Chemspider and Structure of Digitonin
Antony Williams of Chemspider posted an interesting challenge for the community to work out, and decide upon, the structure of digitonin. This molecule is a “saponin” meaning a steroid with sugars attached. The details are on the Chemspider blog and there is a discussion on Friendfeed.
The structure was reported (in German) in Tetrahedron in 1963, with an NMR spectroscopy study being published some years later. This latter paper gives the structure as this:

Published digitoninstructure
I have not gone through the NMR reasoning to check the conclusions. It sounds like they analysed a pure compound, not a mixture: “The seed of Digitalis purpurea L. contain ca. 2% of a saponin mixture whose main component is digitonin. With preparative distribution chromatography on formamide-saturated cellulose, it was possible to obtain 1 in pure form.” The paper’s been cited 12 times, and from the titles it doesn’t look as though there has been a structure revision. Chemspider lists three structures at the moment, which all differ in some aspect of the stereochemistry:

Chemspider structures
Circled are a few anomalies. These structures are actually rotated through 180 degrees to depict the steroid skeleton in (approximately) the usual sense. It’s nice to be proper about these things.
To make the comparison between CS and the literature easier, we can number the structure and redraw the literature structure in this orientation. It turns out that the Chemspider structures have the steroid ring flipped, so we can flip that too:

Lit structure (top), Chemspider orientation (bottom left) and lit structure redrawn (bottom right)
So, which is right? It looks like none of them. Structure 4976216 is close, but the stereochemistry at position 20 (red methyl) looks to be inverted (in all structures). The literature paper is unequivocal about the stereochemistry there.

Digitonin fragment from paper - stereochem at position 20
Interestingly the varied depictions of the spiro moiety can make a comparison confusing. I included two representations in the above figure, but the Chemspider structures have three different depictions of this. They’re all the same, in fact.

Same stereocentre, different spiro drawing
So I’d suggest “digitonin” means a pure compound, with the literature structure as shown above.
The question that’s interesting is why do the CS structures (which are derived from other sources, clearly, and is no fault of CS) differ? Where do the anomalies creep in? If you look at the Wikipedia structure, that stereocentre is also wrong.

Digitonin Structure from Wikipedia
This picture was drawn using “http://www.commonchemistry.org” as source, but I haven’t gone back to check for sources for that. I’m guessing it’s a chemical case of what we used to call ‘Chinese Whispers’ where what starts out as one thing becomes something subtly different after being passed between people. I asked my wife about this, and she thinks it’s a virus (Epimerizer) that’s sweeping the web, randomly inverting stereocentres in chemical databases. (She’s an anthropologist, so doesn’t understand what a nightmare this idea is.)
mattoddchem 12:09 am on September 18, 2009 Permalink |
By pure chance today, one of our organic students, Tim Sheedy, was presenting some research by Prof Istvan Toth during our (probably) celebrated Thursday Morning Problem Sessions, and spoke about the use of a saponin as a delivery agent for biological molecules – it had the extraordinary name of “Glycyrrhizin”. A word made for Scrabble, clearly.
mattoddchem 10:12 pm on November 19, 2009 Permalink |
Something odd has happened to the images above – will fix.
Rich Apodaca 7:01 am on September 26, 2009 Permalink |
@Mat, nice writeup. This little episode is a great example of why data provenance matters so much. The scientific databases of the future will not only need to tell us what the ‘facts’ are, but how those facts came into being.
Rich Apodaca 1:56 am on November 16, 2009 Permalink |
BTW, any chance you still have a molfile? If so, would you be interested in submitting it to Chempedia (http://chempedia.com) ?