Issue contents
Download PDF of article
Download CIF
3D view
Navigation
Highlighting
Dictionary of Crystallography reference
IUPAC Gold Book reference
more ...
Download citation
FormatBIBTeX
EndNote
RefMan
Refer
Medline
CIF
SGML
Plain Text
share
Previous article
Next article
Previous article
Issue contents
Download PDF of article
Download CIF
3D view
Navigation
Highlighting
Dictionary of Crystallography reference
IUPAC Gold Book reference
more ...
Download citation
FormatBIBTeX
EndNote
RefMan
Refer
Medline
CIF
SGML
Plain Text
share
Next article

organic compounds\(\def\hfill{\hskip 5em}\def\hfil{\hskip 3em}\def\eqno#1{\hfil {#1}}\)

Journal logoCRYSTALLOGRAPHIC
COMMUNICATIONS
ISSN: 2056-9890
Volume 66| Part 2| February 2010| Pages o495-o496
https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810003119

tert-Butyl 2-methyl-2-(4-nitro­benzo­yl)propanoate

Chelsey M. Crosse,a Marshall W. Logue,a Rudy L. Luck,a* Louis R. Pignottia and Melissa F. Waineoa

aDepartment of Chemistry, 1400 Townsend Drive, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA
*Correspondence e-mail: rluck@mtu.edu

(Received 8 January 2010; accepted 25 January 2010; online 30 January 2010)

The title compound, C15H19NO5, is bent with a dihedral angle of 61.8 (2)° between the mean planes of the benzene ring and a group encompassing the ester functionality (O=C—O—C). The dihedral angle of 0.8 (2)° between the mean planes of the nitro group and the benzene ring indicates near coplanarity. In the crystal, each mol­ecule is linked to four adjacent mol­ecules by weak C—H⋯O hydrogen-bonding inter­actions. Both benzene H atoms ortho to the ketone O atom form C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds with the keto O atoms of two neighboring mol­ecules (of the keto and ester groups, respectively), and the two other inter­actions involve the H atoms from a methyl group of the dimethyl residue, displaying C—H⋯O inter­actions with the O atoms of the nitro groups. These four inter­actions for each mol­ecule lead to the formation of two-dimensional sheets with a hydro­philic inter­ior, held together by weak hydrogen-bonded inter­actions, and a hydro­phobic exterior composed of protruding methyl groups which interst­ack with the methyl groups in adjacent sheets.

Related literature

For the synthesis, spectroscopic characterization and reactivity of the title compound, see: Logue (1974[Logue, M. W. (1974). J. Org. Chem. 39, 3455-3456.]); Logue et al. (1975[Logue, M. W., Pollack, R. M. & Vitullo, V. P. (1975). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 97, 6868-6869.]). For related structures, see: Crosse et al. (2010[Crosse, C. M., Kelly, E. C., Logue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Maass, J. S., Mehne, K. C. & Pignotti, L. R. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o493-o494.]); Gould et al. (2010[Gould, G. B., Jackman, B. G., Logue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Pignotti, L. R., Smith, A. R. & White, N. M. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o491-o492.]); Logue et al. (2010[Logue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Maynard, N. S., Orlowski, S. S., Pignotti, L. R., Putman, A. L. & Whelan, K. M. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o489-o490.]). For the syntheses and characterization of structurally similar indanone-derived β-keto ester derivatives, see: Alemán et al. (2007[Alemán, J., Reyes, E., Richter, B., Overgaard, J. & Jørgensen, K. A. (2007). Chem. Commun. pp. 3921-3923.]); Elsner et al. (2008[Elsner, P., Bernardi, L., Salla, G. D., Overgaard, J. & Jørgensen, K. A. (2008). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130, 4897-4905.]); Mouri et al. (2009[Mouri, S., Chen, Z., Matsunage, S. & Shibasaki, M. (2009). Chem. Commun. pp. 5138-5140.]); Noritake et al. (2008[Noritake, S., Shibata, N., Nakamura, S., Toru, T. & Shiro, M. (2008). Eur. J. Org. Chem. pp. 3465-3468.]); Rigby & Dixon (2008[Rigby, C. L. & Dixon, D. J. (2008). Chem. Commun. pp. 3798-3800.]); Wang et al. (2006[Wang, Y., Liu, X. & Deng, L. (2006). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 3928-3930.]). For weak hydrogen-bonded inter­actions, see: Karle et al. (2009[Karle, I. L., Huang, L., Venkateshwarlu, P., Sarma, A. V. S. & Ranganathan, S. (2009). Heterocycles, 79, 471-486.]).

[Scheme 1]

Experimental

Crystal data

  • C15H19NO5

  • Mr = 293.31

  • Monoclinic, P 21 /c

  • a = 11.379 (4) Å

  • b = 11.393 (4) Å

  • c = 12.283 (5) Å

  • β = 94.88 (3)°

  • V = 1586.6 (10) Å3

  • Z = 4

  • Mo Kα radiation

  • μ = 0.09 mm−1

  • T = 291 K

  • 0.50 × 0.20 × 0.05 mm
Data collection

  • Enraf–Nonius TurboCAD-4 diffractometer

  • Absorption correction: ψ scan (North et al., 1968[North, A. C. T., Phillips, D. C. & Mathews, F. S. (1968). Acta Cryst. A24, 351-359.]) Tmin = 0.931, Tmax = 0.993

  • 2933 measured reflections

  • 2785 independent reflections

  • 1196 reflections with I > 2σ(I)

  • Rint = 0.072

  • 3 standard reflections every 166 min intensity decay: 3%
Refinement

  • R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.061

  • wR(F2) = 0.171

  • S = 0.98

  • 2785 reflections

  • 195 parameters

  • H-atom parameters constrained

  • Δρmax = 0.17 e Å−3

  • Δρmin = −0.18 e Å−3

Table 1
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, °)

D—H⋯A D—H H⋯A D⋯A D—H⋯A
C3—H3⋯O3i 0.93 2.51 3.191 (4) 130
C5—H5⋯O4ii 0.93 2.57 3.387 (5) 147
C10—H10B⋯O2iii 0.96 2.71 3.535 (5) 145
Symmetry codes: (i) [x, -y+{\script{3\over 2}}, z+{\script{1\over 2}}]; (ii) [x, -y+{\script{3\over 2}}, z-{\script{1\over 2}}]; (iii) [-x, y+{\script{1\over 2}}, -z+{\script{1\over 2}}].

Data collection: CAD-4 EXPRESS (Enraf–Nonius, 1994[Enraf-Nonius (1994). CAD-4 EXPRESS. Enraf-Nonius, Delft, The Netherlands.]); cell refinement: CAD-4 EXPRESS; data reduction: XCAD4 (Harms & Wocadlo, 1995[Harms, K. & Wocadlo, S. (1995). XCAD4. University of Marburg, Germany.]); program(s) used to solve structure: SIR2004 (Burla et al., 2005[Burla, M. C., Caliandro, R., Camalli, M., Carrozzini, B., Cascarano, G. L., De Caro, L., Giacovazzo, C., Polidori, G. & Spagna, R. (2005). J. Appl. Cryst. 38, 381-388.]); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008[Sheldrick, G. M. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 112-122.]); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 1997[Farrugia, L. J. (1997). J. Appl. Cryst. 30, 565.]) and Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008[Macrae, C. F., Bruno, I. J., Chisholm, J. A., Edgington, P. R., McCabe, P., Pidcock, E., Rodriguez-Monge, L., Taylor, R., van de Streek, J. & Wood, P. A. (2008). J. Appl. Cryst. 41, 466-470.]); software used to prepare material for publication: WinGX (Farrugia, 1999[Farrugia, L. J. (1999). J. Appl. Cryst. 32, 837-838.]) and publCIF (Westrip, 2010[Westrip, S. P. (2010). publCIF. In preparation.]).

Supporting information

Crystal structure: contains datablocks global, I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810003119/zl2264sup1.cif

Structure factors: contains datablock I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810003119/zl2264Isup2.hkl

checkCIF report


Comment top

Treatment of 2,2-disubstituted t-butyl β-keto esters with trifluoroacetic acid at room temperature quantitatively generates the corresponding 2,2-disubstituted β-keto acids, which were used to probe the nature of the transition state of their thermal decarboxylation (Logue et al., 1975). Structurally similar indanone-derived β-keto ester derivatives have been prepared recently (Alemán et al., 2007; Elsner et al., 2008; Mouri et al., 2009; Noritake et al., 2008; Rigby & Dixon, 2008; Wang et al., 2006). The directing nature of weak C—H···O H-bonds has been noted to be of importance to afford the three dimensional structure observed in these kinds of molecules (Karle et al., 2009).

In this contribution we present the solid state structure of one such 2,2-disubstituted β-keto acid, i.e. the title compound being the 4-nitrophenyl derivative, and its structure is compared with those of a series of other such compounds with different substitutents in the para-position of the phenyl ring.

The title compound, C15H19N1O5, which is the final compound in a series of four (Crosse et al., 2010; Gould et al., 2010; Logue et al., 2010), is bent and has a dihedral angle between the mean planes of the phenyl ring and the ester functionality of 61.8 (2)°. The low value of the dihedral angle, 0.8 (2)°, between the mean planes for the nitro group and the phenyl ring suggests coplanarity. Each molecule is bonded to four adjacent molecules by weak C—H···O hydrogen bonding interactions. Both phenyl H-atoms ortho to the ketone O-atom form C—H···O hydrogen bonds with keto O atoms of two neighboring molecules (of the keto and ester groups, respectively), and the two other interactions involve H-atoms on the dimethyl group displaying C—H···O interactions with the O-atoms on the nitro groups, Fig. 3. These four interactions for each molecule result in two-dimensional sheets with a hydrophilic interior held together by weak H-bonded interactions and a hydrophobic exterior composed of protruding methyl groups (from the t-butyl moiety) which interact with the same on adjacent sheets, Fig. 4. This arrangement seems to result in a more tightly packed arrangement of molecules than in the other three derivatives, which without the nitro group as another acceptor for C—H···O interactions form only C—H···O bonded chains rather than layers and this might also be the reason why the density at 1.228 g/cm-3 is greatest for the title compound compared to the other three molecules which range from 1.108—1.194 g/cm-3.

The four structures studied which differ only in the substituent on the para-position of the phenyl ring of the title compound, H–, (Logue et al., 2010), CH3–, (Gould et al., 2010), Cl-, (Crosse et al., 2010), and NO2–, (this paper) are structurally very similar and there are no significant differences in the bonding distances or bond angle measurements in these four complexes. They do however display some conformational flexibility which are expressed by the slight variations of the torsion angles of the t-butyl oxopropanoate unit, listed in Table 2 (the common atom numbering used for all four atoms is given in Figure 2). Individually these angles vary by only small amounts, the largest variation is observed for 2—1—7—8 (the torsion angle between the phenyl ring and the plane of the keto functionality) wihich differs by 35° between the NO2- and the CH3- compound with -154.6 (3) and +170.4 (2) °, respectively. The maximum deviation for the next two torsion angles along the C(=O)—C—C(=O)—O—C backbone are with 17.22 (for 1—7—8—11) and 11.42 (for 7—8—11—O3) still significant. The last of these four torsion angles (8—11—O3—12), shows no significant variation between the four compounds.

The similarity of the torsion angles leads for all four compounds to a similar molecular geometry. They are all bent and the t-butyl 2,2-dimethyl units are folding back on the phenyl moiety with angles between the two units between 61.8 (2) and 75.3 (1)° at the extreme for the NO2– and CH3– substituted derivatives. The variations of the torsional angles result however in slightly different conformations for the four molecules, as can be seen in overlays between the various molecules as shown in Figs. 5 to 10. In all figures the six phenyl C-atoms in the two molecules depicted were positioned on top of one another in the overlay using the program Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008). The figures depict overlays of the H–derivative (in red) with one of the molecules containing a CH3–substituent Fig. 5, Cl- Fig. 6 and NO2– group Fig. 7 (each in blue); the CH3–substituent (red) overlayed with Cl- (blue), Fig. 8 and the NO2–group (blue), Fig. 9 and the Cl– (red) and NO2–derivative (blue) overlay, Fig 10.

The effect of the torsional angle defined as 2—1—7—8 is then apparent as this displays the greatest variation among the other selected torsional angles listed in Table 2. As discussed above, the greatest difference in this angle occurs between the CH3– and the NO2–derivative, Fig. 9, and in this drawing the t-butyl groups display the greatest separation compared to the others. On the other hand the overlay displayed in Fig. 7 featuring the H– and NO2– derivatives show the largest overlap between the two molecules with equivalent 2—1—7—8 torsional angles of -160.6 (2) and -154.6 (3)°.

These different conformations and the resultant shapes necessarily lead to different packing of the molecules, caused by different combinations of weak C-H···O interactions. These result in infinite chains of vastly different linkage arrangements in the case of the H–, (Logue et al., 2010), CH3–, (Gould et al., 2010), and Cl-, (Crosse et al., 2010), derivatives and a 2-dimensional sheet for the NO2– derivative (this paper). One constant theme in all of these structures is the acidity of one of the hydrogen atoms in the dimethyl moiety as one of the H atoms is involved in hydrogen bonding in all of them as is the case for other β-keto esters (Alemán et al., 2007; Elsner et al., 2008; Mouri et al., 2009; Noritake et al., 2008; Rigby & Dixon, 2008; Wang et al., 2006).

Related literature top

For the synthesis, spectroscopic characterization and reactivity of the title compound, see: Logue (1974); Logue et al. (1975). For related structures see: Crosse et al. (2010); Gould et al. (2010); Logue et al. (2010). For the syntheses and characterization of structurally similar indanone-derived β-keto ester derivatives, see: Alemán et al. (2007); Elsner et al. (2008); Mouri et al. (2009); Noritake et al. (2008); Rigby & Dixon (2008); Wang et al. (2006). For weak hydrogen-bonded interactions see: Karle et al. (2009). Paper is 4th in series (ZL2265, ZL2266, ZL2267, ZL2264)

Experimental top

Crystals of the material were synthesized as reported earlier and were grown by evaporation of a solution in hexane (Logue, 1974). M.p. 605-610 K. IR (KBr pellet, cm-1): 3113, 2986, 2937 (m, C—H), 1734 (v.s., ester C=O), 1687 (v.s., ketone C=O) 1601 (m, C—C), 1524 (v.s., NO2), 1458 (m), 1389 (m), 1369 (s), 1345 (v.s., NO2), 1282 (s, alkyl methyl C—H), 1254 (s), 1152 (v.s., ester C—O), 989 (s), 932 (m), 847 (s, C—H bend), 721 (s). 1H NMR (CDCl3) δ: 1.28 (s, 9H), 1.50 (s, 6H), 7.99 (d, 2H, J=9.2 Hz), 8.24 (d, 2H, J=9.2 Hz). 13C NMR (CDCl3) δ: 23.8, 27.8, 54.6, 82.6, 129.9, 130.9, 140.5, 150.1, 173.4, 196.9.

Refinement top

All H atoms were placed at calculated positions, with C—H = 0.93 Å (aromatic) or 0.96 Å (methyl) and refined using a riding model with Uiso(H) constrained to be 1.5 Ueq(C) for methyl groups and 1.2 Ueq(C) for all other C atoms. The quality of the data as reflected by only 66% of the reflections observed, large ADP's and inaccurate C—C bond lengths is low. The data had been collected on a 30 year old single point detector instrument not equipped with a low temperature device as part of a class project with undergraduate students. Due to the time constraints imposed by the class schedule a maximum exposure time of 60 s had to be alloted for measuring each reflection.

Structure description top

Treatment of 2,2-disubstituted t-butyl β-keto esters with trifluoroacetic acid at room temperature quantitatively generates the corresponding 2,2-disubstituted β-keto acids, which were used to probe the nature of the transition state of their thermal decarboxylation (Logue et al., 1975). Structurally similar indanone-derived β-keto ester derivatives have been prepared recently (Alemán et al., 2007; Elsner et al., 2008; Mouri et al., 2009; Noritake et al., 2008; Rigby & Dixon, 2008; Wang et al., 2006). The directing nature of weak C—H···O H-bonds has been noted to be of importance to afford the three dimensional structure observed in these kinds of molecules (Karle et al., 2009).

In this contribution we present the solid state structure of one such 2,2-disubstituted β-keto acid, i.e. the title compound being the 4-nitrophenyl derivative, and its structure is compared with those of a series of other such compounds with different substitutents in the para-position of the phenyl ring.

The title compound, C15H19N1O5, which is the final compound in a series of four (Crosse et al., 2010; Gould et al., 2010; Logue et al., 2010), is bent and has a dihedral angle between the mean planes of the phenyl ring and the ester functionality of 61.8 (2)°. The low value of the dihedral angle, 0.8 (2)°, between the mean planes for the nitro group and the phenyl ring suggests coplanarity. Each molecule is bonded to four adjacent molecules by weak C—H···O hydrogen bonding interactions. Both phenyl H-atoms ortho to the ketone O-atom form C—H···O hydrogen bonds with keto O atoms of two neighboring molecules (of the keto and ester groups, respectively), and the two other interactions involve H-atoms on the dimethyl group displaying C—H···O interactions with the O-atoms on the nitro groups, Fig. 3. These four interactions for each molecule result in two-dimensional sheets with a hydrophilic interior held together by weak H-bonded interactions and a hydrophobic exterior composed of protruding methyl groups (from the t-butyl moiety) which interact with the same on adjacent sheets, Fig. 4. This arrangement seems to result in a more tightly packed arrangement of molecules than in the other three derivatives, which without the nitro group as another acceptor for C—H···O interactions form only C—H···O bonded chains rather than layers and this might also be the reason why the density at 1.228 g/cm-3 is greatest for the title compound compared to the other three molecules which range from 1.108—1.194 g/cm-3.

The four structures studied which differ only in the substituent on the para-position of the phenyl ring of the title compound, H–, (Logue et al., 2010), CH3–, (Gould et al., 2010), Cl-, (Crosse et al., 2010), and NO2–, (this paper) are structurally very similar and there are no significant differences in the bonding distances or bond angle measurements in these four complexes. They do however display some conformational flexibility which are expressed by the slight variations of the torsion angles of the t-butyl oxopropanoate unit, listed in Table 2 (the common atom numbering used for all four atoms is given in Figure 2). Individually these angles vary by only small amounts, the largest variation is observed for 2—1—7—8 (the torsion angle between the phenyl ring and the plane of the keto functionality) wihich differs by 35° between the NO2- and the CH3- compound with -154.6 (3) and +170.4 (2) °, respectively. The maximum deviation for the next two torsion angles along the C(=O)—C—C(=O)—O—C backbone are with 17.22 (for 1—7—8—11) and 11.42 (for 7—8—11—O3) still significant. The last of these four torsion angles (8—11—O3—12), shows no significant variation between the four compounds.

The similarity of the torsion angles leads for all four compounds to a similar molecular geometry. They are all bent and the t-butyl 2,2-dimethyl units are folding back on the phenyl moiety with angles between the two units between 61.8 (2) and 75.3 (1)° at the extreme for the NO2– and CH3– substituted derivatives. The variations of the torsional angles result however in slightly different conformations for the four molecules, as can be seen in overlays between the various molecules as shown in Figs. 5 to 10. In all figures the six phenyl C-atoms in the two molecules depicted were positioned on top of one another in the overlay using the program Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008). The figures depict overlays of the H–derivative (in red) with one of the molecules containing a CH3–substituent Fig. 5, Cl- Fig. 6 and NO2– group Fig. 7 (each in blue); the CH3–substituent (red) overlayed with Cl- (blue), Fig. 8 and the NO2–group (blue), Fig. 9 and the Cl– (red) and NO2–derivative (blue) overlay, Fig 10.

The effect of the torsional angle defined as 2—1—7—8 is then apparent as this displays the greatest variation among the other selected torsional angles listed in Table 2. As discussed above, the greatest difference in this angle occurs between the CH3– and the NO2–derivative, Fig. 9, and in this drawing the t-butyl groups display the greatest separation compared to the others. On the other hand the overlay displayed in Fig. 7 featuring the H– and NO2– derivatives show the largest overlap between the two molecules with equivalent 2—1—7—8 torsional angles of -160.6 (2) and -154.6 (3)°.

These different conformations and the resultant shapes necessarily lead to different packing of the molecules, caused by different combinations of weak C-H···O interactions. These result in infinite chains of vastly different linkage arrangements in the case of the H–, (Logue et al., 2010), CH3–, (Gould et al., 2010), and Cl-, (Crosse et al., 2010), derivatives and a 2-dimensional sheet for the NO2– derivative (this paper). One constant theme in all of these structures is the acidity of one of the hydrogen atoms in the dimethyl moiety as one of the H atoms is involved in hydrogen bonding in all of them as is the case for other β-keto esters (Alemán et al., 2007; Elsner et al., 2008; Mouri et al., 2009; Noritake et al., 2008; Rigby & Dixon, 2008; Wang et al., 2006).

For the synthesis, spectroscopic characterization and reactivity of the title compound, see: Logue (1974); Logue et al. (1975). For related structures see: Crosse et al. (2010); Gould et al. (2010); Logue et al. (2010). For the syntheses and characterization of structurally similar indanone-derived β-keto ester derivatives, see: Alemán et al. (2007); Elsner et al. (2008); Mouri et al. (2009); Noritake et al. (2008); Rigby & Dixon (2008); Wang et al. (2006). For weak hydrogen-bonded interactions see: Karle et al. (2009). Paper is 4th in series (ZL2265, ZL2266, ZL2267, ZL2264)

Computing details top

Data collection: CAD-4 EXPRESS (Enraf–Nonius, 1994); cell refinement: CAD-4 EXPRESS (Enraf–Nonius, 1994); data reduction: XCAD4 (Harms & Wocadlo, 1995); program(s) used to solve structure: SIR2004 (Burla et al., 2005); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 1997) and Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008); software used to prepare material for publication: WinGX (Farrugia, 1999) and publCIF (Westrip, 2010).

Figures top
[Figure 1] Fig. 1. ORTEP-3 (Farrugia, 1997) drawing of the title compound with displacement ellipsoids drawn at the 50% probability level.
[Figure 2] Fig. 2. Labelling of the atoms for the purposes of defining the equivalent torsional angles in Table 2.
[Figure 3] Fig. 3. A Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) illustration of the packing of the title compound depicting the H-bonded linkages to four adjacent molecules using blue dashed lines.
[Figure 4] Fig. 4. An expansion of the unit cell packing produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) depicting the nature of the weak H-bonded interactions illustrated with blue dashed lines and the relationships between non-interacting sheets looking down the c-axis.
[Figure 5] Fig. 5. Overlay of molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with H– (red), (Logue et al., 2010) and CH3– (blue), (Gould et al., 2010) as substituents on the para position of the phenyl ring.
[Figure 6] Fig. 6. Overlay of molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with H–(red), (Logue et al., 2010) and Cl–(blue), (Crosse et al., 2010) as substituents on the para position of the phenyl ring.
[Figure 7] Fig. 7. Overlay of molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with H–(red), (Logue et al., 2010) as the substituent on the para position of the phenyl ring and the title compound (blue).
[Figure 8] Fig. 8. Overlay of almost isosteric molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with CH3–(red), (Gould et al., 2010) and Cl–(blue), (Crosse et al., 2010) as substituents on the para position of the phenyl ring.
[Figure 9] Fig. 9. Overlay of almost isosteric molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with CH~3~–(red), (Gould et al., 2010) as the substituent on the para position of the phenyl ring and the title compound (blue).
[Figure 10] Fig. 10. Overlay of almost isosteric molecules produced with Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008) with Cl–(red), (Crosse et al., 2010) as the substituent on the para position of the phenyl ring and the title compound (blue).
tert-Butyl 2-methyl-2-(4-nitrobenzoyl)propanoate top
Crystal data top
C15H19NO5F(000) = 624
Mr = 293.31Dx = 1.228 Mg m−3
Monoclinic, P21/cMo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
Hall symbol: -P 2ybcCell parameters from 25 reflections
a = 11.379 (4) Åθ = 10–15°
b = 11.393 (4) ŵ = 0.09 mm−1
c = 12.283 (5) ÅT = 291 K
β = 94.88 (3)°Prism, colourless
V = 1586.6 (10) Å30.50 × 0.20 × 0.05 mm
Z = 4
Data collection top
Enraf–Nonius TurboCAD-4
diffractometer		1196 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Radiation source: Enraf Nonius FR590Rint = 0.072
Graphite monochromatorθmax = 25.0°, θmin = 1.8°
non–profiled ω/2τ scansh = 0→13
Absorption correction: ψ scan
(North et al., 1968)		k = 0→13
Tmin = 0.931, Tmax = 0.993l = −14→14
2933 measured reflections3 standard reflections every 166 min
2785 independent reflections intensity decay: 3%
Refinement top
Refinement on F2Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods
Least-squares matrix: fullSecondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.061Hydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites
wR(F2) = 0.171H-atom parameters constrained
S = 0.98 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0756P)2]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
2785 reflections(Δ/σ)max < 0.001
195 parametersΔρmax = 0.17 e Å−3
0 restraintsΔρmin = −0.18 e Å−3
Crystal data top
C15H19NO5V = 1586.6 (10) Å3
Mr = 293.31Z = 4
Monoclinic, P21/cMo Kα radiation
a = 11.379 (4) ŵ = 0.09 mm−1
b = 11.393 (4) ÅT = 291 K
c = 12.283 (5) Å0.50 × 0.20 × 0.05 mm
β = 94.88 (3)°
Data collection top
Enraf–Nonius TurboCAD-4
diffractometer		1196 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Absorption correction: ψ scan
(North et al., 1968)		Rint = 0.072
Tmin = 0.931, Tmax = 0.9933 standard reflections every 166 min
2933 measured reflections intensity decay: 3%
2785 independent reflections
Refinement top
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.0610 restraints
wR(F2) = 0.171H-atom parameters constrained
S = 0.98Δρmax = 0.17 e Å−3
2785 reflectionsΔρmin = −0.18 e Å−3
195 parameters
Special details top

Experimental. (North et al., 1968) Number of psi-scan sets used was 2. Theta correction was applied. Averaged transmission function was used. No Fourier smoothing was applied.

Geometry. All s.u.'s (except the s.u. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell s.u.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of s.u.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between s.u.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell s.u.'s is used for estimating s.u.'s involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2, conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > 2σ(F2) is used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzUiso*/Ueq
N10.1227 (3)0.3124 (4)0.1368 (4)0.0837 (12)
O10.1312 (4)0.2370 (3)0.0679 (4)0.1350 (15)
O20.1050 (3)0.2912 (3)0.2318 (3)0.1021 (11)
C10.1353 (3)0.4356 (3)0.1031 (3)0.0577 (10)
C20.1269 (3)0.5237 (4)0.1783 (3)0.0604 (11)
H20.11220.50590.24980.073*
C30.1404 (3)0.6375 (4)0.1472 (3)0.0564 (10)
H30.13570.69760.1980.068*
C40.1613 (3)0.6645 (3)0.0391 (3)0.0502 (9)
C50.1682 (3)0.5738 (4)−0.0348 (3)0.0624 (11)
H50.1810.5911−0.10680.075*
C60.1564 (3)0.4586 (4)−0.0042 (3)0.0679 (12)
H60.16250.3979−0.0540.082*
C70.1776 (3)0.7879 (4)−0.0005 (3)0.0570 (10)
O30.1533 (3)0.8083 (3)−0.0971 (2)0.0886 (10)
C80.2210 (3)0.8869 (3)0.0759 (3)0.0506 (9)
C90.2737 (4)0.9859 (3)0.0097 (3)0.0721 (12)
H9A0.30021.04850.0580.108*
H9B0.21451.015−0.0440.108*
H9C0.33910.9559−0.02620.108*
C100.1165 (3)0.9360 (4)0.1339 (3)0.0759 (13)
H10A0.1421.0030.17690.114*
H10B0.0880.87660.18060.114*
H10C0.05430.95870.08030.114*
C110.3195 (3)0.8458 (3)0.1591 (3)0.0480 (9)
O40.3323 (2)0.8769 (2)0.2523 (2)0.0727 (8)
O50.3918 (2)0.7753 (2)0.11076 (18)0.0583 (7)
C120.4942 (3)0.7164 (4)0.1705 (4)0.0714 (12)
C130.5390 (6)0.6385 (6)0.0848 (5)0.165 (3)
H13A0.47920.58270.06070.248*
H13B0.60810.59760.11480.248*
H13C0.55860.68540.02390.248*
C140.4540 (5)0.6455 (4)0.2639 (5)0.123 (2)
H14A0.39950.58620.23590.184*
H14B0.41580.69610.31240.184*
H14C0.52090.60880.30280.184*
C150.5827 (4)0.8075 (5)0.2131 (5)0.134 (2)
H15A0.60160.85760.15420.2*
H15B0.65310.76920.24380.2*
H15C0.54980.85360.26840.2*
Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) top
U11U22U33U12U13U23
N10.061 (2)0.069 (3)0.124 (4)0.001 (2)0.023 (2)−0.001 (3)
O10.176 (4)0.063 (2)0.174 (4)0.011 (2)0.062 (3)−0.010 (2)
O20.102 (3)0.086 (2)0.121 (3)−0.008 (2)0.025 (2)0.028 (2)
C10.043 (2)0.050 (3)0.080 (3)−0.005 (2)0.005 (2)0.003 (2)
C20.064 (3)0.069 (3)0.049 (2)−0.013 (2)0.0057 (19)−0.002 (2)
C30.066 (3)0.065 (3)0.039 (2)−0.011 (2)0.0061 (18)−0.0035 (19)
C40.046 (2)0.069 (3)0.0356 (19)−0.0047 (19)0.0026 (16)−0.003 (2)
C50.063 (3)0.081 (3)0.044 (2)0.000 (2)0.0116 (19)−0.006 (2)
C60.058 (3)0.076 (3)0.071 (3)0.004 (2)0.015 (2)−0.018 (2)
C70.061 (2)0.070 (3)0.041 (2)0.003 (2)0.0055 (18)0.007 (2)
O30.127 (3)0.096 (2)0.0395 (16)−0.0103 (19)−0.0110 (16)0.0177 (15)
C80.057 (2)0.052 (2)0.0442 (19)0.0064 (19)0.0082 (18)0.0069 (18)
C90.091 (3)0.058 (3)0.068 (3)0.003 (2)0.009 (2)0.017 (2)
C100.068 (3)0.089 (3)0.071 (3)0.029 (3)0.012 (2)0.007 (2)
C110.050 (2)0.047 (2)0.047 (2)−0.0044 (19)0.0103 (19)−0.0005 (19)
O40.0762 (19)0.093 (2)0.0472 (16)0.0111 (16)−0.0022 (13)−0.0140 (15)
O50.0554 (16)0.0646 (16)0.0550 (15)0.0147 (14)0.0055 (13)−0.0037 (13)
C120.050 (2)0.069 (3)0.094 (3)0.012 (2)−0.002 (2)0.004 (3)
C130.148 (6)0.181 (6)0.164 (6)0.102 (5)−0.002 (5)−0.049 (5)
C140.096 (4)0.098 (4)0.172 (5)0.012 (3)0.000 (4)0.071 (4)
C150.059 (3)0.127 (5)0.210 (6)−0.021 (3)−0.021 (4)0.015 (5)
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
N1—O11.216 (5)C9—H9B0.96
N1—O21.225 (4)C9—H9C0.96
N1—C11.474 (5)C10—H10A0.96
C1—C21.373 (5)C10—H10B0.96
C1—C61.384 (5)C10—H10C0.96
C2—C31.365 (5)C11—O41.195 (4)
C2—H20.93C11—O51.326 (4)
C3—C41.403 (4)O5—C121.483 (4)
C3—H30.93C12—C131.499 (6)
C4—C51.381 (5)C12—C141.506 (6)
C4—C71.505 (5)C12—C151.509 (6)
C5—C61.375 (5)C13—H13A0.96
C5—H50.93C13—H13B0.96
C6—H60.93C13—H13C0.96
C7—O31.218 (4)C14—H14A0.96
C7—C81.523 (5)C14—H14B0.96
C8—C111.525 (5)C14—H14C0.96
C8—C91.541 (5)C15—H15A0.96
C8—C101.543 (5)C15—H15B0.96
C9—H9A0.96C15—H15C0.96
O1—N1—O2123.6 (4)H9B—C9—H9C109.5
O1—N1—C1117.5 (4)C8—C10—H10A109.5
O2—N1—C1118.9 (4)C8—C10—H10B109.5
C2—C1—C6122.0 (4)H10A—C10—H10B109.5
C2—C1—N1119.5 (4)C8—C10—H10C109.5
C6—C1—N1118.5 (4)H10A—C10—H10C109.5
C3—C2—C1119.4 (4)H10B—C10—H10C109.5
C3—C2—H2120.3O4—C11—O5125.4 (3)
C1—C2—H2120.3O4—C11—C8125.0 (3)
C2—C3—C4120.3 (4)O5—C11—C8109.5 (3)
C2—C3—H3119.8C11—O5—C12122.9 (3)
C4—C3—H3119.8O5—C12—C13102.7 (3)
C5—C4—C3118.8 (4)O5—C12—C14110.0 (3)
C5—C4—C7118.1 (3)C13—C12—C14111.2 (4)
C3—C4—C7123.1 (3)O5—C12—C15109.5 (3)
C6—C5—C4121.5 (4)C13—C12—C15113.2 (5)
C6—C5—H5119.3C14—C12—C15110.0 (4)
C4—C5—H5119.3C12—C13—H13A109.5
C5—C6—C1118.0 (4)C12—C13—H13B109.5
C5—C6—H6121H13A—C13—H13B109.5
C1—C6—H6121C12—C13—H13C109.5
O3—C7—C4118.0 (3)H13A—C13—H13C109.5
O3—C7—C8119.6 (3)H13B—C13—H13C109.5
C4—C7—C8122.4 (3)C12—C14—H14A109.5
C7—C8—C11111.5 (3)C12—C14—H14B109.5
C7—C8—C9109.7 (3)H14A—C14—H14B109.5
C11—C8—C9106.4 (3)C12—C14—H14C109.5
C7—C8—C10109.3 (3)H14A—C14—H14C109.5
C11—C8—C10110.7 (3)H14B—C14—H14C109.5
C9—C8—C10109.2 (3)C12—C15—H15A109.5
C8—C9—H9A109.5C12—C15—H15B109.5
C8—C9—H9B109.5H15A—C15—H15B109.5
H9A—C9—H9B109.5C12—C15—H15C109.5
C8—C9—H9C109.5H15A—C15—H15C109.5
H9A—C9—H9C109.5H15B—C15—H15C109.5
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
C3—H3···O3i0.932.513.191 (4)130
C5—H5···O4ii0.932.573.387 (5)147
C10—H10B···O2iii0.962.713.535 (5)145
Symmetry codes: (i) x, −y+3/2, z+1/2; (ii) x, −y+3/2, z−1/2; (iii) −x, y+1/2, −z+1/2.

Experimental details

Crystal data
Chemical formulaC15H19NO5
Mr293.31
Crystal system, space groupMonoclinic, P21/c
Temperature (K)291
a, b, c (Å)11.379 (4), 11.393 (4), 12.283 (5)
β (°) 94.88 (3)
V (Å3)1586.6 (10)
Z4
Radiation typeMo Kα
µ (mm−1)0.09
Crystal size (mm)0.50 × 0.20 × 0.05
Data collection
DiffractometerEnraf–Nonius TurboCAD-4
Absorption correctionψ scan
(North et al., 1968)
Tmin, Tmax0.931, 0.993
No. of measured, independent and
observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections		2933, 2785, 1196
Rint0.072
(sin θ/λ)max (Å−1)0.594
Refinement
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S 0.061, 0.171, 0.98
No. of reflections2785
No. of parameters195
H-atom treatmentH-atom parameters constrained
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å−3)0.17, −0.18

Computer programs: CAD-4 EXPRESS (Enraf–Nonius, 1994), XCAD4 (Harms & Wocadlo, 1995), SIR2004 (Burla et al., 2005), SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008), ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 1997) and Mercury (Macrae et al., 2008), WinGX (Farrugia, 1999) and publCIF (Westrip, 2010).

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
C3—H3···O3i0.932.513.191 (4)130.4
C5—H5···O4ii0.932.573.387 (5)147.1
C10—H10B···O2iii0.962.713.535 (5)145
Symmetry codes: (i) x, −y+3/2, z+1/2; (ii) x, −y+3/2, z−1/2; (iii) −x, y+1/2, −z+1/2.
Comparative torsion angle parameters (°) for related complexes, see Fig. 2 for the definition of atomic labels on the moleculesa top
TorsionX=HbX=CH3cX=CldX=NO2e
2—1—7—8-160.6 (2)170.4 (2)-175.6 (3)-154.6 (3)
1—7—8—1143.8 (3)57.8 (3)52.8 (3)40.6 (4)
7—8—11—O345.9 (2)34.1 (3)41.4 (3)40.6 (4)
8—11—O3—12179.50 (17)176.60 (19)179.5 (2)177.4 (3)
Notes: (a) Torsion angles calculated using PARST (Nardelli, 1995). (b) Logue et al. (2010); (c) Gould et al. (2010); (d) Crosse et al. (2010); (e) this work;
 

Acknowledgements

Financial assistance from the Chemistry Department of Michigan Technological University is acknowledged.

References

First citationAlemán, J., Reyes, E., Richter, B., Overgaard, J. & Jørgensen, K. A. (2007). Chem. Commun. pp. 3921–3923.  Google Scholar
 First citationBurla, M. C., Caliandro, R., Camalli, M., Carrozzini, B., Cascarano, G. L., De Caro, L., Giacovazzo, C., Polidori, G. & Spagna, R. (2005). J. Appl. Cryst. 38, 381–388.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationCrosse, C. M., Kelly, E. C., Logue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Maass, J. S., Mehne, K. C. & Pignotti, L. R. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o493–o494.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationElsner, P., Bernardi, L., Salla, G. D., Overgaard, J. & Jørgensen, K. A. (2008). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130, 4897–4905.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
 First citationEnraf–Nonius (1994). CAD-4 EXPRESS. Enraf–Nonius, Delft, The Netherlands.  Google Scholar
 First citationFarrugia, L. J. (1997). J. Appl. Cryst. 30, 565.  CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationFarrugia, L. J. (1999). J. Appl. Cryst. 32, 837–838.  CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationGould, G. B., Jackman, B. G., Logue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Pignotti, L. R., Smith, A. R. & White, N. M. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o491–o492.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationHarms, K. & Wocadlo, S. (1995). XCAD4. University of Marburg, Germany.  Google Scholar
 First citationKarle, I. L., Huang, L., Venkateshwarlu, P., Sarma, A. V. S. & Ranganathan, S. (2009). Heterocycles, 79, 471–486.  PubMed CAS Google Scholar
 First citationLogue, M. W. (1974). J. Org. Chem. 39, 3455–3456.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
 First citationLogue, M. W., Luck, R. L., Maynard, N. S., Orlowski, S. S., Pignotti, L. R., Putman, A. L. & Whelan, K. M. (2010). Acta Cryst. E66, o489–o490.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationLogue, M. W., Pollack, R. M. & Vitullo, V. P. (1975). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 97, 6868–6869.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
 First citationMacrae, C. F., Bruno, I. J., Chisholm, J. A., Edgington, P. R., McCabe, P., Pidcock, E., Rodriguez-Monge, L., Taylor, R., van de Streek, J. & Wood, P. A. (2008). J. Appl. Cryst. 41, 466–470.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationMouri, S., Chen, Z., Matsunage, S. & Shibasaki, M. (2009). Chem. Commun. pp. 5138–5140.  Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
 First citationNardelli, M. (1995). J. Appl. Cryst. 28, 659.  CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationNoritake, S., Shibata, N., Nakamura, S., Toru, T. & Shiro, M. (2008). Eur. J. Org. Chem. pp. 3465–3468.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
 First citationNorth, A. C. T., Phillips, D. C. & Mathews, F. S. (1968). Acta Cryst. A24, 351–359.  CrossRef IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
 First citationRigby, C. L. & Dixon, D. J. (2008). Chem. Commun. pp. 3798–3800.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
 First citationSheldrick, G. M. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 112–122.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
 First citationWang, Y., Liu, X. & Deng, L. (2006). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 3928–3930.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
 First citationWestrip, S. P. (2010). publCIF. In preparation.  Google Scholar

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.

Journal logoCRYSTALLOGRAPHIC
COMMUNICATIONS
ISSN: 2056-9890
Volume 66| Part 2| February 2010| Pages o495-o496
https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810003119
Follow Acta Cryst. E
Sign up for e-alerts
E-alerts
Follow Acta Cryst. on Twitter
Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds
RSS