544
J Chem Crystallogr (2011) 41:541–544
Acknowledgments Authors thank the University sophisticated
instrumentation centre (USIC), Karnatak University, Dharwad for
the spectral data. One of the authors, Mr. Mahantesha. Basanagouda
is grateful to Karnatak University, Dharwad for a University
Research Studentship. (D. S and V. K. G) grateful to the Head,
SAIF, IIT Madras, Chennai for providing the intensity data collec-
tion facility.
O2–C2–C3 in 1 and 2, is attributed to lone-pair interactions
between O1 and O2. X-ray structure of the compounds 1
and 2 reveals that both the molecules are planar. The
phenyl ring C and the coumarin moiety are in the same
plane [dihedral angle 3.79(6)° (compound 1) and dihedral
angle 3.80(4)° (compound 2)]. The C4–C10–O11–C12
torsion angle of 179.6(1)° in compound 1 and 177.7(2)° in
compound 2 indicates an anti-periplanar arrangement
across the bridging atoms. In compound 1, hydrogen H17
on atom C17 forms an intermolecular hydrogen bond with
the carbonyl O2 atom of a neighboring molecule at
(1 ? x,1 - y, -z). One C–HÁÁÁp hydrogen bond is also
present which connects the parent molecule to its centro-
symmetrically related molecule at (1 - x, 1 - y, -z).
Molecules are packed together to form infinite two-
dimensional layers parallel to the (001) plane. Molecules
within the layers are arranged in anti-parallel manner and
are stabilized by C–HÁÁÁp and p–pinteractions for com-
pound 1. In both the compounds 1 and 2, the packing
diagram of the molecules indicates p–p contacts (Table 2)
between the phenoxy moiety and the fused pyrone ring of
coumarin moiety. In compound 2, this interaction generates
linkages between symmetry related molecules which have
their molecular planes perpendicular to each other. There is
only one intramolecular hydrogen bond C3–H3ÁÁÁO11 and
References
1. Kulkarni MV, Kulkarni GM, Lin CH, Sun CM (2006) Curr Med
Chem 13:2795
2. Fylaktakidou KC, Hadjpavlou D, Litinas KE, Nicolaides DN
(2004) Curr Pharm Design 10:3813
3. Neyts J, Clercq ED, Singha R, Chang YH, Das AR, Chakraborty
SK, Hong SC, Tsay SC, Hsu MH, Hwu JR (2009) J Med Chem
52:1486
4. Gnanaguru K, Ramasubbu N, Venkatesan K, Ramamurthy V
(1985) J Org Chem 50:2337
5. Munshi P, Row TNG (2005) J Phys Chem A 109:659
6. Gavuzzo E, Mazza F (1974) Acta Cryst B30:1351
7. Murthy JN, Venkatakrishnan P, Singh AS (2003) Cryst Eng
Commun 5:507
8. Katerinopoulos HE (2004) Curr Pharm Des 10:3835
9. Gaultier J, Hauw C (1965) Acta Cryst C19:927
10. Kokila MK, Puttaraja KulkarniMV, Shivaprakash NC (1996)
Acta Cryst C52:2078
11. Puttaraja, Vasudevan KT, Kulkarni MV (1991) Acta Cryst
C47:774
12. Kempen I, Papapostolou D, Thierry N, Pochet L, Counerotte S,
Masereel B, Foidart J-M, Reboud-Ravaux M, Noel A, Pirotte B
(2003) Br J Can 88:1111
˚
the distance between H3ÁÁÁO11 is 2.30 A in compound 1
˚
and 2.42 A in compound 2 (Fig. 2).
13. Puttaraja, Vasudevan KT, Kulkarni MV (1990) Acta Cryst
C46:2129
14. Basanagouda M, Kulkarni MV, Sharma D, Gupta VK, Pranesha,
Sandhyarani P, Rasal VP (2009) J Chem Sci 121:485
15. Furniss BS, Hannaford AJ, Smith PWG, Tatchell AR (1997)
Vogel’s textbook of practical organic chemistry, 5th edn. Addi-
son Wesley Longman, Harlow, England
16. Bruker, SMART (Version 5.0), SAINT (Version 6.02) Aabd
SADABS (Version 2.10). Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, WI
17. Sheldrick GM, SHELXS-97 (1997) Program for the solution of
crystal structures. University of Goettingen, Germany
18. Sheldrick GM, SHELXL-97 (1997) Program for the refinement of
crystal structures. University of Goettingen, Germany
19. Kulkarni MV, Pujar BG, Patil VD (1981) Arch Pharm 316:15
Supplementary Material
CCDC nos. 704679 and 695895 contain the supplementary
crystallographic data for the compounds 1 and 2 [14],
respectively. These data can be obtained free of charge
data_request@ccdc.cam. ac.uk, or by contacting The
Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, 12 Union Road,
Cambridge, CB2 1EZ, UK. Fax: ?44(0)1223-336033.
123