

feature articles
High-pressure diffraction studies of molecular organic solids. A personal view
aREC-008 Novosibirsk State University, Institute of Solid State Chemistry SB RAS, Kutateladze
18, Novosibirsk 128, 630128 Russia
*Correspondence e-mail: [email protected]
This paper discusses the trends in the experimental studies of molecular organic solids at high pressures by diffraction techniques. Crystallization of liquids, crystallization from solutions and solid-state transformations are considered. Special attention is paid to the high-pressure studies of pharmaceuticals and of biomimetics.
Keywords: compressibility; hydrogen bonds; hydrostatic pressures; kinetic control; lattice strain; phase transitions; polymorphism; solvent-mediated transformations.
1. Introduction
The pioneering studies of organic solids at high pressures date back to the beginning
of the 20th century (Bridgman, 1931, 1946
; Vereschagin & Kabalkina, 1979
), but at that time such studies were rather rare. The main interest in the field
of high-pressure research was focused either on metals, elements, simple molecules,
ices, minerals and inorganic compounds at very high (Mbar) pressures, in relation
to the basic and applied problems of physics, geology, mineralogy and materials sciences,
or on biopolymers and other soft-matter systems at much lower pressures (usually <1 GPa),
in relation to the problems of biology and the food industry [see Tonkov (1988
), Hazen & Finger (1982
), Hazen & Downs (2000
) and Katrusiak & McMillan (2004
) as examples of the entry points to the vast literature on the topic]. In the last
decades, the number of publications dealing with the effects of hydrostatic pressure
on small-molecule organic crystals (usually in the range 0.1–10 GPa) has started to
grow rapidly. To a large extent, this was due to the progress achieved in the design
of diamond-anvil cells and in the procedures of data collection and reduction. Larger
apertures of high-pressure cells provided by new anvil designs, more reliable and
less distorted intensities of reflections, two-dimensional detectors, brighter laboratory
sources of X-rays and easier access to synchrotron radiation – all this has enabled
in situ high-pressure studies also of relatively weakly diffracting crystals with low (monoclinic
and even triclinic) symmetry. Some of these technical developments are summarized
by Katrusiak (2008
), who was one of the pioneers of systematic research of the effect of high pressure
on organic crystals (see, e.g., his reviews: Katrusiak, 1990a
, 1991a
,b
,c
, 1996
, 2001
, 2003
, 2004a
). The aim of my contribution is to complete that by Katrusiak by providing a few
examples of the results achieved in recent years using these advanced techniques,
and to give my personal vision of the main trends and the prospects in the research
of organic molecular crystals.
2. The main research directions
High-pressure studies of small-molecule organic solids are related to one of the following three directions.
(i) High-pressure crystallization of liquids. A comparison of the phases obtained by high pressure and by low-temperature crystallization.
(ii) High-pressure crystallization of solids from solutions. A route to new polymorphs and solvates. Understanding the thermodynamic and kinetic factors in the crystallization of polymorphs from different solvents.
(iii) Studies of the effect of pressure on solids immersed in hydrostatic liquids:
(a) compression of the same phase (bulk compressibility, anisotropy of strain, changes in the intramolecular conformations, rotation of molecules, distortion of intermolecular bonds);
(b) phase transitions;
(c) chemical transformations (induced by pressure; induced by temperature or light and affected by pressure).
These studies are of fundamental importance, giving insight into the nature of intra-
and intermolecular interactions in solids, assisting in a better understanding of
the ; Shakhtshneider et al., 1999
; Hemley & Dera, 2000
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
; Katrusiak, 2001
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider & Ahsbahs, 2002
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2002
; Boldyreva, 2003a
,b
; Fabbiani et al., 2003
, 2004
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Paukov et al., 2004
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Uchtmann et al., 2004
; Boldyreva, Ivashevskaya et al., 2004
; Fabbiani, Allan, Marshall et al., 2005
, Fabbiani, Allan, Parsons & Pulham, 2005
; Fabbiani et al., 2006
, 2007
; Boldyreva, 2006
, 2007a
,b
).
3. Crystallization of liquids
Crystallization of liquids at high pressure is known as an alternative to crystallization
on cooling since the times of Bridgman (1931, 1946
). Later, many examples were published in the papers by several groups (Fourme, 1968
; Piermarini et al., 1969
; Weir et al., 1969
; Fourme et al., 1971
; Allan et al., 1998
; Allan & Clark, 1999a
,b
; Allan et al., 1999
, 2001
, 2002a
,b
; Bujak et al., 2004
; Bujak & Katrusiak, 2004
; Katrusiak et al., 2004
, 2007
; Dziubek & Katrusiak, 2005
; Podsiadlo & Katrusiak, 2005
, 2006
; Podsiadło et al., 2005
, 2006
; Lozano-Casal et al., 2005
; Gajda et al., 2005
, 2006
; Oswald, Allan, Day et al., 2005
; Oswald, Allan, Motherwell & Parsons, 2005
; Budzianowski et al., 2005
; Budzianowski & Katrusiak, 2006a
,b
; Budzianowski et al., 2006
; McGregor et al., 2006
; Bujak et al., 2007
; Dziubek et al., 2007
; Gajda & Katrusiak, 2007
). Sometimes, the same polymorph is formed as a result of crystallization on cooling
and with increasing pressure; examples are 1,2-dichloromethane (Podsiadło et al., 2005
), and carbon disulfide (Dziubek & Katrusiak, 2004
). More often, the high-pressure and the low-temperature polymorphs differ. One of
the examples is water – ambient-pressure and high-pressure ices differ significantly
in their structures and properties (Petrenko & Whitworth, 1999
). Acetone (Allan & Clark, 1999b
), acetic acid (Allan et al., 1999
), (Allan et al., 1998
, 1999
, 2001
), benzene (Fourme, 1968
; Piermarini et al., 1969
; Weir et al., 1969
; Fourme et al., 1971
; Budzianowski & Katrusiak, 2006a
), chlorotrimethylsilane (Gajda et al., 2006
), 1,2-dichloromethane (Podsiadło et al., 2005
), sulfuric acid (Allan et al., 2002b
), phenol (Allan et al., 2002a
), 2-chlorophenol and 4-fluorophenol (Oswald, Allan, Day et al., 2005
; Oswald, Allan, Motherwell & Parsons, 2005
) are further examples of compounds, liquid at ambient conditions, which also give
different polymorphs on cooling and with increasing pressure.
The low-temperature and the high-pressure forms may differ in the conformations of
molecules but, more often, the main structural difference is related to the orientation
of the molecules with respect to each other and to the structure of hydrogen-bonded
networks, or the type of carbonyl–carbonyl, or halogen–halogen or π–π interactions. As examples, compare the crystal structures of acetic acid formed at
low temperatures (Nahringbauer, 1970) and at high pressure (Allan et al., 1999
) (Fig. 1
). Sometimes, a low-temperature structure is disordered and a high-pressure one completely
ordered. This holds, e.g., for 1,3-cyclohexanedione (Katrusiak, 1990b
).
![]() |
Figure 1 Fragments of the crystal structures of (a) the low-temperature and (b) the high-pressure polymorphs of acetic acid |
A comparison of the low-temperature and the high-pressure structures is helpful to
estimate the relative energies of different non-covalent interactions, and to study
the conformational flexibility and the factors determining the crystallization of
a selected polymorph. An example is provided by the crystallization of halogenated
compounds. The interest in these phases dates back to the work by Bridgman, who, in
particular, compared the high-pressure and the low-temperature polymorphs of CCl4 and CBr4 (Bridgman, 1931). The analysis of the high-pressure forms as compared to the low-temperature ones,
as well as of the anisotropy of compression of the crystals with increasing pressure,
makes it possible to reveal the structures, in which the halogen–halogen interactions
can be considered as the main cohesive forces responsible for the molecular arrangements
(Podsiadło & Katrusiak, 2006
; Bujak et al., 2007
), and the structures in which halogen–halogen interactions are not attractive at
all (Podsiadlo et al., 2005
; Gajda et al., 2006
). Very interesting information was obtained for series of substituted dihalomethanes
(CH2XY, where X, Y = Br, Cl, I), 1,2-dihalotetrafluoroethanes X(CF2)2Y (X = Br, I; Y = Br, I) and dichloroacetic acid, which show clearly systematic isostructural relations
resulting from the specific intermolecular interactions in their pressure-crystallized
phases (Podsiadło et al., 2006
; Katrusiak et al., 2007
). Studies of the effect of pressure on the halogenated organic compounds could be
compared with the effect of pressure on the electron lone pairs in inorganic oxides
(Grzechnik et al., 2002
; Dinnebier et al., 2003
; Orosel et al., 2004
). A continuous compression of CS2 up to 8 GPa has allowed the increased energy of the intermolecular S⋯S and C⋯S interactions
to be followed (Dziubek & Katrusiak, 2004
). A recent study of the pressure-freezing of ethynylbenzene made it possible to resolve
≡CH⋯π(arene) and cooperative ≡CH⋯π(C≡C) interactions (Dziubek et al., 2007
).
In many cases, the structures formed are thermodynamically stable at the given P–T conditions and phase diagrams can be used to predict reliably the formation of a
given polymorph. However, some phases can be crystallized only following a special
procedure, combining compression to a high pressure with subsequent decompression
to a lower value, at which crystallization eventually occurs. In many cases, the sample
is recycled many times, combining compression with slight heating and subsequent cooling,
in order to get a single-crystalline sample, for which the structure can be solved
more easily. In a recent paper (Boldyreva, 2007b), we have supposed that for some highly polymorphic compounds a procedure involving
only `pure' compression without temperature variation at all would give forms other
than those given by compression combined with temperature variations (either cooling
or heating). The experimental evidence to substantiate this hypothesis was reported
recently (Katrusiak et al., 2007
). Different polymorphs were crystallized when combining compression of the liquid
without heating–cooling cycles and during compression at constant ambient temperature,
and these two high-pressure phases did not interconvert. Other kinetic factors (such
as the rate of compression or the effects of `over pressurization', the presence of
impurities, lack or presence of smooth surfaces in the gasket or even the presence
of ruby) might also affect nucleation and crystal growth and in this way could also
influence high-pressure of liquid compounds. over-cooling, seeding, impurities and the presence of rough surfaces are well known
to be important for nucleation at ambient pressure.
4. Crystallization of solids from solutions
Another trend in the high-pressure research of molecular organic compounds is to crystallize
compounds which are solid at ambient conditions from their solutions using the decrease in solubility with
increasing pressure, similar to how compounds are crystallized on cooling, using evaporation
or antisolvent techniques. Crystallization at high pressure has been known for a very
long time, but its systematic application for obtaining new polymorphs and solvates
started only a few years ago (Fabbiani et al., 2003, 2004
; Fabbiani, Allan, Parsons & Pulham, 2005
; Fabbiani, Allan, Marshall et al., 2005
; Fabbiani et al., 2007
). Some of the high-pressure polymorphs and solvates were never before observed at
ambient conditions, also those forms that turned out to be quenchable to ambient pressure.
This is a vast field of research, not just because of the practical interest in obtaining
new forms of pharmaceuticals or new molecular materials. It is very promising for
understanding thermodynamic versus kinetic factors governing crystal growth and polymorph formation.
Sometimes, high-pressure crystallization from a solution gives a polymorph which is
thermodynamically stable in these conditions. Paracetamol provides such an example.
At ambient pressure, paracetamol I (P21/n) is the stable form at ambient temperature, although, once obtained, paracetamol
II (Pbca) can be preserved for an indefinitely long time and survive until melting if the
presence of even traces of water and alcohol is excluded (Boldyreva, Drebushchak,
Paukov et al., 2004). Paracetamol II was obtained from paracetamol I at high pressure (see more details
in the next section) (Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider & Ahsbahs, 2002
) and was later shown to be the thermodynamically preferable phase at high pressures
(Espeau et al., 2005
; Ledru et al., 2007
). Direct crystallization of paracetamol from ethanol solution at 1.1 GPa gave paracetamol
II (Fabbiani et al., 2004
). In other cases, high-pressure crystallization from a solution gives metastable
forms and is strongly affected by `non-thermodynamic parameters' such as the details
of the compression procedure (e.g. first compressed, then decompressed to a lower, but still non-ambient, pressure)
or the rates of compression and/or decompression. Crystallization may be sensitive
to the solvent and to the concentration of the solution. Piracetam provides one such
example, giving different forms on crystallization from different solvents and from
the solutions of different concentrations in the same solvent (Fabbiani, Allan, Parsons
& Pulham, 2005
; Fabbiani et al., 2007
). High pressure adds a new dimension to the old problems of solvent-mediated polymorphic
transformations, solvent effect on crystallization, templating effects in crystallization,
crystallization and quenching of metastable polymorphs, varying or viscosity of solutions etc.
5. Pressure effects on solids
5.1. Compression of the same phase
Compressibility is one of the basic quantitative characteristics of the response of a structure to
pressure. For crystals, compressibility can be calculated from X-ray diffraction data
on the changes in cell parameters versus pressure. Bulk compressibility has been systematically studied for inorganic compounds
and minerals and discussions on the equation of states, V(P) dependences, always attract much attention (Hazen & Finger, 1982; Hazen & Downs, 2000
; Katrusiak & McMillan, 2004
). For molecular organic crystals, the values of bulk compressibility are rather high,
typical values of relative volume change being about 5% GPa−1 (Boldyreva, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
). Although attempts to calculate the equation of states for molecular crystals are
also known (Zerilli & Kuklja, 2007
; Molodets, 2006
), the values of bulk compressibility for low-symmetry crystals are not very informative.
Much more information can be obtained if the anisotropy of structural strain is followed. in the directions of the three principal axes of the strain tensor (the three directions
in the which remain mutually orthogonal), as well as in any other selected direction in
the structure, can be calculated from the measured changes in cell parameters versus pressure, as described in Nye (1957
), Hazen & Finger (1982
) and Boldyreva (2004c
). After such a recalculation, peculiar features (minima, maxima) of the pressure
dependences of cell parameters may disappear (see the data measured for the monoclinic
polymorph of paracetamol as an example, Fig. 2
).
![]() |
Figure 2 (a)–(e) Changes in cell parameters and volume and (f) in the directions of principal axes of strain tensor measured for paracetamol I versus hydrostatic pressure (based on data from Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000 ![]() |
Crystals with very similar bulk compressibility can show pronounced difference in
the strain anisotropy, reflecting the anisotropy of the a, b), L- and DL-serine (Figs. 3
c, d) as examples].
![]() |
Figure 3 Pressure-induced changes of (a, c) the volume per molecule and (b, d) in the directions of the principal axes of the strain ellipsoids for the polymorphs of (a, b) paracetamol (red – I, blue – II), (c, d) L- (red), and DL- (blue) serine (based on data from Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The analysis of the anisotropy of strain reveals the directions in which the structure
is rigid and the directions in which it is softer. For the structures in which molecules
form hydrogen-bonded chains or two-dimensional layers, a,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider et al., 2004
).
For example, the structures of amino acids are most rigid in the directions of the
head-to-tail chains formed by ). Thus, the structure of γ-glycine is about 2.5 times less compressible along the head-to-tail chains of than in the plane normal to these chains (Boldyreva et al., 2003
). The compressibility of a helical head-to-tail chain formed by L-serine in the structure of DL-serine is about 2.2 times higher, than that of a flat chain formed by the same L-serine in the crystals of L-serine (Boldyreva, Kolesnik et al., 2005
, 2006
). The structure of α-glycine is also most rigid in the direction along the head-to-tail chains (Boldyreva
et al., 2003
).
Many structures are more compressible in the direction normal to the molecular layers
(Boldyreva, 2003a,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
). This holds for the polymorphs of paracetamol (Shakhtshneider et al., 1999
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider & Ahsbahs, 2002
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Uchtmann et al., 2002
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Sowa & Uchtmann, 2002
), pentaerythrytol (Katrusiak, 1995
), 1,3-cyclohexanedione (Katrusiak, 1990b
), 2-methyl-1,3-cyclopentanedione (Katrusiak, 1990b
, 1991b
), sodium oxalate (Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Sowa & Uchtmann, 2002
; Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2006
). The structure of L-cystine is most compressible in the direction normal to the hydrogen-bonded layers
of in the direction of S–S bridges: changes in C—S–S—C torsion angles allow cystine
molecules to act like springs (Moggach, Allan, Parsons et al., 2005
). There are also exceptions. Thus, one could expect the structure of α-glycine to be most compressible in the direction normal to the double layers but
it is not. The structure is about 1.2 times more compressible along the direction
of the hydrogen bonds linking the head-to-tail chains within a layer (Fig. 4
) (Boldyreva et al., 2003
). Other examples of structures which are most compressible NOT in the directions
normal to the molecular planes are dimedone (5,5-dimethyl-1,3-cyclopentanedione)
(Katrusiak, 1991c
) and benzoquinone (Boldyreva, 2003a
,b
). The structure of DL-serine is most compressible in the direction that is about 30° to the normal to the
double layers, which approach each other with increasing pressure; this direction
coincides with the direction of NH⋯O hydrogen bonds linking a double layer with another
double layer, as well as with the orientation of the type II head-to-tail chains with
alternating L- and D-serine (Fig. 5
). The structure is 5.2 times more compressible along this direction than normal to
it (Boldyreva, Kolesnik et al., 2006
).
![]() |
Figure 4 Orientation of the principal axes of the strain ellipsoid under pressure in α-glycine with respect to the chains of the in a layer; 1P – minimum, 3P – maximum compression, axis 2P is normal to the projection plane (based on data from Boldyreva et al., 2003 ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 5 A fragment of the crystal structure of DL-serine as projected on the ac plane at (a) ambient conditions and (b) at 8.1 GPa. The orientation of the principal axes of strain tensor with increasing pressure (1P – slight expansion, 3P – maximum compression) is shown, axis 2P is normal to the projection plane (based on data from Boldyreva, Kolesnik et al., 2006 ![]() |
, 2001
, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
; Boldyreva et al., 1997a
,b
, 1998
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider & Ahsbahs, 2002
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Uchtmann et al., 2002
; Katrusiak, 1996
, 2001
, 2003
, 2004a
). Hydrogen bonds can be compressed but the structure expands and, vice versa, the structure can be compressed despite the expansion of the intermolecular hydrogen
bonds.
Systematic studies of the compressibility of various types of hydrogen bonds in organic
crystals were initiated by Katrusiak (1990a,b
, 1991a
,b
,c
, 1995
, 1996
, 2001
, 2003
, 2004a
). The compressibility of a bond was shown to depend on the type of intermolecular
motif within the For example, the compressibility of the OH⋯O hydrogen bonds linking molecules into
chains or layers in the structures of 1,3-cyclohexanedione, 2-methyl-1,3-cyclopentanedione
and squaric acid is similar, whereas that of the OH⋯O bonds linking the molecules
of dimedone into helices is much higher (Katrusiak, 1990a
,b
, 1991a
,b
,c
). At the same time, the values of the compression of the NH⋯O and OH⋯O hydrogen bonds
measured for chemically and structurally different compounds were close (Katrusiak,
1991a
,b
,c
; Boldyreva et al., 1998
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
; Boldyreva, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider et al., 2004
).
The anisotropy of pressure-induced strain has been studied over the last few years
for several crystalline amino acids, and the first generalizations can be made (Boldyreva,
2006, 2007a
). All the crystalline amino acids have a common structural motif: hydrogen-bonded
head-to-tail chains formed by These chains are remarkably robust and can mimic peptide chains (Vinogradov, 1979
; Suresh & Vijayan, 1983
). The compressibility of shorter NH⋯O hydrogen bonds linking along the head-to-tail chains is usually smaller than that of other hydrogen bonds
in the structure (Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider et al., 2004
; Boldyreva, Ivashevsyaya et al., 2005
; Dawson et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Morrison et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Parsons et al., 2005
; Boldyreva, Kolesnik et al., 2005
, 2006
; Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
; Moggach, Allan, Parsons & Sawyer, 2006
; Moggach, Allan, Clark et al., 2006
; Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
; Boldyreva, 2007b
). It is only slightly affected even by jumpwise structural rearrangements in the
course of phase transitions. For example, in L-serine, the N–O distance in this hydrogen bond decreases practically linearly at
about 0.01 Å GPa−1 in the pressure range from ambient up to 10 GPa (Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
), although the undergoes two phase transitions, at about 5 and about 8 GPa (Boldyreva, Kolesnik
et al., 2005
; Kolesnik et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Morrison et al., 2005
; Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
; Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
), which are accompanied by a jump-wise increase in the cell parameter along the same
head-to-tail chain (see next section, Figs. 9, 10). The compressibility of the shorter
NH⋯O hydrogen bonds in the head-to-tail chains remains almost unaffected by a structural
arrangement of the triple helices formed by these chains in γ-glycine into a layer in δ-glycine in the course of the irreversible extended single-crystal–powder starting at about 3.5 GPa (see next section, Fig. 7) (Boldyreva, 2003b
; Boldyreva et al., 2003
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider et al., 2004
; Boldyreva, Ivashevskaya et al., 2004
, 2005
). Other hydrogen bonds in the structures of crystalline amino acids are more compressible
than the short NH⋯O bonds within the head-to-tail chains, the changes in the N–O distances
usually being about ±0.02–0.05 Å GPa−1. Similar values were measured for the compressibility of NH⋯O and OH⋯O hydrogen bonds
in other organic crystals (Katrusiak, 1990a
,b
, 1991a
,b
,c
, 1995
, 1996
, 2001
, 2003
, 2004a
,b
; Boldyreva, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
). For a comparison, recently measured typical values for proteins are about ±0.1–0.01 Å GPa−1 (Fourme et al., 2001
, 2006
; Girard et al., 2005
, 2007
; Colloc'h et al., 2006
; Li & Akasaka, 2006
).
For crystals with flexible non-spherical molecules, the anisotropy of strain with
increasing pressure is the result of an interplay between the changes in the conformations
of flexible molecules, the rotation of molecules and the different distortions of
intermolecular hydrogen bonds of several types (Boldyreva, 2001, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
, 2006
). For example, in the monoclinic polymorph of paracetamol, all the intermolecular
hydrogen bonds shorten with increasing pressure. Nevertheless, the structure expands in several crystallographic directions due to the flattening of the individual molecules
and of the pleated hydrogen-bonded layers (Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
). Actually, the flattening of molecules and the shortening of the intermolecular
hydrogen bonds are interrelated since the conformation of a paracetamol molecule is
very sensitive to the charge distribution at the —OH, —C =O, —NH groups (Binev et al., 1998
; Behzadi et al., 2007
). The shifts of the vibrational bands in the IR spectra with increasing pressure
can be a manifestation of the strengthening or loosening of the intermolecular hydrogen
bonds, complementing the geometric data obtained from diffraction experiments. In
complex crystal structures, a correlation of the frequency shifts (IR or Raman spectroscopy)
and the changes in the interatomic distances (X-ray or neutron diffraction experiments)
is not straightforward. For example, although both the N–O and O–O distances in the
NH⋯O and OH⋯O hydrogen bonds in paracetamol shorten with pressure, the vibrational
frequency ν(NH) of the stretching vibration shifts to the red with increasing pressure (as should
be expected), whereas the vibrational frequency ν(OH) increases. A possible interpretation is that the —OH group not only donates a
proton to the carbonyl —C=O group but also accepts another proton from the —NH group
(Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000
; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Uchtmann et al., 2002
).
The anisotropy of strain, corresponding to the same volume change on cooling and with
increasing pressure can be radically different, reflecting the different mechanisms
of reducing volume under these two actions (Boldyreva, 2001, 2003a
,b
, 2004a
,b
,c
; Boldyreva et al., 1997a
,b
, 1998
; Boldyreva, Drebushchak, Shakhtshneider et al., 2004
). It seems clear that the interpretation of the response of the structures to variations
of temperature and pressure should be based on the analysis of the interatomic potentials
and their anharmonicity. Still, even for rather simple systems, the predictive power
of the models is not perfect, especially when not static but dynamic properties are
concerned. Systematic comparative studies of the effects of cooling and increasing
pressure on the same hydrogen bonds can be expected to improve our understanding of
these interactions. First examples of the attempts to reproduce the experimentally
measured pressure-induced strain anisotropy by various level simulations are encouraging
(Dzyabchenko & Boldyreva, 2000
; Boldyreva, 2003b
, 2004c
; Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2006
).
Isotope substitution can serve as a supplementary tool in these studies. Similarity
and difference between deuteration and pressure effect in molecular crystals were
reviewed by Ichikawa (1998). For example, in the case of strong hydrogen bonds, like in KH2PO4 and squaric acid (H4C4O4), deuteration corresponds to a negative pressure effect, whereas in the case of (NH4)3H(SO4)2 deuteration corresponds to a positive pressure.
The studies of the anisotropy of structural strain are important for understanding
the intra- and intermolecular interactions in organic solids. For particular compounds
which serve as biomimetics, such as crystalline amino acids or small , 2007a
). The compressibility of main chains can be compared with the strain in crystalline
amino acids. This comparison should be expected to be more informative for fibrillar
proteins and for amiloid structures than for globular proteins. While the globular
native forms of proteins are side-dominated compact structures evolved by pursuing
a unique fold with optimal packing of amino acid residues, amyloid fibrils are a main-chain-dominated
structure with an extensive hydrogen-bond network (Chatani et al., 2005
; Zanuy et al., 2006
).
It is very interesting also to compare the anisotropy of lattice strain in the crystals
of amino acids with layered structures with the recently measured elastic properties
of two-dimensional layers of oligopeptide films (Isenberg et al., 2006). Compressibility of cavities of biopolymers, the contribution of the rigidity of
the cavity to the conformational stability of the biopolymer can also be mimicked
by studying structures of smaller molecules (Boldyreva, 2006
). Attempts were made to describe the anisotropic compression of some of the crystalline
amino acids by `closing voids' (Dawson et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Morrison et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Parsons et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Parsons & Sawyer, 2006
; Moggach, Allan, Clark et al., 2006
; Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
). Although any pressure-induced process can be expected to result in a structure
with a higher density and smaller voids, crystalline amino acids are still not the
best systems to study compression of cavities since their properties are to a large
extent determined by dipole–dipole interactions and strong hydrogen bonds (OH⋯O and
NH⋯O). For those of the crystals that are piezoelectric, electron-density redistribution
must be taken ito account when analyzing the anisotropy of pressure-induced structural
strain and the mechanisms of phase transitions. Systematic comparative studies of
the series amino acids – salts of amino acids – complexes of amino acids, in addition
to the comparative studies of the polymorphs of the same amino acid and of amino acids
with different side chains, would be helpful. Much better mimetics for the `compressibility
of cavities studies' can be selected among a family of dipeptides with nanosize cavities
and channels, which have been extensively and carefully studied by Görbitz during
the last decade (Görbitz, 2001
, 2003
). One can compare the effect of pressure on layered dipeptides and on the dipeptide
crystal structures having large cavities of variable size and hydrophobic or hydrophilic
properties. The same systems can be used to mimic the effect of liquids on the compressibility
and the conformational stability of the cavity. One can study compression in different
liquids: hydrophilic, hydrophobic, containing special organic additives known to stabilize
proteins of deap-sea piezophiles, using model crystal structures with the cavities
of similar size, but with different – hydrophilic or hydrophobic – properties of the
inner and outer walls of the cavities. Comparison of the compressibilities of different
polymorphs (different structural arrangements of the same amino acid) and of the crystal
structures of different amino acids may be relevant for understanding why the fragments
of proteins built by different sequences of amino acids compress differently. The
knowledge of the elastic properties of the selected fragments of the amino acid crystals
is needed when considering muscles or biopolymers forming silk or spider threads.
One can also use the studies of strain induced by hydrostatic pressure in order to
understand better the conformational transitions induced by substrate–receptor interactions
by variations in temperature (cooling) or by collisions of the biopolymers. Varying
side chains, or the length of the main backbone chains of amino acids and forming the crystal structures, one can obtain control over dipole–dipole interactions,
hydrogen-bond patterns, the occurrence or absence of the inversion center, and then
study the effect of the molecular arrangement on the mechanical properties in a very
systematic way. Hydrates can be compared to anhydrous amino acids, salts to amino
acid molecules, mixed crystals with homomolecular phases etc. Amino acids can be modified chemically, substituting protons for methyl groups,
in order to vary dipole–dipole interactions over a wide range. Selective deuteration
can affect kinematic characteristics of and hydrogen-bonding ability. Biomolecular assemblies (polyaminoacids, two-dimensional layered or nanoporous structures) can serve as an important bridge
between crystalline amino acids and proteins.
5.2. Phase transitions
For many researchers, this is the most interesting direction of high-pressure research.
Obtaining a new high-pressure phase and solving its structure is a real challenge.
With recent development of the technique (see Katrusiak, 2004b, 2008
), even ab initio crystal-structure solutions by are now possible for data collected in a diamond-anvil cell (DAC) using a laboratory
diffractometer. Still, one should be very careful in interpreting the results. Many
of the pressure-induced polymorphic transitions are isosymmetric and the structures
of the ambient-pressure and the high-pressure phases are often related, especially
if the structure is solved by single-crystal diffraction, which means that the crystal
was brought safely through the phase-transition point. Therefore, it may not be sufficient
to have a solved and refined at two pressure points only to distinguish between a and an anisotropic continuous structural distortion. Sodium oxalate provides an example.
The of sodium oxalate does not change either its space-group symmetry P21/c in all the studied pressure range below 8 GPa or the packing of the centroids of
the oxalate anions, although the orientation of the oxalate anions at 4 GPa is about
15° different compared to that at ambient pressure, and this rotation is reversible
on decompression (Fig. 6
) (Boldyreva, 2003b
; Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2006
). Only multiple-pressure measurements could confirm unambiguously the occurrence
of a during which both the cell volume, and the cell parameters a, b and β change by a jump, as do the orientation of the oxalate anions and the coordination
of the sodium cations by O atoms (Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider, Ahsbahs, Sowa & Uchtmann,
2002
; Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2006
).
![]() |
Figure 6 A comparison of the structures of (a) the low-pressure and (b) the high-pressure polymorphs of sodium oxalate (based on results from Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2006 ![]() |
Although discovering a new phase is always exciting, this is just the very beginning
of the story. We are still very far from being able not only to predict the occurrence
of a a priori but also from understanding the mechanisms of the transitions that have already been
observed and the relative role of thermodynamic versus kinetic factors in high-pressure More often than not, the transformations give metastable forms and not the thermodynamically
preferable one. The facts which can indicate kinetically and not thermodynamically
controlled transformations were discussed in a recent review (Boldyreva, 2007b). Different forms can be obtained on compression and on decompression, as well as
with the same conditions from different starting polymorphs. Transformations are often
not reversible. The effect of pressure is often different for single crystals and
for powder samples. The transformation is often characterized by a pronounced or a hysteresis. It can be incomplete or extended in a wide pressure range. Different
forms can be observed, depending on how rapid compression and decompression were,
and on how long the sample was held at a selected pressure. The transformation can
be sensitive to the choice of the pressure-transmitting liquid (in which the sample
is emerged in hydrostatic loading experiments).
I shall discuss a few examples. No phase transitions from paracetamol I into paracetamol
II at pressures at least up to 4 GPa were observed for single crystals. At the same
time, the powder samples of the same polymorph converted partially into form II at
lower pressures, but this transformation occurred only on decompression from a higher
pressure (Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider et al., 2000; Boldyreva, Shakhtshneider & Ahsbahs, 2002
). Other examples of phase transitions occurring on decompression only are described
in the literature (Shibaeva & Yagubskii, 2004
; Moggach, Allan, Clark et al., 2006
). An interesting example of is provided by the polymorphs of glycine, which show a very different response to
pressure. The structure of α-glycine (P21/n) is stable with respect to pressure-induced phase transitions at least up to 23 GPa
(Murli et al., 2003
), β-glycine (P21) undergoes a reversible single-crystal to single-crystal at 0.76 GPa (Goryainov et al., 2005
; Dawson et al., 2005
), whereas γ-glycine (P31) transforms irreversibly into δ-glycine (Pn) in a wide pressure range starting from about 3.5 GPa (Boldyreva, 2003b
; Boldyreva et al., 2003
; Boldyreva, Ivashevsyaya et al., 2004
, 2005
), which then converts into the ζ form on decompression down to 0.6 GPa (Goryainov et al., 2006
) (Fig. 7
); the single crystals of γ-glycine are destroyed during the γ−δ transition. A recent incoherent inelastic neutron scattering experiment has shown
that γ-glycine can transform into a layered polymorph (presumably the δ form) at pressures as low as about 0.6–0.8 GPa if the powder sample is kept under
pressure in fluorinert in the slow-neutron beam for hours (Bordallo et al., 2007
).
![]() |
Figure 7 A schematic presentation of the pressure-induced transitions between the polymorphs of glycine; notations for the polymorphs are as in the publications, where the polymorphs were described first (Iitaka, 1960 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It is remarkable that not only do the transformations of the two starting polymorphs
(the β and the γ forms) occur at different pressures, but also the structures of the high-pressure
phases in these two cases differ radically (β′- and δ-glycine, respectively). The concept of precursor-predetermined transformations, topotaxy,
topochemical transformations or the Ostwald stage rule, which are traditionally used
to describe solid-state reactions, structural transformations and the crystallization
sequence of several polymorphs from solution (Boldyreva, 1999, 2007a
; Boldyreva & Boldyrev, 1999
), are no less applicable to pressure-induced transformations when molecular mobility
in a solid is even more limited and one can expect those structural rearrangements
to be favored which do not require large atomic displacements and breaking of multiple
intermolecular bonds.
Another convincing example of a kinetically controlled pressure-induced β-alanine (Boldyreva et al., 2007). The crystals of the ambient-pressure form transform into a structurally related
polymorph if the sample is first compressed in small (0.5 GPa) steps up to 8 GPa and
then decompressed in similar steps down to ambient conditions within a day; if the
sample was compressed up to 5.5 GPa and then kept at this pressure for about three
days, another high-pressure phase was formed which was preserved on decompression
down to 1.6 GPa, and then converted back to the ambient-pressure form of β-alanine (Fig. 8
).
![]() |
Figure 8 Selected fragments of the Raman spectra of β-alanine on compression and decompression. The sample was kept for several days at 6.4 GPa (based on data from Boldyreva et al., 2007 ![]() |
A study of the effect of hydrostatic pressure on a solid implies the necessity of
using a hydrostatic medium, usually a liquid. Even if the solid is not soluble in
this liquid, one cannot exclude the possibility of an interaction between the solid
surface and the liquid, which can affect the occurrence of a b). Examples are known from the literature where pressure-induced transitions could
be observed when selected liquids were used and did not occur with other liquids or
in dry samples (Boldyreva, Ahsbahs et al., 2000
; Boldyreva, Dmitriev & Hancock, 2006
). This phenomenon has relevance to pharmaceutical processing: many phase transitions
on tabletting were observed only for slurries or when at least traces of solvent were
present (Otsuka et al., 1989
, 1995
; Okumura et al., 2006
).
Single-crystal and powder diffraction experiments can complement each other when studying
high-pressure polymorphs. A recent example can be provided by a study of the isosymmetric
phase transitions in L-serine. In contrast to glycine, serine show significant jump-wise changes in conformation with increasing pressure (some
torsion angles change by about 22°); reversible phase transitions are related to jump-wise
changes in hydrogen-bond networks; molecular layers expand and get flatter, resulting
in a total volume decrease with increasing pressure (Figs. 9 and 10
) (Goryainov et al., 2005
; Moggach, Allan, Morrison et al., 2005
; Boldyreva, Kolesnik et al., 2006
; Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006; Drebushchak et al., 2006
; Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
). Sharp phase transitions I → II and II → III were detected in the single crystals
of L-serine by optical microscopy and Raman spectroscopy (Goryainov et al., 2005
) and by single-crystal X-ray diffraction at about 5 GPa (Moggach, Allan, Morrison
et al., 2005
; Drebushchak et al., 2006
) and at about 8 GPa (Drebushchak et al., 2006
; Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
). During the I → II and the reverse II → I phase transitions in L-serine single crystals, an interface propagated rapidly (<0.3 s) from one side of
the crystal to the other in the [100] direction, after a pronounced `induction period'
at a fixed pressure value, as if the transformation were of a cooperative `cascade'
type. At every selected time moment, the Raman spectra of only one phase (L-serine I, L-serine II or L-serine III) could be registered, different phases did not co-exist within the same
crystal, at least for a time longer than 0.3 s. However, when powder samples of the
same compound were studied by high-resolution X-ray powder diffraction, the co-existence
of the two phases could be observed clearly in the pressure range between 5.3 and
6.4 GPa. The powder diffraction patterns at pressures higher than 5.3 GPa could not
be indexed as belonging to a single-phase system: although most of the main lines
corresponded well to those calculated from the model derived from single-crystal diffraction
experiments, some weak peaks could not be ascribed to the same phase. The patterns
could be interpreted assuming that the system contained some of the non-transformed
phase I, decreasing with increasing pressure. The behavior of powder samples of L-serine at pressures higher than 6.4 GPa was even more complicated. The powder diffraction
patterns could no longer be described satisfactorily either as belonging to a single
phase (II below 7.8 GPa and III above 7.8 GPa) or as corresponding to a two-phase
system (I + II, II + III or I + III). Neither could they be described as belonging
to a I + II + III system. An alternative to a two-phase description of the observed
powder diffraction patterns could be to assume the formation of a Physically, a could result, for example, from a slight reorientation of serine linked via hydrogen bonds in the head-to-tail chains along axis a (or of fragments of these such as —CH2OH groups or NH3 tails). Weak extra peaks could also result from a nanostructured state of the sample
with alternating very thin layers with slightly different structures (Tsybulya et al., 2004
). It is well known that the structures of metastable polymorphs crystallized from
solution or of the products of solid-to-solid transformations often cannot be described
as a homogeneous framework. Ever more examples are reported when nanosize layers of
one structure alternate with the nanosize layers of another structure. Alternatively,
some periodically or incommensurately modulated structures can be formed. of the transformations and the stress field arising in the sample in the course of
the transformation can account for this phenomenon.
![]() |
Figure 9 Cell parameters and volume versus pressure in the three polymorphs of L-serine; open symbols – powder diffraction data, black symbols – single-crystal diffraction data, gray symbols – phase I partly preserved after the I–II transition in the powder sample (reproduced with permission from Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006 ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 10 Fragments of the crystal structures of the polymorphs I at 4.2 GPa (left), II at 5.4 GPa (middle) and III at 8.0 GPa (right) of L-serine. Hydrogen bonds to neighboring molecules are shown by dashed lines (based on data from Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006 ![]() |
Evidence that such lamellar intergrown `polyphase crystals' (nanostructures) can be
formed under non-equilibrium crystallization conditions at ambient pressure was provided,
e.g. for aspirin (Bond et al., 2007). When a structure is formed under high-pressure conditions, the process is also
often kinetically controlled, the molecular mobility is restricted, and the sample
is stressed and strained. Therefore, the nanostructure and modulated phases at high
pressures can be expected to be formed more often than they have been reported up
to now. The formation of a or a nanostructure was supposed in the recently found ζ-form of glycine (Goryainov et al., 2006
). For L-cysteine IV formed on decompression of L-cysteine III, the formation of a structure separated into zones which are alternately
phase I like and phase III like was supposed (Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006c
). A similar phenomenon was reported recently for dabcoHBr complexes (Budzianowski
& Katrusiak, 2006a
,b
). If one starts looking for the nanostructures and superstructures systematically,
using appropriate techniques, more examples can be reported. For L-serine, X-ray powder diffraction patterns at pressures above 6.4 GPa could be well
described, assuming the single-crystal structural models (for phase II below 7.8 GPa
and for phase III above this point) with a superstructural tripling of a and c unit-cell parameters (Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
). Interestingly enough, a neutron powder diffraction study of a completely deuterated
L-serine sample at pressures up to 8 GPa (Moggach, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
) gave the same `basic' structural model for the high-pressure phase III as the single-crystal
study (Drebushchak et al., 2006
) or the X-ray powder diffraction study (Boldyreva, Sowa et al., 2006
) but did not reveal either the co-existence of several phases in the sample or the
formation of any super- or nanostructures. It is difficult to judge if the origin
in this discrepancy is in the different choice of the techniques or of the different
samples – the neutron diffraction patterns (Moggachh, Marshall & Parsons, 2006
) are rather noisy in the regions where extra peaks were observed in the X-ray synchrotron
diffraction spectra collected from a sample in a specially designed DAC without Be
background (Sowa & Ahsbahs, 2006
). One can also suppose that deuterated and non-deuterated samples may behave slightly
differently, although the pressures reported for the two transitions in single crystals
and powder samples are in good agreement for deuterated and non-deuterated samples.
One can also expect `simply' an irreproducible formation of the metastable non-equilibrium
superstructures (or maybe nanostructures), sensitive to subtle changes in the sample
characteristics and the compression conditions.
Predicting the occurrence of phase transitions and the structures of the high-pressure
phases is no less difficult than predicting the strain anisotropy (see previous section).
The absolute values of bulk compressibilities and the shapes of the V(p) dependencies do not allow one to predict the stability of a structure with respect
to pressure-induced phase transitions. For example, although L- and DL-serine have very similar bulk compressibilities up to about 5 GPa, the ambient-pressure
phase of DL-serine remains stable at least up to 8.6 GPa, whereas L-serine undergoes two isosymmetric phase transitions (at about 5 GPa and at about
8 GPa, see above). Pressure induces phase transitions in low-compressible γ-glycine, middle-compressible L-serine and highly compressible L-cysteine. The analysis of the short contacts, or of some `limit value' in a hydrogen
bond, which is achieved in the structure by a particular pressure, is somewhat more
informative. At the same time, even if a particular type of hydrogen bonding is replaced
by another one as a result of the this conversion in some cases may simply promote efficient packing rather than a
stronger hydrogen bond, as was shown recently for salicylaldoxime (Wood et al., 2006).
Pressure-induced phase transitions in crystalline amino acids can mimic conformational
changes in proteins and the first generalizations were made in recent reviews (Boldyreva,
2006, 2007a
,b
). An important observation is that the head-to-tail chains of are preserved, whatever happens to the of amino acids, also during the phase transitions. For glycine, a transformation
from a triple-helix structure into a layered structure is possible but is irreversible.
Transitions between different non-centrosymmetric layered structures are possible,
double centrosymmetric layers are extremely stable. These findings may be relevant
for the problem of different conformational stability of the regions of the differing in secondary structure, for example of α-helices and β-sheets, as well as for understanding the mechanism of triple-helix-to-layer conformational
transitions in collagens and other fibrillar proteins (Pain, 2000
). In contrast to glycine, serine changes its conformation in the course of pressure-induced
phase transitions. It is worth noting that it is the large conformational flexibility
of L-serine that makes this residue so important for the substrate–receptor recognition
and for the mechanical functions and cell motility in many biochemical processes (Titus,
1999
; Hepler, 2000
; Vale & Milligan, 2000
; Liang, 2002
). Cascade-type cooperative phase transitions in L-serine with a rapidly propagating interface can be compared with conformational changes
responsible for the functioning of serine zippers in biochemical systems (Adamian
& Liang, 2002
; Finger et al., 2006
).
5.3. Chemical reactions
Two types of studies can be found in the literature: the reactions which are induced by pressure and the reactions which are induced by temperature or light, but are affected by pressure.
Dimerization, polymerization, more rarely isomerization, and decomposition provide
examples of pressure-induced reactions. Traditionally, they were followed by spectroscopic
techniques. At best, the structure of the final solid product was characterized by
diffraction. With the progress in the experimental techniques (Katrusiak, 2004b, 2008
), it became possible to apply powder and single-crystal diffraction to follow the
fine details of the structural changes at multiple pressures before and after the
chemical reaction and to correlate the structural strain preceding the reaction with
the chemical transformation. Some of these examples are from inorganic chemistry but
it seems to be relevant to mention them also when discussing the high-pressure studies
of organic small-molecule crystals as an illustration of what can be done today.
A combined synchrotron X-ray diffraction, Raman scattering and infrared spectroscopy
study of the pressure-induced changes in H3BO3 to 10 GPa revealed a new high-pressure between 1 and 2 GPa followed by into cubic HBO2, ice-VI, and ice-VII at ~2 GPa. The layered triclinic structure of H3BO3 exhibits a highly anisotropic compression with maximum compression along the c direction, accompanied by a strong reduction of the interlayer spacing. The large
volume variation and structural changes accompanying the decomposition suggest high
activation energy. This yields slow reaction kinetics at room temperature and a phase
composition that is highly dependent on the specific pressure–time path followed by
the sample. The combined results have been used to propose a mechanism for pressure-induced
dehydration of H3BO3 that implies a proton disorder in the system (Kuznetsov et al., 2006).
For carbon disulfide, the anisotropic structural distortion was followed up to 8 GPa,
i.e. until the polymerization onset. The was determined by from single-crystal X-ray diffraction at 295 K at two pressure points: 1.8 and 3.7 GPa
(e.s.d.'s in the lengths of C=S bond 0.0001 nm!). Molecular rearrangements have been
rationalized by the close packing and equidistant S⋯S intermolecular interactions
enforced by pressure. Although only slight lengthening of the covalent double C=S
bond has been observed up to 3.7 GPa, the increase in the energy of the intermolecular
S⋯S and C⋯S interactions revealed the possible reaction pathways of pressure-induced
polymerization of CS2 (Dziubek & Katrusiak, 2004).
A high precision of studying the changes in the intramolecular geometry at high pressure
made it possible to follow the mechanism of the solid–solid phase transitions of Co2(CO)6(XPh3)2 (X = P, As) (Casati et al., 2005; Macchi et al., 2007
). These metal carbonyl dimers transform the conformation of carbonyls about the Co—Co
bond from staggered to eclipsed when the volume is reduced. The is accompanied by shrinking of metal–metal and metal–ligand bonds.
Polymerization of benzene belongs to one of the most studied pressure-induced reactions.
Still, recent detailed diffraction studies of the effect of pressure on the interatomic
contacts in the crystal at pressures below the transition point provide new information
on the possible mechanism of the polymerization (Budzianowski & Katrusiak, 2006a). Interestingly, the polymerization of benzene occurs mainly during the decompression
cycle favored by density decrease (Ciabini et al., 2002
). The polymerization of furan is similar to that induced in benzene but occurs at
much lower pressure. The reaction starts on compression but becomes complete only
with releasing pressure (Ceppatelli et al., 2003
). Compare these results with the phase transitions which occur on decompression only
(see previous section).
The studies of the effect of pressure on the reactions induced thermally or photochemically
is another possible research direction. Such studies are very common in solution chemistry
to elucidate the mechanisms of the reactions, e.g. to distinguish between the intra- and intermolecular mechanisms of the reactions
of the coordination compounds and to study the role of the solvent in the reaction
(Sinn, 1974; Stranks, 1974
; Swaddle, 1974
; Isaacs, 1981
; Palmer & Kelm, 1981
; van Eldik, 1986
, 1999
). In relation to the solid-state reactions, high pressure can be used as a tool of
a continuous compression of the `reaction cavity' (Boldyreva, 1996
, 1997
). A solid-state reaction itself generates strain in the crystal (`internal pressure')
and this strain can influence the further reaction course via various feed-back mechanisms. High-pressure experiments can be helpful for simulating
this strain and for elucidating the role of strain in the solid-state reactivity (Boldyreva
& Boldyrev, 1999
). This was illustrated for the intramolecular isomerization in a series of CoIII complexes (Boldyreva, 1994
, 2001
, 2003a
,b
; Boldyreva & Boldyrev, 1999
). Photo- and thermo-isomerization were studied in situ at variable pressures up to 4 GPa and the values of the activation volumes were calculated;
also, the anisotropy of structural strain induced in these compounds by hydrostatic
pressure and by the reaction itself was compared. This allowed us to suggest a detailed
mechanism of the feedback during this solid-state reaction and to explain why the
reaction with a decrease in molar volume is inhibited by applying hydrostatic pressure.
A similar approach could be applied to many solid-state reactions also in organic solids.
6. Prospects
The studies of the various aspects of the effect of pressure on molecular organic solids usually do not require very high pressures and very sophisticated experimental facilities. Much of the work referred to in this article was carried out using laboratory diffractometers. The field has a very promising future. In my opinion, which is of course very personal, the main challenges for the future are related to the following topics.
1. The interrelation between intra- and intermolecular distortions induced by pressure; relative contributions of these two types of distortions to the anisotropy of structural strain within the limits of stability of the same phase, and to the structural rearrangements resulting in phase transitions and chemical reactions; high pressure as a tool for improving the models used to describe the interatomic interactions in molecular crystals.
2. The role of the kinetic factors in pressure-induced phase transitions and chemical reactions; comparative studies of the effect of pressure on the same solid in different hydrostatic media; studies on the effect of hydrostatic or non-hydrostatic loading; the effects of the rate and duration of applying pressure; different behavior of the system on compression and on decompression; comparative studies of single crystals and powders with different particle size of the same compound.
3. Studies of the periodically and incommensurately modulated structures of the high-pressure phases, as well as of the nanostructured states; application of diffuse scattering in addition to `classical' diffraction studies.
4. High-pressure studies of drugs: the possibility to obtain new polymorphs quenchable down to ambient conditions, acting as seeds for subsequent polymorphic transformations at ambient conditions; model research at hydrostatic conditions in relation to the processes occurring on grinding and on tabletting.
5. High-pressure studies of small-molecule crystals in relation to the dynamic properties of synthetic and natural biopolymers.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges the support by grants from RFBR (05-03-32468), BRHE (NO-008-XI and RUX0-008-NO-06), and integration projects No. 49, No. 43 and No. 110 from the SB RAS, when working on this article. The author also thanks E. F. Achkasova and E. N. Kolesnik for their assistance with preparing the plots for this article, and A. P. Polyakova for technical help.
References
Adamian, L. & Liang, J. (2002). Proteins, 47, 209–218. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Allan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999a). Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3464–3467. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Allan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999b). Phys. Rev. B, 60, 6328–6334. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Brugmans, M. J. P., Ackland, G. J. & Vos, W. L. (1998).
Phys. Rev. B, 58, R11809–R11812. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Dawson, A., McGregor, P. A. & Parsons, S. (2002a). Acta Cryst. B58, 1018–1024. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Dawson, A., McGregor, P. A. & Parsons, S. (2002b). Dalton Commun. 8, 1867–1871. Web of Science CrossRef ICSD Google Scholar
Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Ibberson, R. M., Parsons, S., Pulham, C. R. & Sawyer,
L. (1999). Chem. Commun. pp. 751–752. Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Teat, S. J. (2001). J. Synchrotron Rad. 8, 10–17. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Behzadi, H., Esrafili, M. D. & Hadipour, L. (2007). Chem. Phys. 333 97–104. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Binev, I. G., Vassileva-Boyadjieva, P. & Binev, Y. I. (1998). J. Mol. Struct. 447, 235–246. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (1994). Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. Inc. Non-Lin. Opt. 242, 17–52. CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (1996). Reactivity of Solids. Past, Present, Future, IUPAC Series Chemistry in the 21st Century, edited by V. Boldyrev, pp. 141–184. Oxford: Blackwells. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (1997). Solid State Ionics, 101–103, 843–849. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (1999). Implications of Molecular and Materials Structure for New Technologies, edited by J. A. K. Howard, F. H. Allen & G. P. Shields. NATO Science Series, Series E: Applied Sciences, Vol. 360, pp. 151–174. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2001). Russ. J. Coord. Chem. 27, 1–28. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2003a). J. Mol. Struct. 647, 159–179. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2003b). Cryst. Eng. 6, 235–254. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2004a). Russ. Chem. Bull. 7, 1315–1324. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2004b). J. Mol. Struct. 700, 151–155. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2004c). High-Pressure Crystallography, edited by A. Katrusiak & P. F. McMillan, pp. 495–512. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2006). Proceedings IVth Int. Conf. High Pressures in Biosciences and Biotechnology, J-STAGE, Tsukuba, Japan, 25–26 September 2006, edited by F. Abe & A. Suzuki, Vol.
1, pp. 28–46. Saitama: Japan Science and Technology Agency. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2007a). Models, Mysteries and Magic of Molecules, edited by J. C. A. Boeyens & J. F. Ogilvie, pp. 169–194. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. (2007b). Crystal Growth Des. 7, 1662–1668. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Ahsbahs, H., Chernyshev, V. V., Ivashevskaya, S. N. & Oganov, A.
R. (2006). Z. Kristallogr. 221, 178–186. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Ahsbahs, H., Uchtmann, H. & Kashcheeva, N. E. (2000). High Press. Res. 17, 79–99. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Ahsbahs, H. & Weber, H.-P. (2003). Z. Kristallogr. 218, 231–236. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V. & Boldyrev, V. V. (1999). Editors. Reactivity of Molecular Solids. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Dmitriev, V. P. & Hancock, B. C. (2006). Int. J. Pharm. 327, 51–57. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Drebushchak, T. N., Shakhtshneider, T. P., Sowa, H., Ahsbahs, H.,
Goryainov, S. V., Ivashevskaya, S. N., Kolesnik, E. N., Drebushchak, V. A. & Burgina,
E. B. (2004). Arkivoc, 12, 128–155. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Drebushchak, V. A., Paukov, I. E., Kovalevskaya, Yu. A. & Drebushchak,
T. N. (2004). J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 77, 607–623. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Goryainov, S. V., Seryotkin, Yu. V., Ahsbahs, H. & Dmitriev, V.
P. (2007). Proc. NSU, Ser. Phys. 2, 30–35. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Ivashevskaya, S. N., Sowa, H., Ahsbahs, H. & Weber, H.-P. (2004).
Dokl. Akad. Nauk Phys. Chem. 396, 358–361. Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Ivashevskaya, S. N., Sowa, H., Ahsbahs, H. & Weber, H.-P. (2005).
Z. Kristallogr. 220, 50–57. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E., Kivikoski, J. & Howard, J. A. K. (1997a). Acta Cryst. B53, 394–404. CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E., Kivikoski, J. & Howard, J. A. K. (1997b). Acta Cryst. B53, 405–414. CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Kolesnik, E. N., Drebushchak, T. N., Ahsbahs, H., Beukes, J. A.
& Weber, H.-P. (2005). Z. Kristallogr. 220, 58–65. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Kolesnik, E. N., Drebushchak, T. N., Sowa, H., Ahsbahs, H. & Seryotkin,
Yu. V. (2006). Z. Kristallogr. 221, 150–161. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Naumov, D. Yu. & Ahsbahs, H. (1998). Acta Cryst. B54, 798–808. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Shakhtshneider, T. P. & Ahsbahs, H. (2002). J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 68, 437–452. CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Shakhtshneider, T. P., Ahsbahs, H., Sowa, H. & Uchtmann, H. (2002).
J. Struct. Chem. 43, 107–113. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Shakhtshneider, T. P., Ahsbahs, H., Uchtmann, H., Burgina, E. B.
& Baltakhinov, V. P. (2002). Pol. J. Chem. 76, 1333–1346. CAS Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Shakhtshneider, T. P., Vasilchenko, M. A., Ahsbahs, H. & Uchtmann,
H. (2000). Acta Cryst. B56, 299–309. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Boldyreva, E. V., Sowa, H., Seryotkin, Yu. V., Drebushchak, T. N., Ahsbahs, H., Chernyshev,
V. V. & Dmitriev, V. P. (2006). Chem. Phys. Lett. 429, 474–478. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Bond, A. D., Boese, R. & Desiraju, G. (2007). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 46, 615–622. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Bordallo, H., Boldyreva, E. & Koza, M. (2007). J. Phys. Chem. Submitted. Google Scholar
Bridgman, P. W. (1931). The Physics of High Pressure. London: Bell and Sons. Google Scholar
Bridgman, P. W. (1946). Rev. Modern Phys. 18, 1–93. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Budzianowski, A. & Katrusiak, A. (2006a). Acta Cryst. B62, 94–101. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Budzianowski, A. & Katrusiak, A. (2006b). J. Phys. Chem. B Lett. 110, 9755–9758. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Budzianowski, A., Olejniczak, A. & Katrusiak, A. (2005). Acta Cryst. A61, C463. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Budzianowski, A., Olejniczak, A. & Katrusiak, A. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 1078–1089. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Bujak, M., Budzianowski, A. & Katrusiak, A. (2004). Z. Kristallogr. 219, 573–579. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Bujak, M., Dziubek, K. & Katrusiak, A. (2007). Acta Cryst. B63, 124–131. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Bujak, M. & Katrusiak, A. (2004). Z. Kristallogr. 219, 669–674. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Casati, N., Macchi, P. & Sironi, A. (2005). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 44, 7736–7739. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Ceppatelli, M., Santoro, M., Bini, R. & Schettino, V. (2003). J. Chem. Phys. 118, 1499–1506. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Chatani, E., Kato, M., Kawai, T., Naiki, H. & Goto, Y. (2005). J. Mol. Biol. 352, 941–951. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Ciabini, L., Santoro, M., Bini, R. & Schettino, V. (2002). J. Chem. Phys. 116, 2928–2935. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Colloc'h, N., Girard, E., Dhaussy, A.-C., Kahn, R., Ascone, I., Mezouar, M. & Fourme,
R. (2006). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1764, 391–397. Web of Science PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Dawson, A., Allan, D. R., Belmonte, S. A., Clark, S. J., David, W. I. F., McGregor,
P. A., Parsons, S., Pulham, C. R. & Sawyer, L. (2005). Cryst. Growth Des. 5, 1415–1427. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Dinnebier, R. E., Garlson, S., Hanfland, M. & Jansen, M. (2003). Am. Mineral. 88, 996–1002. CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Drebushchak, T. N., Sowa, H., Seryotkin, Y. V., Boldyreva, E. V. & Ahsbahs, H. (2006).
Acta Cryst. E62, o4052–o4054. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Dziubek, K. F. & Katrusiak, A. (2004). J. Phys. Chem. B, 108, 19089–19092. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Dziubek, K. F. & Katrusiak, A. (2005). Acta Cryst. A61, C36. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Dziubek, K., Podsiadlo, M. & Katrusiak, A. (2007). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129, 12620–12621. Web of Science CSD CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Dzyabchenko, A. V. & Boldyreva, E. V. (2000). Acta Cryst. A56, s215. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Eldik, R. (1986). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 25, 673–682. CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
Eldik, R. (1999). Coord. Chem. Rev. 182, 373–410. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Espeau, P., Ceolin, R., Tamarit, J.-L., Perrin, M.-A., Gauchi, J.-P. & Leveiller,
F. (2005). J. Pharm. Sci. 94, 524–539. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A., Allan, D. R., David, W. I. F., Davidson, A. J., Lennie, A. R.,
Parsons, S., Pulham, C. R. & Warren, J. E. (2007). Cryst. Growth Des. 7, 1115–1124. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A., Allan, D. R., David, W. I. F., Moggach, S. A., Parsons, S. & Pulham,
C. R. (2004). CrystEngComm, 6, 504–511. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A., Allan, D. R., Dawson, A., David, W. I. F., McGregor, P. A., Oswald,
I. D. H., Parsons, S. & Pulham, C. R. (2003). Chem. Commun. 24, 3004–3005. Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A., Allan, D. R., Marshall, W. G., Parsons, S., Pulham, C. R. & Smith,
R. I. (2005). J. Cryst. Growth, 275, 185–192. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Pulham, C. R. (2005). CrystEngComm, 7, 179–186. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Fabbiani, F. P. A. & Pulham, C. R. (2006). Chem. Soc. Rev. 35, 932–942. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Finger, C., Volkmer, T., Prodoehl, A., Otzen, D. E., Engelma, D. M. & Schneider, D.
(2006). J. Mol. Biol. 358, 1221–1228. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Fourme, R. (1968). J. Appl. Cryst. 1, 23–30. CrossRef IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Fourme, R., André, D. & Renaud, M. (1971). Acta Cryst. B27, 1275–1276. CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Fourme, R., Girard, E., Kahn, R., Dhaussy, A.-C., Mezouar, M., Colloc'h, N. & Ascone,
I. (2006). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1764, 384–390. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Fourme, R., Kahn, R., Mezouar, M., Girard, E., Hoerentrup, C., Prangé, T. & Ascone,
I. (2001). J. Synchrotron Rad. 8, 1149–1156. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Gajda, R., Dziubek, K. & Katrusiak, A. (2005). Acta Cryst. A61, C463. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Gajda, R., Dziubek, K. & Katrusiak, A. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 86–93. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Gajda, R. & Katrusiak, A. (2007). Acta Cryst. B63, 111–117. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Girard, E., Dhaussy, A.-C., Couzinet, B., Chervin, J.-C., Mezouar, M., Kahn, R., Ascone,
I. & Fourme, R. (2007). J. Appl. Cryst. 40, 912–918. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Girard, E., Kahn, R., Mezouar, M., Dhaussy, A.-C., Lin, T., Johnson, J. E. & Fourme,
R. (2005). Biophys. J. 88, 3562–3571. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Görbitz, C. H. (2001). Chem. Eur. J. 7, 5153–5159. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Görbitz, C. H. (2003). New J. Chem. 27, 1789–1793. Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
Goryainov, S. V., Boldyreva, E. V. & Kolesnik, E. N. (2006). Chem. Phys. Lett. 419, 496–500. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Goryainov, S. V., Kolesnik, E. N. & Boldyreva, E. V. (2005). Physica B Condens. Matter, 357, 340–347. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Grzechnik, A., Farina, L., Lauck, R., Syassen, K., Loa, I. & Bouvier, P. (2002). J. Solid State Chem. 168, 184–191. Web of Science CrossRef ICSD CAS Google Scholar
Hazen, R. M. & Downs, R. T. (2000). Editors. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Vol. 41, High-Temperature and High-Pressure Crystal Chemistry. Washington: Mineralogical Society of America. Google Scholar
Hazen, R. M. & Finger, L. W. (1982). Comparative Crystal Chemistry. Temperature, Pressure, Composition and Variation of
Crystal Structure. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
Hemley, R. J. & Dera, P. (2000). Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Vol. 41, High-Temperature and High-Pressure Crystal Chemistry, pp. 335–419. Washington: Mineralogical Society of America. Google Scholar
Hepler, P. K. (2000). Biology, 574, https://www.bio.umass.edu/vidali/web/cell_motil/oct_3_long1.htm. Google Scholar
Ichikawa, M. (1998). Polish J. Chem. 72, 230–240. CAS Google Scholar
Iitaka, Y. (1960). Acta Cryst. 13, 35–45. CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Iitaka, Y. (1961). Acta Cryst. 14, 1–10. CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Isaacs, N. S. (1981). Liquid Phase High Pressure Chemistry. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
Isenberg, H., Kjaer, K. & Rapaport, H. (2006). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 12468–12472. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Jönsson, P.-G. & Kvick, Å. (1972). Acta Cryst. B28, 1827–1833. CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1990a). High Press. Res. 4, 496–498. CrossRef Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1990b). Acta Cryst. B46, 246–256. CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1991a). Cryst. Res. Tech. 26, 523–531. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1991b). High Press. Res. 6, 155–167. CrossRef Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1991c). High Press. Res. 6, 265–275. CrossRef Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1995). Acta Cryst. B51, 873–879. CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (1996). Crystallogr. Rev. 5, 133–180. CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (2001). Frontiers of High Pressure Research II: Application of High Pressure to Low-Dimensional
Novel Electronic Materials, pp. 73–85. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (2003). Crystallogr. Rev. 9, 91–133. CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (2004a). High-Pressure Crystallography, edited by A. Katrusiak & P. McMillan, pp. 513–520. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (2004b). Acta Cryst. A60, 409–417. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 135–148. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A., Budzianowski, A. & Dziubek, K. (2004). Acta Cryst. A60, s100. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A., Gajda, R., Olejniczak, A. & Podsiadło, M. (2007). Acta Cryst. A63, s68–s69. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Katrusiak, A. & McMillan, P. F. (2004). Editors. High-Pressure Crystallography. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
Kolesnik, E. N., Goryainov, S. V. & Boldyreva, E. V. (2005). Dokl. Phys. Chem. 404, 61–64. (In Russian.) Engl. transl: 404, 169–172. Google Scholar
Kuznetsov, A. Yu., Pereira, A. S., Shiryaev, A. A., Haines, J., Dubrovinsky, L., Dmitriev,
V., Pattison, P. & Guignot, N. (2006). J. Phys. Chem. B, 110, 13858–13865. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Ledru, J., Imrie, C. T., Pulham, C. R., Ceolin, R. & Hutchinson, J. M. (2007). J. Pharm. Sci. 96, 2784–2794. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Li, H. & Akasaka, K. (2006). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1764, 331–345. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Liang, J. (2002). Current Opin. Chem. Biol. 6, 878–884. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Lozano-Casal, P., Allan, D. R. & Parsons, S. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 717–723. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Macchi, P., Casati, N. & Sironi, A. (2007). Proc. Am. Crystallogr. Assoc. Meeting,
Abstract W0033. Google Scholar
McGregor, P. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Clark, S. J. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 599–605. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Moggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Gutmann, M. J., Parsons, S., Pulham, C.
R. & Sawyer, L. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 296–309. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Moggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Morrison, C. A., Parsons, S. & Sawyer, L. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 58–68. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Moggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Sawyer, L. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 310–320. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Moggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S., Sawyer, L. & Warren, J. E. (2005). J. Synchrotron Rad. 12, 598–607. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Moggach, S. A., Marshall, W. G. & Parsons, S. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 815–825. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Molodets, A. M. (2006). Proceedings of International Workshop on High Pressures, Dubna,
October 2006, p. 32. Google Scholar
Murli, C., Sharma, S. M., Karmakar, S. & Sikka, S. K. (2003). Physica (Utrecht) B, 339, 23–30. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Nahringbauer, I. (1970). Acta Chem. Scand. 24, 453–462. CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Nye, J. F. (1957). Physical Properties of Crystals: their Representation by Tensors and Matrices. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Okumura, T., Ishida, M., Takayama, K. & Otsuka, M. (2006). J. Pharm. Sci. 95, 689–700. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Orosel, D., Leynaud, O., Balog, P. & Jansen, M. (2004). J. Solid State Chem. 177, 1631–1638. Web of Science CrossRef ICSD CAS Google Scholar
Oswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Day, G. M., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005).
Cryst. Growth Des. 5, 1055–1071. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Oswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 69–79. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Otsuka, M., Matsumoto, T., Higuchi, S., Otsuka, K. & Kaneniwa, N. (1995). J. Pharm. Sci. 84, 614–618. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Otsuka, M., Matsumoto, T. & Kaneniwa, N. (1989). J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 41, 665–669. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Pain, R. H. (2000). In Mechanisms of Protein Folding, Frontiers in Molecular Biology Series, edited by B. D. Hames & D. M. Glover. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Palmer, D. A. & Kelm, H. (1981). Coord. Chem. Rev. 36, 89–153. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Petrenko, V. & Whitworth, R. (1999). Physics of Ice. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Piermarini, G. J., Mighell, A. D., Weir, C. E. & Block, S. (1969). Science, 165, 1250–1255. CSD CrossRef PubMed CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Podsiadło, M., Dziubek, K. & Katrusiak, A. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 595–600. Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Podsiadło, M., Dziubek, K., Szafrański, M. & Katrusiak, A. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 1090–1098. Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Podsiadlo, M. & Katrusiak, A. (2005). Acta Cryst. A61, C329. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Podsiadło, M. & Katrusiak, A. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 1071–1077. Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Shakhtshneider, T. P., Boldyreva, E. V., Vasilchenko, M. A., Ahsbahs, H. & Uchtmann,
H. (1999). J. Struct. Chem. 40, 1140–1148. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Shibaeva, R. P. & Yagubskii, E. B. (2004). Chem. Rev. 104, 5347–5378. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Sinn, E. (1974). Coord. Chem. Rev. 12, 185–220. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Sowa, H. & Ahsbahs, H. (2006). J. Appl. Cryst. 39, 169–175. Web of Science CrossRef ICSD CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Stranks, D. R. (1974). Pure Appl. Chem. 38, 303–324. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Suresh, C. G. & Vijayan, M. (1983). Int. J. Peptide Protein Res. 22, 129–143. CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Swaddle, T. W. (1974). Coord. Chem. Rev. 14, 217–268. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Titus, M. A. (1999). In Guidebook to the Cytoskeletal and Motor Proteins, 2nd ed., edited by T. Kreis & R. Vale. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Tonkov, E. Yu. (1988). Phase Transitions of Compounds at High Pressures. Moscow: Metallurgy. Google Scholar
Tsybulya, S. V., Cherepanova, S. V. & Kryukova, G. N. (2004). Diffraction Analysis of Microcrystalline Materials, edited by E. J. Mittemejer & P. Scardi, p. 93. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
Vale, R. D. & Milligan, R. A. (2000). Science, 288, 88–95. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Vereschagin, L. F. & Kabalkina, S. S. (1979). X-ray Diffraction Studies at High Pressures. Moscow: Nauka. Google Scholar
Vinogradov, S. N. (1979). Int. J. Peptide Protein Res. 14, 281–289. CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Weir, C. E., Piermarini, G. J. & Block, S. (1969). J. Chem. Phys. 50, 2089–2093. CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Wood, P. A., Forgan, R. S., Henderson, D., Parsons, S., Pidcock, E., Tasker, P. A.
& Warren, J. E. (2006). Acta Cryst. B62, 1099–1111. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Zanuy, D., Nusinov, R. & Aleman, C. (2006). Phys. Biol. 3, S80–S90. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Zerilli, F. J. & Kuklja, M. M. (2007). J. Phys. Chem. A, 111, 1721–1725. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
© International Union of Crystallography. Prior permission is not required to reproduce short quotations, tables and figures from this article, provided the original authors and source are cited. For more information, click here.