Download PDF
Synlett
DOI: 10.1055/a-2616-5514
letter
Emerging Trends in Organic Chemistry: A Focus on India

Design, Synthesis, and Antifungal Activity of Isochroman-Fused Coumarins against Rhizoctonia solani

Kavita Kavita
a   Bioorganic Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
,
Sumit Kumar
a   Bioorganic Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
,
Prashant Kaushik
b   Division of Agricultural Chemicals, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Delhi, 110012, India
,
Amita Dua
c   Department of Chemistry, Dyal Singh College, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110003, India
,
Najam Akhtar Shakil
b   Division of Agricultural Chemicals, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Delhi, 110012, India
,
Brajendra K. Singh∗
a   Bioorganic Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110007, India
› Author Affiliations
We appreciate the funding provided by the Institute of Emminence (IoE), University of Delhi which has contributed to further research and development. Kavita, Sumit Kumar thanks Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India for the award of Senior Research Fellowship.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category


We dedicate this article to the fond memory of our beloved Late Prof. Ashok K. Prasad

Abstract

This study presents the synthesis and antifungal assessment of novel isochroman-fused coumarin derivatives against Rhizoctonia solani. The compounds were synthesized using an efficient and environmentally benign approach and demonstrated strong in silico binding affinity to CYP51. In vitro assays further confirmed their antifungal activity, with one compound exhibiting the highest potency, achieving an ED50 value of 3.59 μM. These findings underscore the potential of isochroman-fused coumarins as eco-friendly rice sheath blight control agents.

Key words

isochroman-fused coumarins - antifungal agents - Rhizoctonia solani - palladium catalysis - in silico

Supporting Information

    Supporting information for this article is available online at https://doi-org.accesdistant.sorbonne-universite.fr/10.1055/a-2616-5514.
  • Supporting Information


Publication History

Received: 10 March 2025

Accepted after revision: 19 May 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
20 May 2025

Article published online:
02 July 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References and Notes

  • 1 John DA, Babu GR. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021; 5: 644559
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Shiferaw B, Smale M, Braun HJ, Duveiller E, Reynolds M, Muricho G. Food Secur. 2013; 5: 291
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Iqbal J, Zia-ul-Qamar, Yousaf U, Asgher A, Dilshad R, Qamar FM, Bibi S, Rehman SU, Haroon M. In Sustainable Agriculture in the Era of the OMICs Revolution . Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2023: 241
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Ayaz M, Li CH, Ali Q, Zhao W, Chi YK, Shafiq M, Ali F, Yu XY, Yu Q, Zhao JT, Yu JW. Molecules 2023; 28: 6735
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Strange RN, Scott PR. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2005; 43: 83
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Singh A, Rohilla R, Singh US, Savary S, Willocquet L, Duveiller E. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 2002; 24: 65
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Senapati M, Tiwari A, Sharma N, Chandra P, Bashyal BM, Ellur RK, Bhowmick PK, Bollinedi H, Vinod KK, Singh AK, Krishnan SG. Front. Plant Sci. 2022; 13: 881116
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Singh A, Rohila R, Willocquet SS. L, Singh US. Indian Phytopathol. 2003; 56: 434
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Aydın MH. Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi 2022; 9: 118
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Almeida F, Rodrigues ML, Coelho C. Front. Microbiol. 2019; 10: 214
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Wu TL, Zhang BQ, Luo XF, Li AP, Zhang SY, An JX, Zhang ZJ, Liu YQ. Ind. Crops Prod. 2023; 191: 115975
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Upadhyay RK, Saini KK, Deswal N, Singh T, Tripathi KP, Kaushik P, Shakil NA, Bharti AC, Kumar R. RSC Adv. 2022; 12: 24412
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Shen HC. Tetrahedron 2009; 65: 3931
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Xie S, Li X, Yu H, Zhang P, Wang J, Wang C, Xu S, Wu Z, Liu J, Zhu Z, Xu J. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2019; 27: 2764
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Patel GM, Deota PT. Heterocycl. Commun. 2014; 20: 299
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Xie S, Li X, Yu H, Zhang P, Wang J, Wang C, Xu S, Liu J, Zhu Z, Wu Z, Xu J. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2019; 27: 2764
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Manivel P, Sharma A, Maiyalagan T, Rajeswari MR, Khan FN. Phosphorus, Sulfur Silicon Relat. Elem. 2010; 185: 387
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Mateos R, Madrona A, Pereira-Caro G, Domínguez V, Cert RM, Parrado J, Sarria B, Bravo L, Espartero JL. Food Chem. 2015; 173: 313
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Wang J, Han G, Wei Y, Jiang G. Chin. J. Chem. 1998; 15: 112
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Tamanna Tamanna, Kumar M, Joshi K, Chauhan P. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2020; 362: 1907
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Dillon MP, Simpson TJ, Sweeney JB. Tetrahedron Lett. 1992; 33: 7569
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 He G, Matsuura H, Takushi T, Kawano S, Yoshihara T. J. Nat. Prod. 2004;  67: 1084
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Inagaki T, Kaneda K, Suzuki Y, Hirai H, Nomura E, Sakakibara T, Yamauchi Y, Huang LH, Norcia M, Wondrack JA, Sutcliffe JA, Kojima SA, Kojima N. J. Antibiot. 1998; 51: 112
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Saeed A, Mumtaz A. J. Saudi Chem. Soc. 2017;  21: 186
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Rusman Y, Held BW, Blanchette RA, Wittlin S, Salomon CE. J. Nat. Prod. 2015;  78: 1456
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 McMullin DR, Nsiama TK, Miller JD. J. Nat. Prod. 2014;  77: 206
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Stefanachi A, Francesco L, Leonardo P, Marco C, Angelo C. Molecules 2018; 23: 1
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Arya CG, Chandrakanth M, Fabitha K, Thomas NM, Pramod RN, Gondru R, Banothu J. Results Chem. 2022; 4: 100631
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Ronad PM, Noolvi MN, Sapkal S, Dharbhamulla S, Maddi VS. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2010; 45: 85
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Raghu M, Nagaraj A, Reddy CS. J. Heterocycl. Chem. 2009; 46: 261
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Shaikh MH, Subhedar DD, Khan FA. K, Sangshetti JN, Shingate BB. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2016; 27: 295
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Maikhuri VK, Bohra K, Srivastava S, Kavita Prasad AK. Synth. Commun. 2019; 49: 3140
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 33 Lončarić M, Gašo-Sokač D, Jokić S, Molnar M. Biomolecules 2020; 10: 151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Citarella A, Vittorio S, Dank C, Ielo L. Front. Chem. 2024; 12: 1362992
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Polymer Science: A Comprehensive Reference, Vol. 3 . Matyjaszewski K, Möller M. Elsevier; Amsterdam: 2012
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 37 Kathiravan MK, Salake AB, Chothe AS, Dudhe PB, Watode RP, Mukta MS, Gadhwe S. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2012; 20: 5678
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 General Procedure for the Synthesis of Isochroman-Fused Coumarins 4a–i 4-Hydroxy coumarins 1a–h (1 equiv) and 2-bromobenzyl bromide 2a,b (1 equiv) were dissolved in propylene carbonate (5 mL) in the presence of potassium carbonate base (3 equiv) and 10 mol% PdCl2 as a catalyst in a 50 mL round-bottomed flask. The reaction mixture stirred for 4 h at 120 °C. Chloroform was then used to extract the resultant reaction mixture (3 × 30 mL) after the indication of completion of the reaction by TLC. The combined extracts were washed with brine solution, then dried using anhydrous sodium sulfate, filtered, and then concentrated under reduced pressure under a vacuum resulting in the isolation of the crude product. The crude product thus obtained was purified by silica gel chromatography using ethyl acetate in petroleum ether as a gradient solvent system. The separated pure products were characterized by 1H, 13C NMR spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, and IR spectroscopy.
  • 39 6H,11H-Isochromeno[4,3-c]chromen-11-one (4a) It was obtained as a white solid in 68% yield using 5% ethyl acetate in petroleum ether as an eluent, mp 105–107 °C; R ƒ = 0.4 (8% ethyl acetate in petroleum ether). IR (KBr): 1702, 1612, 1490, 1332, 1286, 1091, 913, 750 cm–1. 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ = 8.56 (1 H, d, J = 7.9 Hz), 7.86–7.88 (1 H, m), 7.57 (1 H, t, J = 8.4 Hz), 7.42 (1 H, t, J = 7.6 Hz), 7.32 (3 H, dt, J = 15.2, 7.7 Hz), 7.13 (1 H, d, J = 7.4 Hz), 5.41 (2 H, s). 13C NMR (100.6 MHz, CDCl3): δ = 161.3, 160.3, 153.0, 132.6, 129.2, 128.4, 127.5, 126.8, 125.0, 124.2, 124.1, 123.2, 116.7, 115.3, 102.8, 69.9. HRMS (ESI): m/z calcd for C16H11O3 [M + H]+: 251.0703; found: 251.0705.