1

I have the following reaction scheme plotted with chemfig as shown in figure:

enter image description here

MWE

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{chemfig}

\begin{document}

\schemestart
A \arrow(a--b){->[*{0}$\mathrm{-HO}$][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] B
\arrow(@b--c){->[][]} C
% \subscheme{\arrow{->}\lewis{1.,R}}%
\arrow(@b--d){<=>[][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] D
\arrow(@d--f){}[0,1.5] F + \arrow(--g){0}[]G
\arrow(@g--i){}[90] I
\arrow(@i--c){}[-180,,,,dashed]
\arrow(@d--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}
\arrow(@b--@f){->[$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$][$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$]}
\arrow(@d--e){<=>[][]}[-90] E
\arrow(@e--h){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{3.,OH}}$][]} H
\arrow(@e--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}
\schemestop


\end{document}

Why is there a large gap between the compounds 'F' and 'G'? If I fix with the MWE (below) this is what I get:

enter image description here

MWE

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{chemfig}

\begin{document}

\schemestart
A \arrow(a--b){->[*{0}$\mathrm{-HO}$][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] B
\arrow(@b--c){->[][]} C
% \subscheme{\arrow{->}\lewis{1.,R}}%
\arrow(@b--d){<=>[][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] D
\arrow(@d--f){}[0,1.5] F + \arrow(--g){0}[0,0]G
\arrow(@g--i){}[90] I
\arrow(@i--c){}[-180,,,,dashed]
\arrow(@d--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}
\arrow(@b--@f){->[$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$][$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$]}
\arrow(@d--e){<=>[][]}[-90] E
\arrow(@e--h){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{3.,OH}}$][]} H
\arrow(@e--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}
\schemestop

\end{document}

What is the correct way to fix this?

2

You can use a separate node for the + and another one for the G:

\arrow(@d--f){}[0,1.5] F
\arrow(@f.east--p.west){0}[0,0]+
\arrow(@p.east--g.west){0}[0,0]G

Note that you also need to replace the line with \arrow(@i--c) by \arrow(@i--@c). I also needed to add [,,solid] at the end of the \arrow(@d--@f) line: otherwise that arrow became dashed too.

enter image description here

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{chemfig}

\begin{document}

    \schemestart
    A \arrow(a--b){->[*{0}$\mathrm{-HO}$][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] B
    \arrow(@b--c){->[][]} C
    % \subscheme{\arrow{->}\lewis{1.,R}}%
    \arrow(@b--d){<=>[][*{0}$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$]}[-90] D
    \arrow(@d--f){}[0,1.5] F \arrow(@f.east--p.west){0}[0,0]+ \arrow(@p.east--g.west){0}[0,0]G
    \arrow(@g--i){}[90] I
    \arrow(@i--@c){->}[,,dashed]
    \arrow(@d--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}[,,solid]
    \arrow(@b--@f){->[$\mathrm{+O_{2}}$][$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$]}
    \arrow(@d--e){<=>[][]}[-90] E
    \arrow(@e--h){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{3.,OH}}$][]} H
    \arrow(@e--@f){->[$\mathrm{-\lewis{1.,HO}}$][]}
    \schemestop

\end{document}
| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.