This report compares biomimetic hydrogen evolution reaction catalysts with and without the amine cofactor (adt(NH)): Fe(2)(adt(NH))(CO)(2)(dppv)(2) (1(NH)) and Fe(2)(pdt)(CO)(2)(dppv)(2) (2) [(adt(NH))(2-) = HN(CH(2)S)(2)(2-), pdt(2-) = 1,3-(CH(2))(3)S(2)(2-), and dppv = cis-C(2)H(2)(PPh(2))(2)]. These compounds are spectroscopically, structurally, and stereodynamically very similar but exhibit very different catalytic properties. Protonation of 1(NH) and 2 gives three isomeric hydrides each, beginning with the kinetically favored terminal hydride, which converts sequentially to sym and unsym isomers of the bridging hydrides. In the case of 1(NH), the corresponding ammonium hydrides are also observed. In the case of the terminal amine hydride [t-H1(NH)]BF(4), the ammonium/amine hydride equilibrium is sensitive to counteranions and solvent. The species [t-H1(NH(2))](BF(4))(2) represents the first example of a crystallographically characterized terminal hydride produced by protonation. The NH---HFe distance of 1.88(7) Å indicates dihydrogen-bonding. The bridging hydrides [μ-H1(NH)](+) and [μ-H2](+) reduce near -1.8 V, about 150 mV more negative than the reductions of the terminal hydride [t-H1(NH)](+) and [t-H2](+) at -1.65 V. Reductions of the amine hydrides [t-H1(NH)](+) and [t-H1(NH(2))](2+) are irreversible. For the pdt analogue, the [t-H2](+/0) couple is unaffected by weak acids (pK(a)(MeCN) = 15.3) but exhibits catalysis with HBF(4)·Et(2)O, albeit with a turnover frequency (TOF) around 4 s(-1) and an overpotential greater than 1 V. The voltammetry of [t-H1(NH)](+) is strongly affected by relatively weak acids and proceeds at 5000 s(-1) with an overpotential of 0.7 V. The ammonium hydride [t-H1(NH(2))](2+) is a faster catalyst, with an estimated TOF of 58 000 s(-1) and an overpotential of 0.5 V.
This report compares biomimetic hydrogen evolution reaction catalysts with and without the n class="Chemical">amine cofactor (adt(NH)): Fe(2)(adt(NH))(CO)(2)(dppv)(2) (1(NH)) and Fe(2)(pdt)(CO)(2)(dppv)(2) (2) [(adt(NH))(2-) = HN(CH(2)S)(2)(2-), pdt(2-) = 1,3-(CH(2))(3)S(2)(2-), and dppv = cis-C(2)H(2)(PPh(2))(2)]. These compounds are spectroscopically, structurally, and stereodynamically very similar but exhibit very different catalytic properties. Protonation of 1(NH) and 2 gives three isomeric hydrides each, beginning with the kinetically favored terminal hydride, which converts sequentially to sym and unsym isomers of the bridging hydrides. In the case of 1(NH), the corresponding ammonium hydrides are also observed. In the case of the terminal amine hydride [t-H1(NH)]BF(4), the ammonium/amine hydride equilibrium is sensitive to counteranions and solvent. The species [t-H1(NH(2))](BF(4))(2) represents the first example of a crystallographically characterized terminal hydride produced by protonation. The NH---HFe distance of 1.88(7) Å indicates dihydrogen-bonding. The bridging hydrides [μ-H1(NH)](+) and [μ-H2](+) reduce near -1.8 V, about 150 mV more negative than the reductions of the terminal hydride [t-H1(NH)](+) and [t-H2](+) at -1.65 V. Reductions of the amine hydrides [t-H1(NH)](+) and [t-H1(NH(2))](2+) are irreversible. For the pdt analogue, the [t-H2](+/0) couple is unaffected by weak acids (pK(a)(MeCN) = 15.3) but exhibits catalysis with HBF(4)·Et(2)O, albeit with a turnover frequency (TOF) around 4 s(-1) and an overpotential greater than 1 V. The voltammetry of [t-H1(NH)](+) is strongly affected by relatively weak acids and proceeds at 5000 s(-1) with an overpotential of 0.7 V. The ammonium hydride [t-H1(NH(2))](2+) is a faster catalyst, with an estimated TOF of 58 000 s(-1) and an overpotential of 0.5 V.
Authors: Aušra Jablonskytė; Joseph A Wright; Shirley A Fairhurst; Jamie N T Peck; Saad K Ibrahim; Vasily S Oganesyan; Christopher J Pickett Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Matthew T Olsen; Maurizio Bruschi; Luca De Gioia; Thomas B Rauchfuss; Scott R Wilson Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2008-08-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Salah Ezzaher; Jean-François Capon; Frédéric Gloaguen; François Y Pétillon; Philippe Schollhammer; Jean Talarmin; Roger Pichon; Nelly Kervarec Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2007-03-31 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: Manuel G Basallote; Maria Besora; C Esther Castillo; María J Fernandez-Trujillo; Agustí Lledós; Feliu Maseras; M Angeles Mañez Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-04-28 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Aaron M Appel; John E Bercaw; Andrew B Bocarsly; Holger Dobbek; Daniel L DuBois; Michel Dupuis; James G Ferry; Etsuko Fujita; Russ Hille; Paul J A Kenis; Cheryl A Kerfeld; Robert H Morris; Charles H F Peden; Archie R Portis; Stephen W Ragsdale; Thomas B Rauchfuss; Joost N H Reek; Lance C Seefeldt; Rudolf K Thauer; Grover L Waldrop Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: David Schilter; James M Camara; Mioy T Huynh; Sharon Hammes-Schiffer; Thomas B Rauchfuss Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2016-06-29 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Raja Angamuthu; Chi-Shian Chen; Tyler R Cochrane; Danielle L Gray; David Schilter; Olbelina A Ulloa; Thomas B Rauchfuss Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2015-05-22 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: Konstantinos D Vogiatzis; Mikhail V Polynski; Justin K Kirkland; Jacob Townsend; Ali Hashemi; Chong Liu; Evgeny A Pidko Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Riccardo Zaffaroni; Thomas B Rauchfuss; Danielle L Gray; Luca De Gioia; Giuseppe Zampella Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2012-11-13 Impact factor: 15.419