organic compounds
Thieno[3,4-d][1,3]dithiole-2-thione
aSchool of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China, and bState Key Laboratory of Crystal Materials, Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
*Correspondence e-mail: fangqi@sdu.edu.cn
In the title compound, C5H2S4, the terminal monocyclic S atom deviates by 0.117 (1) Å from the mean plane of the other non-H atoms (r.m.s. deviation = 0.001 Å). All six C—S bonds and the central C—C bond in the rings are characterized by π-conjugated lengths, endowing the molecule with high π-conjugation. In the crystal, the molecules are parallel packed, forming columnar stacks along the a axis. Short intermolecular S⋯S contacts [3.397 (1) and 3.486 (1) Å], are observed.
Related literature
For details of the synthesis, see: Chiang et al. (1983); Gronowitz & Moses (1962). For DFT calculations using GAUSSIAN, see: Frisch et al. (2003).
Experimental
Crystal data
|
Data collection: APEX2 (Bruker, 2005); cell SAINT (Bruker, 2005); data reduction: SAINT; program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: SHELXTL (Sheldrick, 2008); software used to prepare material for publication: SHELXL97.
Supporting information
10.1107/S1600536811044084/bg2422sup1.cif
contains datablocks I, global. DOI:Structure factors: contains datablock I. DOI: 10.1107/S1600536811044084/bg2422Isup2.hkl
Supporting information file. DOI: 10.1107/S1600536811044084/bg2422Isup3.cml
The title compound was synthesized by a similar procedure to Chiang et al. (1983). 3,4-Dibromothiophene (2.18 g, 9.0 mmol) was dissolved in 30 ml anhydrous diethyl ether and stirred in the presence of N2 at 195 K while n-butyllithium (5.6 ml, 9.0 mmol, 1.6 M in hexane) was added via syringe. Stirring was continued for 0.5 h, then sulfur (0.288 g, 9.0 mmol) was added. The reaction mixture was stirred for 1 h, and n -butyllithium (5.6 ml, 9.0 mmol) was added via syringe. After being stirred for 0.5 h, sulfur (0.288 g, 9.0 mmol) was added to the yellow solution. After 1 h, the reaction mixture was allowed to come to r.t. and was dried in vacuo. After removal of the solvent, 2 M sodium hydroxide solution (20 ml) and carbon disulfide (12 ml) were added. The mixture was refluxed under N2 at 363 K for 4 h. And then the solution was stirred overnight at r.t.. The excess of carbon disulfide was removed in vacuo. Filtration of the mixture gave a yellow solid. Recrytallization of the solid from dichloromethane-hexane (1:5, v/v) gave 0.26 g (15% yield) of the compound. Crystals were grown by slow evaporation of a dichloromethane solution.
Both H atoms were located in a difference Fourier map and freely refined in isotropic approximation, leading to C—H distances 0.88 (2), 0.94 (2) Å and Uiso 0.045 (5), 0.060 (7)Å-1.
Data collection: APEX2 (Bruker, 2005); cell
SAINT (Bruker, 2005); data reduction: SAINT (Bruker, 2005); program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: SHELXTL (Sheldrick, 2008); software used to prepare material for publication: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008).C5H2S4 | F(000) = 384 |
Mr = 190.31 | Dx = 1.800 Mg m−3 |
Orthorhombic, P212121 | Mo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å |
Hall symbol: P 2ac 2ab | Cell parameters from 6079 reflections |
a = 3.9425 (1) Å | θ = 2.4–26.6° |
b = 9.2588 (2) Å | µ = 1.25 mm−1 |
c = 19.2368 (3) Å | T = 294 K |
V = 702.20 (3) Å3 | Bar, yellow |
Z = 4 | 0.20 × 0.06 × 0.03 mm |
Bruker APEX2 CCD area-detector diffractometer | 1601 independent reflections |
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tube | 1486 reflections with I > 2σ(I) |
Graphite monochromator | Rint = 0.030 |
Detector resolution: 8.3 pixels mm-1 | θmax = 27.5°, θmin = 2.4° |
phi and ω scans | h = −5→5 |
Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Bruker, 2005) | k = −12→12 |
Tmin = 0.792, Tmax = 0.962 | l = −24→25 |
17824 measured reflections |
Refinement on F2 | Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map |
Least-squares matrix: full | Hydrogen site location: difference Fourier map |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.021 | All H-atom parameters refined |
wR(F2) = 0.053 | w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0337P)2 + 0.0176P] where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3 |
S = 1.05 | (Δ/σ)max < 0.001 |
1601 reflections | Δρmax = 0.25 e Å−3 |
90 parameters | Δρmin = −0.13 e Å−3 |
0 restraints | Absolute structure: Flack (1983), 618 Friedel pairs |
Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods | Absolute structure parameter: 0.18 (10) |
C5H2S4 | V = 702.20 (3) Å3 |
Mr = 190.31 | Z = 4 |
Orthorhombic, P212121 | Mo Kα radiation |
a = 3.9425 (1) Å | µ = 1.25 mm−1 |
b = 9.2588 (2) Å | T = 294 K |
c = 19.2368 (3) Å | 0.20 × 0.06 × 0.03 mm |
Bruker APEX2 CCD area-detector diffractometer | 1601 independent reflections |
Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Bruker, 2005) | 1486 reflections with I > 2σ(I) |
Tmin = 0.792, Tmax = 0.962 | Rint = 0.030 |
17824 measured reflections |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.021 | All H-atom parameters refined |
wR(F2) = 0.053 | Δρmax = 0.25 e Å−3 |
S = 1.05 | Δρmin = −0.13 e Å−3 |
1601 reflections | Absolute structure: Flack (1983), 618 Friedel pairs |
90 parameters | Absolute structure parameter: 0.18 (10) |
0 restraints |
Experimental. Scan width 0.5° ω, Crystal to detector distance 5.96 cm |
Geometry. All e.s.d.'s (except the e.s.d. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell e.s.d.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of e.s.d.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between e.s.d.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell e.s.d.'s is used for estimating e.s.d.'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 > σ(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. |
x | y | z | Uiso*/Ueq | ||
S1 | 0.00458 (13) | −0.19316 (5) | 0.07833 (3) | 0.04533 (13) | |
S2 | −0.01295 (11) | 0.26695 (5) | 0.07145 (2) | 0.03376 (11) | |
S3 | 0.28209 (12) | 0.16829 (5) | 0.20312 (2) | 0.03822 (12) | |
S4 | 0.25260 (16) | 0.48015 (5) | 0.17223 (3) | 0.05033 (14) | |
C1 | −0.0743 (5) | −0.0312 (2) | 0.03940 (10) | 0.0403 (4) | |
C2 | 0.0144 (4) | 0.08048 (18) | 0.08177 (8) | 0.0306 (3) | |
C3 | 0.1522 (4) | 0.03202 (19) | 0.14643 (9) | 0.0321 (3) | |
C4 | 0.1774 (4) | 0.31270 (18) | 0.15017 (8) | 0.0313 (4) | |
C5 | 0.1610 (5) | −0.1139 (2) | 0.15177 (11) | 0.0415 (4) | |
H1 | −0.168 (5) | −0.030 (2) | −0.0057 (13) | 0.060 (7)* | |
H2 | 0.230 (5) | −0.162 (2) | 0.1886 (10) | 0.045 (5)* |
U11 | U22 | U33 | U12 | U13 | U23 | |
S1 | 0.0560 (3) | 0.0293 (2) | 0.0507 (3) | 0.0022 (2) | −0.0044 (3) | −0.00404 (19) |
S2 | 0.0428 (2) | 0.0297 (2) | 0.0288 (2) | 0.0009 (2) | −0.00395 (19) | 0.00159 (16) |
S3 | 0.0476 (2) | 0.0372 (2) | 0.0299 (2) | 0.0011 (2) | −0.00840 (19) | 0.00048 (17) |
S4 | 0.0692 (3) | 0.0328 (2) | 0.0490 (3) | −0.0045 (3) | −0.0055 (3) | −0.0084 (2) |
C1 | 0.0485 (11) | 0.0348 (9) | 0.0377 (10) | 0.0017 (9) | −0.0078 (8) | −0.0023 (8) |
C2 | 0.0331 (8) | 0.0292 (8) | 0.0296 (8) | 0.0024 (7) | 0.0005 (8) | 0.0003 (6) |
C3 | 0.0336 (8) | 0.0323 (9) | 0.0303 (8) | 0.0014 (7) | 0.0015 (6) | 0.0023 (7) |
C4 | 0.0323 (8) | 0.0327 (9) | 0.0289 (8) | −0.0002 (7) | 0.0016 (6) | −0.0017 (7) |
C5 | 0.0527 (11) | 0.0326 (10) | 0.0391 (10) | 0.0054 (8) | −0.0018 (8) | 0.0027 (8) |
S1—C1 | 1.705 (2) | S4—C4 | 1.6345 (17) |
S1—C5 | 1.707 (2) | C2—C1 | 1.362 (2) |
S2—C2 | 1.7412 (17) | C2—C3 | 1.429 (2) |
S2—C4 | 1.7422 (17) | C3—C5 | 1.355 (2) |
S3—C4 | 1.7308 (17) | C5—H2 | 0.879 (19) |
S3—C3 | 1.7445 (18) | C1—H1 | 0.94 (2) |
C1—S1—C5 | 92.94 (9) | C3—C5—S1 | 110.88 (15) |
C2—S2—C4 | 96.62 (8) | C3—C5—H2 | 125.0 (13) |
C4—S3—C3 | 96.94 (8) | S1—C5—H2 | 124.0 (12) |
C1—C2—C3 | 112.34 (16) | C2—C1—S1 | 110.97 (14) |
C1—C2—S2 | 131.94 (14) | C2—C1—H1 | 129.9 (14) |
C3—C2—S2 | 115.72 (12) | S1—C1—H1 | 119.2 (14) |
C5—C3—C2 | 112.87 (17) | S4—C4—S3 | 122.45 (10) |
C5—C3—S3 | 131.76 (15) | S4—C4—S2 | 122.31 (10) |
C2—C3—S3 | 115.37 (13) | S3—C4—S2 | 115.24 (9) |
C4—S2—C2—C1 | −177.48 (19) | S3—C3—C5—S1 | −178.73 (11) |
C4—S2—C2—C3 | 3.09 (15) | C1—S1—C5—C3 | 0.08 (16) |
C1—C2—C3—C5 | −0.7 (2) | C3—C2—C1—S1 | 0.7 (2) |
S2—C2—C3—C5 | 178.87 (14) | S2—C2—C1—S1 | −178.73 (12) |
C1—C2—C3—S3 | 178.54 (13) | C5—S1—C1—C2 | −0.46 (16) |
S2—C2—C3—S3 | −1.92 (18) | C3—S3—C4—S4 | −177.35 (11) |
C4—S3—C3—C5 | 178.7 (2) | C3—S3—C4—S2 | 2.45 (10) |
C4—S3—C3—C2 | −0.32 (14) | C2—S2—C4—S4 | 176.50 (11) |
C2—C3—C5—S1 | 0.3 (2) | C2—S2—C4—S3 | −3.29 (11) |
Experimental details
Crystal data | |
Chemical formula | C5H2S4 |
Mr | 190.31 |
Crystal system, space group | Orthorhombic, P212121 |
Temperature (K) | 294 |
a, b, c (Å) | 3.9425 (1), 9.2588 (2), 19.2368 (3) |
V (Å3) | 702.20 (3) |
Z | 4 |
Radiation type | Mo Kα |
µ (mm−1) | 1.25 |
Crystal size (mm) | 0.20 × 0.06 × 0.03 |
Data collection | |
Diffractometer | Bruker APEX2 CCD area-detector diffractometer |
Absorption correction | Multi-scan (SADABS; Bruker, 2005) |
Tmin, Tmax | 0.792, 0.962 |
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections | 17824, 1601, 1486 |
Rint | 0.030 |
(sin θ/λ)max (Å−1) | 0.649 |
Refinement | |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S | 0.021, 0.053, 1.05 |
No. of reflections | 1601 |
No. of parameters | 90 |
H-atom treatment | All H-atom parameters refined |
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å−3) | 0.25, −0.13 |
Absolute structure | Flack (1983), 618 Friedel pairs |
Absolute structure parameter | 0.18 (10) |
Computer programs: APEX2 (Bruker, 2005), SAINT (Bruker, 2005), SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008), SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008), SHELXTL (Sheldrick, 2008).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant Nos. 50673054 and 20972089).
References
Bruker (2005). APEX2, SAINT and SADABS. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Google Scholar
Chiang, L.-Y., Shu, P., Holt, D. & Cowan, D. (1983). J. Org. Chem. 48, 4713–4717. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Flack, H. D. (1983). Acta Cryst. A39, 876–881. CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Frisch, M. J., et al. (2003). GAUSSIAN03. Gaussian Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Google Scholar
Gronowitz, S. & Moses, P. (1962). Acta Chem. Scand. 16, 105–110. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 112–122. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals 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.
Although the synthesis of the title compound was reported early by Gronowitz & Moses, 1962, there is no report about its crystal structure. We have recently re-synthesized this compound and determined its X-ray structure.
The molecule adopts a nearly planar C2v conformation (see below for details). All the C—S bond lengths, from the longest 1.744 (2)Å to the shortest 1.635 (2) Å, are between the lengths of C—S single bond and C═S double bond. The central C≐C bond, shared by the two fused five-member rings, also features a delocalized bond with its length being 1.430 (2) Å. Thus the molecule is characterized by a highly planar π-conjugation.
The molecules pack in a paralleled way along the a axis, forming columnar stacks along this direction. The molecular packing is also characterized by many short intermolecular S···S contacts (for instance, S2···S2 [-1/2 + x, 1/2 - y, -z] and S3···S4 [1 - x, -1/2 + y, 1/2 - z] distances are 3.397 (1)Å and 3.486 (1) Å, respectively). We believe that this kind of S···S intermolecular interactions helps to stabilitate the molecular packing in the crystal.
The terminal S4 atom deviates by 0.117 (1)Å from the least-squares plane through the other eight non-H atoms (C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, S1, S2, S3). We suppose that this deviation may be the result of the above S···S intermolecular interactions. To support this assumption, we carried out an optimization procedure for the molecular conformation by using the Gaussian-03 programs (Frisch et al., 2003) within the framework of the DFT at the B3LYP/6–311(d) level. The optimized "free" molecule indeed adopts a perfect planar conformation with a strict C2v symmetry. All the theoretical bond parameters are in good agreement with those of the X-ray results.