(a) Pure (8,0) ZnO nanotube, (b) Ag1 configuration, (c) Ag1N2 configuration, (d) Ag1N3,4 configuration, (e) Ag1N2,3,4 configuration, (f) Ag1N5 configuration, and (g) Ag1N6 configuration. Figure 4 Total DOS (a) and PDOS (b) of Ag 1, Ag 1 N 2, Ag 1 N 3,4, and Ag 1 N 2,3,4 configurations.
These evidences suggested that the double bond (C8 C9) was a E configuration (Fig. 2).
Both conformers prefer enol form in the solid state, adopting E configuration about the CN double bond.
Verified by the ROESY correlation between H-3′ (δH 7.34 /H-5′ (δH 5.78), Δ4′ could identified as E configuration.
The e) configuration is a fully thermally coupled column, known as a Petlyuk column [4, 5, 7 11].
Meanwhile, we observed the titles compounds possess E and Z configuration in the 1H-NMR spectra, but the E configuration was mainly forms by the spectra analysis, such as E configuration of -CONHAr proton appeared at 12.11, but Z proton was occurred at 12.01 in 3e, and the E/Z is approximately equal to 3.60.
Δ11 was E configuration, which could be identified by the H-12 (δH 5.12)/H-10 (δH 2.00, 1.44) ROESY correlation.
Furthermore, although the (E -4 doublE -4ndoubleot essential for inhibondry actisity, the (E) conotguration is ressentialsince the analogue with a (Z)-4 unsaturation was not inhibitory.
Crucially, the E configuration observed for 3′ allows for the formation of a hypervalent Te⋯O interaction as well as an O⋯HO hydrogen bond with the Gly27 and Glu122 residues, respectively.
