halysis of '?C-nmr data using newly developed substituent constants reveals structures 1 and 2 previously assigned for the marine monoterpene plocamenone are incorrect, and structure 3 is now proposed.Recently, we demonstrated how substituent regiochemistry can be readily elucidated in halogenated marine natural products by use of 13C-nmr additivity constants (1,2). This strategy employs a,p, and y increments, which are applied according to the degree of substitution at the carbon of interest. Unfortunately, a-effects are always overestimated in compounds containing vicinal polar substituents (2). To overcome this limitation, we have developed new substituent values, which appear in Table 1. The analysis of C = O shifts also represents an unexplored strategy which we have tested by generating a set of polar vicinal p increment values collected in Table 2 . Many experimental chemical shifts can now be accurately reproduced via Tables 1 or 2 , and to illustrate their use, we have examined two past structures 1 (4) and 2 (5) proposed for plocamenone. After comparing available spectroscopic data ( 1,3-5) to calculated 13C-nmr shifts along with other arguments, we conclude that structures 1 and 2 are in error and suggest 3 as a corrected structure. lJy++cl * C l -, 3 0 , * 191.3 133.0 1 0 Cl Br 0 Br 0 1 2 3Analyzing the I3C shifts of some 80 vicinal dipolar compounds, the C = O shifts of 40 a haloketones, and shifts of more than 50 alkyl and 20 alkenyl ketones provided the increments in Tables 1 and 2. One example of the excellent agreement between experimental shifts and those calculated from these tables comes from inspection of the C = O shifts for three poly a-substituted ketones 4 (6) (calc= 188 ppm, expt= 190.9), 5 (7) (calc= 186 ppm, expt= 186.2) and 6 (8) (calc= 189 ppm, expt= 188.3). By contrast, a substantial difference of 5 pprn in the calculated vs. experimental C = O shift exists for plocamenone (1) (talc= 196) while perfect agreement is observed for its recently revised structure 2 ( 5 ) (calc= 191, expt= 191.3). In spite ofthis, we were still uncertain about the placement of the halogens at C-4, C-5, and C-6. In particular, assignment of Cl at C-4 as shown by 3 also provided a perfect match of its calculated C = O shift (190) vs.the experimental.Consideration of other 13C data revealed serious inconsistencies between reported chemical shifts and structure 2. First, a calculated value of 88 pprn is obtained for C-4' using increments from Table 1, and it along with experimental shifts of85-95 ppm for tal vs. expected 13C shift is also apparent for the C-6 methyl. Based upon analogy to the a chloro ketones iii, ix, and xiv (Table 3) are vastly different compared to 6 69 previously asigned at C-4 in structure 2 (5). Next, a substantial difference in the experimen-'C=O shifts were calculated by adding appropriate increments from Table 2 to the following base values: 1-3=2 14 ppm (2-methyl-3-hexanone); 4 , 5 = 2 11 ppm (3-hexanone); 5=209 pprn (2-hexanone).'We calculate C-4=88 ppm for 4,4-dichloro-3-decanone...