On acetylation (OH group was changed to OCOCH3 group), the alpha
( P- ]- F( ]2 Z* `1 X5 s# Xcarbon will show a downfield shift while the belta carbon will show a! [/ _: w; r4 r4 k1 J4 [
upfield shif. , Z' S/ K9 \- G8 U0 D- w% W } 5 i I/ K. n* b# d6 h. B7 BSee the following article how to revise a structure reported before just using the above rule! 9 }! k2 q. Y, {1 b: G6 U: d H 4 n2 j) c" W9 i
One compound with C-6 OH, C-7 OH (compound IV in the article): chemical shift values of C-6 79.3 ppm, C-7 76.2 ppm were known. 9 B) S b+ K5 r. e
: t6 {- l, d3 Y1 y- \Another compound with one OH group acetylated: it could be C-6 OAc, C-7# `2 k+ ?# K% C3 \+ |8 Q) R
OH (compound I in the article) or could be C-6 OH, C-7OAc (compound II+ ?. g2 K' e3 v f8 L) p7 t* r8 Z& q
in the article). The chemical shifts of the two carbons are 78.1 and
5 T) v4 r' o) M# h6 P1 W: z+ c80.5. How to determine which carbon (C-6 or C-7) has the OAC group?
Q" ~1 b$ d8 L& H& P+ `- C" l P' M% ?7 Q( T: |$ YThe auhors resovled the problem: 4 N1 T* q! L+ k; K& Y/ J# h! E
1 |9 @- x7 P: C1 t
If C-6 (80.5) and C-7 (78.5) were right, meaning both the chemical+ x* S8 e. b1 G: \6 @( p T
shifts of C-6 (79.3 to 80.5) and C-7 (76.2 to 78.5) were increased.
- O$ w: S" w* u3 q ~That assupmtion violates the above rule. + P/ |9 [. f' [ [0 d- g3 I, v
- t' M$ s2 A' w5 F$ dSo chemical shift of C-6 was not 80.5 but 78.5, chemical shift of C-7 was not 78.5 but 80.5. * t! d. @5 S/ C' V# J
6 @! W% V* x- i9 V2 u( ]6 U
C-6 (78.5) and C-7 (80.5) meaned that C-6 shifted to highfield (from4 w. D! S, L, o. A. G+ o" F$ h
79.3 to 78.5), C-7 shifted to lowfield (from 76.2 to 80.5). Logically,
5 O3 d8 w9 a" h1 G; Hit was the C-7 with the OAC group (compound II), not the C-6 with the
u; Y0 t* }, bOAC group (compound I). & M2 [* g( R. H3 q* Y/ @2 ]5 D3 G , z" [, r! m3 N& n& O
Simple, logic structural revision published in 1981!