Mendeleev Commun., 2009, 19, 334–336
exist as six different isomers (the conformations of substituents
at carbon atoms located in the α-positions with respect to the
peroxide group are shown):
C(12)
C(11)
C(4A)
C(5A)
C(12A)
C(4)
C(5)
C(13A)
C(3A)
C(3)
C(11A)
C(14A)
C(13)
C(1A)
O(1A)
O(1)
C(1)
N(1)
O(3A)
C(10A)
C(2)
C(10)
C(18)
Two meso-forms: tN/g(C+)-g(C–) – tN/g(C–)-g(C+)
C(2A)
C(6A)
C(14)
N(2)
C(6)
gN(+)/tC-g(C–) – gN(–)/tC-g(C+)
N(1A)
N(2A)
C(18A)
O(3)
C(7A)
C(17)
O(2A)
O(4)
tN/g(C+)-g(C–) – gN(+)/tC-g(C–)
tN/g(C+)-g(C–) – gN(–)/tC-g(C+)
gN(+)/tC-g(C–) – gN(+)/tC-g(C–)
gN(–)/tC-g(C+) – gN(–)/tC-g(C+)
C(7)
Four d,l-forms:
C(9)
C(9A)
C(8A)
C(17A)
C(15A)
C(15)
C(8)
C(16A)
O(4A)
C(16)
O(2)
Figure 1 Molecular structure of 2a; hydrogen atoms are omitted for
clarity; two independent molecules representing the different conformers
are shown. Labels A denote symmetrically equivalent atoms relative to the
2-fold axis. Selected bond lengths (Å) and angles (°): O(1)–O(1A) 1.482(3),
O(3)–O(3A) 1.486(3), O(1)–C(1) 1.459(2), O(3)–C(10) 1.457(2), N(1)–C(1)
1.442(3), N(1)–C(6) 1.469(2), N(1)–C(9) 1.465(3), N(2)–C(10) 1.443(3),
N(2)–C(15) 1.461(3), N(2)–C(18) 1.467(3); O(1A)–O(1)–C(1) 108.1(2),
O(3A)–O(3)–C(10) 108.0(2), N(1)–C(1)–O(1) 114.2(2), N(2)–C(10)–O(3)
114.4(2), O(1)–C(1)–C2 100.6(2), O(1)–C(1)–C(5) 110.3(2), O(3)–C(10)–
C(11) 110.8(2), O(3)–C(10)–C(14) 100.7(2), C(1)–N(1)–C(6) 118.2(2),
C(1)–N(1)–C(9) 114.0(2), C(6)–N(1)–C(9) 109.1(2), C(10)–N(2)–C(15)
114.5(2), C(10)–N(2)–C(18) 117.0(2), C(15)–N(2)–C(18) 109.1(2), C(1)–
O(1)–O(1A)–C(1A) –156.4(2), C(10)–O(3)–O(3A)–C(10A) 158.9(2), O(1A)–
O(1)–C(1)–N(1) –59.1(2), O(3A)–O(3)–C(10)–N(2) –66.6(2), O(1A)–O(1)–
C(1)–C(2) –179.1(1), O(1A)–O(1)–C(1)–C(5) 69.9(2), O(3A)–O(3)–C(10)–
C(11) –63.0(2), O(3A)–O(3)–C(10)–C(14) –172.4(1).
However, the gC-gC conformation of saturated carbon cycles
with respect to the peroxide group is sterically unfavourable;
hence, an experiment is most likely to show the formation of only
three of the isomers specified above, namely, one meso-form
(gN(+)/tC-g(C–) – gN(–)/tC-g(C+)) and two d,l- forms (gN(+)/tC-g(C–)
–
gN(+)/tC-g(–) and gN(–)/tC-g(+) – gN(–)/tC-g(+)). In fact, all the three
isomersCare actually forCmed in compoCunds 2a (both d,l-forms)
and 2b (meso-form). While compound 2a is crystallized as a
racemate of enantiomers of both isomers (space group C2/c),
compound 2b either forms only the meso-form, or its isomers
are spontaneously separated from each other upon crystalliza-
tion (space group P21). The assumption that compound 2b can
exist only as a meso-form follows from the fact that, apparently,
due to steric factors, an increase in the size of cycloalkane sub-
stituents at the carbon atoms in α-positions with respect to the
peroxide group should favour the formation of the meso-form.
Second, isomers of peroxides 2 can also form various con-
formers. Note that the experimentally observed isomers of per-
oxide 2a are different conformers with respect to the orientation
of five-membered rings, which have an envelope conformation
typical of such fragments. In fact, in one of the isomers, it is
the C(4) atom in the β-position to the C(1) nodal carbon atom
which deviates from the plane formed by the other four atoms
in both five-membered rings, whereas in the other isomer, it is
the C(10) nodal atom (Figure 1). In the latter case, the mor-
pholine substituents occupy the equatorial positions, whereas
the peroxide group is axial. Furthermore, the meso-form of
compound 2b observed in a crystal also has an unusual con-
formation with respect to the mutual orientation of the cyclo-
hexane fragments. While one of the cyclohexane fragments
contains a peroxide group in an equatorial position and a
morpholine substituent in an axial position, the other fragment,
conversely, contains a morpholine substituent in an equatorial
position and a peroxide group in an axial position (Figure 2).
Apparently, a superposition of the two geometrical factors
described above gives a single enantiomer of compound 2b;
as a result, crystallization of this compound occurs in chiral
space group P21. It should be noted that both factors can act
independently of each other and can depend on the kinetic
conditions of the reaction.
It is interesting that, despite the different structures of com-
pounds 2a and 2b, the geometric characteristics of their main
peroxide C–O–O–C fragment are rather similar. This fragment
deviates slightly from an ideal planar structure [the torsion
angles are –156.4(2) and 158.9(2)° for 2a and –170.6(3)° for
2b]; this deviation is more significant for compound 2a, as
O(4)
C(18)
C(19)
‡
C(4)
Crystal data for 2a: C18H32N2O4, M = 340.46, monoclinic, space
group C2/c, at 120 K: a = 22.346(3), b = 14.313(2) and c = 15.556(2) Å,
b = 134.008(2)°, V = 3578.5(8) Å3, Z = 8, dcalc = 1.264 g cm–3, F(000) =
= 1488, m = 0.089 mm–1, R1 = 0.059 for 3003 independent reflections
with I > 2s(I), wR2 = 0.177 for all data, GOF = 1.028. 15854 reflections
(3771 unique, Rint = 0.037) were measured on a Bruker SMART 1K
CCD diffractometer (MoKα-radiation, graphite monochromator, j and
w scan mode, 2qmax = 54°).
Crystal data for 2b: C20H36N2O4, M = 368.51, monoclinic, space
group P21, at 100 K: a = 10.7044(14), b = 6.2298(8) and c = 14.517(2) Å,
b = 91.407(3)°, V = 967.8(2) Å3, Z = 2, dcalc = 1.265 g cm–3, F(000) = 404,
m = 0.087 mm–1, R1 = 0.050 for 1469 independent reflections with
I > 2s(I), wR2 = 0.106 for all data, GOF = 1.005. 9706 reflections (2180
unique, Rint = 0.062) were measured on a Bruker SMART 1K CCD
diffractometer (MoKα-radiation, graphite monochromator, j and w scan
mode, 2qmax = 53°).
The structures were determined by direct methods and refined by full-
matrix least squares technique on F2 with anisotropic displacement
parameters for non-hydrogen atoms. The hydrogen atoms were placed in
calculated positions and refined in the riding model with fixed isotropic
displacement parameters. All calculations were carried out using the
SHELXTL program.3
CCDC 745598 and 745599 contain the supplementary crystallographic data
for this paper. These data can be obtained free of charge from The Cambridge
For details, see ‘Notice to Authors’, Mendeleev Commun., Issue 1, 2009.
C(5)
C(17)
C(20)
C(6)
C(3)
C(2)
N(1)
N(2)
O(1)
C(1)
C(8)
C(11)
C(12)
O(2)
C(7)
C(16)
C(10)
C(13)
C(9)
C(15)
C(14)
O(3)
Figure 2 Molecular structure of 2b; hydrogen atoms are omitted for
clarity. Selected bond lengths (Å) and angles (°): O(1)–O(2) 1.497(3),
O(1)–C(1) 1.455(4), O(2)–C(11) 1.458(4), N(1)–C(1) 1.454(4), N(1)–C(7)
1.461(4), N(1)–C(10) 1.473(4), N(2)–C(11) 1.451(4), N(2)–C(17) 1.467(4),
N(2)–C(20) 1.481(5); O(1)–O(2)–C(11) 106.4(2), O(2)–O(1)–C(1) 108.7(2),
N(1)–C(1)–O(1) 113.7(3), N(2)–C(11)–O(2) 114.0(3), O(1)–C(1)–C(2)
111.1(3), O(1)–C(1)–C(6) 101.1(3), O(2)–C(11)–C(12) 111.0(3), O(2)–
C(11)–C(16) 100.6(3), C(1)–N(1)–C(7) 115.6(3), C(1)–N(1)–C(10) 117.2(3),
C(7)–N(1)–C(10) 108.7(3), C(11)–N(2)–C(17) 115.7(3), C(11)–N(2)–C(20)
118.0(3), C(17)–N(2)–C(20) 107.4(3), C(1)–O(1)–O(2)–C(11) –170.6(3),
O(1)–O(2)–C(11)–N(2) 71.2(3), O(2)–O(1)–C(1)–N(1) –77.6(3), O(1)–
O(2)–C(11)–C(12) –56.0(3), O(1)–O(2)–C(11)–C(16) –171.8(2), O(2)–
O(1)–C(1)–C(2) 49.4(3), O(2)–O(1)–C(1)–C(6) 163.6(2).
– 335 –