Literature DB >> 21523003

Gallic Acid.

Jianping Zhao, Ikhlas A Khan, Frank R Fronczek.   

Abstract

Anhydrous 3,4,5-trihy-droxy-benzoic acid, C(7)H(6)O(5), is essentially planar, with its non-H atoms exhibiting mean and maximum deviations from coplanarity of 0.014 and 0.0377 (5) Å, respectively. The C-C-C-OH torsion angle about the bond linking the carboxyl group to the benzene ring is -0.33 (10)°. In the crystal, the -COOH groups form centrosymmetric hydrogen-bonded cyclic dimers [graph set R(2) (2)(8)] and the phenolic -OH groups participate in both intra- and inter-molecular hydrogen bonds, forming a three-dimensional network structure.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 21523003      PMCID: PMC3051435          DOI: 10.1107/S1600536811000262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Crystallogr Sect E Struct Rep Online        ISSN: 1600-5368


Related literature

For distribution of gallic acid in plants and for biological studies, see: Fiuza et al. (2004 ▶); Ow & Stupans (2003 ▶); Hemingway et al. (1999 ▶). For NMR data, see: Lu et al. (2007 ▶). For graph sets, see: Etter (1990 ▶); Zaheer et al. (2010 ▶). For related structures, see: Jiang et al. (2000 ▶); Okabe et al. (2001 ▶); Billes et al. (2007 ▶); Qadeer et al. (2007 ▶).

Experimental

Crystal data

C7H6O5 M = 170.12 Monoclinic, a = 25.690 (4) Å b = 4.8946 (5) Å c = 11.097 (2) Å β = 105.746 (6)° V = 1343.0 (4) Å3 Z = 8 Mo Kα radiation μ = 0.15 mm−1 T = 90 K 0.25 × 0.23 × 0.15 mm

Data collection

Nonius KappaCCD diffractometer with an Oxford Cryosystems Cryostream cooler 17352 measured reflections 2674 independent reflections 2391 reflections with I > 2σ(I) R int = 0.016

Refinement

R[F 2 > 2σ(F 2)] = 0.034 wR(F 2) = 0.103 S = 1.06 2674 reflections 122 parameters H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement Δρmax = 0.62 e Å−3 Δρmin = −0.31 e Å−3 Data collection: COLLECT (Nonius, 2000 ▶); cell refinement: SCALEPACK (Otwinowski & Minor, 1997 ▶); data reduction: DENZO (Otwinowski & Minor, 1997 ▶) and SCALEPACK; program(s) used to solve structure: SIR97 (Altomare et al., 1999 ▶); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008 ▶); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 1997 ▶); software used to prepare material for publication: SHELXL97. Crystal structure: contains datablocks global, I. DOI: 10.1107/S1600536811000262/zs2084sup1.cif Structure factors: contains datablocks I. DOI: 10.1107/S1600536811000262/zs2084Isup2.hkl Additional supplementary materials: crystallographic information; 3D view; checkCIF report
C7H6O5F(000) = 704
Mr = 170.12Dx = 1.683 Mg m3
Monoclinic, C2/cMo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
Hall symbol: -C 2ycCell parameters from 2808 reflections
a = 25.690 (4) Åθ = 2.5–33.7°
b = 4.8946 (5) ŵ = 0.15 mm1
c = 11.097 (2) ÅT = 90 K
β = 105.746 (6)°Plate fragment, colorless
V = 1343.0 (4) Å30.25 × 0.23 × 0.15 mm
Z = 8
Nonius KappaCCD diffractometer with an Oxford Cryosystems Cryostream cooler2391 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tubeRint = 0.016
graphiteθmax = 33.7°, θmin = 3.3°
ω and φ scansh = −39→40
17352 measured reflectionsk = −7→6
2674 independent reflectionsl = −17→17
Refinement on F2Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
Least-squares matrix: fullHydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.034H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
wR(F2) = 0.103w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0587P)2 + 0.8373P] where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
S = 1.06(Δ/σ)max = 0.001
2674 reflectionsΔρmax = 0.62 e Å3
122 parametersΔρmin = −0.31 e Å3
0 restraintsExtinction correction: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008), Fc*=kFc[1+0.001xFc2λ3/sin(2θ)]-1/4
Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methodsExtinction coefficient: 0.0044 (13)
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.
xyzUiso*/Ueq
O10.44464 (2)0.87525 (12)0.40294 (5)0.01094 (12)
O20.48521 (2)0.73099 (12)0.59692 (5)0.01333 (13)
H200.5098 (6)0.863 (3)0.5937 (13)0.020*
O30.27635 (2)0.27737 (12)0.28219 (5)0.01114 (12)
H300.2590 (5)0.123 (3)0.2837 (12)0.017*
O40.28383 (2)−0.05022 (12)0.48841 (5)0.01200 (13)
H400.2916 (5)−0.133 (3)0.5572 (13)0.018*
O50.36851 (2)−0.02019 (12)0.69013 (5)0.01222 (12)
H500.3938 (5)0.025 (3)0.7598 (13)0.018*
C10.40393 (3)0.51466 (15)0.49199 (7)0.00865 (13)
C20.35992 (3)0.48758 (15)0.38610 (7)0.00907 (13)
H20.35730.59970.31480.011*
C30.32001 (3)0.29613 (15)0.38566 (6)0.00847 (13)
C40.32395 (3)0.13157 (14)0.49036 (6)0.00861 (13)
C50.36881 (3)0.15566 (15)0.59516 (6)0.00883 (13)
C60.40877 (3)0.34810 (15)0.59730 (6)0.00946 (13)
H60.43880.36660.66880.011*
C70.44573 (3)0.72128 (15)0.49266 (6)0.00906 (13)
U11U22U33U12U13U23
O10.0098 (2)0.0112 (2)0.0104 (2)−0.00298 (17)0.00042 (17)0.00155 (18)
O20.0101 (2)0.0151 (3)0.0115 (2)−0.00630 (19)−0.00259 (18)0.00275 (19)
O30.0078 (2)0.0101 (2)0.0120 (2)−0.00233 (17)−0.00328 (17)0.00127 (18)
O40.0094 (2)0.0120 (3)0.0133 (2)−0.00483 (18)0.00076 (18)0.00206 (18)
O50.0133 (2)0.0130 (3)0.0087 (2)−0.00419 (19)0.00019 (18)0.00260 (18)
C10.0072 (3)0.0085 (3)0.0094 (3)−0.0018 (2)0.0009 (2)−0.0001 (2)
C20.0077 (3)0.0091 (3)0.0093 (3)−0.0011 (2)0.0005 (2)0.0005 (2)
C30.0066 (2)0.0083 (3)0.0091 (3)−0.0002 (2)−0.0003 (2)0.0000 (2)
C40.0068 (3)0.0082 (3)0.0100 (3)−0.0014 (2)0.0010 (2)−0.0003 (2)
C50.0086 (3)0.0089 (3)0.0083 (3)−0.0009 (2)0.0012 (2)0.0003 (2)
C60.0079 (3)0.0102 (3)0.0090 (3)−0.0019 (2)0.0003 (2)−0.0001 (2)
C70.0075 (3)0.0091 (3)0.0096 (3)−0.0012 (2)0.0006 (2)−0.0007 (2)
O1—C71.2429 (9)C1—C21.3984 (10)
O2—C71.3163 (9)C1—C61.4025 (10)
O2—H200.910 (15)C1—C71.4737 (10)
O3—C31.3732 (8)C2—C31.3880 (10)
O3—H300.881 (14)C2—H20.9500
O4—C41.3575 (9)C3—C41.3947 (10)
O4—H400.838 (14)C4—C51.4025 (9)
O5—C51.3624 (9)C5—C61.3885 (10)
O5—H500.893 (14)C6—H60.9500
C7—O2—H20111.7 (9)O4—C4—C3118.82 (6)
C3—O3—H30110.1 (9)O4—C4—C5121.19 (6)
C4—O4—H40108.0 (9)C3—C4—C5119.99 (6)
C5—O5—H50111.0 (9)O5—C5—C6125.08 (6)
C2—C1—C6120.91 (6)O5—C5—C4114.36 (6)
C2—C1—C7119.42 (6)C6—C5—C4120.56 (6)
C6—C1—C7119.67 (6)C5—C6—C1118.82 (6)
C3—C2—C1119.67 (7)C5—C6—H6120.6
C3—C2—H2120.2C1—C6—H6120.6
C1—C2—H2120.2O1—C7—O2121.78 (6)
O3—C3—C2118.88 (6)O1—C7—C1123.64 (6)
O3—C3—C4121.07 (6)O2—C7—C1114.57 (6)
C2—C3—C4120.02 (6)
C6—C1—C2—C30.95 (11)O4—C4—C5—C6−178.08 (7)
C7—C1—C2—C3−179.03 (6)C3—C4—C5—C61.92 (11)
C1—C2—C3—O3178.27 (6)O5—C5—C6—C1179.54 (7)
C1—C2—C3—C4−0.12 (11)C4—C5—C6—C1−1.09 (11)
O3—C3—C4—O40.35 (10)C2—C1—C6—C5−0.35 (11)
C2—C3—C4—O4178.70 (6)C7—C1—C6—C5179.64 (7)
O3—C3—C4—C5−179.65 (6)C2—C1—C7—O1−0.56 (11)
C2—C3—C4—C5−1.30 (11)C6—C1—C7—O1179.45 (7)
O4—C4—C5—O51.35 (10)C2—C1—C7—O2179.65 (6)
C3—C4—C5—O5−178.64 (6)C6—C1—C7—O2−0.33 (10)
D—H···AD—HH···AD···AD—H···A
O2—H20···O1i0.910 (15)1.730 (15)2.6384 (8)175.6 (13)
O3—H30···O3ii0.881 (14)1.964 (14)2.7943 (5)156.6 (12)
O3—H30···O40.881 (14)2.345 (13)2.7579 (9)108.8 (10)
O4—H40···O50.838 (14)2.191 (13)2.6688 (8)116.1 (11)
O5—H50···O1iii0.893 (14)1.828 (14)2.7200 (8)178.6 (14)
Table 1

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, °)

D—H⋯AD—HH⋯ADAD—H⋯A
O2—H20⋯O1i0.910 (15)1.730 (15)2.6384 (8)175.6 (13)
O3—H30⋯O3ii0.881 (14)1.964 (14)2.7943 (5)156.6 (12)
O3—H30⋯O40.881 (14)2.345 (13)2.7579 (9)108.8 (10)
O4—H40⋯O50.838 (14)2.191 (13)2.6688 (8)116.1 (11)
O5—H50⋯O1iii0.893 (14)1.828 (14)2.7200 (8)178.6 (14)

Symmetry codes: (i) ; (ii) ; (iii) .

  4 in total

1.  Gallic acid monohydrate.

Authors:  R W Jiang; D S Ming; P P But; T C Mak
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr C       Date:  2000-05-15       Impact factor: 1.172

2.  A short history of SHELX.

Authors:  George M Sheldrick
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr A       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 2.290

Review 3.  Gallic acid and gallic acid derivatives: effects on drug metabolizing enzymes.

Authors:  Yin-Yin Ow; Ieva Stupans
Journal:  Curr Drug Metab       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.731

4.  Phenolic acid derivatives with potential anticancer properties--a structure-activity relationship study. Part 1: methyl, propyl and octyl esters of caffeic and gallic acids.

Authors:  S M Fiuza; C Gomes; L J Teixeira; M T Girão da Cruz; M N D S Cordeiro; N Milhazes; F Borges; M P M Marques
Journal:  Bioorg Med Chem       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 3.641

  4 in total
  10 in total

1.  EPR spectral investigation of radiation-induced radicals of gallic acid.

Authors:  Hasan Tuner
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 1.925

2.  Protective effect of gallic acid against arsenic-induced anxiety-/depression- like behaviors and memory impairment in male rats.

Authors:  Noreen Samad; Sadia Jabeen; Imran Imran; Iqra Zulfiqar; Kainat Bilal
Journal:  Metab Brain Dis       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 3.584

3.  How does the presence of an oxyradical influence the behavior of polyphenolic antioxidant? A case study on gallic acid.

Authors:  Rakiba Rohman; Rahul Kar
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 1.810

4.  Protective effect of gallic acid isolated from Peltiphyllum peltatum against sodium fluoride-induced oxidative stress in rat's kidney.

Authors:  Seyed Mohammad Nabavi; Solomon Habtemariam; Seyed Fazel Nabavi; Antoni Sureda; Maria Daglia; Akbar Hajizadeh Moghaddam; Mohammad Ali Amani
Journal:  Mol Cell Biochem       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 3.396

Review 5.  Recent advances and uses of grape flavonoids as nutraceuticals.

Authors:  Vasil Georgiev; Anthony Ananga; Violeta Tsolova
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 5.717

6.  Histopathological Analysis from Gallic Acid Administration on Hippocampal Cell Density, Depression, and Anxiety Related Behaviors in A Trimethyltin Intoxication Model.

Authors:  Marzieh Moghadas; Mohammad Amin Edalatmanesh; Reza Robati
Journal:  Cell J       Date:  2016-01-17       Impact factor: 2.479

Review 7.  Putative Roles of Plant-Derived Tannins in Neurodegenerative and Neuropsychiatry Disorders: An Updated Review.

Authors:  Ghulam Hussain; Jia Huang; Azhar Rasul; Haseeb Anwar; Ali Imran; Javeria Maqbool; Aroona Razzaq; Nimra Aziz; Ehtisham Ul Haq Makhdoom; Muhsin Konuk; Tao Sun
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 4.411

8.  A novel green process for tannic acid hydrolysis using an internally sulfonated hollow polystyrene sphere as catalyst.

Authors:  Qionglin Luo; Shunqin Zeng; You Shu; Zaihui Fu; Hongran Zhao; Shengpei Su
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 4.036

Review 9.  Metabolic Engineering of Shikimic Acid Biosynthesis Pathway for the Production of Shikimic Acid and Its Branched Products in Microorganisms: Advances and Prospects.

Authors:  Sijia Wu; Wenjuan Chen; Sujuan Lu; Hailing Zhang; Lianghong Yin
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 4.927

10.  Complex Polymorphic System of Gallic Acid-Five Monohydrates, Three Anhydrates, and over 20 Solvates.

Authors:  Doris E Braun; Rajni M Bhardwaj; Alastair J Florence; Derek A Tocher; Sarah L Price
Journal:  Cryst Growth Des       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 4.076

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.