2-ETHOXYETHYL 2-CYANO-3-((2-ETHOXYTHIAZOL-5-YL)METHYLAMINO)-3-(METHYLTHIO)ACRYLATE


Source	Gaulton A, Kale N, van Westen GJ, Bellis LJ, Bento AP, Davies M, Hersey A, Papadatos G, Forster M, Wege P, Overington JP. A large-scale crop protection bioassay data set. Sci Data. 2015 Jul 7;2:150032. Read more ...


Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Bioactive chemicals	Exact Similarity SubStructure	Threshold (%) >= 70

Structure


InChI Key	CQSZQGWVPFDBMJ-OUKQBFOZSA-N
Smiles	CCOCCOC(=O)\C(=C(/NCc1cnc(OCC)s1)\SC)\C#N
InChI	InChI=1S/C15H21N3O4S2/c1-4-20-6-7-22-14(19)12(8-16)13(23-3)17-9-11-10-18-15(24-11)21-5-2/h10,17H,4-7,9H2,1-3H3/b13-12+

Physicochemical Descriptors

Property Name	Value
Molecular Formula	C15H21N3O4S2
Molecular Weight	371.47
AlogP	1.91
Hydrogen Bond Acceptor	8.0
Hydrogen Bond Donor	1.0
Number of Rotational Bond	12.0
Polar Surface Area	147.01
Molecular species	NEUTRAL
Aromatic Rings	1.0
Heavy Atoms	24.0

Assay Description	Organism	Bioactivity
Herbicidal activity against Amaranthus retroflexus assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 375 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Amaranthus retroflexus	70.3 %
Herbicidal activity against Amaranthus retroflexus assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 750 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Amaranthus retroflexus	80.9 %
Herbicidal activity against Brassica napus (oilseed rape) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 375 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Brassica napus	77.3 %
Herbicidal activity against Brassica napus (oilseed rape) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 750 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Brassica napus	93.1 %
Inhibition of photosynthetic electron transport in Spinacia oleracea (spinach)isolated chloroplasts assessed as inhibition of Hill reaction	Spinacia oleracea	114.82 nM	Inhibition of photosynthetic electron transport in Spinacia oleracea (spinach)isolated chloroplasts assessed as inhibition of Hill reaction	Spinacia oleracea	0.115 ppm
Herbicidal activity against hairy Digitaria sanguinalis (hairy crabgrass) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during preemergence treatment protocol	Digitaria sanguinalis	44.6 %
Herbicidal activity against Medicago sativa (alfalfa) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during preemergence treatment protocol	Medicago sativa	14.8 %
Herbicidal activity against Brassica napus (oilseed rape) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during preemergence treatment protocol	Brassica napus	23.3 %
Herbicidal activity against Amaranthus retroflexus assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during preemergence treatment protocol	Amaranthus retroflexus	43.2 %
Herbicidal activity against hairy Digitaria sanguinalis (hairy crabgrass) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Digitaria sanguinalis	51.2 %
Herbicidal activity against Medicago sativa (alfalfa) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Medicago sativa	62.6 %
Herbicidal activity against Amaranthus retroflexus assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Amaranthus retroflexus	100.0 %
Herbicidal activity against Brassica napus (oilseed rape) assessed as inhibition of herb growth at 1.5 kg/ha during postemergence treatment protocol	Brassica napus	100.0 %

Cross References

Resources	Reference
ChEMBL	CHEMBL2228006
PubChem	24770268

CONTENTS


PREMIER has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement No 875508. The JU receives support from the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). The views reflect only the authors’ perspective and the JU is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information this manuscript contains. Elements of the website have been developed under projects PREMIER and the Biocenter Finland Drug Discovery and Chemical Biology network. CSC-IT is thanked for providing computational resources. Content of the website is provided without guarantee for correctness. Data has been collected and integrated from multiple public sources, for the largest: FDA, HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee, ChEMBL, IUPHAR/BPS guide to pharmacology, Reactome, UniProt, and Ensembl. Credit is given to Ensembl for collecting species images (provided under public domain licences such as Wikimedia and NHGRI).

PREMIER has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement No 875508. The JU receives support from the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). The views reflect only the authors’ perspective and the JU is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information this manuscript contains.

Elements of the website have been developed under projects PREMIER and the Biocenter Finland Drug Discovery and Chemical Biology network. CSC-IT is thanked for providing computational resources. Content of the website is provided without guarantee for correctness. Data has been collected and integrated from multiple public sources, for the largest: FDA, HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee, ChEMBL, IUPHAR/BPS guide to pharmacology, Reactome, UniProt, and Ensembl. Credit is given to Ensembl for collecting species images (provided under public domain licences such as Wikimedia and NHGRI).