Mendeleev Commun., 2019, 29, 294–295
F
group in an intensity ratio of 67:18:15. The three peaks at 1.504,
.335 and 1.253 ppm could be attributed to the 15, 67 and 18%
1
conformers, respectively. We have assumed that the different
t
chemical shifts of the Bu hydrogen atoms were influenced by
N
i
O
ii, iii
45%
the different electron withdrawing effect of the oxygen atom
connected to the Bu group. Considering the atomic charge
distributions in terms of Natural Population Analysis (NPA), one
might see that the relative charge of the C(=O)–O–CMe is
1
a
9
4%
t
N
H
O
6
3
F
changing in the order 4'''b (–0.586), 4'b (–0.582), 4''''b
(
–0.578), 4''b (–0.573). It shows that the relative charge of the
oxygen atom is the least negative in rotamer 4''b, therefore it
draws less electron density from the alkyl group thus causing the
most upfiled chemical shift (calculated amount: 19%, measured:
18% at 1.253 ppm). On the contrary, conformer 4'''b (calculated:
N
N
O
iv (H+)
O
5
a
1
1%) has the largest negative charge causing the most downfield
O
chemical shift (measured: 15% at 1.504 ppm). It is assumed that
the other two conformers (4'b and 4''''b, calculated populations:
60 and 10%, respectively) having similar charges (–0.578 and
NH
H N
2
7
–0.582, respectively) between those of 4''b and 4'''b, are detected
Scheme 2 Reagents and conditions: i, HOCH CH OH, p-TsOH, 120°C,
2
2
as one peak at 1.335 ppm (measured: 67%).
7
h; ii, BrCH CO Et, Cs CO , MeCN/CH Cl , room temperature, ~18 h;
2 2 2 3 2 2
+
In summary, five representatives of 1-aryl-3H-[1,2,5]triazepino-
iii, N H ·H O, EtOH, reflux, 48 h; iv, H O (HCl/H O/EtOH/reflux, or
HClO /CH Cl /room temperature, or H SO /H O/CH Cl /SiO /room
2
4
2
3
2
[5,4-a]benzimidazol-4(5H)-ones 5a–e containing a novel benzene-
4
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
2
temperature, cf. ref. 14).
fused triazepino imidazole ring system have been synthesized.
The H and C NMR spectra of their precursors 4 showed
1
13
investigated in detail for compound 4b with quantum chemical
calculations. The geometry of the conformers was based on the
assumed rotation around the two amide bonds, leading to four
corresponding conformers (Figure 1). The geometries of the
conformers were optimized, and the distribution of the conformers
was determined (for details, see Online Supplementary Materials).
The wB97XD/6-311G++(2d,2p) method considering the implicit
DMSO solvent model together with two explicit DMSO molecules
gave the nearest distribution values compared to the experimental
values (see Online Supplementary Materials, Table S2). When
taking a closer look at the conformers, two times two pairs
can be considered depending on the bonds rotated: 4'b–4''''b,
distinct rotamers in DMSO-d . The conformers were examined
6
with quantum chemical computations and the calculated distribu-
tion based on the conformational analyses and NBO population
analysis corresponded to the experimentally observed ratio of
the conformers, and moreover, the distribution of the chemical
shifts was explained as well.
Online Supplementary Materials
Supplementary data associated with this article (experimental
and computational details, NMR and IR spectra) can be found in
the online version at doi: 10.1016/j.mencom.2019.05.017.
4
''b–4'''b, or 4'b–4'''b, and 4''b–4''''b. Regarding the experi-
References
1
t
mental results, three H NMR peaks were observed for the Bu
1
L. Noman, F. Oke-Altuntas, A. Zellagui, A. S. Yaglioglu, I. Demirtas,
S. M. Cardoso, S. Akkal, N. Gherraf and S. Rhouati, Nat. Prod. Res.,
2
017, 31, 2032.
S
2 L. B. Townsend and G. R. Revankar, Chem. Rev., 1970, 70, 389.
3 Yu. V. Koshchienko, T. A. Kuz’menko, A. S. Morkovnik, M. A. Kiskin
and G. G. Alexandrov, Mendeleev Commun., 2016, 26, 320.
4 V. D. Gvozdev, K. N. Shavrin, E. G. Baskir, M. P. Egorov and O. M.
Nefedov, Mendeleev Commun., 2017, 27, 231.
5 N. V. Vchislo, E. A. Verochkina, L. I. Larina, A. V. Vashchenko and
Yu. A. Chuvashev, Mendeleev Commun., 2017, 27, 166.
6 Y. Bansal and O. Silakari, Bioorg. Med. Chem., 2012, 20, 6208.
But
O
N
N
N O
O
H
O
N
O
S
S
N
N
O
O
O
H
O
N
H
H
N
O
7
R. S. Keri, A. Hiremathad, S. Budagumpi and B. M. Nagaraja, Chem.
Biol. Drug. Des., 2015, 86, 19.
O
S
O
But
8 M. Milen, T. Földesi, A. Dancsó, G. Simig and B. Volk, Synlett, 2015,
26, 2418.
9 T. Földesi, A. Dancsó, G. Simig, B. Volk and M. Milen, Tetrahedron,
016, 72, 5427.
0 T. Földesi, A. Dancsó, B. Volk and M. Milen, Tetrahedron, 2017, 73,
711.
6
0%
19%
''b
4
'b
4
2
1
S
1
N O
N
11 H. Yang, F. N. Murigi, Z. Wang, J. Li, H. Jin and Z. Tu, Bioorg. Med.
Chem. Lett., 2015, 25, 919.
12 M. Milen, A. Grün, E. Bálint, A. Dancsó and G. Keglevich, Synth.
Commun., 2010, 40, 2291.
O
But
H
N
O
N
O
O
S
S
N
N
O
O
O
1
3 P. Guerret, J.-F. Ancher and M. Langlois, J. Heterocycl. Chem., 1983,
20, 1525.
H
O
H
N
H
O
N
14 T. W. Greene and P. G. M. Wuts, Protective Groups in Organic Synthesis,
rd
3
edn., Wiley-VHC, New York, 1999.
S
O
O
But
1
1%
10%
4
'''b
4''''b
Figure 1 Structures and calculated populations of four possible conformers
of compound 4b.
Received: 11th October 2018; Com. 18/5717
295 –
–