On acetylation (OH group was changed to OCOCH3 group), the alpha
4 j+ T/ i: m. i1 o% @carbon will show a downfield shift while the belta carbon will show a
' F' q: _1 A7 O# \ lupfield shif. 5 ~; m" R( M U- B2 }5 j6 W * s, h* b1 _( n1 i& T
See the following article how to revise a structure reported before just using the above rule! ; x3 [& W! N! e8 z3 J+ l . e! H4 M4 ]. n: L& s; }5 g8 X
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. 3 V) T- ^ a9 U8 D$ F/ Y$ w# M ) ~! N& d0 B" \3 zAnother compound with one OH group acetylated: it could be C-6 OAc, C-7& a) u; l' a# a
OH (compound I in the article) or could be C-6 OH, C-7OAc (compound II
+ Y' j, L# G: C) k) z6 f9 K% p) d5 Xin the article). The chemical shifts of the two carbons are 78.1 and
* |; F. Y+ j' Q80.5. How to determine which carbon (C-6 or C-7) has the OAC group?
. ]+ u6 g l! i+ K
* l- o2 R7 V0 @3 o
The auhors resovled the problem: + L# w% y/ T5 g5 U
0 j8 F' v( j2 k
If C-6 (80.5) and C-7 (78.5) were right, meaning both the chemical- E; a3 Y* y8 J
shifts of C-6 (79.3 to 80.5) and C-7 (76.2 to 78.5) were increased." H7 k+ L7 z; M; g- ?" B
That assupmtion violates the above rule. 0 B4 `0 t" Z0 o* R$ @
# i& j' F0 ]9 p3 _3 a/ X# w; 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. 2 V- C4 P8 s0 I
6 U7 @0 y/ m' U9 m& s; P
C-6 (78.5) and C-7 (80.5) meaned that C-6 shifted to highfield (from
( Z! t( Z7 I1 d5 j5 g3 o79.3 to 78.5), C-7 shifted to lowfield (from 76.2 to 80.5). Logically,4 R; ^) S: [" F% G6 G
it was the C-7 with the OAC group (compound II), not the C-6 with the) u `1 W6 w3 E7 s8 q& l: W" K
OAC group (compound I). " G5 H9 l+ ]+ M& Z3 W8 `( a# F
! @; |, J" W3 |. Z' rSimple, logic structural revision published in 1981!