4.6 Article

Synthesis, characterization, stereochemistry, antibacterial and antioxidant activity of N-chloroacetyl-2,6-diphenylpiperidines

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR STRUCTURE
卷 1284, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.molstruc.2023.135384

关键词

N-chloroacetyl-2; 6-diphenylpiperidines; NMR spectra; Chair conformation; Twist-boat conformation; A 13-strain; X-ray crystal structure

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new series of N-chloroacetyl-2,6-diphenylpiperidines 13-18 were synthesized from piperidines 7-12. Compound 14 was characterized by multiple techniques, while compounds 13-16 & 18 were characterized using specific spectroscopic techniques. NMR data revealed distinct conformations for the compounds, with compound 17 preferring alternate chair conformation and the others preferring boat conformation. The crystal structure of compound 16 supported its distorted boat conformation. Compounds 15 & 16 showed superior antibacterial activity, while all synthesized compounds displayed promising antioxidant activity compared to a standard antioxidant.
A new series of N-chloroacetyl-2,6-diphenylpiperidines 13-18 have been synthesized from their corre-sponding piperidines 7-12 . The synthesized compound 14 is unambiguously characterized using IR, mass, 1D and 2D (1H-1H, COSY & 1H-13C, HSQC) NMR spectral techniques and the remaining compounds 13-16 & 18 are characterized by IR, mass and 1D NMR spectra. The NMR spectral data indicate that the com-pound 17 prefers to adopt alternate chair conformation and remaining compounds prefer to adopt boat conformation. The X-ray crystal structure solved for N-chloroacetyl-3-isopropyl-2,6-diphenylpiperidine 16 supports the distorted boat conformation in the solid state. Anti-bacterial evaluation shows that the com-pounds 15 & 16 demonstrate superior activity against all the tested bacteria. All the synthesized com-pounds show promising antioxidant activities compared to the standard BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole).(c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据