organic compounds
angle C4—C5—C51—O51 (Table 1). In each structure, formyl
atom O51 is involved in an intramolecular N—HÁ Á ÁO
hydrogen bond (Table 2), forming an S(6) motif (Bernstein et
al., 1995).
tronic structure, in addition to the classical aromatic form (B).
Within the formyl fragments, the C—O distance is, in every
˚
case, long for its type [reference mean = 1.192 A and upper
˚
quartile = 1.197 A; Allen et al. (1987, 2006)], while the C5—
C51 bond between the formyl group and the pyrimidine ring is
Compounds (I)–(III) (Fig. 1) all have an N-methyl-N-
phenyl substituent at position 6 of the pyrimidine ring with
slightly different substituents at position 4 (Fig. 1), viz. a
glycinate ester and a glycinamide substituent in (I) and (II),
respectively, and a 3-aminopropionate ester substituent in
(III), and in each of (I)–(III) the pyrimidine ring is effectively
planar. Compounds (IV) and (V) both have an N-benzyl-N-
methyl substituent at position 6, with different amino acid
ester substituents at position 4; the orientation of the
6-substituent is different, as indicated by the torsion angles
C5—C6—N61—C67 and C5—C6—N61—C68 (Table 1 and
Fig. 1). In addition, the pyrimidine ring in each of (IV)–(VI) is
slightly distorted from planarity into a boat conformation, as
indicated by the ring-puckering parameters (Cremer & Pople,
1975) for the atom sequence N1–C2–N3–C4–C5–C6 (Table 1).
Thus, the ring-puckering parameters for compounds (IV)–
(VI) are all very similar, and in each case the boat confor-
mation has atoms C2 and C5 as the prow and stern of the boat,
respectively, displaced to one side of the mean plane through
the ring atoms, with atoms N1, N3, C4 and C6 all displaced to
the opposite side of this plane, indicated schematically as (A)
in the Scheme. Where three substituents are present at the 4-,
5- and 6-positions in pyrimidines, the ring is often found to be
quite markedly nonplanar, leading to boat (Quesada et al.,
2004; Low et al., 2007; Trilleras et al., 2007; Cobo et al., 2008),
twist-boat (Melguizo et al., 2003; Quesada et al., 2003; Cobo et
al., 2008) or screw-boat (Low et al., 2007) conformations, as
well as a variety of intermediate forms (Cobo et al., 2008). The
conformations of (IV)–(VI) reported here are thus fully
consistent with some of the examples reported earlier.
However, even when the pyrimidine ring is effectively planar,
as in (I)–(III), the ring substituent atoms are not always
coplanar with the ring, with atom C51 always markedly
displaced from the mean plane (Table 1).
˚
short for its type (reference mean = 1.470 A and lower
˚
quartile = 1.463 A). The N21—C2, C2—N3, N3—C4 and
C4—N41 bond lengths (Fig. 1) are all very similar in each
compound, despite the fact that the C2—N3 and N3—C4
bonds are formally of heteroaromatic type, while the exocyclic
N21—C2 and C4—N41 bonds are formally single bonds. It
may also be noted here that the N1—C2 bond is usually the
longest of the ring N—C bonds, while the C6—N61 bond is
consistently longer than the C4—N41 bond, and this may be
associated with the fact that, in general, the substituents at
N61 are usually displaced well away from the mean pyrimidine
plane by a rotation about the C6—N61 bond. Moreover, the
geometry at N61 is always slightly pyramidal, with a mean sum
˚
of the bond angles of 353.6 (2) A, while atom N41 is always
effectively planar.
The supramolecular assembly is dominated by N—HÁ Á ÁN
and N—HÁ Á ÁO hydrogen bonds, with C—HÁ Á ÁO hydrogen
bonds also present in the structures of (II) and (V) and a C—
HÁ Á ÁN hydrogen bond present in the structure of (VI). C—
HÁ Á ÁO interactions involving C—H bonds in methyl groups,
and those having D—HÁ Á ÁA angles significantly less than 140ꢁ,
have been discounted (cf. Wood et al., 2009). However, N—
HÁ Á Áꢀ(arene) and C—HÁ Á Áꢀ(arene) hydrogen bonds are
absent, while the polarized pyrimidine rings are far from being
aromatic. Despite the rather similar constitutions of (I)–(VI),
the patterns of their hydrogen-bonded supramolecular
assemblies vary widely, from simple dimeric units in (I), via
chains and sheets, to a three-dimensional framework structure
While the glycinate ester side chains at position 4 in (I) and
(IV) both adopt all-transoid extended-chain conformations, as
demonstrated by the relevant torsion angles, which all lie
within 10ꢁ of 180ꢁ, the corresponding aminopropionate
substituents in (III), (V) and (VI) show a considerable
variation in their conformations (Table 1 and Fig. 1). In
particular, the values of the three torsion angles C4—N41—
C42—C43, N41—C42—C43—C44 and C42—C43—C44—O45
show wide variations among these compounds. While it is
tempting to associate these variations with the different
patterns of hydrogen bonds involving this substituent in (III),
(V) and (VI), such an approach cannot readily be reconciled
with the similarity in the conformations of the 4-substituent in
(I) and (IV), where the hydrogen bonds involving the
4-substituent are also different, with no involvement at all in
(I), but participation of atom O43 in (IV) (Table 2).
Figure 2
Part of the crystal structure of (I), showing the formation of a
centrosymmetric hydrogen-bonded (dashed lines) R22(8) dimer. For the
sake of clarity, H atoms other than those bonded to atom N21 have been
omitted. Atoms marked with an asterisk (*) are at the symmetry position
(Àx, Ày + 1, Àz + 1).
There are some interesting patterns in the bond lengths in
(I)–(VI) (Table 1) which suggest that the polarized form (C)
(see Scheme) is a significant contributor to the overall elec-
ꢀ
164 Acosta et al.
C16H19N5O3, C14H16N6O2, C17H21N5O3, C18H23N5O3 and C15H23N5O3
Acta Cryst. (2013). C69, 162–171