Crystal structure, computational study and Hirshfeld surface analysis of ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hy­droxy-3-phenyl­propano­ate

Ben Ali, A.; El Bakri, Y.; Lai, C.-H.; Sebhaoui, J.; El Ghayati, L.; Essassi, E.M.; Mague, J.T.

doi:10.1107/S2056989019015743

research communications

CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC
COMMUNICATIONS

ISSN: 2056-9890

Volume 75| Part 12| December 2019| Pages 1919-1924

https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743

Open

access

Crystal structure, computational study and Hirshfeld surface analysis of ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hydroxy-3-phenylpropanoate

Abdelkader Ben Ali,^a Youness El Bakri,^b ^* Chin-Hung Lai,^c,^d Jihad Sebhaoui,^b Lhoussaine El Ghayati,^b El Mokhtar Essassi ^b and Joel T. Mague ^e

^aLaboratoire de Chimie Appliquée des Matériaux, Centres des Sciences des Matériaux, Faculty of Sciences, Mohammed V University in Rabat, Avenue Ibn, Battouta, BP 1014, Rabat, Morocco, ^bLaboratoire de Chimie Organique Hétérocyclique, Centre de Recherche des Sciences des Médicaments, URAC 21, Pôle de Compétence Pharmacochimie, Av Ibn Battouta, BP 1014, Faculté des Sciences, Université Mohammed V, Rabat, Morocco, ^cDepartment of Medical Applied Chemistry, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung 40241, Taiwan, ^dDepartment of Medical Education, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung 40241, Taiwan, and ^eDepartment of Chemistry, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70118, USA
^*Correspondence e-mail: yns.elbakri@gmail.com

Edited by B. Therrien, University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Received 29 October 2019; accepted 21 November 2019; online 26 November 2019)

In the title molecule, C₁₃H₁₆N₄O₃, the mean planes of the phenyl and triazole rings are nearly perpendicular to one another as a result of the intramolecular C—H⋯O and C—H⋯π(ring) interactions. In the crystal, layers parallel to (101) are generated by O—H⋯N, N—H⋯O and N—H⋯N hydrogen bonds. The layers are connected by inversion-related pairs of C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds. The experimental molecular structure is close to the gas-phase geometry-optimized structure calculated by DFT methods. Hirshfeld surface analysis indicates that the most important interaction involving hydrogen in the title compound is the H⋯H contact. The contribution of the H⋯O, H⋯N, and H⋯H contacts are 13.6, 16.1, and 54.6%, respectively.

Keywords: crystal structure; triazole; hydrogen bond; C—H⋯π(ring) interaction; Hirshfeld surface analysis; computational chemistry.

CCDC reference: 1967185

1. Chemical context

The triazole ring system has attracted considerable interest among synthetic organic chemists and those dealing with medicinal compounds because of its versatile potential to interact with biological systems (Martins et al., 2015 ). Many of its derivatives are important as agrochemicals (Dayan et al., 2000 ; Huang et al., 2006 ; Ling et al., 2007 ). There is also a continuing need for the development of new drugs as those currently available are becoming ineffective because of the drug resistance developed by pathogens. Moreover, life-threatening infections caused by pathogenic fungi are becoming increasingly very common (Leather & Wingard, 2006 ; Walsh et al., 2004 ; Chai et al., 2011 ). Triazole compounds have shown great efficacy against fungal infections. In 1944, Woolly discovered the excellent antifungal properties of azole derivatives, which led to the development of fluconazole, variconazole, albaconazole and itraconazole (Dismukes et al., 2000 ; Zonios et al., 2008 ; Gupta et al., 2003 ). Further structural modifications of this ring system are expected to result in potential candidates for antifungal agents. These modifications use different functionalities such as aliphatic chains, aromatic rings, heterocyclic ring systems etc. (Calderone et al., 2008 ; Kim et al., 2010 ; Giffin et al., 2008 ; Wang et al., 2005 ). As a continuation of our research on the synthesis, functionalization, physico-chemical and biological properties of triazole derivatives (El Bakri et al., 2018 , 2019a ,b ,c ), we report herein on the crystal structure, DFT calculations and Hirshfeld surface analysis of ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hydroxy-3-phenylpropanoate (1).

2. Structural commentary

The conformation of the molecule is controlled in part by two intramolecular interactions, a C2—H2⋯O1 hydrogen bond and a C—H⋯π(ring) interaction between C5—H5 and the triazole ring (Table 1 and Fig. 1). This leads to a dihedral angle of 87.12 (4)° between the phenyl and triazole rings. Atoms N4 and C3 are displaced from the mean plane of the triazole ring by 0.046 (1) and −0.056 (1) Å, respectively. All bond distances and interbond angles are as expected for the formulation given.

Table 1
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, °)

Cg1 is the centroid of the triazole ring.

D—H⋯A	D—H	H⋯A	D⋯A	D—H⋯A
O1—H1⋯N3ⁱ	0.881 (18)	1.887 (18)	2.7417 (12)	162.9 (16)
N4—H4A⋯O2ⁱⁱ	0.887 (16)	2.182 (17)	3.0317 (14)	160.2 (13)
N4—H4B⋯N1ⁱⁱⁱ	0.898 (18)	2.127 (18)	3.0066 (15)	166.1 (15)
C2—H2⋯O1	0.954 (16)	2.257 (16)	2.8665 (14)	120.9 (12)
C12—H12B⋯O1^iv	1.000 (15)	2.569 (15)	3.4225 (15)	143.2 (11)
C5—H5⋯Cg1	0.982 (14)	2.856 (14)	3.4816 (13)	122.3 (10)
Symmetry codes: (i) $[-x+{\script{3\over 2}}, y-{\script{1\over 2}}, -z+{\script{1\over 2}}]$ ; (ii) $[-x+{\script{3\over 2}}, y+{\script{1\over 2}}, -z+{\script{1\over 2}}]$ ; (iii) -x+2, -y+1, -z; (iv) -x+2, -y+1, -z+1.

Figure 1
The title molecule with the labelling scheme and 50% probability displacement ellipsoids. The intramolecular C—H⋯O hydrogen bond is shown by a black dashed line while the C—H⋯π(ring) interaction is shown by a green dashed line.

3. Supramolecular features

In the crystal, O1—H1⋯N3, N4—H4A⋯O2 and N4—H4B⋯N1 hydrogen bonds (Table 1) form layers of molecules parallel to (101) (see Fig. 2), which are joined by inversion-related pairs of C12—H12B⋯O1 hydrogen bonds (Table 1 and Fig. 2).

Figure 2
The packing viewed along the b-axis direction. O—H⋯N, N—H⋯O, N—H⋯N and C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds are shown, respectively, by red, light-blue, orange and black dashed lines.

4. Database survey

Searches of the CSD (Version 5.40, updated to September 2019; Groom et al., 2016 ) with two different search fragments were performed. The first, with 3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazole as the search fragment, found three structures in which a side chain is bound to the nitrogen atom in the 1-position of the triazole ring (N2 in 1), namely 4-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-4-methylpentan-2-one (QISROC; Zemlyanaya et al., 2018 ), 1-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-3,3-dimethylbutan-2-one (VATPEO; Cai et al., 2017 ) and 3-amino-1-guanyl-1,2,4-triazole dinitramide (YOPDAJ; Zeng et al., 2008 ). The triazole ring in each of these is essentially planar and the distances of the corresponding C and N substituent atoms from the mean plane of the triazole ring are comparable to those observed for 1.

The second search, using 1-benzyl-1H-1,2,4-triazole as the search fragment, found fifteen structures, but in most of these the phenyl group is oriented with the line joining the ortho carbon atoms approximately parallel to that joining the atoms in the triazole ring corresponding to C2 and N3 in Fig. 1, so that there is an intramolecular C—H⋯π(ring) interaction is not possible. Those in which this interaction is possible are (+)-6-[(4-chlorophenyl)(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methyl]-1-methyl-1H-benzotriazole (HALHOR; Peeters et al., 1993 ), (+)-6-[(4-chlorophenyl)(4-azonia-1H-1,2-diazol-1-yl)methyl]-1-methyl-1H-benzotriazole bromide monohydrate (HALHUX; Peeters et al., 1993), 5,6-bis{4-methyl-2,6-bis[(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methyl]phenoxy}pyrazine-2,3-dicarbonitrile monohydrate (NEJFIU; Ghazal et al., 2017 ) and 4,4′-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methylenebis(benzonitrile) (UKAKIA; Xu et al., 2002 ). The H⋯centroid distances and C—H⋯centroid angles for these are: HALHOR: 2.94 Å, 111°; HALHUX: 2.78 Å, 124°; NEJFIU: 2.92 Å, 153° and 2.66 Å, 127°; UKAKIA: 2.83 Å, 126°. The geometries of all of the C—H⋯π(ring) interactions in these molecules, except for the first of the two interactions listed for NEJFIU, are comparable to that found in 1.

5. Theoretical studies

5.1. calculation of the electronic structure

The structure in the gas phase of 1 was optimized by means of density functional theory. The DFT calculation was performed by the hybrid B3LYP method, which is based on the idea of Becke and considers a mixture of the exact (HF) and DFT exchange utilizing the B3 functional, together with the LYP correlation functional (Becke, 1993 ; Lee et al., 1988 ; Miehlich et al., 1989 ). In conjunction with the basis set def2-SVP, the B3LYP calculation was performed (Weigend & Ahlrichs, 2005 ). After obtaining the converged geometry, the harmonic vibrational frequencies were calculated at the same theoretical level to confirm the number of imaginary frequencies is zero for the stationary point. Both the geometry optimization and harmonic vibrational frequency analysis of 1 were performed using the Gaussian 16 program (Frisch et al., 2016 ).

5.2. comparison between the gas- and solid-phase geometries

From a comparison of selected geometrical parameters obtained from the B3LYP geometry optimization for 1 (Fig. 3) with those from the crystallographic study (Table 2), it is evident that the B3LYP-optimized geometry shows little deviation from the X-ray structure. To quantify the difference between the calculated and experimental geometries, the structure comparer built into the ChemCraft software (https://www.chemcraftprog.com) was used to obtain their r.m.s. deviation. A weighted r.m.s.d. of 0.5684 was obtained with r.m.s. deviations of 0.7365, 0.4474, 0.1926, and 0.2606 for the H, C, N and O atoms, respectively.

Table 2
Bond lengths and angles (Å, °) in the B3LYP-optimized and the X-ray structures

	B3LYP	X-ray		B3LYP	X-ray
N1—C1	1.365	1.3648 (15)	O1—C10	1.399	1.3968 (13)
N1—C2	1.321	1.3242 (15)	O2—C11	1.210	1.2079 (14)
N2—C3	1.459	1.4609 (13)	O3—C11	1.329	1.3277 (14)
N2—C22	1.354	1.3319 (15)	O3—C12	1.447	1.4697 (13)
N2—N3	1.364	1.3794 (13)	C4—C9	1.403	1.3992 (16)
N3—C1	1.328	1.3288 (14)	C8—C7	1.397	1.380 (2)
N4—C1	1.377	1.3610 (15)	C8—C9	1.398	1.3867 (18)
C3—C4	1.523	1.5171 (15)	C10—C11	1.530	1.5278 (15)
C3—C10	1.551	1.5522 (15)

C2—N2—N3	109.4	108.99 (9)	N1—C1—N3	114.9	114.34 (10)
O2—C11—O3	125.0	125.05 (10)	C10—C11—O3	113.4	111.04 (9)

Figure 3
The B3LYP-optimized geometry (Å) of the title compound.

5.3. Hirshfeld surface analysis

Both the definition of a molecule in a condensed phase and the recognition of distinct entities in molecular liquids and crystals are fundamental concepts in chemistry. Based on Hirshfeld's partitioning scheme, Spackman et al. (1997 ) proposed a method to divide the electron distribution in a crystalline phase into molecular fragments (Spackman & Byrom, 1997; McKinnon et al., 2004 ; Spackman & Jayatilaka, 2009 ). Their proposed method partitioned the crystal into regions where the electron distribution of a sum of spherical atoms for the molecule dominates over the corresponding sum of the crystal. As it is derived from Hirshfeld's stockholder partitioning, the molecular surface is named as the Hirshfeld surface. In this study, the Hirshfeld surface analysis of 1 was performed using CrystalExplorer (Turner et al., 2017 ).

The standard resolution molecular Hirshfeld surface (d_norm) of 1 is depicted in Fig. 4. This surface can be used to identify very close intermolecular interactions. The value of d_norm is negative (positive) when intermolecular contacts are shorter (longer) than the van der Waals radii. The red regions on the surface represent closer contacts with a negative d_norm value while the blue regions represent longer contacts with a positive d_norm value while, the white regions represent contacts equal to the van der Waals separation and have a d_norm value of zero. As depicted in Fig. 4, the important interactions in 1 are H⋯O and H⋯N hydrogen bonds. In order to understand the relative importance of H⋯O hydrogen bonds versus H⋯N hydrogen bonds, we calculated the two-dimensional fingerprint plots for 1 (Fig. 5), which highlight particular atom-pair contacts and enable the separation of contributions from different interaction types that overlap in the full fingerprint. The most important interaction involving hydrogen in 1 is the H⋯H contact. The contributions of the H⋯O, H⋯N, and H⋯H contact are 13.6%, 16.1% and 54.6%, respectively.

Figure 4
The d_norm Hirshfeld surface of the title compound (red: negative, white: zero, blue: positive; scale: −0.6530 to 1.3260 a.u.).

Figure 5
The two-dimensional fingerprint plots of the title compound (a) all, and delineated into (b) H⋯N, (c) H⋯O and (d) H⋯H contacts.

6. Synthesis and crystallization

A mixture of 3-amino-1,2,4-triazole (2 g, 23.8 mmol) and ethyl 3-phenylglycidate (4.5 mL, 32.8 mmol) in n-butanol (20 mL) was refluxed for 24 h. After completion of the reaction (TLC indicated complete consumption of reactants), the solvents were removed in vacuo. The purified product was recrystallized from ethanol solution to afford 1 as colourless crystals. ¹H NMR (300 MHz, DMSO-d₆), δ(ppm): 1.77 (s, 3H, CH₃),7.66 (q, 2H, CH₂), 5.21 (d, 1H, CH), 5.82 (d, 1H, CH), 6.20 (s, 1H, OH), 6.62 (s, 2H, NH₂), 7.28–7.32 (CH_Ar), 8.32 (s, 1H, CH_triazolic).¹³C NMR (75 MHz, DMSO-d₆) δ (ppm): δ 15.6, 63.8, 70.3, 82.02, 129.2, 130.6, 131.1, 145.9, 146.8, 164.5, 172.9. HRMS (EI). Calculated for C₁₃H₁₆N₄O₃: [M + H⁺] = 277.12. Found: [M + H⁺] = 277.30. Elemental analysis: calculated: C, 56.51%; H, 5.84%; N, 20.28%; O, 17.37%, found: C, 56.76%; H, 4.16%; N, 19.94%; O, 19.14%.

7. Refinement

Crystal data, data collection and structure refinement details are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3
Experimental details

Crystal data
Chemical formula	C₁₃H₁₆N₄O₃
M_r	276.30
Crystal system, space group	Monoclinic, P2₁/n
Temperature (K)	150
a, b, c (Å)	8.4766 (2), 9.4841 (2), 16.9904 (3)
β (°)	94.308 (1)
V (Å³)	1362.05 (5)
Z	4
Radiation type	Cu Kα
μ (mm⁻¹)	0.82
Crystal size (mm)	0.34 × 0.22 × 0.09

Data collection
Diffractometer	Bruker D8 VENTURE PHOTON 100 CMOS
Absorption correction	Multi-scan (SADABS; Krause et al., 2015 )
T_min, T_max	0.83, 0.93
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections	10203, 2718, 2485
R_int	0.027
(sin θ/λ)_max (Å⁻¹)	0.625

Refinement
R[F² > 2σ(F²)], wR(F²), S	0.033, 0.084, 1.05
No. of reflections	2718
No. of parameters	246
H-atom treatment	All H-atom parameters refined
Δρ_max, Δρ_min (e Å⁻³)	0.22, −0.16
Computer programs: APEX3 and SAINT (Bruker, 2016 ), SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015a ), SHELXL2018 (Sheldrick, 2015b ), DIAMOND (Brandenburg & Putz, 2012 ) and SHELXTL (Sheldrick, 2008 ).

Supporting information

CCDC reference: 1967185

Crystal structure: contains datablocks global, I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743/tx2015sup1.cif

Structure factors: contains datablock I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743/tx2015Isup2.hkl

Supporting information file. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743/tx2015Isup3.cdx

Supporting information file. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743/tx2015Isup4.cml

checkCIF report

Computing details top

Data collection: APEX3 (Bruker, 2016); cell refinement: SAINT (Bruker, 2016); data reduction: SAINT (Bruker, 2016); program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015a); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL2018 (Sheldrick, 2015b); molecular graphics: DIAMOND (Brandenburg & Putz, 2012); software used to prepare material for publication: SHELXTL (Sheldrick, 2008).

Ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hydroxy-3-phenylpropanoate top

Crystal data top

C₁₃H₁₆N₄O₃	F(000) = 584
M_r = 276.30	D_x = 1.347 Mg m⁻³
Monoclinic, P2₁/n	Cu Kα radiation, λ = 1.54178 Å
a = 8.4766 (2) Å	Cell parameters from 8615 reflections
b = 9.4841 (2) Å	θ = 2.6–74.5°
c = 16.9904 (3) Å	µ = 0.82 mm⁻¹
β = 94.308 (1)°	T = 150 K
V = 1362.05 (5) Å³	Thick plate, colourless
Z = 4	0.34 × 0.22 × 0.09 mm

Data collection top

Bruker D8 VENTURE PHOTON 100 CMOS diffractometer	2718 independent reflections
Radiation source: INCOATEC IµS micro–focus source	2485 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Mirror monochromator	R_int = 0.027
Detector resolution: 10.4167 pixels mm^-1	θ_max = 74.5°, θ_min = 5.2°
ω scans	h = −9→10
Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Krause et al., 2015)	k = −11→11
T_min = 0.83, T_max = 0.93	l = −20→21
10203 measured reflections

Refinement top

Refinement on F²	Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
Least-squares matrix: full	Hydrogen site location: difference Fourier map
R[F² > 2σ(F²)] = 0.033	All H-atom parameters refined
wR(F²) = 0.084	w = 1/[σ²(F_o²) + (0.0378P)² + 0.3844P] where P = (F_o² + 2F_c²)/3
S = 1.05	(Δ/σ)_max < 0.001
2718 reflections	Δρ_max = 0.22 e Å⁻³
246 parameters	Δρ_min = −0.16 e Å⁻³
0 restraints	Extinction correction: SHELXL2018 (Sheldrick, 2015b), Fc^*=kFc[1+0.001xFc²λ³/sin(2θ)]^-1/4
Primary atom site location: dual	Extinction coefficient: 0.0057 (5)

Special details top

Geometry. All esds (except the esd in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell esds are taken into account individually in the estimation of esds in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between esds in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell esds is used for estimating esds 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 > 2sigma(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

	x	y	z	U_iso*/U_eq
O1	0.91699 (9)	0.36786 (8)	0.32916 (5)	0.02713 (19)
H1	0.835 (2)	0.3191 (18)	0.3429 (10)	0.051 (5)*
O2	0.81808 (10)	0.45251 (9)	0.47136 (5)	0.0329 (2)
O3	0.85502 (10)	0.68009 (8)	0.44013 (4)	0.0308 (2)
N1	0.97355 (13)	0.50581 (12)	0.09965 (6)	0.0373 (3)
N2	0.85183 (11)	0.57435 (10)	0.20247 (5)	0.0263 (2)
N3	0.81168 (11)	0.67258 (10)	0.14453 (5)	0.0265 (2)
N4	0.88970 (15)	0.69505 (13)	0.01404 (6)	0.0382 (3)
H4A	0.8193 (19)	0.7639 (17)	0.0066 (9)	0.039 (4)*
H4B	0.917 (2)	0.6404 (18)	−0.0258 (10)	0.049 (4)*
C1	0.88946 (13)	0.62675 (12)	0.08448 (6)	0.0286 (3)
C2	0.94526 (15)	0.47729 (14)	0.17358 (7)	0.0346 (3)
H2	0.9802 (18)	0.3965 (17)	0.2035 (9)	0.043 (4)*
C3	0.78317 (13)	0.58436 (12)	0.27861 (6)	0.0246 (2)
H3	0.7800 (16)	0.6852 (14)	0.2914 (8)	0.027 (3)*
C4	0.61677 (13)	0.52484 (12)	0.27637 (6)	0.0266 (2)
C5	0.55667 (14)	0.43446 (13)	0.21732 (7)	0.0315 (3)
H5	0.6185 (16)	0.4141 (14)	0.1720 (8)	0.030 (3)*
C6	0.40816 (16)	0.37325 (15)	0.22196 (8)	0.0409 (3)
H6	0.372 (2)	0.3122 (18)	0.1811 (10)	0.051 (4)*
C7	0.31994 (16)	0.40186 (17)	0.28540 (9)	0.0460 (3)
H7	0.220 (2)	0.3540 (19)	0.2888 (10)	0.056 (5)*
C8	0.37591 (15)	0.49637 (17)	0.34260 (8)	0.0436 (3)
H8	0.311 (2)	0.5198 (18)	0.3888 (10)	0.056 (5)*
C9	0.52284 (14)	0.55881 (15)	0.33796 (7)	0.0349 (3)
H9	0.5614 (19)	0.6306 (17)	0.3805 (9)	0.045 (4)*
C10	0.89794 (13)	0.51219 (11)	0.34175 (6)	0.0250 (2)
H10	1.0024 (15)	0.5580 (13)	0.3377 (7)	0.025 (3)*
C11	0.85120 (13)	0.54268 (12)	0.42518 (6)	0.0263 (2)
C12	0.81350 (16)	0.72230 (14)	0.51908 (7)	0.0344 (3)
H12A	0.6980 (19)	0.7131 (16)	0.5195 (9)	0.041 (4)*
H12B	0.8654 (17)	0.6543 (16)	0.5579 (9)	0.039 (4)*
C13	0.8721 (2)	0.86853 (16)	0.53308 (10)	0.0515 (4)
H13A	0.839 (2)	0.905 (2)	0.5884 (13)	0.077 (6)*
H13B	0.821 (2)	0.932 (2)	0.4918 (12)	0.076 (6)*
H13C	1.000 (3)	0.870 (2)	0.5340 (11)	0.071 (6)*

Atomic displacement parameters (Å²) top

	U¹¹	U²²	U³³	U¹²	U¹³	U²³
O1	0.0277 (4)	0.0259 (4)	0.0285 (4)	0.0019 (3)	0.0070 (3)	0.0016 (3)
O2	0.0381 (5)	0.0354 (4)	0.0258 (4)	−0.0044 (3)	0.0064 (3)	0.0033 (3)
O3	0.0387 (5)	0.0307 (4)	0.0232 (4)	0.0009 (3)	0.0049 (3)	−0.0016 (3)
N1	0.0413 (6)	0.0472 (6)	0.0247 (5)	0.0175 (5)	0.0113 (4)	0.0041 (4)
N2	0.0274 (5)	0.0307 (5)	0.0214 (4)	0.0049 (4)	0.0073 (4)	0.0028 (4)
N3	0.0308 (5)	0.0279 (5)	0.0217 (4)	0.0019 (4)	0.0077 (4)	0.0030 (4)
N4	0.0515 (7)	0.0397 (6)	0.0250 (5)	0.0125 (5)	0.0141 (5)	0.0052 (4)
C1	0.0296 (6)	0.0335 (6)	0.0235 (5)	0.0025 (4)	0.0072 (4)	0.0005 (4)
C2	0.0376 (7)	0.0414 (7)	0.0257 (6)	0.0159 (5)	0.0087 (5)	0.0035 (5)
C3	0.0279 (5)	0.0272 (5)	0.0196 (5)	0.0034 (4)	0.0079 (4)	0.0009 (4)
C4	0.0249 (5)	0.0307 (6)	0.0244 (5)	0.0052 (4)	0.0039 (4)	0.0050 (4)
C5	0.0298 (6)	0.0357 (6)	0.0289 (6)	0.0053 (5)	0.0013 (5)	0.0023 (5)
C6	0.0333 (7)	0.0462 (8)	0.0419 (7)	−0.0008 (5)	−0.0065 (5)	0.0003 (6)
C7	0.0253 (6)	0.0625 (9)	0.0501 (8)	−0.0028 (6)	0.0026 (6)	0.0103 (7)
C8	0.0279 (6)	0.0658 (9)	0.0382 (7)	0.0027 (6)	0.0099 (5)	0.0052 (6)
C9	0.0286 (6)	0.0480 (7)	0.0290 (6)	0.0047 (5)	0.0074 (5)	0.0007 (5)
C10	0.0246 (5)	0.0270 (5)	0.0237 (5)	0.0001 (4)	0.0042 (4)	0.0005 (4)
C11	0.0251 (5)	0.0298 (6)	0.0237 (5)	−0.0004 (4)	0.0013 (4)	0.0005 (4)
C12	0.0376 (7)	0.0423 (7)	0.0236 (6)	0.0048 (5)	0.0043 (5)	−0.0059 (5)
C13	0.0712 (11)	0.0410 (8)	0.0414 (8)	0.0027 (7)	−0.0013 (7)	−0.0099 (6)

Geometric parameters (Å, º) top

O1—C10	1.3968 (13)	C4—C9	1.3992 (16)
O1—H1	0.881 (18)	C5—C6	1.3939 (18)
O2—C11	1.2079 (14)	C5—H5	0.982 (14)
O3—C11	1.3277 (14)	C6—C7	1.384 (2)
O3—C12	1.4679 (13)	C6—H6	0.938 (17)
N1—C2	1.3242 (15)	C7—C8	1.380 (2)
N1—C1	1.3648 (15)	C7—H7	0.963 (18)
N2—C2	1.3319 (15)	C8—C9	1.3867 (18)
N2—N3	1.3794 (13)	C8—H8	1.017 (18)
N2—C3	1.4609 (13)	C9—H9	1.028 (16)
N3—C1	1.3288 (14)	C10—C11	1.5278 (15)
N4—C1	1.3610 (15)	C10—H10	0.993 (13)
N4—H4A	0.887 (16)	C12—C13	1.486 (2)
N4—H4B	0.898 (18)	C12—H12A	0.983 (16)
C2—H2	0.954 (16)	C12—H12B	1.000 (15)
C3—C4	1.5171 (15)	C13—H13A	1.06 (2)
C3—C10	1.5522 (15)	C13—H13B	1.00 (2)
C3—H3	0.982 (14)	C13—H13C	1.08 (2)
C4—C5	1.3871 (17)

C10—O1—H1	111.7 (11)	C8—C7—C6	119.90 (13)
C11—O3—C12	116.00 (9)	C8—C7—H7	121.3 (10)
C2—N1—C1	102.80 (10)	C6—C7—H7	118.8 (10)
C2—N2—N3	108.99 (9)	C7—C8—C9	120.01 (13)
C2—N2—C3	131.21 (10)	C7—C8—H8	120.6 (10)
N3—N2—C3	119.65 (8)	C9—C8—H8	119.4 (10)
C1—N3—N2	102.53 (9)	C8—C9—C4	120.54 (12)
C1—N4—H4A	115.5 (10)	C8—C9—H9	118.8 (9)
C1—N4—H4B	114.0 (11)	C4—C9—H9	120.6 (9)
H4A—N4—H4B	121.9 (14)	O1—C10—C11	111.63 (9)
N3—C1—N4	123.58 (11)	O1—C10—C3	113.57 (9)
N3—C1—N1	114.34 (10)	C11—C10—C3	111.41 (9)
N4—C1—N1	122.06 (10)	O1—C10—H10	107.7 (7)
N1—C2—N2	111.32 (11)	C11—C10—H10	106.0 (7)
N1—C2—H2	126.7 (9)	C3—C10—H10	106.0 (7)
N2—C2—H2	121.9 (9)	O2—C11—O3	125.05 (10)
N2—C3—C4	112.65 (9)	O2—C11—C10	123.90 (10)
N2—C3—C10	108.22 (8)	O3—C11—C10	111.04 (9)
C4—C3—C10	112.74 (9)	O3—C12—C13	107.49 (11)
N2—C3—H3	106.2 (8)	O3—C12—H12A	106.8 (9)
C4—C3—H3	109.1 (8)	C13—C12—H12A	113.7 (9)
C10—C3—H3	107.6 (8)	O3—C12—H12B	107.6 (9)
C5—C4—C9	118.98 (11)	C13—C12—H12B	111.8 (9)
C5—C4—C3	122.57 (10)	H12A—C12—H12B	109.1 (12)
C9—C4—C3	118.41 (10)	C12—C13—H13A	110.1 (12)
C4—C5—C6	120.04 (12)	C12—C13—H13B	109.0 (12)
C4—C5—H5	120.0 (8)	H13A—C13—H13B	107.4 (17)
C6—C5—H5	120.0 (8)	C12—C13—H13C	109.9 (11)
C7—C6—C5	120.36 (13)	H13A—C13—H13C	108.1 (15)
C7—C6—H6	122.1 (10)	H13B—C13—H13C	112.4 (16)
C5—C6—H6	117.6 (10)

C2—N2—N3—C1	−1.38 (12)	C3—C4—C5—C6	174.36 (11)
C3—N2—N3—C1	−177.37 (10)	C4—C5—C6—C7	−0.12 (19)
N2—N3—C1—N4	−177.46 (11)	C5—C6—C7—C8	2.9 (2)
N2—N3—C1—N1	1.03 (13)	C6—C7—C8—C9	−2.3 (2)
C2—N1—C1—N3	−0.29 (15)	C7—C8—C9—C4	−1.2 (2)
C2—N1—C1—N4	178.23 (12)	C5—C4—C9—C8	3.98 (18)
C1—N1—C2—N2	−0.65 (15)	C3—C4—C9—C8	−173.77 (11)
N3—N2—C2—N1	1.33 (15)	N2—C3—C10—O1	−63.92 (11)
C3—N2—C2—N1	176.70 (11)	C4—C3—C10—O1	61.36 (12)
C2—N2—C3—C4	−94.74 (14)	N2—C3—C10—C11	168.99 (9)
N3—N2—C3—C4	80.22 (12)	C4—C3—C10—C11	−65.74 (12)
C2—N2—C3—C10	30.59 (16)	C12—O3—C11—O2	−0.70 (16)
N3—N2—C3—C10	−154.44 (9)	C12—O3—C11—C10	−179.49 (9)
N2—C3—C4—C5	18.19 (15)	O1—C10—C11—O2	−7.54 (15)
C10—C3—C4—C5	−104.64 (12)	C3—C10—C11—O2	120.60 (12)
N2—C3—C4—C9	−164.15 (10)	O1—C10—C11—O3	171.26 (9)
C10—C3—C4—C9	73.02 (13)	C3—C10—C11—O3	−60.59 (12)
C9—C4—C5—C6	−3.29 (17)	C11—O3—C12—C13	162.57 (11)

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top

Cg1 is the centroid of the triazole ring.

D—H···A	D—H	H···A	D···A	D—H···A
O1—H1···N3ⁱ	0.881 (18)	1.887 (18)	2.7417 (12)	162.9 (16)
N4—H4A···O2ⁱⁱ	0.887 (16)	2.182 (17)	3.0317 (14)	160.2 (13)
N4—H4B···N1ⁱⁱⁱ	0.898 (18)	2.127 (18)	3.0066 (15)	166.1 (15)
C2—H2···O1	0.954 (16)	2.257 (16)	2.8665 (14)	120.9 (12)
C12—H12B···O1^iv	1.000 (15)	2.569 (15)	3.4225 (15)	143.2 (11)
C5—H5···Cg1	0.982 (14)	2.856 (14)	3.4816 (13)	122.3 (10)

Symmetry codes: (i) −x+3/2, y−1/2, −z+1/2; (ii) −x+3/2, y+1/2, −z+1/2; (iii) −x+2, −y+1, −z; (iv) −x+2, −y+1, −z+1.

Bond lengths and angles (Å, °) in the B3LYP-optimized and the X-ray structures top

	B3LYP	X-ray		B3LYP	X-ray
N1—C1	1.365	1.3648 (15)	O1—C10	1.399	1.3968 (13)
N1—C2	1.321	1.3242 (15)	O2—C11	1.210	1.2079 (14)
N2—C3	1.459	1.4609 (13)	O3—C11	1.329	1.3277 (14)
N2—C22	1.354	1.3319 (15)	O3—C12	1.447	1.4697 (13)
N2—N3	1.364	1.3794 (13)	C4—C9	1.403	1.3992 (16)
N3—C1	1.328	1.3288 (14)	C8—C7	1.397	1.380 (2)
N4—C1	1.377	1.3610 (15)	C8—C9	1.398	1.3867 (18)
C3—C4	1.523	1.5171 (15)	C10—C11	1.530	1.5278 (15)
C3—C10	1.551	1.5522 (15)

C2—N2—N3	109.4	108.99 (9)	N1—C1—N3	114.9	114.34 (10)
O2—C11—O3	125.0	125.05 (10)	C10—C11—O3	113.4	111.04 (9)

Funding information

The support of NSF-MRI grant No. 1228232 for the purchase of the diffractometer and Tulane University for support of the Tulane Crystallography Laboratory are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Becke, A. D. (1993). J. Chem. Phys. 98, 5648–5652. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Brandenburg, K. & Putz, H. (2012). DIAMOND, Crystal Impact GbR, Bonn, Germany. Google Scholar
Bruker (2016). APEX3, SAINT and SADABS. Bruker AXS, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Google Scholar
Cai, G.-R., Zheng, D.-F., Li, B. & Feng, N.-J. (2017). Jiegou Huaxue, 36, 599–605. CAS Google Scholar
Calderone, V., Fiamingo, F. L., Amato, G., Giorgi, I., Livi, O., Martelli, A. & Martinotti, E. (2008). Eur. J. Med. Chem. 43, 2618–2626. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Chai, X., Zhang, J., Cao, Y., Zou, Y., Wu, Q., Zhang, D., Jiang, Y. & Sun, Q. (2011). Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 21, 686–689. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Dayan, F. E., Vincent, A. C., Romagni, J. G., Allen, S. N., Duke, S. O., Duke, M. V., Bowling, J. J. & Zjawiony, J. K. (2000). J. Agric. Food Chem. 48, 3689–3693. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Dismukes, W. E. (2000). Clin. Infect. Dis. 30, 653–657. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
El Bakri, Y., Guo, L., Anouar, E. H., Harmaoui, A., Ben Ali, A., Essassi, E. M. & Mague, J. T. (2019b). J. Mol. Struct. 1176, 290–297. CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
El Bakri, Y., Guo, L., Anouar, E. H., Harmaoui, A., Ben Ali, A., Essassi, E. M. & Mague, J. T. (2019c). J. Mol. Struct. 1176, 290–297. CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
El Bakri, Y., Lai, C., Sebhaoui, J., Ali, A. B., Ramli, Y., Essassi, E. M. & Mague, J. T. (2018). Chem. Data Collect. 17–18, 472–482. CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
El Bakri, Y., Marmouzi, I., El Jemli, M., Anouar, E. H., Karthikeyan, S., Harmaoui, A., Faouzi, M. A., Mague, J. T. & Essassi, E. M. (2019a). Bioorg. Chem. 92, 103193–103215. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Frisch, M. J., Trucks, G. W., Schlegel, H. B., Scuseria, G. E., Robb, M. A., Cheeseman, J. R., Scalmani, G., Barone, V., Petersson, G. A., Nakatsuji, H., Li, X., Caricato, M., Marenich, A. V., Bloino, J., Janesko, B. G., Gomperts, R., Mennucci, B., Hratchian, H. P., Ortiz, J. V., Izmaylov, A. F., Sonnenberg, J. L., Williams-Young, D., Ding, F., Lipparini, F., Egidi, F., Goings, J., Peng, B., Petrone, A., Henderson, T., Ranasinghe, D., Zakrzewski, V. G., Gao, J., Rega, N., Zheng, G., Liang, W., Hada, M., Ehara, M., Toyota, K., Fukuda, R., Hasegawa, J., Ishida, M., Nakajima, T., Honda, Y., Kitao, O., Nakai, H., Vreven, T., Throssell, K., Montgomery, J. A., Peralta, J. E. Jr, Ogliaro, F., Bearpark, M. J., Heyd, J. J., Brothers, E. N., Kudin, K. N., Staroverov, V. N., Keith, T. A., Kobayashi, R., Normand, J., Raghavachari, K., Rendell, A. P., Burant, J. C., Iyengar, S. S., Tomasi, J., Cossi, M., Millam, J. M., Klene, M., Adamo, C., Cammi, R., Ochterski, J. W., Martin, R. L., Morokuma, K., Farkas, O., Foresman, J. B. & Fox, D. J. (2016). Gaussian 16, Revision A. 03. Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford CT. Google Scholar
Ghazal, B., Machacek, M., Shalaby, M. A., Novakova, V., Zimcik, P. & Makhseed, S. (2017). J. Med. Chem. 60, 6060–6076. CSD CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Giffin, M. J., Heaslet, H., Brik, A., Lin, Y. C., Cauvi, G., Wong, C. H., McRee, D. E., Elder, J. H., Stout, C. D. & Torbett, B. E. (2008). J. Med. Chem. 51, 6263–6270. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Groom, C. R., Bruno, I. J., Lightfoot, M. P. & Ward, S. C. (2016). Acta Cryst. B72, 171–179. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Gupta, A. K. & Tomas, E. (2003). Dermatol. Clin. 21, 565–576. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Huang, W. & Yang, G. G. (2006). Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14, 8280–8285. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Kim, E. M., Joung, M. H., Lee, C. M., Jeong, H. J., Lim, S. T., Sohn, M. H. & Kim, D. W. (2010). Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 20, 4240–4243. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Krause, L., Herbst-Irmer, R., Sheldrick, G. M. & Stalke, D. (2015). J. Appl. Cryst. 48, 3–10. Web of Science CSD CrossRef ICSD CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Leather, H. L. & Wingard, J. R. (2006). Blood Rev. 20, 267–287. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Lee, C., Yang, W. & Parr, R. G. (1988). Phys. Rev. B, 37, 785–789. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Ling, S., Xin, Z., Qing, Z., Jian–Bing, L., Zhong, J. & Jian–Xin, F. (2007). Synth. Commun. 37, 199–207. CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Martins, P., Jesus, J., Santos, S., Raposo, L. R., Roma-Rodrigues, C., Baptista, P. V. & Fernandes, A. R. (2015). Molecules, 20, 16852–16891. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
McKinnon, J. J., Spackman, M. A. & Mitchell, A. S. (2004). Acta Cryst. B60, 627–668. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Miehlich, B., Savin, A., Stoll, H. & Preuss, H. (1989). Chem. Phys. Lett. 157, 200–206. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Peeters, O. M., Schuerman, G. S., Blaton, N. M. & De Ranter, C. J. (1993). Acta Cryst. C49, 1958–1961. CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 112–122. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2015a). Acta Cryst. A71, 3–8. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2015b). Acta Cryst. C71, 3–8. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Spackman, M. A. & Byrom, P. G. (1997). Chem. Phys. Lett. 267, 215–220. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Spackman, M. A. & Jayatilaka, D. (2009). CrystEngComm, 11, 19–32. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Turner, M. J., McKinnon, J. J., Wolff, S. K., Grimwood, D. J., Spackman, P. R., Jayatilaka, D. & Spackman, M. A. (2017). CrystalExplorer17. University of Western Australia. Google Scholar
Walsh, T. J., Groll, A., Hiemenz, J., Fleming, R., Roilides, E. & Anaissie, E. (2004). Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 10 Suppl 1, 48–66. CrossRef Google Scholar
Wang, Q., Chittaboina, S. & Barnhill, H. N. (2005). Lett. Org. Chem. 2, 293–301. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Weigend, F. & Ahlrichs, R. (2005). Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 7, 3297–3305. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Xu, X.-Y., Ma, W.-X., Wang, J., Chem, H. H., Yang, X.-J. & Wang, X. (2002). HuaiHai Gongxueyuan Xuebao 11, 30–33. Google Scholar
Zemlyanaya, N. I., Karnozhitskaya, T. M., Musatov, V. I., Konovalova, I. S., Shishkina, S. V. & Lipson, V. V. (2018). Zh. Org. Khim. 54, 1241–1249. CAS Google Scholar
Zeng, Z., Wang, R., Twamley, B., Parrish, D. A. & Shreeve, J. M. (2008). Chem. Mater. 20, 6176–6182. CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Zonios, D. I. & Bennett, J. E. (2008). Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 29, 198–210. CrossRef PubMed 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.

CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC
COMMUNICATIONS

ISSN: 2056-9890

Volume 75| Part 12| December 2019| Pages 1919-1924

https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989019015743

Open

access

Format		BIBTeX
		EndNote
		RefMan
		Refer
		Medline
		CIF
		SGML
		Plain Text
		Text

Format		BIBTeX
		EndNote
		RefMan
		Refer
		Medline
		CIF
		SGML
		Plain Text
		Text

Search IUCr Journals		doi		Advanced search
Author		volume	page

research communications\(\def\hfill{\hskip 5em}\def\hfil{\hskip 3em}\def\eqno#1{\hfil {#1}}\)

Crystal structure, computational study and Hirshfeld surface analysis of ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hy­dr­oxy-3-phenyl­propano­ate

1. Chemical context

2. Structural commentary

3. Supra­molecular features

4. Database survey

5. Theoretical studies

5.1. calculation of the electronic structure

5.2. comparison between the gas- and solid-phase geometries

5.3. Hirshfeld surface analysis

6. Synthesis and crystallization

7. Refinement

Supporting information

Funding information

References

research communications

Crystal structure, computational study and Hirshfeld surface analysis of ethyl (2S,3R)-3-(3-amino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)-2-hydroxy-3-phenylpropanoate

3. Supramolecular features