Laise Pascal, 24 Avenue des Landais, 63177 Aubiere, France, and c ??Laboratoire de Chimie des Substances Naturelles, Unite Associe au CNRST ?(URAC16), Faculte des Sciences-Semlalia, BP 2390, Boulevard My Abdellah, 40000 Marrakech, Morocco Correspondence e-mail: [email protected] Received ten July 2013; accepted 19 July 2013 ?Essential indicators: single-crystal X-ray study; T = 296 K; mean (C ) = 0.004 A; R aspect = 0.042; wR issue = 0.106; data-to-parameter ratio = 7.three.aData collectionBruker APEXII CCD diffractometer Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Sheldrick, 2008) Tmin = 0.627, Tmax = 0.745 4379 measured reflections 1350 independent reflections 1220 reflections with I two(I) Rint = 0.RefinementR[F 2 2(F two)] = 0.042 wR(F 2) = 0.106 S = 1.08 1350 reflections 186 parameters 1 restraint H-atom parameters constrained ? ax = 0.29 e A? ? in = ?.24 e A?Table?Hydrogen-bond geometry (A, ).D–H?? O2–H2?? 2i D–H 0.3 2; yThe title compound, C17H21NO2, was synthesized by the reaction of (1R)-(+)-3-benzylcamphor and hydroxylamine. The oxazole ring tends to make a dihedral angle of 23.42 (16) with the phenyl ring. The six-membered ring on the norboryl group adopts a boat conformation, whereas each of your fivemembered rings with the norboryl group displays a flattened envelope conformation, with the C atom carrying the methyl groups representing the flap for each rings. Within the crystal, molecules are linked into zigzag chains propagating along the b axis by O–H?? hydrogen bonds.H?? 2.D?? 2.877 (3)D–H??Symmetry code: (i) ??1 two; .Data collection: APEX2 (Bruker, 2009); cell refinement: SAINT (Bruker, 2009); data reduction: SAINT; program(s) utilised to resolve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); plan(s) applied to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows (Farrugia, 2012)and PLATON (Spek, 2009); computer software applied to prepare material for publication: WinGX (Farrugia, 2012).Associated literatureFor the functionalization of camphor, see: Jennings ?Herschbach (1965); Pastran et al., (2011). For transition metal complexes of camphor, see: Spannenberg et al. (2002); Harrad et al. (2010); Ait Ali et al. (2006); Gaudo et al. (2011). For ringpuckering parameters, see: Cremer Pople (1975).The authors thank Professor Daniel Avignant for the X-ray measurements.Supplementary data and figures for this paper are readily available from the IUCr electronic archives (Reference: BT6921).
Microbial mats are macroscale communities of metabolically linked organisms (Taffs et al.Formula of Bis(pinacolato)diborane , 2009; Klatt et al., 2013) occupying a shared biogenic ultrastructure commonly composed of an organic exopolymeric matrix (Decho et al., 2005; Braissant et al.1427158-38-0 Price , 2009).PMID:33576313 As such, microbial mats exist as entire ecosystems exactly where comprehensive energy and element cycles, otherwise taking location more than huge distances, take place on millimeter scales (reviewed in Franks and Stolz, 2009; Paerl and Yannarell, 2010). Consequently, the diverse metabolic activities in the community members impose steep physical and chemical gradients and produce niches with fine spatiotemporal resolution (Dupraz et al., 2009). Sunlight drives robust vertical community structuring of phototrophic microbial mats as photons of precise wavelengths are selectively harvestedwith depth (e.g., Pierson et al., 1987; Jorgensen and Des Marais, 1988). These mats encounter substantial variation in their physicochemical environments and, consequently, the interspecies interactions operating within them, as light availability.
