On acetylation (OH group was changed to OCOCH3 group), the alpha7 h) W% ~4 m8 C/ Z' L
carbon will show a downfield shift while the belta carbon will show a
: j: L5 p& a4 s+ H3 b- t% t( B, Iupfield shif. . M. `& ~$ K* a6 b! [( U) C
: n. t- o; n0 u& l# D
See the following article how to revise a structure reported before just using the above rule! ' E6 V, G! j3 J/ q: s8 `
0 |! c$ @& n8 Y8 ~* I1 s( l
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. % w# c0 a. _# f ( _! S( l9 ~& R' J( ^Another compound with one OH group acetylated: it could be C-6 OAc, C-76 ^% h! N. J3 y, j7 N
OH (compound I in the article) or could be C-6 OH, C-7OAc (compound II
# R, @3 n) [! U/ jin the article). The chemical shifts of the two carbons are 78.1 and, {0 c9 L! g: k" {. z% c4 l6 O" R
80.5. How to determine which carbon (C-6 or C-7) has the OAC group?
( d; ]% O3 R _ ) z4 V7 {7 h. m6 H" a) {7 T
The auhors resovled the problem: . c% \; s' P/ e$ x
/ X# P/ ^' H5 }2 E/ {If C-6 (80.5) and C-7 (78.5) were right, meaning both the chemical
7 h4 K0 Q5 S0 {0 d; X8 e3 jshifts of C-6 (79.3 to 80.5) and C-7 (76.2 to 78.5) were increased.# L& m) u! U# D* H$ W8 l
That assupmtion violates the above rule. ( z; l! I% ?) ?# ~( x
# K. ?( K; G' t3 TSo chemical shift of C-6 was not 80.5 but 78.5, chemical shift of C-7 was not 78.5 but 80.5. - g) t& X" P; ^( F& D7 r# O + K7 J1 y# o1 }* {& H3 XC-6 (78.5) and C-7 (80.5) meaned that C-6 shifted to highfield (from
, u4 }9 U4 s0 i h" ^. z79.3 to 78.5), C-7 shifted to lowfield (from 76.2 to 80.5). Logically,
( t7 h2 b3 T. h( w: T" }it was the C-7 with the OAC group (compound II), not the C-6 with the
8 G, P- t' j$ G) z$ _) M4 tOAC group (compound I). * L% x' U' | {" ^& @ ) ?6 s. ~( @# e$ JSimple, logic structural revision published in 1981!