Cargando…

Different N—H⋯π inter­actions in two indole derivatives

We describe the syntheses and crystal structures of two indole derivatives, namely 6-isopropyl-3-(2-nitro-1-phenyl­eth­yl)-1H-indole, C(19)H(20)N(2)O(2), (I), and 2-(4-meth­oxy­phen­yl)-3-(2-nitro-1-phenyl­eth­yl)-1H-indole, C(23)H(20)N(2)O(3), (II); the latter crystallizes with two mol­ecules (A an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kerr, Jamie R., Trembleau, Laurent, Storey, John M. D., Wardell, James L., Harrison, William T. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Union of Crystallography 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4908542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27308022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S2056989016006162
Descripción
Sumario:We describe the syntheses and crystal structures of two indole derivatives, namely 6-isopropyl-3-(2-nitro-1-phenyl­eth­yl)-1H-indole, C(19)H(20)N(2)O(2), (I), and 2-(4-meth­oxy­phen­yl)-3-(2-nitro-1-phenyl­eth­yl)-1H-indole, C(23)H(20)N(2)O(3), (II); the latter crystallizes with two mol­ecules (A and B) with similar conformations (r.m.s. overlay fit = 0.139 Å) in the asymmetric unit. Despite the presence of O atoms as potential acceptors for classical hydrogen bonds, the dominant inter­molecular inter­action in each crystal is an N—H⋯π bond, which generates chains in (I) and A+A and B+B inversion dimers in (II). A different aromatic ring acts as the acceptor in each case. The packing is consolidated by C—H⋯π inter­actions in each case but aromatic π–π stacking inter­actions are absent.