Home Two new taxane-glycosides from the needles of Taxus canadensis
Article Publicly Available

Two new taxane-glycosides from the needles of Taxus canadensis

  • Nan Li , Jin Wang , Hui-Min Yan , Man-li Zhang EMAIL logo , Qing-Wen Shi , Françoise Sauriol , Hiromasa Kiyota EMAIL logo and Mei Dong EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: September 26, 2015
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Two minor taxane glycosides were isolated for the first time from the needles of Taxus canadensis. Their structures were characterized as 2α,5α-diacetoxy-10β-(6′-O-acetyl-β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxy-14β-[(2′R,3′S)-3′-hydroxy-2′-methylbutanoyl]oxytaxa-4(20),11-diene (1) and 2α,14β-diacetoxy-10β-(β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxytaxa-4(20),11-dien-5β-ol (2) on the basis of 1D and 2D NMR data analysis and confirmed by high-resolution fast atom bombardment mass spectrometry.

1 Introduction

The plant kingdom provides an extensive reservoir of natural products. Taxoids are group of naturally occurring diterpenoids which have attracted the attention of many chemists all over world since the discovery of paclitaxel (Taxol), the first promoters of tubulin polymerization in the war against cancer. The collection of a large amount of needles of Taxus canadensis enabled the characterization of many minor taxanes with unusual skeletons [1–11]. This small bush has been shown to have a distinct composition quite different from the Pacific or European yews. The discovery of an abundant taxane, 9-dihydro-13-acetylbaccatin III [12, 13], and its conversion to the anti-cancer drug paclitaxel (Taxol) [14] emphasized its specificity. Phytochemical investigation found that this major taxane could be rearranged under acidic or basic conditions [15–17]. Previous studies have tried to explain the bioactivities of taxuspine D and taxagifine (two taxinine derivatives) by molecular modeling studies [18–20]. A number of less polar analogs were described in earlier publications [21–23]. We have investigated rooted cuttings of Taxus cuspidata hoping to get insights into the biosynthesis of taxanes. However, our result showed a completely different composition of taxanes in rooted cuttings with no correlations with the biosyntheses of taxanes from mature plants [3]. In the present work, we report the isolation and structural elucidation of two new taxane glycosides isolated for the first time from this species. These compounds were isolated from polar fractions from methanolic extraction of dried needles of the Canadian yew, T. canadensis.

2 Results and discussion

2.1 Isolation and structure elucidation of 1

A methanolic extract of the needles of T. canadensis was purified as described in Section 3. Two pure taxane glycosides (1, 2) were obtained as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1: Taxane glucosides isolated from the needles of T. canadensis.
Fig. 1:

Taxane glucosides isolated from the needles of T. canadensis.

Taxane 1 was obtained as colorless amorphous solid in a very small yield from air-dried needles of the Canadian yew. The molecular composition of 1, C37H56O14, was established from the combined analysis of high-resolution fast atom bombardment mass spectrometry (HR-FAB-MS) and 2D NMR spectral data. The 1H NMR spectrum of 1, shown in Table 1, exhibited three-proton signals due to the four tertiary methyl groups at δH = 1.21, 1.69, 2.10 and 0.85 ppm, two of which were correlation spectroscopy (COSY)-correlated peaks as geminal methyls (Me-16 and Me-17), and three acetoxy groups at δH = 2.15, 1.99 and 1.96 ppm, which were confirmed by the observation of the signals at δC = 20.9, 19.6 and 20.3 ppm, and the corresponding carbonyl carbons at δC = 168.6 and 169.5 and 168.8 ppm in the 13C NMR spectrum. These findings suggested that 1 had a taxane-type core skeleton [6–8]. Indeed, the heteronuclear multiple-bond correlations (HMBC) from H3-C(18) to C(11), C(12), C(13); and H3-C(16) and H3-C(17) to C(1), C(11), C(15); and H3-C(19) to C(3), C(7), C(8), C(9) revealed that Me-18 was attached to C(12) whereas Me-16 and Me-17 were attached to C(15) and Me-19 was attached to C(8), implying that 1 has a regular 6/8/6 ring system (Fig. 2). The connectivities of the protons on the skeleton of 1 were determined by the analysis of the 1H–1H COSY spectrum. Interpretation of 1H, 13C NMR and HMBC spectra permitted the positional assignment of all the functional groups. The 1H NMR signals at δH = 5.25 (1H, br. s), 4.85 (1H, br. s) and 2.99 ppm (1H, d, J = 6.6 Hz) together with the signals at δC = 142.7 and 115.9 ppm in the 13C NMR spectrum are characteristic of an exocyclic methylene with a C(3) ring junction proton in a taxa-4(20),11-diene [6, 7]. Using H-C(3) as a reference, the connectivities from C(3) to C(2) to C(1) to C(14) to C(13) were deduced from the 1H–1H COSY spectrum. The signal at δH = 5.38 ppm (1H, dd, J = 6.6, 2.3 Hz) was attributed to H-C(2); the chemical shift indicated that an acetyl group was positioned at C(2). This was confirmed by the observation of the HMBC from H-C(2) to the carbonyl group at δC = 168.8 ppm. The signal at δH = 5.01 ppm (1H, dd, J = 9.4, 4.8 Hz) was assigned to H-C(14) and suggested that a side chain was attached to C(14). Indeed, a detailed analysis of the 1H–1H COSY spectrum revealed a 3-hydroxy-2-methylbutanoyl group in taxane 1. This moiety has been found in several natural taxane analogs [6–8]. Attachment of the 3-hydroxy-2-methylbutanoyl group at C(14) was deduced from a long-range correlation from H-C(14) to C(1′) (δC = 173.3 ppm) in the HMBC experiment. The similarity of the NMR data of the 3-hydroxy-2-methylbutanoyl group with the known taxanes reveals the configuration of C(2′) to be R [6–8, 24, 25]. The signal at δH = 5.25 ppm (1H, m) was assigned to H-C(5). The chemical shifts of H-C(5) and C(5) suggested that an acetyl group was attached to C(5). Similarly, using H-C(5) as a starting point, the spin system derived from C(5) to C(7) through C(6) was readily interpreted from the analysis of the 1H–1H COSY spectrum. The signal at δH = 5.30 ppm (1H, dd, J = 12.3, 5.7 Hz), which showed long-range correlations with C(9), C(12) and C(15) in the HMBC spectrum, was attributed to H-C(10). Taxanes with oxygen substitutions at C(2), C(5), C(10) and C(14) have a downfield chemical shift for C(1) (δC = 59.3 ppm), a rather unusual chemical shift value for a non-oxygenated methine in the 13C NMR spectrum [6, 7]. Additionally, an anomeric carbon signal at δC = 98.5 ppm as well as five oxygenated carbons between δC = 63.7 and 77.3 ppm, and six hydrogen signals between δH = 3.28 and 4.43 ppm indicated the existence of one sugar moiety in taxane 1. The chemical shift, multiplicity and coupling constant values indicated the presence of a glucopyranosyl unit. The analysis of the 2D-NMR data (COSY, HMBC) as well as the MS fragment of [M+H–180]+ confirmed it. The coupling constant J = 7.7 Hz of the anomeric proton H-C(1″) indicated that this moiety was connected to the aglycon via a β-linkage (J = 6–8 Hz) [26, 27]. The anomeric proton H-C(1″) showed a long-range correlation with C(10). In addition, H-C(10) was correlated to C(1″) in the HMBC experiment, establishing that the glucose unit was attached to C(10). The orientations of the substituents on the taxane skeleton were confirmed by the coupling constants in the 1H NMR and the correlations in the nuclear Overhauser effect spectroscopy (NOESY) experiment. The remaining acetyl group was positioned at C(6″) of the glucose residue as indicated by the chemical shifts of Hα–C(6″) and Hβ–C(6″) of the glucose moiety, which was further confirmed by the long-range H-C correlation of Hα–C(6″) to the carbonyl carbon at δC = 169.5 ppm in the HMBC experiment. The NOE correlation and the small coupling constant between H-C(14) and H-C(1) suggested that their dihedral angle was about 90°: the C(14) side chain was therefore β-oriented. The chemical structure of 1 was therefore determined as 2α,5α-diacetoxy-10β-(6′-O-acetyl-β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxy-14β-[(2′R,3′S)-3′-hydroxy-2′-methylbutanoyl]oxytaxa-4(20),11-diene, the 6′-O-acetyl derivative of the taxane isolated from Taxus yunnanensis (Cheng et L. K. Fu) [25].

Table 1

1H and 13C NMR data for 1 in [D6]acetone (500 MHz for 1H, 125 MHz for 13C).

PositionδH mult.aJ (Hz)δCbHMBCNOESYc
11.87 (br. d)2.359.32,s 14,m 16,s 17s
25.38 (dd)6.6, 2.370.04, 8,14, 15, 168.81,s 9β,s 16,s 19s
32.99 (d)6.642.22, 5, 8, 197α,s 14,s 18m
4142.7
55.25 (m)77.6
6αβ1.7828.619m
7α

7β
2.00

1.22
33.53,s 7β,s 10,s 18m

7α,m 19s
839.1
9β

9α
1.63 (m)

2.38 (m)
44.83, 7, 8, 10, 119β,s 10,m 19s

2,s 9α,s 16,s 19m
105.30 (dd)12.3, 5.771.09, 12, 157α,s 9α,m 18,s G1w
11135.5
12136.1
13α

13β
2.90 (dd)

2.49 (dd)
19.6, 9.64

19.6, 4.8
39.61, 11, 1813β,s 14,s 18,s

13α,s 14,w 17s
145.01 (dd)9.4, 4.869.71, 2, 15, 173.31,m 3,s 13α,s 13βw
1536.8
171.21 (s)31.11, 11, 15, Me-161,s 13β,s 16,s G1m
161.69 (s)24.21, 11, 15, Me-171,s 2,s 9β,s 17,s G1w
182.10 (br. s)20.011, 12, 133,m 7α,m 10,s 13αs
190.85 (s)21.93, 7, 8, 92,s 6,m 7β,s 9α,s 9β,m 20bm
20a

20b
5.25 (o. s)

4.85 (s)
115.93, 4

3, 5
19m
OAc2.15 (s)

1.99 (s)

1.96 (s)
20.9

168.6

19.6

169.5

20.3

168.8
168.6

169.5

168.8
1′ CO173.3
2′2.41 (quint)6.647.5
Me-2′1.07 (d)7.012.31′, 2′, 3′
3′

OH-3′
3.89 (m)

3.75 (br. d)
5.168.4
4′ (Me)1.13 (d)6.219.72′, 3′
G14.33 (d)7.798.510G3,s G5,s 10,w 16,w 17m
G23.28 (m)73.7
G33.38 (m)77.3G1s
G43.30 (m)70.6
G53.42 (m)73.9G1s
G6a

G6b
4.43 (dd)

4.12 (dd)
12.1, 1.7

12.1, 6.8
63.75, 169.5

aMutiplicity: s, singlet; d, doublet; dd, doublet of doublets; t, triplet; m, mutiplet.

bThe 13C chemical shifts were extracted from the HMQC experiment (±0.2 ppm). The numbers in bold represent quaternary carbons whose chemical shifts were obtained from the HMBC experiment (±0.2 ppm).

cNOESY intensities are marked as strong (s), medium (m), or weak (w).

Fig. 2: 2D NMR analyses of 1. The dashed arrows show the key HMBC (H→C), and the bold bonds indicate the 1H–1H COSY correlations. Most protons are omitted for clarity.
Fig. 2:

2D NMR analyses of 1. The dashed arrows show the key HMBC (H→C), and the bold bonds indicate the 1H–1H COSY correlations. Most protons are omitted for clarity.

2.2 Structure elucidation of 2

Compound 2 was obtained as colorless amorphous solid. Its molecular composition, C30H46O11, was obtained from HR-FAB-MS at m/z = 621.2677 [M+K]+. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra of 2 in CD3OD (Table 2) showed the characteristic signals of C(14) substituted taxanes, H-C(2) and H-C(10) resonating as doublets of doublet; C(1) had an unusual downfield shift at δC = 60.5 ppm, and C(14) appeared in the range of oxygenated carbon at δC = 71.9 ppm. The NMR data for the glucose unit are similar to those of 1. The main difference is the presence of a C(14) acetyl group instead of the 3-hydroxy-2-methylbutanoyl group in 1, and the chemical shift of Hα–C(6′) and Hβ–C(6′) in the glucose residue shifted to the upfield indicated that the acetyl group on the OH-C(6) of the glucose was removed. The sugar residue on C(10) in 2 is confirmed by the HMBC of H-C(10) to C(1′) and H-C(1′) to C(10). The β-configuration of the glucose unit was determined by the coupling constant (J = 7.7 Hz) of the anomeric proton H-C(1′) [26, 27]. The NOESY correlations showed the same relative orientations as in taxanes 1. Therefore, the structure of 2 is 2α,14β-diacetoxy-10β-(β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxytaxa-4(20),11-dien-5β-ol, the 5-de-O-acetyl derivative of the taxane isolated from T. canadensis [5]. The NMR spectral data in CDCl3 are also shown in Table 3.

Table 2

1H and 13C NMR data for 2 in CD3OD (500 MHz for 1H, 125 MHz for 13C).

PositionδH mult.aJ (Hz)δCbHMBCNOESYc
11.77 (d)1.860.53, 14, 152,s 14,w 16,s 17s
25.38 (dd)6.1, 1.772.41, 8, 14, 171.71,s 9β,s 16,s 19s
33.26 (o. m)41.47α,s 14,s 18m
4149.5
54.11 (t)2.476.83, 206,s 20as
6αβ1.70 (m)31.95,s 19m
7α

7β
2.14 (m)

1.06 (m)
34.23,s 10,s 7β,s 18s

7α,s 9α,s 19s
840.4
9α

9β
1.59 (dd)

2.35 (dd)
14.8, 4,8 14.8, 12.445.47, 8, 10, 11

8, 10, 19
7β,s 9β,s 10,w 19m

2,s 9α,s 16,s 19m
105.37 (dd)12.4, 4.872.79, 12, 15, G17α,s 9α,m 18,s G1m
11136.0
12138.9
13α

13β
2.77 (dd)

2.42 (br. dd)
19.1, 9.5

19.1, 3.9
39.91, 11, 12, 14, 18

11
13β,s 14,s 18s

13α,s 17s
145.09 (dd)9.5, 4.33.071.91, 2, 15, 172.11,w 3,s 13αs
1538.1
171.18 (s)32.01, 11, 15, Me1,s 13β,s 16,s G1m
161.68 (s)25.11, 11, 15, Me1,s 2,s 9β,s 17s
182.00 (br. s)20.511, 12, 133,m 7α,s 10,s 13α,s G1m
190.82 (s)22.53, 7, 8, 9, 10 (weak)2,s 6,m 7β,s 9α,m 9β,m 20bw
20a 20b5.12 (s)

4.79 (br. s)
113.33, 5

3, 4, 5
5,s 20bs

19,w 20as
OAc2.02 (s)

2.01 (s)
21.0

172.1

21.0

171.7
172.1

171.7
G14.29 (d)7.799.710G3,m G4,m G5,s 10,m 17,m 18m
G23.25 (m)74.8
G33.31 (m)78.2G1m
G43.32 (o. m)71.4G1,m G6bm
G53.16 (m)77.6G1,s G6a,s G6b,s
G6a

G6b
3.84 (dd)

3.68 (dd)
12.0, 2.3

12.0, 5.5
62.3G1

G5
G5,s G6bs

G4,m G5,m G6as

a,b,cSee footnotes for Table 1.

Table 3

1H and 13C NMR data for 2 in CDCl3 (500 MHz for 1H, 125 MHz for 13C).

PositionδH mult.aJ (Hz)δCbHMBCNOESYc
11.81 (br. s)59.02,s 14,s G1m
25.38 (br. d)5.970.91,s 3,w 7αα,s 9β,m 16,m 19s
33.14 (d)5.939.92,w 13α,s 14,s 18m
4
54.16 (br. s)76.16,s 20a,s 20bs
6αβ1.70 (o. m)30.65,s 9β,s 19m
7α

7β
2.02 (o. m)

1.09 (o. m)
32.93,s 7β,w 10,m 20a,w 20bs

7αw
8~39
9α

9β
1.62 (o. m)

2.30 (o. m)
44.09β,s 10,m 19s

2,m 6,s 9α,s 16,s 19m
105.27 (br. dd)11.3, 5.272.27α,m 9α,m 18,s G1m
11134.6
12138.2
13α

13β
2.77 (br. dd)

2.35 (o. m)
18.3, 8.239.33,s 13β,s 14,s 18s

13α,s 14,w 17s
145.00 (br. dd)9.3, 5.370.51,s 3,s 13α,s 13βw
1537.2
161.14 (o. s)31.51, 11, 15, Me2,m 9β,s G1w
171.63 (o. s)24.71, 11, 15, Me13β,s G1s
181.95 (s)20.411, 12, 133,m 10,s 13αs
190.79 (s)21.93/8, 7, 92,s 6,m 9α,s 9β,m 20bw
20a

20b
5.08 (br. s)

4.77 (br. s)
113.45,s 7α,w 19,m 20bs

5,s 7α,s 19,w 20as
OAc2.09 (s)

2.03 (s)
21.0

170.3

21.1

169.6
G14.34 (br. d)7.998.2G2,w G3,s G5,s 1,m 10,m 16,w 17s
G23.4 (br. t)~7.373.5G1w
G33.53 (br. t)~876.4G1s
G43.63 (m)70.2
G53.28 (br. m)75.1G1s
G6ab3.85 (o. m)61.9

a,b,cSee footnotes for Table 1.

3 Experimental section

Flash chromatography: silica gel 60 (230–400 mesh, EM Science). Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) silica gel 60 F254 (0.25 mm or 0.5 mm, EM Science). Preparative HPLC: Waters Delta Prep 3000, Waters UV 486 Tunable Absorbance detector (210 nm), and Whatman partisil 10 ODS-2 Mag-9 (9.4 × 250 mm2). Optical rotation: Jasco DIP-370. NMR: Bruker Avance-500 rel. to solvent ([D6]acetone: δ = 2.09 ppm for 1H, δ = 30.60 ppm for 13C; CD3OD: δ = 3.36 ppm for 1H, δ = 49.86 ppm for 13C; CDCl3: δ = 7.26 ppm for 1H, δ = 77.00 ppm for 13C) as an internal standard [28]; δ in ppm, J in Hz. MS: Vacuum Generators ZAB-HS.

3.1 Plant material

The needles of T. canadensis Marsh were collected in September 1997 at St-Jean, Quebec, Canada. Several specimens (under accession voucher number lz97-03) have been deposited in the herbarium of the Montreal Botanical Garden, Montreal, Canada.

3.2 Extraction and isolation

Air-dried needles of T. canadensis were ground (4.0 kg) and extracted with 24 L of methanol for 1 day at room temperature. The ground plants were filtered and extracted again with fresh solvent for another three times (each time with 8 L solvent, total 24 L) in 3 days. The combined organic extracts were evaporated under reduced pressure. Water (3 L) was added and lipids were removed by stirring the mixture with hexane (3 × 3 L). The hexane fraction was condensed into 1500 mL and extracted with 80% methanol four times (each 500 mL). The 80% methanol extract, after re-extracted with hexane two times (each 300 mL), was evaporated under reduced pressure, and 1000 mL of water was added and extracted with ethyl acetate for three times (each 700 mL). The combined ethyl acetate extracts were dried with anhydrous sodium sulfate, filtered and evaporated yielding a dark brown extract 25 g. The aqueous phase was then salted (NaCl, 200 g) and extracted with CH2Cl2 (4 × 3 L). The combined CH2Cl2 extracts were dried with anhydrous sodium sulfate, filtered and evaporated yielding a dark green extract 115 g. The ethyl acetate extract (25 g) was dissolved in 55 mL acetone and absorbed onto 40 g silica gel and subjected to normal phase column chromatography (silica gel 230–400 mesh, 850 g, 25 × 9 cm2) with elution with a mixture of CH2Cl2 and MeOH (9:1, 6:1, 5:1, 4:1, 7:3 v/v). Twenty-seven fractions were obtained (FrE-1 to FrE-27). FrE-2 (1.9 g) was dissolved in 5 mL acetone and absorbed onto 5 g silica gel and subjected to normal phase column chromatography (silica gel 230–400 mesh, 100 g, 29 × 3 cm2) and eluted with a mixture of hexane–EtOAc (600:400 mL). Twenty fractions were obtained (FrE-2-1 to FrE-2-20). FrE-2-2 (400 mg) was subjected to preparative HPLC, eluted with a linear gradient of acetonitrile in water from 25% to 100% in 50 min at a flow rate of 18 mL/min. The material eluted at tR = 34.52 min was collected, concentrated and applied to preparative TLC (1 × 20 × 20 cm2, thickness 0.25 mm). Development with a mixture of hexane–ethyl acetate (7:5) yielded taxane 7 (3.0 mg, Rf = 0.40). A portion of the CH2Cl2 extract (50 g) was absorbed onto 110 g silica gel and subjected to column chromatography (silica gel 230–400 mesh, 1320 g). Successive elution with a CH2Cl2–MeOH gradient with increasing amounts of MeOH from 5% to 45% (total 15 L) yielded 45 fractions (FrD-1 to FrD-45). Fractions FrD-42 to FrD-45 were pooled (1.2 g), decolored with active carbon and partitioned between water and ethyl acetate and obtained ethyl acetate soluble fraction 200 mg, which was further separated by HPLC and afforded 2 (2.2 mg, tR = 21.1 min) and 1 (2.5 mg, tR = 28.5 min).

3.3 2α,5α-Diacetoxy-10β-(6′-O-acetyl-β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxy-14β-[(2′R,3′S)-3′-hydroxy-2′-methylbutanoyl]oxytaxa-4(20),11-diene (1)

Amorphous solid. – [α]D22 + 32° (c = 0.10, CHCl3). – 1H and 13C NMR spectral data; see Table 1 ([D6]acetone). – HRMS [(+)-FAB]: m/z = 763.3257 (calcd. 763.3307 for C37H56O14K, [M+K]+).

3.4 2α,14β-Diacetoxy-10β-(β-d-glucopyranosyl)oxytaxa-4(20), 11-dien-5β-ol (2)

Amorphous solid. – [α]D22 + 29° (c = 0.1, CHCl3). – 1H and 13C NMR spectral data; see Tables 2 (CD3OD) and 3 (CDCl3). – HRMS [(+)-FAB]: m/z = 621.2678 (calcd. 621.2677 for C30H46O11K, [M+K]+).


Corresponding authors: Man-li Zhang, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Hebei Medicinal University, 050017 Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, P. R. China, e-mail: ; Hiromasa Kiyota, Graduate School of Environmental & Life Sciences, Okayama University, 700-8530 Okayama, Japan, e-mail: ; and Mei Dong, School Basic Medicine, Hebei Medicinal University, Hebei Key Laboratory of Forensic Medicine, Collaborative Innovation Center of Forensic Medical Molecular Identification, 050017 Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, P. R. China, e-mail:

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (81072551, 81241101, 81302664), Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province (H2015206113, H2014206230), the Youth Foundation of Hebei Educational Committee and Technology Research Project (QN2014090) and the Science and Technology Research Projects of Hebei Educational Committee (ZD2014107). We also wish to extend our sincere thanks for financial support of Syngenta Ltd. (2013-Hebei Medical University-Syngenta-04) and JSPS KAKENHI (Grant Numbers 19580120, 22560112, 25450144 and 26925019).

References

[1] Q. W. Shi, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 470.10.1021/np020361nSearch in Google Scholar

[2] A. Nikolakakis, K. Haidara, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2003, 11, 1551.10.1016/S0968-0896(02)00607-7Search in Google Scholar

[3] Q. W. Shi, T. L. Petzke, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, Can. J. Chem. 2003, 81, 64.10.1139/v02-190Search in Google Scholar

[4] Q. W. Shi, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, J. Chem. Soc.,Chem. Commun. 2003, 68.10.1039/b209312jSearch in Google Scholar

[5] Q. W. Shi, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 1480.10.1021/np030322rSearch in Google Scholar

[6] D. G. I. Kingston, A. A. Molinero, G. M. Rimoldi in Progress in the Chemistry of Organic Natural Products, Vol. 61 (Eds.: W. Herz, R. E. Moore, G. W. Kirby, W. Steglich, C. Tamm), Springer, Wien, 1993, p. 1.Search in Google Scholar

[7] G. Appendino in The Chemistry and Pharmacology of Taxol and Its Derivatives, Vol. 22 (Ed.: V. Farina), Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 1995, pp. 1 and 55.10.1016/S0165-7208(06)80016-4Search in Google Scholar

[8] E. Baloglu, D. G. I. Kingston, J. Nat. Prod. 1999, 62, 1448.10.1021/np990176iSearch in Google Scholar

[9] Q. W. Shi, H. Kiyota, Chem. Biodivers. 2005, 2, 1597.10.1002/cbdv.200590131Search in Google Scholar

[10] M. Dong, M. L. Zhang, Q. W. Shi, Y. C. Gu, H. Kiyota in Natural Products: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Pharmacology (Ed.: G. Brahmachali), Narosa, New Delhi, 2008, chapter 9, p. 247.Search in Google Scholar

[11] Y. F. Wang, Q. W. Shi, M. Dong, H. Kiyota, Y. C. Gu, B. Cong, Chem. Rev. 2011, 111, 7652.10.1021/cr100147uSearch in Google Scholar

[12] L. O. Zamir, M. E. Nedea, S. Bélair, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, E. Jacqmain, F. I. Jean, F. X. Garneau, Tetrahedron Lett. 1992, 33, 5173.10.1016/S0040-4039(00)79125-8Search in Google Scholar

[13] G. P. Gunawardana, U. Premachandran, N. S. Burres, D. N. Whittern, R. Henry, S. Spanton, J. B. McAlpine, J. Nat. Prod. 1992, 55, 1686.10.1021/np50089a022Search in Google Scholar

[14] L. O. Zamir, M. E. Nedea, Z. H. Zhou, S. Bélair, G. Caron, F. Sauriol, E. Jacqmain, F. I. Jean, F. X. Garneau, O. Mamer, Can. J. Chem. 1995, 73, 655.10.1139/v95-084Search in Google Scholar

[15] L. O. Zamir, Z. H. Zhou, G. Caron, M. E. Nedea, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1995, 529.10.1039/c39950000529Search in Google Scholar

[16] L. O. Zamir, Y. F. Zheng, G. Caron, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 6435.10.1016/0040-4039(96)01426-8Search in Google Scholar

[17] A. Nikolakakis, G. Caron, A. Cherestes, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2000, 8, 1269.10.1016/S0968-0896(00)00056-0Search in Google Scholar

[18] J. H. Wu, L. O. Zamir, Anti-Cancer Drug Des. 2000, 15, 73.Search in Google Scholar

[19] J. H. Wu, L. O. Zamir, Anti-Cancer Drug Des. 2000, 15, 441.10.1016/S0338-9898(00)80257-7Search in Google Scholar

[20] J. H. Wu, G. Batist, L. O. Zamir, Anti-Cancer Drug Des. 2001, 16, 129.Search in Google Scholar

[21] J. Zhang, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, X. L. You, M. Alaoui-Jamali, G. Batist, L. O. Zamir, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 450, and references cited therein.10.1021/np0004449Search in Google Scholar

[22] Q. W. Shi, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 43, 6869.10.1016/S0040-4039(02)01535-6Search in Google Scholar

[23] Q. W. Shi, F. Sauriol, O. Mamer, L. O. Zamir, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2002, 11, 293.10.1016/S0968-0896(02)00347-4Search in Google Scholar

[24] T. Sugiyama, T. Oritani, T. Oritani, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1994, 58, 1923.10.1271/bbb.58.1923Search in Google Scholar

[25] S. H. Li, H. J. Zhang, X. M. Niu, P. Yao, H. D. Sun, H. H. S. Fong, Tetrahedron2003, 59, 37.10.1016/S0040-4020(02)01483-7Search in Google Scholar

[26] R. Kasai, M. Okihara, Y. Asakawa, K. Mizutani, O. Tanaka, Tetrahedron1979, 35, 1427.10.1016/0040-4020(79)85038-3Search in Google Scholar

[27] J. Yin, K. Kouda, Y. Tezuka, Q. Tran, T. Miyahara, Y. Chen, S. Kadota, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 646.10.1021/np0205957Search in Google Scholar

[28] H. E. Gottlieb, V. Kotlyar, A. Nudelman, J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 7512.10.1021/jo971176vSearch in Google Scholar

Received: 2015-4-20
Accepted: 2015-7-17
Published Online: 2015-9-26
Published in Print: 2015-11-1

©2015 by De Gruyter

Downloaded on 19.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/znb-2015-0074/html
Scroll to top button