D. Hwang et al.
Table 2. The 13C NMR chemical shifts of chalcone derivatives 1–20
δ of 13C
Position
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
193.2
127.8
143.4
129.4
158.3
111.8
133.1
120.9
130.5
137.2
106.5
161.2
102.6
161.2
106.5
55.9
–
190.4
122.8
145.0
136.9
113.1
160.1
129.7
119.4
121.2
139.7
106.5
161.2
103.0
161.2
106.5
–
188.8
122.5
144.1
131.2
131.0
114.0
163.6
114.0
131.0
137.1
106.4
161.2
102.7
161.2
106.4
–
190.9
123.1
140.7
140.7
106.6
161.0
105.1
161.0
106.6
124.1
159.0
111.4
132.0
120.9
129.4
–
190.2
122.4
144.9
136.3
106.5
161.0
105.1
161.0
106.5
140.2
113.5
160.1
130.0
116.5
121.3
–
190.2
119.9
144.9
127.7
106.4
161.0
104.9
161.9
106.4
140.7
130.4
114.6
161.9
114.6
130.4
–
190.1
122.6
145.0
136.8
106.5
161.0
105.1
161.0
106.5
140.2
106.5
161.2
102.9
161.2
106.5
–
192.6
121.0
140.2
114.4
166.2
101.2
166.7
107.7
131.4
123.9
159.0
111.4
132.1
120.9
129.6
–
192.0
120.8
144.5
114.3
166.5
101.3
166.9
108.0
131.5
136.4
113.8
160.2
130.2
116.6
121.3
–
192.0
117.9
144.4
114.3
166.2
101.2
166.7
107.7
131.3
114.3
130.5
114.6
161.9
114.6
130.5
–
2
3
1ꢁ
2ꢁ
3ꢁ
4ꢁ
5ꢁꢁ
6ꢁꢁ
1
2ꢁꢁ
3ꢁꢁ
4ꢁꢁ
5ꢁꢁ
6ꢁꢁ
2ꢁ-OMe
3ꢁ-OMe
4ꢁꢁ-OMe
5ꢁꢁ-OMe
2ꢁꢁ-OMe
3 -OMe
4ꢁꢁ-OMe
5ꢁꢁ-OMe
55.6
–
–
55.8
–
55.7
–
55.7
–
55.7
–
–
–
–
–
55.6
–
55.7
–
55.8
–
55.5
–
–
–
55.8
55.7
–
55.7
–
55.7
–
55.7
–
–
–
–
55.7
–
–
–
55.6
–
55.6
–
55.6
–
55.4
–
–
55.5
–
55.6
–
–
–
55.5
–
–
55.5
–
55.6
55.6
55.6
–
–
55.5
–
–
H-5ꢁ at 7.01 and 7.04 ppm, respectively. Long-range coupling
was observed between the C-1 and the H-6ꢁ peak at 7.62 ppm.
Assignments of H-3ꢁ, H-4ꢁ, and H-5ꢁ were made based on COSY
cross peaks. The coupling constant between H-2 and H-3 (15.9 Hz)
indicated that the conformation of the bond between C-2 and C-3
was trans.
and HMBC were acquired with 2048 data points for t2 and 256
for t1 increments. The long-ranged coupling time for HMBC was
70 ms. Prior to Fourier transformation, zero filling of 2K and a
sine-squared bell window function were applied using XWIN-NMR
(Bruker).[6]
The spectral assignments of the other chalcones followed the
same general pattern. A complete list of the 1H and 13C chemical
shifts of 1–20 is listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Of these 20
chalcone derivatives, only the 1H and 13C NMR data of 4 and 10,
Results and Discussion
The structures and the nomenclatures of chalcones 1–20 are
shown in Fig. 1. The assignment of 1 is explained here in
detail. Fifteen peaks were observed in the 13C NMR spectrum
of 1. The peak at 193.2 ppm was assigned to a ketone at C-
1. Three peaks showing double intensities at 55.6, 106.5, and
161.2 ppm were attributed to 3ꢁꢁ-OMe/5ꢁꢁ-OMe, C-2ꢁꢁ/C-6ꢁꢁ, and
C-3ꢁꢁ/C-5ꢁꢁ, respectively. The peak at 55.9 ppm was assigned to
2ꢁ-OMe. In the COSY spectrum, a cross-peak between 7.32 and
7.53 ppm was observed and correlated with two 13C peaks
at 127.8 and 143.4 ppm, respectively, in the HMQC spectrum.
Therefore, these shifts were assigned to H-2/C-2 and H-3/C-
3, respectively. H-2 was long range coupled to a 13C peak at
137.2 ppm in the HMBC spectrum and attributed to C-1ꢁꢁ. The
13C peak at 102.6 ppm in the HMBC spectrum was assigned
to C-4ꢁꢁ based on long-range coupling with H-2ꢁꢁ/H-6ꢁꢁ. Four 1H
peaks at 7.01, 7.04, 7.48, and 7.62 ppm were correlated in the
COSY spectrum and assigned to H-3ꢁ, H-4ꢁ, H-5ꢁ, and/or H-6ꢁ,
respectively. These were connected directly to four 13C peaks at
111.8, 133.1, 120.9, and 130.5 ppm, respectively, in the HMQC
spectrum. The 13C peak at 158.3 ppm could be attributed to
methoxylated C-2ꢁ, which was long-range coupled with H-4ꢁ
and/or H-6ꢁ at 7.48 and 7.62 ppm, respectively, in the HMBC
spectrum. The 13C peak at 129.4 ppm was coupled to H-3ꢁ and/or
1
and the H NMR data of 19, had been previously reported;[8–10]
the literature spectra matched well with the NMR data given
herein.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Priority Research Centers Program
through NRF funded by MEST (2009-0093824), Agenda program
(RDA, 11-30-68), and Disease Network Research Program Grant
(NRF, 20090084183).
References
[1] W. Vermerris, R. Nicholson, Phenolic Compound Biochemistry,
Springer: New York, 2008.
[2] H. Ashihara, W. W. Deng, W. Mullen, A. Crozier, Phytochemistry
2010, 71, 559.
[3] P. M. Sivakumar, V. Prabhawathi, M. Doble, SAR QSAR Environ. Res.
2010, 21, 247.
[4] M. Pilatova, L. Varinska, P. Perjesi, M. Sarissky, L. Mirossay, P. Solar,
A. Ostro, J. Mojzis, Toxicol. In Vitro 2010, 24, 1347.
[5] G. S. Viana, M. A. Bandeira, F. J. Matos, Phytomedicine 2003, 10, 189.
[6] Y. Park, B.-H. Moon, H. Yang, Y. Lee, E. Lee, Y. Lim, Magn. Reson.
Chem. 2007, 45, 1072.
c
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/mrc
Copyright ꢀ 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Magn. Reson. Chem. 2011, 49, 41–45