Green Chemistry
Paper
degrees of saturation. The composition of saturated, mono-,
di- and tri-unsaturated cardanol was calculated from inte-
gration of the olefinic proton signals the protons adjacent to
the double binds and the aromatic protons.
Monounsaturated cardanol (2d).25 RuCl3·xH2O (17 mg,
1.1 mmol) was dissolved in 2-propanol (5 mL) and cardanol
(0.5 g, 1.66 mmol) was added. The reaction was refluxed for
18 h under an N2 atmosphere. The resulting brown solution
was cooled to room temperature and the solvent removed to
give a viscous brown oil. The oil was dissolved in CH2Cl2
(20 ml) and filtered over a 5 cm3 plug of silica to give a yellow
oil. Yield: 0.43 g, 1.4 mmol (86%). 1H NMR (CDCl3): δ 0.9
(t, 3H, CH3); 1.3 (m, 16 H, CH2); 2.0 (m, 4H, CH2–CvC); 2.6
(m, 2H, Ar–CH2–); 5.4 (m, 2H, HCvCH); 6.7–7.2 (m, 4H, Ar)
ppm. MS (m/z): 302, 304 (saturated cardanol).
Methyl protected monounsaturated cardanol (8b).24 Mono-
unsaturated cardanol (1 g, 3.3 mmol) and potassium carbon-
ate (0.9 g, 6.6 mmol) were suspended in dry acetone (15 mL).
Methyl iodide (0.4 mL, 6.6 mmol) was added dropwise and the
mixture allowed to reflux for 6 h. The reaction was then
allowed to cool to room temperature and the solvent was
removed under reduced pressure. The residue was dissolved in
ethyl acetate (50 ml). The organic layer was washed with water
(3 × 20 ml), dried over MgSO4, filtered and evaporated to give a
yellow oil. The oil was then purified over a silica column using
hexane–EtOAc (5 : 1). Yield: 55%. 1H NMR (CDCl3): δ 0.9 (t, 3H,
CH3); 1.3 (m, 16 H, CH2); 2.0 (m, 4H, CH2–CvC); 2.6 (m, 2H,
Ar–CH2–); 3.8 (s, 3H, OCH3); 5.4 (m, 2H, HCvCH); 6.7–7.2
(m, 4H, Ar) ppm. MS (m/z): 316.
Methyl linolenate (12). Oleic acid (0.92 g, 3.5 mmol) and
polyethyleneglycol-750 (1.24 g) were dissolved in CH2Cl2
(5 mL). KOH (0.37 g) was added and, after stirring for 1 h, MeI
(0.5 g, 0.22 mL, 3.4 mmol). After stirring for 5 h, during which
time a white precipitate formed, water was added followed by
NaCl to break the emulsion. The organic phase was collected
combined with CH2Cl2 washings of the aqueous phase
(2 × 5 mL), dried over anhydrous MgSO4 and evaporated to
dryness. The product was separated on a silica column using
hexane–EtOAc (4 : 1). GCMS analysis if the product showed it
to be contaminated with up to 50% methyl linoleate and
traces of methyl oleate. NMR integration also suggests that sig-
nificant amounts of methyl linoleate are present.
Fig. 9 YES assay for cardanol and CNSL compared with oestradiol.
FF100 Recirc 13649 series, where the port was evacuated for
30 minutes and flooded with nitrogen gas for 3 cycles. All reac-
tions which used air sensitive chemicals were carried out
under nitrogen atmosphere using standard Schlenk line and
catheter techniques.
GC-MS analyses were carried out using a Hewlett-Packard
6890 series gas chromatograph instrument equipped with a
flame ionization detector for quantitative analysis and a
Hewlett-Packard 5973 series mass selective detector fitted with
hp1 film for mass spectral identification of products. Helium
was used as the carrier gas with initial flow of 1 mL min−1
.
1
The H NMR and 13C NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker
AM 400 NMR spectrometer at 400 and 100 MHz or a Bruker
AM 300 spectrometer at 300 and 75 MHz, respectively. Samples
were dissolved in deuterated solvents which were referenced
internally relative to tetramethylsilane (TMS) at δ = 0 ppm.
Chemical shifts, δ, are reported in ppm relative to TMS. All 13
C
NMR spectra were proton-decoupled.
3-Hydroxyphenyl oleate (11). Oleic acid (1.6 g, 4.21 mmol)
and resorcinol (1.6 g, 14.82 mmol) were dissolved in THF
(10 mL). The reaction mixture was cooled to 0 °C and slowly
N,N-dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (991 mg, 4.81 mmol) and DMAP
(22 mg, 0.18 mmol) were added. The reaction mixture turned
turbulent and a white precipitate was formed. The suspension
was allowed to warm and was stirred for 85 h at room tempera-
ture. Ethyl acetate (25 mL) was added to the mixture and the
precipitate was collected by filtration. The filtrate was evapor-
ated and the remaining residue was purified via column
chromatography with hexane–EtOAc (4 : 1) as eluent. Yield:
62%. 1H NMR(CDCl3): δ 0.91 (t, 3J = 6.9 Hz, 3 H, CH3),
1.27–1.45 (m, 20 H, CH2), 1.75–1.79 (m, 2 H, CH2), 2.01–2. 07
(m, 4 H, CH2), 2.57 (t, 3J = 7.8 Hz, CH2), 5.36–5.42 (m, 2 H,
Analysis of cardanol (2). Cardanol was analysed via GC and
1
NMR. H NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3): δ 0.93–1.00 (m, 1.9 H, CH3/
CH2), 1.33–1.45 (m, 12.4 H, CH2), 2.05–2.14 (m, 2.1 H, CH2),
2.57–2.62 (m, 3.1 H, CH2), 2.83–2.92 (m, 1.9 H, CH2), 5.03–5.16
(m, 0.8 H, CH), 5.33–5.56 (m, 4.0 H, CH), 5.82–5.95 (m, 0.4 H,
CH), 6.70–7.22 (m, 4H, Ar-H) ppm. 13C (75 MHz, CDCl3): 14.3,
14.6 (CH3), 32.1, 23.3, 26.0, 26.1, 27.6, 27.7, 29.4, 29.7, 29.8,
29.9, 30.1, 30.1, 30.2, 31.7, 32.0, 32.2, 36.3 (CH2). 127.3, 128.0,
128.4, 128.6 129.7, 129.8 (CH), 130.4, 130.6, 130.8, 137.3,
145.3, 155.8 (Ar-C) ppm. The integration of the 1H NMR-
signals did not result in even numbers, as cardanol is a
mixture of compounds of different saturation. Furthermore,
more than 21 C-signals can be observed due to the different
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2014
Green Chem., 2014, 16, 2846–2856 | 2853