| Literature DB >> 30474759 |
Said Tighadouini1, Redouane Benabbes2, Monique Tillard3, Driss Eddike4, Khadija Haboubi5, Khalid Karrouchi6, Smaail Radi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nowadays, is emerging a new generation of highly promising inhibitors bearing the β-ketoenol functionality. The present work relates to the first synthesis, the structure determination, the DFT studies and the use of a new biomolecule designed with a β-ketoenol group bounded to a pyrazolic moiety. RESULT: A novel β-ketoenol-pyrazole has been synthesized, well characterized and its structure was confirmed by single crystal X-ray diffraction. The electron densities and the HOMO-LUMO gap have been calculated using the DFT method with BLYP, PW91, PWC functionals and 6-31G* basis set. An evaluation of the molecule stability is provided by a NBO analysis and the calculated Fukui and Parr functions have been used to locate the reactive electrophile and nucleophile centers in the molecule. The synthesized compound, screened for its in vitro antifungal behavior against the Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. albedinis FAO fungal strains, shows a moderate activity with an inhibition percentage of 46%. The product was also tested against three bacterial strains (Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis and Micrococcus luteus), but no significant effect was observed against these organisms. <br> CONCLUSIONS: Density functional calculations are used to evaluate the HOMO-LUMO energy gap, the molecular electrostatic potential and to provide a natural bond orbital analysis. The measured antimicrobial activities encourage us to continue searching for other structures, likely to be good antifungal candidates.Entities:
Keywords: Biological activity; Fukui and Parr functions; NBO analysis; Reactivity indices; Single-crystal structure; β-Keto-enol-pyrazole
Year: 2018 PMID: 30474759 PMCID: PMC6768133 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-018-0492-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
Scheme 1Synthesis of the target compound 1
Crystal data and structure refinement for C14 H13 Br N2 O2
| CCDC deposit number | 1817604 |
| Formula, M, Z | C14 H13 Br N2 O2, 321.17, 4 |
| Space group | Triclinic, |
| Lattice | a = 11.1458(7), b = 11.6337(3), c = 12.7221(9) Å, |
| α = 112.075(2), β = 105.637(2), γ = 103.793(2) | |
| θ range | 1.88 to 29.09° |
| Reflections | 18,366 collected/6297 unique [R(int) = 0.0414] |
| Crystal | colorless, 0.20 × 0.13 × 0.12 mm |
| Data/parameters | 6297/357 |
| R indices [I > 2σ(I)] | R1 = 0.0451, wR2 = 0.0968 |
| R indices (all data) | R1 = 0.1012, wR2 = 0.1068 |
| Δρ Fourier residuals | 0.55/−0.33 e.Å−3 |
Atomic coordinates (× 104) and equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2 × 103) for C14 H13 Br N2 O2. Ueq is defined as 1/3 of the trace of the orthogonalized Uij tensor
| Molecule 1 | Molecule 2 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x | y | z | Ueq | x | y | z | Ueq | |
| Br | 56(1) | 6869(1) | 227(1) | 66(1) | 1104(1) | 12,097(1) | − 3397(1) | 77(1) |
| O1 | − 4056(2) | 6644(2) | − 3183(2) | 56(1) | 4307(2) | 11,637(2) | 182(2) | 55(1) |
| O2 | − 6166(2) | 6129(2) | − 4913(2) | 55(1) | 5549(2) | 11,122(2) | 1789(2) | 57(1) |
| N1 | − 10,238(2) | 3242(2) | − 5973(2) | 38(1) | 3715(3) | 8399(2) | 3102(2) | 44(1) |
| N2 | − 8973(2) | 3673(3) | − 5150(2) | 40(1) | 3306(3) | 8867(3) | 2305(2) | 44(1) |
| C1 | − 4761(3) | 5719(3) | − 3007(3) | 40(1) | 3195(3) | 10,766(3) | 28(3) | 42(1) |
| C2 | − 6118(3) | 5006(3) | − 3717(3) | 42(1) | 3209(4) | 10,106(3) | 720(3) | 44(1) |
| C3 | − 6786(3) | 5265(3) | − 4677(3) | 42(1) | 4436(3) | 10,317(3) | 1601(3) | 42(1) |
| C4 | − 8234(3) | 4514(3) | − 5421(3) | 37(1) | 4448(3) | 9595(3) | 2341(3) | 40(1) |
| C5 | − 9038(3) | 4600(3) | − 6420(3) | 43(1) | 5559(3) | 9567(3) | 3141(3) | 46(1) |
| C6 | − 10,317(3) | 3787(3) | − 6759(3) | 39(1) | 5077(3) | 8798(3) | 3630(3) | 39(1) |
| C7 | − 11,613(3) | 3477(4) | − 7736(3) | 53(1) | 5792(4) | 8413(3) | 4543(3) | 55(1) |
| C8 | − 11,320(3) | 2284(3) | − 5949(3) | 50(1) | 2700(3) | 7551(4) | 3293(3) | 62(1) |
| C9 | − 3978(3) | 5493(3) | − 2014(3) | 41(1) | 1964(3) | 10,554(3) | − 957(3) | 42(1) |
| C10 | − 4596(3) | 4618(3) | − 1630(3) | 53(1) | 700(3) | 9632(3) | − 1272(3) | 51(1) |
| C11 | − 3823(4) | 4409(4) | − 715(3) | 61(1) | − 430(4) | 9417(4) | − 2231(4) | 61(1) |
| C12 | − 2436(4) | 5076(4) | − 175(3) | 59(1) | − 292(4) | 10,156(4) | − 2853(3) | 65(1) |
| C13 | − 1844(3) | 5938(3) | − 548(3) | 47(1) | 950(4) | 11,076(3) | − 2530(3) | 51(1) |
| C14 | − 2599(3) | 6146(3) | − 1451(3) | 43(1) | 2073(3) | 11,293(3) | − 1593(3) | 46(1) |
Fig. 1Ortep molecular representation of C14 H13 Br N2 O2 (30% probability ellipsoids)
Fig. 2Molecular packing in the triclinic lattice enhancing the peculiar layered arrangement of molecules in planes parallel to ()
Fig. 3Experimental molecule and hypothetical models built by changing the rings orientation
Fig. 4Representation of the 3D isosurface electron density (volumic contour) mapped with the deformation density. Positive value (yellow domains) indicate electron localization
Selected bond lengths [Å] and angles [°] for C14 H13 Br N2 O2
| Mole 1/mole 2 | PW91 | BLYP | PWC | Solid PWC | Solid BLYP | Solid PW91 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Br–C13 |
|
|
|
| |||
| O2–C3 |
|
|
|
| |||
| N1–N2 |
|
|
|
| |||
| N1–C6 |
|
|
|
| |||
| N1–C8 |
|
|
|
| |||
| N2–C4 |
|
|
|
| |||
| O1–C1 |
|
|
|
| |||
| N2–N1–C6 |
|
|
|
| |||
| C4–N2–N1 |
|
|
|
| |||
| mol1–mol2 angle |
|
|
|
|
Experimental (bolditalic) values in the crystal are compared with values calculated (italic) in molecular or 3D models
Fig. 5Atomic spin density spatial distribution mapped onto the electrostatic potential showing the electrophilic (left image) and nucleophilic (right image) centers as red zones
Second-order perturbation analysis interactions in C14 H13 Br N2 O2
| Donor ( | Acceptor ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NBO type occupation | NBO type occupation | kcal.mol−1 | a.u. | a.u. | ||||
| O1 | LP | 1.79161 | C1–C2 | π* | 0.25875 | 44.40 | 0.36 | 0.114 |
| N1 | LP | 1.52345 | C5–C6 | π* | 0.32998 | 38.56 | 0.31 | 0.101 |
| C1–C2 | π | 1.76788 | O2–C3 | π* | 0.32146 | 32.54 | 0.28 | 0.087 |
| N1 | LP | 1.52345 | N2–C4 | π* | 0.46366 | 31.65 | 0.28 | 0.084 |
| C5–C6 | π | 1.76975 | N2–C4 | π* | 0.46366 | 29.85 | 0.27 | 0.085 |
| C2–H2 | σ | 1.96995 | C13–C14 | π* | 0.35711 | 22.20 | 4.36 | 0.304 |
| C11–C12 | π | 1.65057 | C9–C10 | π* | 0.37373 | 21.06 | 0.29 | 0.070 |
| C9–C10 | π | 1.62726 | C11–C12 | π* | 0.32589 | 20.12 | 0.28 | 0.068 |
| C13–C14 | σ | 1.67945 | C11–C12 | π* | 0.32589 | 20.03 | 0.30 | 0.070 |
| C13–C14 | σ | 1.67945 | C9–C10 | π* | 0.37373 | 17.75 | 0.30 | 0.067 |
| O2 | LP | 1.90100 | C3–C4 | σ* | 0.05429 | 16.30 | 0.75 | 0.100 |
| N2–C4 | π | 1.83133 | O2–C3 | π* | 0.32146 | 15.55 | 0.31 | 0.064 |
| C9–C10 | π | 1.62726 | C1–C2 | π* | 0.25875 | 14.87 | 0.29 | 0.060 |
| N2–C4 | π | 1.83133 | C5–C6 | π* | 0.32998 | 13.19 | 0.34 | 0.062 |
| O2 | LP | 1.90100 | O1–HO1 | σ* | 0.03204 | 12.68 | 1.12 | 0.108 |
| O2 | LP | 1.90100 | C2–C3 | σ* | 0.04207 | 12.25 | 0.80 | 0.090 |
| C1–C2 | π | 1.76788 | C9–C10 | π* | 0.37373 | 9.46 | 0.29 | 0.049 |
E(2) is the hyper conjugative interaction energy, εi − εj the energy difference between i and j NBO orbitals and F(i, j) the Fock matrix element between i and j NBO orbital
LP lone pair
Fig. 6Molecular structures of compounds 1–6
Values of antifungal activity of the pyrazole-keto enol compounds against Fusarium oxysporum f.sp.
| Compounds | Volume withdrawn (µL) | Diameter of the strain in the presence of the drug (cm) | Inhibition (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 50 | 5 | 0 |
| 200 | 3.8 | 24 | |
| 500 | 2.7 | 46 | |
|
| 50 | 5 | 0 |
| 200 | 3.5 | 30 | |
| 500 | 2.3 | 54 | |
|
| 50 | 5 | 0 |
| 200 | 3.6 | 28 | |
| 500 | 2.5 | 50 | |
|
| 50 | 5 | 0 |
| 200 | 3.8 | 24 | |
| 500 | 3.2 | 36 | |
|
| 50 | 1.2 | 76 |
| 200 | 0.9 | 82 | |
| 500 | 0.5 |
| |
|
| 50 | 2.0 | 60 |
| 200 | 1.3 | 74 | |
| 500 | 0.2 |
| |
| Benomyl | 50 | 2.3 | 54 |
| 200 | 1.1 | 78 | |
| 500 | 0.3 |
|