolded
conformer is the predominant factor in the equilibrium
between the unfolded and the folded conformers of the
heterocyclic ureas. Understanding of the conformational
equilibriums inherent in heterocyclic ureas is broadening
the potential of multiple hydrogen-bonding modules. By
employing our concept, the development of new quadruple
hydrogen-bonding modules including five-membered
heterocyclic urea structures is ongoing.
(B3LYP/6-31+G ).15 Ureas uf-1a, uf-2a (R1 = CH2CH3),
**
uf-3a, uf-6a, and uf-7a (R3 = CH2CH3) were used as the
model compounds. The distances between the hydrogen
Hc on the heteroaromatic ring and the oxygen on the urea
carbonyl substitute of each heterocyclic urea are shown in
Table 2. The CHcÁ Á ÁO distances of six-membered hetero-
˚
cyclic ureas (2.2 A) were clearly shorter than those of
Acknowledgments
˚
five-membered heterocyclic ureas (2.4–2.5 A). In addition,
as shown in Table 2 and Figure 4, the angle of three nitro-
gen atoms (\N–N–N) of six-membered heterocyclic ureas
(uf-1a and uf-2a) were smaller than that of five-membered
heterocyclic ureas (uf-3a, uf-6a and uf-7a). The slightly con-
cave shape3d,e of uf-1a and uf-2a suggested the presence of
a steric strain. Thus, the six-membered heterocyclic ureas 1
and 2 would be destabilized as an effect of steric repulsion
due to the closer distance between CHcÁ Á ÁO and their con-
formational equilibriums were biased toward the stable
folded conformer. In contrast, the longer distance in the
five-membered heterocyclic ureas decreased such unfavour-
able interactions. Generally, the distance of CHcÁ Á ÁO in the
six-membered heterocyclic ureas suggested the presence of
a weak intramolecular hydrogen bond.16 In this case, if the
This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scien-
tific Research from the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology, Japan. We are grateful
to Ms. S. Kato (Graduate School of Pharmaceutical
Sciences) for technical support with NMR measurements.
Supplementary data
Experimental details describing the synthesis of the
heterocyclic ureas, characterization of all new compounds,
1
the H NMR measurements and the calculation studies.
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
Table 2
References and notes
Calculated CHcÁ Á ÁO distances and \N–N–Na
c
˚
Ureas
Ring size
CH Á Á ÁO (A)
\N–N–N (°)
1. (a) Jeffrey, G. A. An Introduction to Hydrogen Bonding; Oxford
University Press: Oxford, 1997; (b) Watson, J. D.; Baker, T. A.; Bell,
S. P.; Gann, A.; Levine, M.; Losick, R. Molecular Biology of the Gene,
5th ed.; Benjamin-Cummings: San Francisco, 2003.
2. For reviews, see: (a) Zimmerman, S. C.; Corbin, P. S. Struct. Bond.
2000, 96, 63–94; (b) Prins, L. J.; Reinhoudt, D. N.; Timmerman, P.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 2382–2426; (c) Sijbesma, R. P.;
Meijer, E. W. Chem. Commun. 2003, 5–16; (d) Sessler, J. L.;
Lawrence, C. M.; Jayawickramarajah, J. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2007, 36,
314–325; (e) Sivakova, S.; Rowan, S. J. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2005, 34, 9–
21; (f) Sessler, J. L.; Jayawickramarajah, J. Chem. Commun. 2005,
1939–1949; (g) Cooke, G.; Rotello, V. M. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2002, 31,
275–286; (h) Wilson, A. J. Soft Matter 2007, 3, 409–425.
uf-3a
uf-7a
uf-6a
uf-2a
uf-1a
a
5
5
5
6
6
2.52
2.45
2.37
2.24
2.23
**
173
171
169
166
165
Calculated with DFT at the B3LYP/6-31G level.
3. (a) Papadopoulou, M. V.; Goswami, S.; Hamilton, A. D. J.
Heterocycl. Chem. 1995, 32, 675–681; (b) Corbin, P. S.; Zimmerman,
S. C.; Thiessen, P. A.; Hawryluk, N. A.; Murray, T. J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2001, 123, 10475–10488; (c) Corbin, P. S.; Zimmerman, S. C. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 3779–3780; (d) Quinn, J. R.; Zimmerman,
S. C. Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 1649–1652; (e) Mayer, M. F.; Nakashima, S.;
Fig. 4. Optimized structures of (A) uf-1a and (B) uf-3a, obtained by DFT
at the B3LYP/6-31G level.
**
Zimmerman, S. C. Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 3005–3008; (f) Luning, U.;
¨