The Cambridge Structural Database (CSD) contains a complete record of all published organic and metal–organic small-molecule crystal structures. The database has been in operation for over 50 years and continues to be the primary means of sharing structural chemistry data and knowledge across disciplines. As well as structures that are made public to support scientific articles, it includes many structures published directly as CSD Communications. All structures are processed both computationally and by expert structural chemistry editors prior to entering the database. A key component of this processing is the reliable association of the chemical identity of the structure studied with the experimental data. This important step helps ensure that data is widely discoverable and readily reusable. Content is further enriched through selective inclusion of additional experimental data. Entries are available to anyone through free CSD community web services. Linking services developed and maintained by the CCDC, combined with the use of standard identifiers, facilitate discovery from other resources. Data can also be accessed through CCDC and third party software applications and through an application programming interface.

https://journals.iucr.org/b/issues/2016/02/00/bm5086/bm5086.pdf

The Cambridge Structural Database

In the last few years the analysis of molecular crystal structures using tools based on Hirshfeld surfaces has rapidly gained in popularity. This approach represents an attempt to venture beyond the current paradigm—internuclear distances and angles, crystal packing diagrams with molecules represented via various models, and the identification of close contacts deemed to be important—and to view molecules as “organic wholes”, thereby fundamentally altering the discussion of intermolecular interactions through an unbiased identification of all close contacts.

Hirshfeld surface analysis

The program Mercury, developed at the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, was originally designed primarily as a crystal structure visualization tool. Over the years the fields and scientific communities of chemical crystallography and crystal engineering have developed to require more advanced structural analysis software. Mercury has evolved alongside these scientific communities and is now a powerful analysis, design and prediction platform which goes a lot further than simple structure visualization.

/pdf/mercury-4-0-from-visualization-to-analysis-design-and-2pxlp4hlx2.pdf

Mercury 4.0: from visualization to analysis, design and prediction

Cellulose samples are routinely analyzed by X-ray diffraction to determine their crystal type (polymorph) and crystallinity. However, the connection is seldom made between those efforts and the crystal structures of cellulose that have been proposed with synchrotron X-radiation and neutron diffraction over the past decade or so. In part, this desirable connection is thwarted by the use of different conventions for description of the unit cells of the crystal structures. In the present work, powder diffraction patterns from cellulose Iα, Iβ, II, IIII, and IIIII were calculated based on the published atomic coordinates and unit cell dimensions contained in modified “crystal information files” (.cif) that are supplied in the Supplementary Information. The calculations used peak widths at half maximum height of both 0.1 and 1.5° 2θ, providing both highly resolved indications of the contributions of each contributing reflection to the observable diffraction peaks as well as intensity profiles that more closely resemble those from practical cellulose samples. Miller indices are shown for each contributing peak that conform to the convention with c as the fiber axis, a right-handed relationship among the axes and the length of a < b. Adoption of this convention, already used for crystal structure determinations, is also urged for routine studies of polymorph and crystallinity. The calculated patterns are shown with and without preferred orientation along the fiber axis. Diffraction intensities, output by the Mercury program from the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, have several uses including comparisons with experimental data. Calculated intensities from different polymorphs can be added in varying proportions using a spreadsheet program to simulate patterns such as those from partially mercerized cellulose or various composites.

Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs

Molecular recognition in biological systems relies on the existence of specific attractive interactions between two partner molecules. Structure-based drug design seeks to identify and optimize such interactions between ligands and their host molecules, typically proteins, given their three-dimensional structures. This optimization process requires knowledge about interaction geometries and approximate affinity contributions of attractive interactions that can be gleaned from crystal structure and associated affinity data.

Here we compile and review the literature on molecular interactions as it pertains to medicinal chemistry through a combination of careful statistical analysis of the large body of publicly available X-ray structure data and experimental and theoretical studies of specific model systems. We attempt to extract key messages of practical value and complement references with our own searches of the CSDa,(1) and PDB databases.(2) The focus is on direct contacts between ligand and protein functional groups, and we restrict ourselves to those interactions that are most frequent in medicinal chemistry applications. Examples from supramolecular chemistry and quantum mechanical or molecular mechanics calculations are cited where they illustrate a specific point. The application of automated design processes is not covered nor is design of physicochemical properties of molecules such as permeability or solubility.

Throughout this article, we wish to raise the readers’ awareness that formulating rules for molecular interactions is only possible within certain boundaries. The combination of 3D structure analysis with binding free energies does not yield a complete understanding of the energetic contributions of individual interactions. The reasons for this are widely known but not always fully appreciated. While it would be desirable to associate observed interactions with energy terms, we have to accept that molecular interactions behave in a highly nonadditive fashion.3,4 The same interaction may be worth different amounts of free energy in different contexts, and it is very hard to find an objective frame of reference for an interaction, since any change of a molecular structure will have multiple effects. One can easily fall victim to confirmation bias, focusing on what one has observed before and building causal relationships on too few observations. In reality, the multiplicity of interactions present in a single protein−ligand complex is a compromise of attractive and repulsive interactions that is almost impossible to deconvolute. By focusing on observed interactions, one neglects a large part of the thermodynamic cycle represented by a binding free energy: solvation processes, long-range interactions, conformational changes. Also, crystal structure coordinates give misleadingly static views of interactions. In reality a macromolecular complex is not characterized by a single structure but by an ensemble of structures. Changes in the degrees of freedom of both partners during the binding event have a large impact on binding free energy.

The text is organized in the following way. The first section treats general aspects of molecular design: enthalpic and entropic components of binding free energy, flexibility, solvation, and the treatment of individual water molecules, as well as repulsive interactions. The second half of the article is devoted to specific types of interactions, beginning with hydrogen bonds, moving on to weaker polar interactions, and ending with lipophilic interactions between aliphatic and aromatic systems. We show many examples of structure−activity relationships; these are meant as helpful illustrations but individually can never confirm a rule.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/jm100112j

A Medicinal Chemist’s Guide to Molecular Interactions

The program Mercury, developed by the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, is designed primarily as a crystal structure visualization tool. A new module of functionality has been produced, called the Materials Module, which allows highly customizable searching of structural databases for intermolecular interaction motifs and packing patterns. This new module also includes the ability to perform packing similarity calculations between structures containing the same compound. In addition to the Materials Module, a range of further enhancements to Mercury has been added in this latest release, including void visualization and links to ConQuest, Mogul and IsoStar.

Lucia Rodriguez-Monge

Papers

Mercury CSD 2.0 – new features for the visualization and investigation of crystal structures