Buy article online - an online subscription or single-article purchase is required to access this article.
Download citation
Download citation
link to html
A new polymorph (denoted polymorph II) of 3-acetyl-4-hydroxy-2H-chromen-2-one, C11H8O4, was obtained unexpectedly during an attempt to recrystallize the compound from salt–melted ice, and the structure is compared with that of the original polymorph (denoted polymorph I) [Lyssenko & Antipin (2001). Russ. Chem. Bull. 50, 418–431]. Strong intra­molecular O—H...O hydrogen bonds are observed equally in the two polymorphs [O...O = 2.4263 (13) Å in polymorph II and 2.442 (1) Å in polymorph I], with a slight delocalization of the hydroxy H atom towards the ketonic O atom in polymorph II [H...O = 1.32 (2) Å in polymorph II and 1.45 (3) Å in polymorph I]. In both crystal structures, the packing of the mol­ecules is dominated and stabilized by weak inter­molecular C—H...O hydrogen bonds. Additional π–π stacking inter­actions between the keto–enol hydrogen-bonded rings stabilize polymorph I [the centres are separated by 3.28 (1) Å], while polymorph II is stabilized by inter­actions between α-pyrone rings, which are parallel to one another and separated by 3.670 (5) Å.

Supporting information

cif

Crystallographic Information File (CIF) https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053229615016083/qs3049sup1.cif
Contains datablocks I, global

hkl

Structure factor file (CIF format) https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053229615016083/qs3049Isup2.hkl
Contains datablock I

cml

Chemical Markup Language (CML) file https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053229615016083/qs3049Isup3.cml
Supplementary material

CCDC reference: 1052230

Introduction top

Coumarin (2H-1-benzo­pyran-2-one, cis-o-coumarinic acid lactone or coumarinic anhydride) consists of an aromatic ring fused to a condensed lactone ring. Because of its biochemical properties, coumarin has been used in clinical medicine (Egan et al., 1990; Thornes et al., 1989; Cox et al., 1989; Dexeus et al., 1990; Marshall et al., 1994).

Coumarin is a naturally occurring compound, being present in a wide variety of plants and microorganisms and in some animal species. The metabolism, toxicity and results of tests for carcinogenicity have recently been reviewed with respect to the safety for humans of coumarin present in foodstuffs and for fragrances used in cosmetic products (Lake, 1999). In many studies, coumarin has been reported to reduce the incidence of tumours produced by genotoxic carcinogens (Tseng, 1991).

In general, active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) are capable of existing in polymorphic forms and hence may show distinguishable physicochemical properties, bioavailabilities and therapeutic effects due to the different arrangement of the molecules in the crystal structure. Therefore, identifying and controlling the polymorphic properties of this class of compound are of crucial importance in medicinal chemistry (Arshad et al., 2014). In fact, slight variations in the crystallization process, such as changes in temperature, solvent, additives and concentration, can lead to different packings and the formation of different crystal structures or polymorphs (Munshi et al., 2004). Thus, the identification of new polymorphs of coumarin derivatives, like 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy­coumarin, is an inter­esting target for organic chemists. Various strategies for manipulating their synthesis through changes in acyl­ation, bromination, metallation or Claisen–Schmidt condensation could result in more polymorphs (Abdou, 2014).

The present investigation is a continuation of our broad focus on the synthesis, biological evaluation and structural study of coumarin derivatives as Schiff bases (Rohlíček et al., 2013), amino­coumarins (Brahmia et al., 2013) or chalcones (Mechi et al., 2009; Afef et al., 2011) in order to understand the geometric features and underlying inter­molecular inter­actions which govern the assembly of the molecules in the crystalline lattice. In this paper, we report the crystal structure of a new polymorph, hereafter polymorph II, of 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy­coumarin, (I) (see Scheme 1), and compare it with the structure of the originally reported polymorph, hereafter polymorph I (Lyssenko & Anti­pin, 2001).

Synthesis and crystallization top

All the chemicals were available commercially and used without further purification. All the solvents were dried using standard methods before use. Phospho­rus oxychloride (5.6 ml) was added to a solution of 4-hy­droxy­chromen-2-one (3 g, 1.86 mmol) in acetic acid (16 ml). The mixture was heated under reflux for 30 min. After cooling, the precipitate was collected and recrystallized from ethanol at low temperature in a salt–melted ice bath to give 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy­chromen-2-one, (I), as light-yellow prism crystals (yield 2.7 g, 90%; m.p. 408-410 K). It should be noted that the recrystallization of 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy­coumarin at room temperature led systematically to polymorph I as yellow needle-shaped crystals (m.p. 405–407 K). The synthetic procedure used to prepare polymorph II of (I) is shown in Scheme 1.

Refinement details top

Crystal data, data collection and structure refinement details (for model 1a) are summarized in Table 1. First, the O4—H hydrogen atom was located in a difference map and refined isotropically with full occupancy and no restraints. When the H atom was removed, two distinct peaks were evident in the electron-density difference map. Two other models with a split H atom were investigated (see Fig. 1). In the first split model, denoted model 2b, two hy­droxy H atoms were allowed to refine with an occupancy of 0.5, using a rotating-group refinement. In the second split model, denoted model 2c, these hy­droxy H atoms were refined with restraints on the O—H bond lengths (O—H = 0.82 Å for O3—H93 and O4—H94) and with occupancies of 0.4 and 0.6. Refinement assuming split model 2b yielded residuals of wR(F2) = 0.1971 and R(F) = 0.0555; for split model 2c, the residuals were wR(F2) = 0.1955 and R(F) = 0.0554. Split-model 2c seems to be the more reliable. The remaining H atoms were placed at idealized positions and allowed to ride on their parent atoms, with C—H = 0.93 (aromatic) or 0.96 Å (CH3), and with Uiso(H) = 1.2Ueq(C). We refer to both model 1a and split-model 2c in the discussion that follows.

Results and discussion top

An attempt to recrystallize freshly synthesized 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy­coumarin, (I), from ethanol in an ice–salt bath unexpectedly produced light-yellow prism-shaped crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction. Fig. 2 shows two models of the crystal structure of this new polymorph, hereafter polymorph II, i.e. with the H atom located in difference maps and refined isotropically with no restraints (model 1a) or the more reliable split-atom model (model 2c).

A detailed discussion of the geometric analysis of polymorph I from X-ray single-crystal diffraction data collected at room temperature and at different temperatures has already been reported in the literature (Lyssenko & Anti­pin, 2001; Traven et al., 2000). Both polymorphs crystallize in the monoclinic system with different unit-cell parameters, i.e. a = 10.3193 (9) Å, b = 5.1605 (5) Å, c = 17.071 (1)Å and β = 99.337 (2)° for polymorph I; see Table 1 for the corresponding parameters for polymorph II. In all discussions herein, we refer to the room-temperature structure determination of polymorph I at 300 K (Lyssenko & Anti­pin, 2001).

In polymorphs I and II, the molecules have very similar geometries and exhibit strong intra­molecular hydrogen bonding of the O—H···O type between the hy­droxy group and the ketonic O atom [O···O = 2.4263 (13) Å in polymorph II and 2.442 (1) Å in polymorph I; Tables 2 and 3]. The H···O3 distance of 1.32 (2) Å, considering model 1a for polymorph II, is decreased compared with its value in polymorph I [1.45 (3) Å]. In fact, the O—H distance [1.02 (3) Å] in polymorph I is shorter than that in model 1a of polymorph II [1.11 (2) Å], owing to a shift of the hy­droxy H atom towards the ketonic O atom. The O4—H···O3 angle of 169 (2)° in polymorph II is larger than that found for polymorph I [161 (2)°]. It should be noted that the C10—O3, C10—C8, C8—C7 and C7—O4 bond lengths [1.2534 (15), 1.4459 (17), 1.3995 (15) and 1.2957 (13) Å, respectively, for split-model 2c of polymorph II; Table 2] are only slightly different compared with the corresponding values observed for polymorph I [1.255 (1), 1.449 (2), 1.396 (2) and 1.304 (2) Å, respectively]; the C9—O2 bond length of 1.2019 (15) Å for split-model 2c of polymorph II is similar to, and possibly shorter than, that found in polymorph I at room temperature [1.203 (2) Å; Lyssenko & Anti­pin, 2001]. The bond lengths within the O4—C7 C8—C10O3 keto–enol fragment in polymorph II are indicative of substantial electron-density stabilization, which is manifested in the elongation of the formal C7C8 and C10O3 double bonds and the shortening of the C7—O4 and C8—C10 single bonds, compared with the `ideal' values for C—O, C O, C—C and CC bonds (Gilli et al., 1989). Broadly speaking, the increase in π-delocalization of the O—CC—COH fragment appears to be linearly related to the decrease in the O···O contact distance (intra­molecular hydrogen bond).

In polymorph II using split-model 2c, the acetyl group is nearly coplanar with the fused ring plane, with torsion angles C7—C8—C10—C11 = -177.38 (11)°, C9—C8—C10—C11 = 0.94 (19)°, O2—-C9—-C8—C10 = -1.4 (2)° and C7—C8—C9—O2 = 179.74 (13)°. The C8—C7 bond length of 1.3995 (15) Å is representative of sp2 CC double-bond character and is slightly elongated from the CC double bond found at the same position in other compounds, for example, 1.375 (8) Å for the coumarin derivative 3-(2,2-di­bromo­acetyl)-4-hy­droxy-2H-chromen-2-one (Brahmia et al., 2015), and slightly shorter than the corresponding distance found in the structure of polymorph I, i.e. 1.4035 (15) Å. The O2 C9 bond length of 1.2019 (15) Å and the bond angles of 114.81 (11), 127.59 (13) and 117.60 (10)° at the C9 atom (Table 2) confirm the CO bond character. The shorter O2C9 bond length is probably due to the delocalized electrons in the lactone system. Table 2 recapitulates and summarizes the principal bond lengths and angles in polymorphs I and II (model 1a and split-model 2c) according to X-ray diffraction data at room temperature.

Fig. 3 shows that the packing in the crystalline lattice of polymorph II is mainly through C—H···O inter­actions, which link molecules into zigzag chains extended in the [100] direction, and a ππ inter­action, with an acceptable separation distance, providing additional stability to the dimers and holding the chains in the crystallographic [010] direction. Lyssenko & Anti­pin (2001) have shown that, in the crystal packing of polymorph I, the molecules are linked into dimers through bifurcated C—H···O contacts, viz. C4—H4···O1' and C4—H4···O2' [C4···O1' = 3.523 (1) Å, H4···O1' = 2.51 Å and C4—H4··· O1' = 157°; C4···O2' = 3.404 (1) Å, H4···O2' = 2.44 Å and C4—H4···O2' = 149°; The prime denotes which symmetry operation?]. The dimers, in turn, are linked into layers through analogous contacts between the H atoms of the methyl group and the O3 atom of the keto–enol fragment [C11—-H11···O3''; C11···O3'' = 3.535 (1) Å, H11···O3'' = 2.47 Å and C11—H11···O3'' = 177°; The double prime denotes which symmetry operation?]. However, in polymorph II, we found that the molecules are linked into layers through analogous contacts between the H atoms of the methyl group and the O4 atom of the hy­droxy group, viz. C11—H11···O4ii and C4—H4···O2i (Table 3). In addition to the above-mentioned contacts, the dimers in polymorph I are linked by ππ inter­actions between the keto–enol hydrogen-bonded rings parallel to one another, with a separation of 3.280 Å between their centres (Lyssenko & Anti­pin, 2001), while in polymorph II, ππ inter­actions are observed between the lactone rings (α-pyrone rings), with a Cg1···Cg1i separation of 3.670 (5) Å [Cg1 is the centroid of the O1/C5–C9 ring [OK?]; symmetry code: (i) -x + 1, -y - 1, -z + 1]. The observed stacking arrangement can be considered as a balance between van der Waals dispersion and repulsion inter­actions, and electrostatic inter­actions between the two α-pyrone rings of opposed polarity resulting from the opposed orientation. It can be said that the subsequent verification of subtle differences in the inter­molecular inter­actions is due to delocalization of the hy­droxy H atom between the hy­droxy O atom and the ketone O atom in polymorph II. This result also correlates with the difference in the melting points of the two crystals, viz. 408–410 K for polymorph I and 405–407 K for polymorph II.

Conclusions top

We have compared the crystal structures of two polymorphs of 3-acetyl-4-hy­droxy-2H-chromen-2-one which pack differently in their crystal structures. In addition, there is more delocalization in polymorph II versus polymorph I, leading to almost identical C—O bond lengths for formally C—OH and CO bonds, resulting in a molecule with an H atom shared between two O-atom centres.

Computing details top

Data collection: SMART (Bruker, 2001); cell refinement: SMART (Bruker, 2001); data reduction: SAINT (Bruker, 2001); program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 2012); software used to prepare material for publication: WinGX (Farrugia, 2012).

Figures top
[Figure 1] Fig. 1. The central ring in polymorph II for (a) model 1a, (b) split-model 2b and (c) split-model 2c. The dashed line denotes a hydrogen bond. [Updated caption OK?]
[Figure 2] Fig. 2. The molecular structures of (a) model 1a and (b) model 2c of polymorph II, showing 50% probability displacement ellipsoids and the atomic numbering. The dashed line denotes a hydrogen bond.
[Figure 3] Fig. 3. A packing diagram showing the ππ interactions (between α-pyrone rings; dashed line) in polymorph II, along the b axis.
3-Acetyl-4-hydroxy-2H-chromen-2-one top
Crystal data top
C11H8O4Z = 4
Mr = 204.17F(000) = 424
Monoclinic, P21/nDx = 1.481 Mg m3
Hall symbol: -P 2 y nMo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
a = 7.3340 (1) ŵ = 0.11 mm1
b = 9.9110 (1) ÅT = 298 K
c = 12.6800 (2) ÅPrism, yellow
β = 96.649 (1)°0.40 × 0.30 × 0.20 mm
V = 915.48 (2) Å3
Data collection top
Bruker SMART?? CCD area-detector
diffractometer
2153 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tubeRint = 0.021
Graphite monochromatorθmax = 35.5°, θmin = 2.6°
φ and ω scansh = 1110
12216 measured reflectionsk = 1615
4084 independent reflectionsl = 1820
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)] = 0.056Hydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites
wR(F2) = 0.199H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
S = 1.05 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.1018P)2 + 0.041P]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
4084 reflections(Δ/σ)max < 0.001
140 parametersΔρmax = 0.33 e Å3
0 restraintsΔρmin = 0.24 e Å3
Crystal data top
C11H8O4V = 915.48 (2) Å3
Mr = 204.17Z = 4
Monoclinic, P21/nMo Kα radiation
a = 7.3340 (1) ŵ = 0.11 mm1
b = 9.9110 (1) ÅT = 298 K
c = 12.6800 (2) Å0.40 × 0.30 × 0.20 mm
β = 96.649 (1)°
Data collection top
Bruker SMART?? CCD area-detector
diffractometer
2153 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
12216 measured reflectionsRint = 0.021
4084 independent reflections
Refinement top
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.0560 restraints
wR(F2) = 0.199H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
S = 1.05Δρmax = 0.33 e Å3
4084 reflectionsΔρmin = 0.24 e Å3
140 parameters
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
xyzUiso*/Ueq
O40.79610 (14)0.14012 (9)0.64919 (6)0.0553 (3)
C80.69322 (14)0.13504 (11)0.46616 (8)0.0385 (2)
O30.68053 (16)0.34053 (10)0.55390 (8)0.0632 (3)
C70.76572 (15)0.07321 (11)0.56104 (8)0.0385 (2)
C60.81042 (14)0.06839 (11)0.56420 (8)0.0387 (2)
C50.78099 (16)0.14036 (12)0.47033 (9)0.0434 (3)
C90.66511 (17)0.05560 (13)0.36977 (9)0.0473 (3)
C10.88262 (18)0.13521 (13)0.65727 (10)0.0502 (3)
H10.90350.08810.72090.060*
C40.8210 (2)0.27721 (15)0.46668 (12)0.0602 (4)
H40.80100.32510.40330.072*
O20.60509 (16)0.09320 (12)0.28242 (7)0.0740 (3)
C110.5836 (2)0.35630 (15)0.37174 (12)0.0647 (4)
H11A0.56720.44880.39100.097*
H11B0.67030.35130.32070.097*
H11C0.46810.31960.34150.097*
C100.65335 (17)0.27786 (13)0.46759 (10)0.0482 (3)
C30.8913 (2)0.34009 (14)0.55981 (14)0.0647 (4)
H30.91830.43170.55880.078*
C20.9223 (2)0.27032 (15)0.65409 (12)0.0595 (4)
H20.97020.31480.71570.071*
O10.71054 (13)0.08011 (10)0.37678 (7)0.0543 (3)
H0.754 (3)0.238 (2)0.6105 (17)0.114 (7)*
Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) top
U11U22U33U12U13U23
O40.0777 (6)0.0544 (5)0.0325 (4)0.0051 (4)0.0006 (4)0.0086 (3)
C80.0379 (5)0.0443 (6)0.0329 (5)0.0010 (4)0.0025 (4)0.0021 (4)
O30.0820 (7)0.0478 (5)0.0587 (6)0.0102 (5)0.0027 (5)0.0094 (4)
C70.0400 (5)0.0448 (6)0.0311 (4)0.0026 (4)0.0054 (4)0.0041 (4)
C60.0383 (5)0.0412 (5)0.0375 (5)0.0027 (4)0.0083 (4)0.0003 (4)
C50.0434 (6)0.0449 (6)0.0428 (5)0.0053 (4)0.0081 (4)0.0051 (4)
C90.0490 (6)0.0568 (7)0.0349 (5)0.0032 (5)0.0003 (4)0.0037 (5)
C10.0530 (7)0.0563 (7)0.0423 (6)0.0017 (5)0.0095 (5)0.0069 (5)
C40.0672 (8)0.0480 (7)0.0675 (8)0.0062 (6)0.0175 (7)0.0138 (6)
O20.0970 (8)0.0855 (8)0.0348 (5)0.0016 (6)0.0123 (5)0.0001 (4)
C110.0671 (9)0.0618 (9)0.0633 (9)0.0132 (7)0.0001 (7)0.0146 (7)
C100.0437 (6)0.0510 (7)0.0495 (6)0.0018 (5)0.0038 (5)0.0034 (5)
C30.0677 (9)0.0410 (6)0.0898 (11)0.0035 (6)0.0282 (8)0.0072 (7)
C20.0608 (8)0.0560 (7)0.0648 (8)0.0071 (6)0.0201 (6)0.0187 (6)
O10.0671 (6)0.0552 (5)0.0391 (4)0.0030 (4)0.0001 (4)0.0127 (4)
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
O4—C71.2965 (13)C9—O11.3861 (16)
O4—H1.11 (2)C1—C21.3719 (19)
C8—C71.3992 (15)C1—H10.9300
C8—C101.4460 (17)C4—C31.381 (2)
C8—C91.4483 (15)C4—H40.9300
O3—C101.2540 (15)C11—C101.4830 (18)
O3—H1.32 (2)C11—H11A0.9600
C7—C61.4407 (16)C11—H11B0.9600
C6—C51.3830 (15)C11—H11C0.9600
C6—C11.4025 (16)C3—C21.377 (2)
C5—O11.3743 (14)C3—H30.9300
C5—C41.3895 (19)C2—H20.9300
C9—O21.2028 (14)
C7—O4—H93.1 (11)C3—C4—C5118.12 (13)
C7—C8—C10118.37 (10)C3—C4—H4120.9
C7—C8—C9119.36 (10)C5—C4—H4120.9
C10—C8—C9122.25 (10)C10—C11—H11A109.5
C10—O3—H96.1 (9)C10—C11—H11B109.5
O4—C7—C8121.84 (10)H11A—C11—H11B109.5
O4—C7—C6117.29 (10)C10—C11—H11C109.5
C8—C7—C6120.87 (9)H11A—C11—H11C109.5
C5—C6—C1119.12 (11)H11B—C11—H11C109.5
C5—C6—C7117.79 (10)O3—C10—C8118.94 (11)
C1—C6—C7123.08 (10)O3—C10—C11117.42 (12)
O1—C5—C6121.62 (11)C8—C10—C11123.64 (11)
O1—C5—C4117.07 (11)C2—C3—C4121.56 (13)
C6—C5—C4121.31 (12)C2—C3—H3119.2
O2—C9—O1114.79 (11)C4—C3—H3119.2
O2—C9—C8127.58 (13)C1—C2—C3120.10 (13)
O1—C9—C8117.63 (10)C1—C2—H2120.0
C2—C1—C6119.79 (13)C3—C2—H2120.0
C2—C1—H1120.1C5—O1—C9122.72 (9)
C6—C1—H1120.1
C10—C8—C7—O40.56 (17)C5—C6—C1—C20.21 (18)
C9—C8—C7—O4178.97 (10)C7—C6—C1—C2179.84 (11)
C10—C8—C7—C6179.18 (10)O1—C5—C4—C3179.76 (11)
C9—C8—C7—C60.77 (16)C6—C5—C4—C30.05 (19)
O4—C7—C6—C5179.11 (10)C7—C8—C10—O31.79 (17)
C8—C7—C6—C50.64 (15)C9—C8—C10—O3179.85 (11)
O4—C7—C6—C10.52 (17)C7—C8—C10—C11177.38 (11)
C8—C7—C6—C1179.73 (10)C9—C8—C10—C110.97 (19)
C1—C6—C5—O1179.99 (10)C5—C4—C3—C20.3 (2)
C7—C6—C5—O10.37 (16)C6—C1—C2—C30.01 (19)
C1—C6—C5—C40.19 (17)C4—C3—C2—C10.3 (2)
C7—C6—C5—C4179.84 (11)C6—C5—O1—C90.25 (17)
C7—C8—C9—O2179.77 (12)C4—C5—O1—C9179.95 (11)
C10—C8—C9—O21.4 (2)O2—C9—O1—C5179.98 (11)
C7—C8—C9—O10.62 (16)C8—C9—O1—C50.37 (17)
C10—C8—C9—O1178.96 (10)
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
O4—H···O31.11 (2)1.32 (2)2.4263 (13)169 (2)
C4—H4···O2i0.932.653.510 (2)153
C11—H11C···O4ii0.962.643.320 (2)128
Symmetry codes: (i) x+3/2, y+1/2, z+1/2; (ii) x1/2, y1/2, z1/2.

Experimental details

Crystal data
Chemical formulaC11H8O4
Mr204.17
Crystal system, space groupMonoclinic, P21/n
Temperature (K)298
a, b, c (Å)7.3340 (1), 9.9110 (1), 12.6800 (2)
β (°) 96.649 (1)
V3)915.48 (2)
Z4
Radiation typeMo Kα
µ (mm1)0.11
Crystal size (mm)0.40 × 0.30 × 0.20
Data collection
DiffractometerBruker SMART?? CCD area-detector
diffractometer
Absorption correction
No. of measured, independent and
observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections
12216, 4084, 2153
Rint0.021
(sin θ/λ)max1)0.818
Refinement
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S 0.056, 0.199, 1.05
No. of reflections4084
No. of parameters140
H-atom treatmentH atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å3)0.33, 0.24

Computer programs: SMART (Bruker, 2001), SAINT (Bruker, 2001), SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008), SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008), ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 2012), WinGX (Farrugia, 2012).

Principal bond lengths (Å) and angles (°) in polymorphs I and II top
ParameterPolymorph IPolymorph II (model 1a)Polymorph II (model 2c)
O4—O32.442 (1)2.4263 (13)2.4309 (14)
O4—C71.304 (2)1.2965 (13)1.2957 (13)
O4—H1.02 (3)1.11 (2)0.829 (18)
C8—C71.396 (2)1.3992 (15)1.3995 (15)
C8—C101.45 (3)1.4460 (17)1.4459 (17)
C8—C91.452 (2)1.4483 (15)1.4485 (15)
O3—C101.255 (1)1.2540 (15)1.2534 (15)
O3—H1.45 (3)1.32 (2)0.862 (19)
C7—C61.442 (2)1.4407 (16)1.4407 (16)
C9—O21.203 (2)1.2028 (14)1.2019 (15)
C9—O11.381 (2)1.3861 (16)1.3864 (17)
C11—C101.485 (2)1.4830 (18)1.4830 (18)
O1—C51.365 (1)1.3743 (14)1.3742 (15)
O4—H—O3161 (2)169 (2)167 (3)
C7—O4—H99 (1)93.1 (11)96 (2)
C10—O3—H99.7 (9)96.1 (9)101 (3)
O3—C10—C8118.9 (1)118.94 (11)119.06 (11)
O3—C10—C11118.2 (1)117.42 (12)117.32 (12)
C7—C8—C10118.7 (1)118.37 (10)118.36 (10)
O4—C7—C8122.1 (1)122.84 (10)121.94 (10)
O1—C9—C8117.5 (1)117.63 (10)117.60 (10)
C9—O1—C5122.7 (1)122.72 (9)122.74 (9)
O2—C9—O1115.2 (1)114.79 (11)114.81 (11)
O2—C9—C8127.3 (1)127.58 (13)127.59 (13)
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
O4—H···O31.11 (2)1.32 (2)2.4263 (13)169 (2)
C4—H4···O2i0.932.653.510 (2)153.1
C11—H11C···O4ii0.962.643.320 (2)127.9
Symmetry codes: (i) x+3/2, y+1/2, z+1/2; (ii) x1/2, y1/2, z1/2.
 

Subscribe to Acta Crystallographica Section C: Structural Chemistry

The full text of this article is available to subscribers to the journal.

If you have already registered and are using a computer listed in your registration details, please email support@iucr.org for assistance.

Buy online

You may purchase this article in PDF and/or HTML formats. For purchasers in the European Community who do not have a VAT number, VAT will be added at the local rate. Payments to the IUCr are handled by WorldPay, who will accept payment by credit card in several currencies. To purchase the article, please complete the form below (fields marked * are required), and then click on `Continue'.
E-mail address* 
Repeat e-mail address* 
(for error checking) 

Format*   PDF (US $40)
   HTML (US $40)
   PDF+HTML (US $50)
In order for VAT to be shown for your country javascript needs to be enabled.

VAT number 
(non-UK EC countries only) 
Country* 
 

Terms and conditions of use
Contact us

Follow Acta Cryst. C
Sign up for e-alerts
Follow Acta Cryst. on Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds