David C Lacy1, Charles C L McCrory, Jonas C Peters. 1. Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis, Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology , Pasadena, California 91125, United States.
Abstract
The cobalt complex [Co(III)N4H(Br)2](+) (N4H = 2,12-dimethyl-3,7,11,17-tetraazabicyclo-[11.3.1]-heptadeca-1(7),2,11,13,15-pentaene) was used for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction in wet MeCN with a glassy carbon working electrode. When water was employed as the proton source (10 M in MeCN), CO was produced (fCO= 45% ± 6.4) near the Co(I/0) redox couple for [Co(III)N4H(Br)2](+) (E1/2 = -1.88 V FeCp2(+/0)) with simultaneous H2 evolution (fH2= 30% ± 7.8). Moreover, we successfully demonstrated that the catalytically active species is homogeneous through the use of control experiments and XPS studies of the working glassy-carbon electrodes. As determined by cyclic voltammetry, CO2 catalysis occurred near the formal Co(I/0)redox couple, and attempts were made to isolate the triply reduced compound ("[Co(0)N4H]"). Instead, the doubly reduced ("Co(I)") compounds [CoN4] and [CoN4H(MeCN)](+) were isolated and characterized by X-ray crystallography. Their molecular structures prompted DFT studies to illuminate details regarding their electronic structure. The results indicate that reducing equivalents are stored on the ligand, implicating redox noninnocence in the ligands for H2 evolution and CO2 reduction electrocatalysis.
The cobaltcomplex [Co(III)N4H(Br)2](+) (N4H = 2,12-dimethyl-3,7,11,17-tetraazabicyclo-[11.3.1]-heptadeca-1(7),2,11,13,15-pentaene) was used for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction in wet MeCN with a glassy carbon working electrode. When water was employed as the proton source (10 M in MeCN), CO was produced (fCO= 45% ± 6.4) near the Co(I/0) redox couple for [Co(III)N4H(Br)2](+) (E1/2 = -1.88 V FeCp2(+/0)) with simultaneous H2 evolution (fH2= 30% ± 7.8). Moreover, we successfully demonstrated that the catalytically active species is homogeneous through the use of control experiments and XPS studies of the working glassy-carbon electrodes. As determined by cyclic voltammetry, CO2 catalysis occurred near the formal Co(I/0)redox couple, and attempts were made to isolate the triply reduced compound ("[Co(0)N4H]"). Instead, the doubly reduced ("Co(I)") compounds [CoN4] and[CoN4H(MeCN)](+) were isolated and characterized by X-ray crystallography. Their molecular structures prompted DFT studies to illuminate details regarding their electronic structure. The results indicate that reducing equivalents are stored on the ligand, implicating redox noninnocence in the ligands for H2 evolution andCO2 reduction electrocatalysis.
Transitionn class="Chemical">metal complexes
supported by nitrogen-donor ligands constitute an important class
of molecular electrocatalysts for CO2reduction.[1] Whereas the earliest report featured phthalocyanine
as a supporting ligand,[2] a host of nitrogen-rich
donor ligands have since been employed that include porphyrins,[3] polypyridines,[4] cyclam,
and related unsaturated N4-macrocycles.[5] Convincing evidence has been provided in support of a hypothesis
whereby reducing equivalents are stored on supporting polypyridine
ligands during electrocatalytic CO2 reduction.[6] Redox noninnocence at the ligand may have a significant
impact on both substrate and product selectivity.[7] For example, bipyridyl-supported manganese and rhenium
tricarbonyl catalysts reduce CO2 rather than protons in
the presence of water and/or weak acids.[8] These findings encouraged our interest in exploring the importance
of redox noninnocent ligand properties in electrocatalytic CO2 reductions.
In the present study we continue the theme
of elucidating a role for ligan class="Disease">nd redox noninnocence in the context
of electrocatalytic CO2 reduction by cobalt. We employ
the ligand NH (NH = 2,12-dimethyl-3,7,11,17-tetraazabicyclo-[11.3.1]-heptadeca-1(7),2,11,13,15-pentaene),
chosen because it contains a potentially redox-active pyridyldiimine
(PDI) moiety.[9,10] Additionally, there is literature
precedent for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction with the PDI
platform with cobalt.[11] In particular,
three prior studies employed the NH ligand for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction
and showed production of large amounts of H2 relative to
CO and low overall current efficiencies.[5a,12] The latter observation is consistent with appreciable current being
consumed to reductively degrade the molecular precursor. The catalytic
role of resulting heterogeneous material must therefore be considered
but was difficult to assess owing to the choice of mercury as the working electrode. Mercury
electrodes are known to strongly adsorb N4-macrocyclic
cobaltcomplexes,[13] and there has been
significant discussion about the activity of dissolved molecular complexes
versus mercury adsorbed species in catalysis.[14,15] Reports that some nominally discrete homogeneous molecular cobalt-based
electrocatalysts form catalytically active heterogeneous deposits,
even on glassy carbon electrode surfaces, encourage added caution
to be taken when defining likely contributors to observed overall
electrocatalysis.[16]
The present combined
synthetic/electrocatalytic study employs a glassy-n class="Chemical">carbon working electrode
to investigate the cobalt-NH system for CO2 reduction. The lead observation
made pertains to preferential CO2 reduction (to produce
CO) relative to H2 evolution when wet organic solvent is
used. To begin to develop a better understanding of this system, synthetic
studies are described wherein reduced and protonated cobalt species
that we presume are relevant to overall electrocatalysis are characterized.
The structural data obtained for these species are correlated to DFT
calculations and suggest that redox noninnocent ligand behavior is
likely operative. Of course, the molecular studies described are directly
relevant to the overall CO2 reduction electrocatalysis
only if homogeneous catalysis is operative. Several control experiments
support a dominant role for homogeneous species in the observed CO2 electrocatalysis, despite the fact that some heterogeneous
cobalt material forms on the electrode surface during electrocatalysis.
Results
Electrocatalytic
CO2 Reduction with [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ in
Wet MeCN
Cyclic voltammograms (CVs) of 0.3 mM solutions of
[CoIIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)2]+ with nBu4NPF6 in MeCN were measured (Figure 1), and three reversible redox couples were observed at −0.40
V, −0.92 V, and −1.88 V (all potentials are referenced
to the FeCp2+/0 couple). These redox events
are assigned as the formal CoIII/II, CoII/I,
andCoI/0 couples, respectively. When MeCN solutions of
[CoIIINH(Br)2]+ were saturated with CO2,
an increase in the magnitude of the reductive current appeared near
the CoI/0 couple, suggesting the possibility of catalytic
activity. Adding water increased the magnitude of the catalytic wave
near the CoI/0 couple in the CV (Figure 1). A different current response was observed when no CO2 was present (Figure 1, bottom). These
findings are generally consistent with an early study by Tinnemans
et al. in 1984, where it was first demonstrated that CVs of [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ were affected by CO2 and that H2Ocould enhance the catalytic wave.[12a]
Figure 1
(Top)
Cyclic voltammograms of 0.3 mM [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ in
MeCN (black), addition of CO2 (red), and addition of water
to make a 10 M solution in MeCN (blue). Inset shows a plot of current
vs time for a 40-min controlled potential electrolysis experiment
(potential held at −2.13 vs FeCp2+/0).
(Bottom) CV of 0.7 mM [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ in MeCN with 10
M H2O with CO2 (blue) and without CO2 (green); the dashed black line is the background current in MeCN
with 10 M H2O and CO2 with no added cobalt complex.
Conditions: scan rate = 0.100 V/s; supporting electrolyte is 0.1 M nBu4NPF6; working electrode = glassy
carbon; reference electrode = isolated Ag/AgNO3 (1 mM)
with 0.1 M nBu4NPF6; counter
electrode = glassy carbon.
Tinnemans et al. and Che et al. performed n class="Chemical">controlled potential
electrolysis (CPE) experiments under various conditions, andCO was
produced in 20–30% Faradaic efficiency at −1.8 V in
MeCN with waterconcentrates as high as 3 M (Table S2 in the Supporting Information [SI]).[12] We obtained similar results and observed turbid solutions
after an extended 40 min CPE in MeCN with waterconcentrations as
low as 0.035 ± 4 M (measured by Karl Fischer) and likewise obtained
low total current efficiencies for CO (fCO = 24%) and little to no H2 (fH2 = <1%). However, increasing the waterconcentration to 10 M gave
substantially higher Faradaic efficiencies for CO (fCO = 45% ± 6.4), with H2 production (fH2 = 30% ± 7.8) (Table 1).[17] The solutions with 10 M H2O did not become turbid, and a UV–vis spectrum of the
working solution after a CPE displayed features that were similar
to those observed for [CoIINH(Br)]+ and [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ (vida infra) (Figure S1 in the SI); though quantification was not possible because the exact speciation
could not be established, the spectrum indicates that a [CoIINH]2+ complex is the majority species present. Over the course of these
40-min CPE experiments 22 ± 3.2 C were passed, and a plot of
current vs time was relatively constant (Figure 1, inset). These data correspond to a TONCO of 4.1 ±
0.9 and TONH2 of 2.8 ± 1.0. In contrast to the original
report,[12a] no formate or oxalate was detected
under any set of conditions.[18] Substitution
of CO2 with NaHCO3 (30 mM, saturated) in bulk
electrolysis experiments did not yield any reduced CO2 products.
Table 1
Results of Controlled Potential Electrolysis (CPE)
Experiments Held at −2.0 V vs a Ag/AgNO3 Reference
Electrodea for 40 Min
comments
q/ C
fCO/ %
fH2/ %
[CoN4H(Br)2]+ in MeCN
(10 M H2O) w/ CO2
22 ± 3.2
45 ± 6.4
30 ± 7.8
[CoN4H(Br)2]+ in MeCN (10 M H2O) w/o CO2
40 ± 4.5
0
63 ± 3.5
CoCl2 in MeCN (10 M H2O) w/ CO2
6.9 ± 0.4
<1%
83 ± 4.0
background in
MeCN (10 M H2O) w/CO2 w/bare electrode
2.1 ± 1.3
<1%
61 ± 13*
background in MeCN (10 M H2O) w/ CO2 w/ used electrode
2.9 ± 1.3
<1%
66 ± 17*
The reference electrode
was externally referenced to a solution containing ferrocene in MeCN
with 0.1 M nBu4NClO4. The FeCp20/+ couple occurred at 0.13 V. See Experimental Section for conditions.
The hydrogen detected was near the detection limit
of the GC (∼1000 ppm) and accounts for the large error.
It has been previously reported that, in the case of hydrogen evolution
by a n class="Chemical">tris(glyoximate) cobalt clathro chelate precatalyst
complex, the catalytic species is a cobaltous material electrodeposited
onto the electrode surface at negative potentials rather than the
molecular complex.[16a] To test whether the
catalytic species in the present study might be an electro-deposited
film, the electrode surface was probed with XPS, and several informative
control experiments were conducted. After a CPE experiment, the electrode
was removed and washed with fresh acetonitrile andwater, and the
surface was then probed by XPS. A very low coverage of <0.3 atom
% cobalt was found on the surface (Figure S2 and S3, Table S3 in the SI), corresponding to a Co/C ratio of <0.004.
For comparison, a monolayer coverage of e-beam deposited Co on SiO2 has a Co/Si ratio of ∼0.1,[19] and a monolayer coverage of electro-deposited Co oxide on Au has
a Co/Au ratio of ∼1.4.[20] This suggests
that there is significantly less than a monolayer coverage of Co deposited
onto the glassy carbon electrodes post-CPE, although rigorous quantification
of Cocoverage would require additional experiments beyond the scope
and intent of this manuscript. To test whether the deposited material
was catalytically active, electrodes that were used for CPE experiments
with [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ were rinsed with fresh acetonitrile
andwater, and an additional 40 min electrolysis was run under identical
conditions, except that the precatalyst [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ was not added to the solution. For these background experiments
with the “used electrodes”, 2.9 ± 1.3 C of charge
were passed with fCO = <1%. The results
are similar to those obtained from the background CPE experiments
in which a clean unused electrode was used with no dissolved precatalyst
(2.1 ± 1.3 C, fCO = <1%). For
these control experiments, the amount of charge passed is appreciably
less than those containing dissolved precatalyst complex (22 ±
3.2 C), and more importantly, selectivity for CO2 over
H+ is dramatically enhanced in the presence of [CoIIINH(Br)2]+. We also performed control CPE experiments with
dissolved CoCl2 which formed turbid solutions and produced
H2 in fH2 = 83% ± 4.0
and fCO = <1% (6.9 ± 0.4 C). Note
that it is known that CoCl2 deposits cobalt material on
glassy carbon.[16c] These observations provide
evidence that any cobalt material deposited on the electrode is not
responsible for the observed CO2 reduction catalysis and
that a molecular cobalt–NH complex is involved in the electrocatalytic process.
(Top)
Cyclic voltammograms of 0.3 mM [CoIIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)2]+ in
MeCN (black), addition of CO2 (red), and addition of water
to make a 10 M solution in MeCN (blue). Inset shows a plot of current
vs time for a 40-min controlled potential electrolysis experiment
(potential held at −2.13 vs FeCp2+/0).
(Bottom) CV of 0.7 mM [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ in MeCN with 10
M H2O with CO2 (blue) and without CO2 (green); the dashed black line is the background current in MeCN
with 10 M H2O andCO2 with no added cobaltcomplex.
Conditions: scan rate = 0.100 V/s; supporting electrolyte is 0.1 M nBu4NPF6; working electrode = glassy
carbon; reference electrode = isolated Ag/AgNO3 (1 mM)
with 0.1 M nBu4NPF6; counter
electrode = glassy carbon.
The reference electrode
was externally referenced to a solution containing n class="Chemical">ferrocene in MeCN
with 0.1 M nBu4NClO4. The FeCp20/+ couple occurred at 0.13 V. See Experimental Section for conditions.
The hydrogen detected was near the detection limit
of the GC (∼1000 ppm) an class="Disease">nd accounts for the large error.
Synthesis of [CoN], [CoNH(MeCN)]+, and [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+
Con class="Disease">nditions: (a) 2KC8, THF, RT; (b) NaBPh4, MeCN/H2O (3:1), RT;
(c) [H-DMF][OTf], MeCN, RT; (d) electrochemical reduction, E1/2 = −0.92 V vs FeCp2+/0.
Synthesis and Molecular
Structure of [CoN]
Conn class="Chemical">sidering that electrocatalytic CO2 reduction occurred
at a potential very close to the CoI/0 couple, we endeavored
to isolate the reduced species and study its stoichiometric reactions
with CO2. This was accomplished by using [CoIINH(Br)]Br as a
synthon.[21] Reduction of [CoIINH(Br)]Br with
2 equiv KC8 in THF afforded a dark-purple, benzene soluble
product that analyzed as [CoN] (Scheme 1).[22] The 1H NMR spectrum of [CoN] in C6D6 is that of a diamagnetic
species andcontains four aliphatic and two aromatic C–H resonances
but is missing the resonance expected for the NH group of the NH ligand (Figure S4
in the SI).[23] Further indication of the absence of an N–H bondcomes from
the lack of a ν(NH) in the FTIR-ATR spectrum of [CoN] (Figure S5 in the SI). Crystals suitable for X-ray diffraction were obtained
by slow diffusion of pentane into a concentrated benzene solution
of [CoN].
Scheme 1
Synthesis of [CoN], [CoNH(MeCN)]+, and [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+
X-ray crystal structure
of [CoN] (left) an class="Disease">nd [CoNH(MeCN)]+ (right). Except for the NH group, hydrogen atoms are removed for
clarity. Thermal ellipsoids displayed at 50% probability. The [BPh4]− counteranion in [CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4] has been
removed for clarity.
The molecular structure
of [CoN] revealed that the n class="Chemical">cobalt
ion is four-coordinate and distorted square planar (Figure 2). The amidonitrogen N4 is planar (Σ∠
= 360.0°), and no hydrogen was found in the difference map. The
cobalt-pyridineCo1–N1 bond distance is 1.800(2) Å, a
contraction compared to 1.848(1) Å in [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ (vide infra; Table 2). Similarly short
Co–Npy bond distances of 1.787(2) Å and 1.797(3)
Å were observed for the related [PDI]CoClcomplexes.[24,25] For [CoN], the Co1–N1
contraction is accompanied by a shortening of the Co1–N4(amido) distance to 1.810(2) Å, down from 1.966(1) Å
in [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+. Compared to other cobalt–amido bond
distances, the Co1–N4 distance in [CoN] is unusually short. For comparison, Fryzuk et al.
has characterized several high-spin [CoIPNP] complexes
with Co–Namido bond distances ranging from 1.898(3)
to 1.904(3) Å.[26] Caulton andco-workers
have reported a three coordinate S = 1 [CoIPNP] complex which has a Co–Namido bond distance
of 1.973(2) Å that shortens by ∼0.03 Å when CO is
bound.[27a] Additionally, Mindiola andco-workers
synthesized a different [CoIPNP]2(μ-N2) complex with a Co–Namido distance of 1.928(2)
Å.[27b] Except for [CoIPNP(CO)]
and [CoIPNP]2(μ-N2), the difference
in spin state (paramagnetic [CoIPNP] vs diamagnetic [CoN]) makes it difficult to meaningfully
compare these bond distances to those in [CoN]. Finally, the imine C–N bond distances (1.330(2)
Å) in [CoN] are longer
than expected for a redox-innocent PDI moiety, which complicates the
oxidation state assignment of the cobalt ion and is discussed further
below.
Figure 2
X-ray crystal structure
of [CoN] (left) and [CoNH(MeCN)]+ (right). Except for the NH group, hydrogen atoms are removed for
clarity. Thermal ellipsoids displayed at 50% probability. The [BPh4]− counteranion in [CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4] has been
removed for clarity.
Table 2
Comparison of metrical parameters from XRD data for
[CoN4], [CoN4H(MeCN)]+, and [CoIIN4H(MeCN)]2+
[CoN4]
[CoN4H(MeCN)]+
[CoIIN4H(MeCN)]2+
Bond Distances (Å)
Co1–N1
1.800(2)
1.807(1)
1.848(1)
Co1–N2
1.881(2)
1.920(1)
1.957(1)
Co1–N3
1.888(2)
1.921(1)
1.971(1)
Co1–N4
1.810(2)
2.023(1)
1.966(1)
N2–C2
1.330(2)
1.319(2)
1.303(2)
N3–C3
1.330(2)
1.325(2)
1.294(2)
Co1–N5
–
1.998(1)
2.105(1)
C1–C2
1.442(2)
1.444(2)
1.476(3)
C3–C4
1.436(2)
1.435(2)
1.474(3)
Bond
Angles (deg)
N1–Co–N4
178.81(5)
155.48(2)
172.671(4)
N2–Co–N3
162.91(5)
160.92(2)
162.101(3)
Synthesis and Molecular Structure of [CoNH(MeCN)]+
We investigated
the possibility of isolating the protonated form of [n class="Chemical">CoN]. This was accomplished by dissolving purple
[CoN] in a 3:1 MeCN/H2O mixture, affording a dark-forest green solution (Scheme 1). The new species [CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4] was isolated in 65%
yield by precipitation with NaBPh4. The 1H NMR
spectrum of [CoNH(MeCN)]+ contains sharp resonances in the diamagnetic
region and includes a resonance at 2.43 ppm (1H, t, JN–H = 11.5 Hz) that integrates to one proton. This
resonance is greatly diminished in the 1H NMR spectrum
of the isotopomer [CoN(MeCN)]+ (Figure S6 in the SI). The FTIR-ATR spectrum of [CoNH(MeCN)]+ contains
an isotopically sensitive ν(NH) band at 3250 cm–1 that shifts to 2415 cm–1 when [CoN(MeCN)]+ is used (ν(NH)/ ν(ND) = 1.345; calcd = 1.370)
(Figure S5 in the SI).
The X-ray
crystal structure of the cation [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]+ reveals a five-coordinate
distorted square pyramidal (τ = 0.09) cobalt ion bound to NH (Figure 2). In contrast to [CoN], the aminenitrogen N4 is protonated and pyramidalized (Σ∠
= 338.8°). The Co1–N1 bond distance in [CoNH(MeCN)]+ is 1.807(1)
Å, similar to that found in [CoN]. However, in [CoNH(MeCN)]+ the Co1–N4 bond is elongated to
2.023(1) Å reflecting the protonation of the amido ligand. An
acetonitrile molecule occupies the fifth coordination site of the
cobalt ion. As with [CoN], the
C2–N2 and C3–N3 imine bond lengths in [CoNH(MeCN)]+ are elongated
to 1.319(2) Å and 1.325(2) Å, respectively, compared to
those in [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+.
Synthesis and Molecular
Structure of [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+
We explored the stoichiometric
reactivity of [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]+ with acid. Treating [CoNH(MeCN)]+ with one equivalent
of [H-DMF][OTf] (pKa = 6.1)[28] in MeCN resulted in an immediate color change
from dark-forest green to orange-red. The headspace of the reaction
analyzed by GC confirmed production of 1/2 equiv H2 (47%
± 4).[29] A similar experiment was
performed in a sealed J-young tube with [H-DMF][OTf] and [CoN(MeCN)]+, and it was found that the 1H NMR spectrum contained
an H2 resonance but showed no evidence of coupling from
incorporation of deuterium. This result suggests that the
proton on the 2product.
X-ray crystal structure
of [CoIINH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]2+. Except for the NH group, hydrogen atoms are
removed for clarity. Thermal ellipsoids displayed at 50% probability.
The [BPh4]− and [OTf]− counteranions in [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][BPh4] have been removed
for clarity.
CV of 1 mM [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]+ in MeCN
before (black) and after (dashed blue) addition of 1 equiv [H-DMF][OTf].
Conditions: 0.1 M nBu4NPF6;
reference electrode = silver wire (* = internal FeCp2).
The orange-red solution resulting
from treatment of [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]+ with [H-DMF][OTf] contained a paramagnetic S = 1/2 cobaltcomplex (μeff = 1.6 μB, RT in CD3CN). This conclusion is supported by
the 77 K EPR spectrum (Figure S7 in the SI) of a frozen solution of the purified material, which was isolated
in 87% yield and analyzed as [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][BPh4]. The UV–vis
and EPR spectra of the product are nearly identical to those very
recently reported by Deronzier andco-workers (Figure S8 in the SI) in the context of photochemical H2 production.[30] The molecular structure
of [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ was determined by X-ray diffraction and revealed
a five-coordinate (τ = 0.18) cobaltcomplex with two outer sphere
anions (Figure 3). The amine on NH is H-bonded to the triflate
anion as indicated from the N4···O1 distance of 2.844(2)
Å. Compared to [CoN] and
[CoNH(MeCN)]+, the complex [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ has noticeably shorter imine
C–N bond lengths (1.303(2) Å and 1.294(3) Å) (Table 2). These shorter bond lengths are consistent with
the spectroscopic assignment of the product being a CoII ion bound to the neutral ligand NH.
Figure 3
X-ray crystal structure
of [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+. Except for the NH group, hydrogen atoms are
removed for clarity. Thermal ellipsoids displayed at 50% probability.
The [BPh4]− and [OTf]− counteranions in [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][BPh4] have been removed
for clarity.
Electrochemical Properties of [CoNH(MeCN)]+ and [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ and Electrocatalytic H2 Evolution
We
also probed the electrochemical properties of [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)]+ and [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+. The CV of [CoNH(MeCN)]+ (Figure 4) exhibits
two reversible couples, one oxidation at −0.88 V vs FeCp2+/0 (formally the CoI/II couple) and
one reduction at −1.88 V vs FeCp2+/0 (formally
the CoI/0 couple).[31] Addition
of 1 equiv [H-DMF][OTf] caused the solution to turn orange red, but
there was no change in the CV except that the resting state potential
shifted positive of the redox couple at −0.88 V, indicative
of an oxidation state change. Notably, addition of excess [H-DMF][OTf]
or tosic acid (TsOH·H2O) resulted in the formation
of a catalytic wave near the CoII/I couple consistent with
electrocatalytic H2 evolution (Figure S9 in the SI). CPE experiments were conducted at two potentials
for TsOH·H2O (pKa = 8)[32] and2,6-dichloroanalinium tetrafluoroborate
([2,6-DCA][BF4], pKa = 5.1),[33] the results of which are presented in Table
S4 in the SI. These experiments confirm
H2 as the major product with >85% Faradaic efficiency.
Figure 4
CV of 1 mM [CoNH(MeCN)]+ in MeCN
before (black) and after (dashed blue) addition of 1 equiv [H-DMF][OTf].
Conditions: 0.1 M nBu4NPF6;
reference electrode = silver wire (* = internal FeCp2).
Discussion
The CVs of [CoIIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)2]+ in
the presence of CO2 indicated that CO2 reacts
at the formal “CoI/0” couple. On the basis
of the reversibility of this couple and on the successful isolation
of the [NiNH] complex,[10] we anticipated that treatment of cobalt–NH complexes with the
appropriate stoichiometric reductant would produce an analogous [CoNH] complex. However,
in all attempts the only tractable cobalt-containing product was [CoN]. To summarize, treatment of either
[CoIINH(Br)]+ or [CoIINH(MeCN)]2+ with 2 equiv KC8 or NaHg only formed [CoN].
The same occurred when 1 equiv KC8 was reacted with [CoNH(MeCN)]+. The mechanism by which [CoN] is formed is not known; however, a cobalt-hydrido species may result
from isomerization of [CoNH] and subsequently lose H• bimolecularly in the form
of H2 (Scheme 2).[22] This contrasts the stability of [NiNH], which does not appear to lose H2 to form the corresponding [NiN] complex.
Scheme 2
Plausible Outline for CO2 Reduction Involving
the Putative “[CoNH]” Complex That Is Formed at the Formal CoI/0 Redox Couple; the “[CoNH]” Complex Is Unstable to Loss of H2 but Can Be Intercepted by CO2
This loss of H2 at the n class="Gene">CoI/0 redox event may be a consequence of ligand noninnocence and its
interaction with the cobalt ion. To probe this possibility, we explored
the electronic structures of the reduced complexes we prepared. On
the basis of the charge of [CoN] and [CoNH(MeCN)]+, the cobalt ions are in the +1 oxidation state. However,
the imine C–N bond distances suggest a more complicated description
of the electronic structures. Several research groups have investigated
[PDI]CoX (X = halide, alkyl, H) complexes.[9,10,24,25] From these
studies, the sum of the results suggest that the electronic environments
of [PDI]CoX species (formally CoI) are usually best described
as having an open-shell singlet configuration in which a low-spin
CoII ion is antiferromagnetically coupled to a ligand-based
anion radical.[24,25] The [NiNH] complex, that Wieghardt andco-workers
have characterized, formally contains a “Ni0”
ion but has elongated imine C–N bond lengths (1.353(7) Å
and 1.351(8) Å).[10] Along with DFT
studies, the complex [NiNH] was interpreted as containing a NiII ion bound
to the dianionic ligand NH. The imine C–N bond
lengths of [CoN] and [CoNH(MeCN)]+ are in between those of NHand NH, and close to those in the [PDI]CoXcomplexes, suggesting a description for [CoN] having a CoII ion bound to N (and NH for [CoNH(MeCN)]+).
To
supplement the crystallography, we also performed DFT calculations
on [CoN] an class="Disease">nd [CoNH(MeCN)]+ and found
that in both cases the open-shell singlet configuration was 4.4 and
4.6 kcal/mol, respectively, lower in enthalpy than the closed-shell
configuration. A surface plot of the atomic spin density (Figure 5) supports the hypothesis that an anion radical
(N, NH) is antiferromagnetically coupled
to a low-spin CoII ion. For [CoN] and [CoNH(MeCN)]+, the atomic spin-density on the cobalt
ion is 0.75 and 0.81, respectively, with the remaining spin density
distributed throughout the ligand.
Figure 5
Mulliken atomic spin-density surface of
[CoN] (left) and [CoNH(MeCN)]+ (right)
(isovalue = 0.003). Hydrogen atoms removed for clarity.
Mulliken atomic spin-density surface of
[n class="Chemical">CoN] (left) and [CoNH(MeCN)]+ (right)
(isovalue = 0.003). Hydrogen atoms removed for clarity.
The redox noninnocence of NH may have implications on selectivity between
H2 evolution an class="Disease">nd CO2 reduction electrocatalysis.
This is important because the difficulty of decoupling CO2 reduction from H2 evolution remains an outstanding challenge
in electrocatalysis. For example, some of the better H2-evolving molecular electrocatalysts are cobalt N4-macrocyles
with imino-glyoximate ligands.[34] However,
to our knowledge there are no reports of successful electrocatalytic
CO2 reduction using cobaltcomplexes with these ligands.[35] Recent investigations into the electronic structure
of reduced cobalt andnickelcomplexes with imino-glyoximate ligands
have suggested redox noninnocence, albeit with deleterious side reactions
resulting in ligand modification.[36] Including
this report, previous investigations from Peters,[34i] Deronzier[30] and Lau[37] have demonstrated that [CoIIINH(X)2]+ (X = halogen) is a competent precatalyst for H2 evolution. It was therefore surprising that [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ is a competent precatalyst for CO2 reduction under
the appropriate conditions. The stability of the reduced NH ligand radical anion, and perhaps the ability to accommodate
a second redox equivalent as demonstrated by [NiNH], likely contributes to preferential
CO2 reduction in wet MeCN. Although the putative [CoNH] complex is unstable
to loss of H2, the electrogenerated [CoNH] intermediate is at least sufficiently
stable under electrocatalytic conditions to be intercepted by CO2 (Scheme 2). The mechanism by which
CO andH2 are formed, either by two competing or one synchronous
path, is still undetermined and currently under investigation.
Conclusions
In this report, we have explored the CO2 reduction activity
of a n class="Chemical">cobalt complex with a redox active pyridyldiimine moiety. In
particular, we have shown that the formally “CoI” complex [CoNH(MeCN)]+ is a precatalyst for the reduction of
CO2 to CO in CO2-saturated solutions of MeCN
with 10 M H2O (fCO = 45% ±
6.4), and does so preferentially to H+ reduction even though
the complex is known to be competent for electrocatalytic H2-evolution. XPS measurements of glassy carbon electrodes post-CPE
and other control experiments support the assertion that the dissolved
molecular complex, rather than an electrodeposited film, is responsible
for the observed electrocatalysis. In addition, we have isolated the
formally “CoI” complex [CoNH(MeCN)]+ by protonation
of the “CoI”–amidocomplex [CoN], both of which were characterized
by X-ray crystallography. Along with the molecular structures, broken
symmetry DFT calculations suggest they are nominally described as
low-spin CoII ions antiferromagnetically coupled to a ligand
radical-anion (NH and N), a result
consistent with the [PDI]CoX literature.[9] The stability of the NH ligand radical anion
and ability to accommodate a second redox equivalent may contribute
to the preferential reduction of CO2 over H+ in the presence of large concentrations of water.
Experimental
Section
General and Physical Methods
All reagents were purchased
from commercial sources an class="Disease">nd used as received unless otherwise noted.
Solvents were sparged with nitrogen and dried over columns containing
molecular sieves or alumina. The deuterated solvents were degassed
and dried over activated 3 Å sieves prior to use. NMR spectra
were recorded on Varian 300, 400, and 500 MHz spectrometers. 1H and13C chemical shifts are reported in ppm relative
to residual solvent as internal standards and are singlets unless
otherwise stated. Identification of 13C shifts were made
on the basis of standard 2D methods (HSQC and HMBC). Elemental analyses
were performed on a Perkin Elmer 2400 CHNS analyzer. Electronic absorbance
spectra were recorded with a Cary 50 spectrometer. Fourier transform
infrared ATR spectra were collected on a Thermo Scientific Nicolet
iS5 spectrometer with diamondATR crystal (utilized iD5 ATR insert).
GC measurements were collected using an Agilent Technologies 7890A
GC system with front andback TCD channels. X-band EPR spectra were
recorded on a Bruker EMX spectrometer. Electrochemical experiments
were conducted using a Biologic VSP-300 five-channel potentiostat
using the EC Lab Express version 5.53 software package.
Electrochemical
Methods
Cyclic Voltammetry
Unless otherwise stated, the working
electrode was a 0.071 cm2 diameter glassy carbon disk electrode
(CH instruments), an class="Disease">nd the counter electrode was carbon rod (99.999%
Strem). The reference electrode was a Ag/AgNO3 (1.0 mM)/MeCN
nonaqueous reference electrode (also contained 0.1 M nBu4NPF6) separated from the solution by a Vycor
frit (Bioanalytical Systems, Inc.) and externally referenced to ferrocene.
Alternately, the reference electrode was a silver wire with an internal
ferrocene standard (internally referenced CVs contain an asterisk
indicating the FeCp2+/0 couple).
Controlled-Potential
Electrolysis
Controlled-potential electrolyn class="Chemical">sis experiments
were conducted at ambient pressure in a sealed two-chamber cell where
the first chamber held the working and reference electrodes in 40
mL of 0.1 M nBu4NClO4 in MeCN
with 0.3 mM catalyst, and the second chamber held the auxiliary electrode
in 19 mL of 0.1 M nBu4NClO4 in MeCN with 20 mM FeCp2. The two chambers were separated
by a fine porosity glass frit. A 6 cm × 1 cm × 0.3 cm glassy
carbon plate (Tokai Carbon U.S.A.) was used as the working electrode,
about a quarter of which was submerged in the solution. The auxiliary
electrode was a nichrome wire (EISCO scientific). The reference electrode
was a Ag/AgNO3 (1 mM)/MeCN nonaqueous reference electrode
separated from the solution by a Vycor frit (Bioanalytical Systems,
Inc.) andcontained 0.1 M nBu4NClO4. The cell was prepared with degassed solvent on a Schlenk
line with N2 or CO2 for 30 min and then sealed
before the beginning of each controlled-potential electrolysis experiment.
Each controlled-potential electrolysis experiment was conducted for
40 min at the specified potential (−2.0 V vs the Ag/AgNO3 reference electrode) under vigorous stirring (the stir plate
was set to 900 rpm). The amount of CO andH2 evolved was
quantified from an analysis of the headspace with an Agilent 7890A
gas chromatograph using a thermal conductivity detector. Faradaic
efficiencies were determined by dividing the measured CO andH2 produced by the amount of CO andH2 expected on
the basis of the charge passed during the controlled-potential electrolysis
measurement.
X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy
The surface compon class="Chemical">sition of the carbon electrode surface after a 40-min
bulk electrolysis in the presence of [CoIIINH(Br)2]+ andCO2 was determined via XPS on a Kratos Axis Nova
spectrometer with DLD (Kratos Analytical; Manchester, UK). The excitation
source for all analysis was monochromatic Al Kα1,2 (hv = 1486.6 eV) operating at 30 mA and 15 kV.
The X-ray source was directed 45° with respect to the sample
normal. A base pressure of 1 × 10–9 Torr
is maintained in the analytical chamber, which rises to 5 × 10–9 Torr during spectral acquisition. All spectra were
acquired using the hybrid lens magnification mode and slot aperture,
resulting in an analyzed area of 700 μm × 400 μm.
Survey scans were collected using 160 eV pass energy, while narrow
region scans used 20 eV; charge compensation via the attached e–-flood source was not necessary in this study. The
following sequence of scans was performed: Survey (−5–1200
eV), Na 1s (1068–1076 eV), O 1s (528–538 eV), Ag 3d
(364–378 eV), C 1s (280–292 eV), Si 2s (146–161
eV) andCo 3p (52–70 eV).
Subsequent peak fitting andcomposition analysis was performed using CasaXPS version 2.3.16 (Casa
Software Ltd.; Teignmouth, UK). Energy scale correction for the survey
and narrow energy regions was accomplished by setting the large component
in the C 1s spectrum, corresponding to a C 1s C(=C) transition,
to 284.8 eV. All components were fitted using a Gaussian 30% Lorentzian
convolution function. For quantification, Shirley baselines were employed
where there was a noticeable change in CPS before and after the peak
in the survey spectrum; otherwise, linear was chosen. Atomic percentages
were calculated using the CasaXPS packages for regions and/or components
and are reported herein. Calculations were performed using region
or component areas normalized to relative sensitivity factors specific
to the instrument conditions with deconvolution from the spectrometer
transmission function.
Synthetic Methods
[CoIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)]Br and
[CoIIINH(Br)2]Br were synthesized on a Schlenk line according
to literature methods.[21] Remaining manipulations
and syntheses were conducted in a Vacuum Atmospheres, Co. drybox under
a nitrogen atmosphere. Solvents were dried using a JC-Meyer solvent
system and otherwise degassed with N2 before use. KC8 and[H-DMF][OTf] were synthesized according to literature
procedures.[38,39]
Preparation of [CoIINH(Br)]Br
Following a slightly modified procedure from Busch,[21] 2,6-diacetylpyridine (1.00 g, 6.13 mmol) andn class="Chemical">CoBr2 (1.35 g, 6.17 mmol) were dissolved in 20 mL of degassed
EtOH and treated with 0.5 mL of H2O. Dropwise addition
of 3,3′-diaminodipropylamine to the blue-green solution caused
the solution to become dark-red and opaque. After complete addition
of 3,3′-diaminodipropylamine, the solution was treated with
glacial acetic acid (1 μL), and the resulting dark-purple heterogeneous
mixture was stirred for 12 h at 50 °C and afterward cooled to
room temperature. The purple solid was collected on a glass fritted
funnel and washed with Et2O and dried over P2O5 for 24 h (2.5 g, 84%). FTIR-ATR: (solid powder, cm–1) 3193, 3056, 2930, 2862, 1585, 1567. The elemental
analysis match literature but are reported here for convenience: Anal.
Calcd (found) for [CoIINH(Br)]Br·0.5H2O (C15H23Br2CoN4O0.5): %C 37.06,
(37.22); %H 4.77, (4.48); %N 11.53, (11.39). Post drying with P2O5 Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoIINH(Br)]Br (C15H22Br2CoN4): %C 37.76, (37.28);
%H 4.75, (4.93); %N 11.74, (11.35).
Preparation of [CoIIINH(Br)2]Br
The salt [CoIIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)2]Br was prepared
according to literature procedures.[18] Aerobic
oxidation of in situ prepared [CoIINH(Br)2] in the presence of
1 equiv HBr( overnight afforded a green
solution. Recrystallization was accomplished by diffusion of Et2O into MeOH solutions of [CoIIINH(Br)2]Br. The solid
was dried under reduced pressure with P2O5. 1H NMR (MeOD-d3, 400 MHz): δ
8.57 (3H, m, Ar-H), δ 6.43 (1H, t, J = 11.5, NH), δ 4.20 (2H, d, J = 16.4, CH), δ 3.65 (2H, t, J = 13.5, CH), δ 3.48 (2H, q, J = 11.5, CH), δ 3.12 (2H, d, J = 12.4, CH), δ 2.92 (6H, s, CH3), δ 2.28 (4H, m, CH2). Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoIIINH(Br)2]Br (C15H22Br3CoN4): %C 32.34, (32.07);
%H 3.98, (4.04); %N 10.06, (9.78).
Preparation of [CoN]
Solid [CoIINH(n class="Chemical">Br)]Br (294
mg, 0.616 mmol) andKC8 (178 mg, 1.32 mmol) were placed
in a 20 mL scintillation vial with a stir bar (the stir bar had been
previously stirred over KC8 in THF). THF (10 mL) was added
at room temperature, and the vigorously stirring solution immediately
became inky-purple and warm. Small amounts of bubbles were observed.
After 30 min, the solution was filtered through Celite, and the filtrate
was dried in vacuo. The solid was washed with 10
mL of toluene and passed through a medium porosity glass fritted funnel
to remove insoluble material. The toluene was removed in vacuo to yield an analytically pure dark-purple solid (161 mg, 83%). X-ray
quality crystals were grown by pentane vapor diffusion into a saturated
benzene solution. The material could be further purified by saturating
a solution in toluene and adding pentane and storing the solution
at −35 °C for several days and washing the crystals with
cold pentane on a glass fritted funnel (10% yield). To determine gaseous
products, the reaction was conducted in a sealed flask, andTHF solvent
was added via syringe. By GC analysis, the amount of H2 produced corresponded to a 20% yield based on [CoN] product. 1H NMR (C6H6, 300 MHz): δ 8.15 (1H, t, J = 7.5
Hz, Ar-H), δ 7.62 (2H, d, J = 7.5 Hz, Ar-H), δ 4.28 (4H, br s, CH2), δ 3.55 (4H, br s, CH2), δ 2.25 (4H, br s, CH2), δ 0.99 (6H, s, CH3).13C NMR (C6H6, 100 MHz) δ 117.3 (meta-C), δ 114.2 (para-C), δ 57.7 (CH2), δ 53.4 (CH2), δ 34.3 (CH2), δ 17.0 (C). FTIR-ATR: (cm–1) 3105, 3070, 2905, 2808, 2745, 2663, 1571, 1530, 1510, 1485, 1446,
1380, 1355, 1337, 1317, 1260, 1194, 1177, 1152, 1136, 1125, 1013.
UV–vis: λmax (THF, nm (ε, M–1 cm–1)) 375 (8300), 452 (shoulder, 2100), 544 (8300),
650 (1400), 773 (1750). Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoN] (C15H21CoN4): %C 56.96 (56.69); %H 6.69 (6.79); %N 17.71 (17.51). Alternatively,
solid [CoIINH(MeCN)2][BPh4]2 (100 mg,
0.1 mmol) was suspended in 5 mL of THF and stirred with a stir bar
that had been previously stirred over KC8. The solution
was treated with KC8 (28 mg, 0.2 mmol) in two roughly equal
portions causing the reaction to become dark inky-purple. After stirring
for 5 min, 2 mL of pentane was added and allowed to stir for an additional
1 min after which the solution was passed through a filter pipet containing
glass-fiber filter paper and a Celite pad, removing white/gray solid
(KBPh4 and C). The resulting homogeneous inky-purple filtrate
was reduced to dryness in vacuo, and the resulting solid was treated
with 5 mL benzene followed by 1 mL of pentane and again filtered through
a filter pipet with glass wool. The resulting filtrate was reduced
to dryness in vacuo (this process was repeated at least one more time).
The resulting product was identical to [CoN] and analytically pure.
Preparation of [CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4]
Solid [CoN] (107
mg, 0.339 mmol) was dissolved in n class="Chemical">MeCN (15 mL) with NaBPh4 (118 mg, 0.345 mmol), and degassed H2O (2 mL) was added
causing a color change from dark purple to dark green and was brought
into an oxygen-free “wet” box. A small amount of water
was added (∼0.5–5 mL) until crystallization was induced,
and the resulting mixture was allowed to rest at room temperature
for several days. The dark-green crystals were isolated on a glass
fritted filter funnel and dried under reduced pressure for at least
12 h (149 mg, 65%). 1H NMR (MeCN-d3 400 MHz): δ 8.48 (1H, t, J = 7.7 Hz, Ar-H), δ 7.71 (2H, d, J = 7.7 Hz, Ar-H), δ 7.27 (8H, br s, Ar-H), δ
6.99 (8H, t, J = 7.3 Hz), Ar-H),
δ 6.84 (4H, t, J = 7.1 Hz, Ar-H), δ 4.47 (2H, d, J = 14.2 Hz, CH), δ 3.29 (2H, t, J = 13.4 Hz, CH), δ 2.86 (2H, t, J = 11.3 Hz, CH), δ 2.75 (2H, q, J = 11.5 Hz, CH), δ 2.42 (1H, t, J = 11.5, NH), δ 2.22 (2H, d, J = 14.9, CH), δ 1.96 (s, coordinated MeCN), δ 1.82 (2H,
q, J = 12.9, CH), δ 1.63 (6H,
s, CH3).13C NMR (C6H6, 100 MHz) δ 164.8 (q, J = 49.5,
BPh4), δ 148.2 (ortho-C) δ 136.7 (q, J = 1.34, BPh4), δ 126.6 (q, J = 2.65, BPh4), δ 124.6
(meta-C), δ 122.7
(BPh4), δ 116.6 (para-C), δ 54.2 (CH2), δ 52.5 (CH2), δ
29.6 (CH2), δ 16.6 (C). UV–vis: λmax (MeCN, nm (ε, M–1 cm–1)) 331 (6900), 430 (4750), 687 (1300), 845 (sh). FTIR-ATR: (cm–1) 3251, 3047, 2979, 2935, 2920, 2873, 2840, 1579,
1475, 1426, 1386, 1306, 1257, 1142, 1060. Anal. Calcd (found) for
[CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4], C41H45BCoN5: %C 72.68
(72.67); %H 6.69 (6.63); %N 10.34 (10.26).
Yield of H2 from
Treatment of [CoNH(MeCN)][BPh4] with [H-DMF][OTf]
Solid [CoNH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)][BPh4] (20.0 mg, 0.030 mmol) was dissolved in 5 mL of MeCN in a 250 mL
round-bottom flask and sealed. A stock solution of [H-DMF][OTf] in
MeCN was added (1.0 mL, 30 mM), causing the immediate color change
from dark green to orange-red. After 10 min, the headspace was sampled
with a gas-tight syringe and injected into a GC. The yield was based
on a calibrated method experiment (47% yield (±4%)).
Preparation
of [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][BPh4]
Solid [CoIINH(n class="Chemical">MeCN)][BPh4] (74.1 mg, 0.109 mmol) was dissolved in 5 mL of MeCN in a 20 mL
vial. [H-DMF][OTf] (25.0 mg, 0.112 mmol) in 1 mL MeCN was added causing
the immediate color change from dark green to orange-red. After 0.5
h the solution was layered under Et2O affording red crystals
(78.8 mg, 87%). μeff = 1.60 μB (MeCN-d3, 20 °C). UV–vis: λmax (MeCN, nm (ε, M–1 cm–1)) 358 (990), 445 (1220), 450 (1210). FTIR-ATR: (cm–1) 3235, 3082, 3048, 3026, 2995, 2982, 2940, 2924, 2886, 2873, 1582,
1478, 1464, 1426, 1366, 1326, 1286, 1251, 1237, 1220, 1170, 1157,
1144, 1093, 1077, 1064, 1051, 1024. Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][[BPh4], C42H45BCoF3N5O3S: %C 61.02 (60.79); %H 5.49 (5.66) %N 8.47 (8.47).
Preparation of [CoIINH(MeCN)2][BPh4]2
Under a flow of n class="Chemical">N2, solid Co(BF4)2·6H2O (1.04 g, 3.1 mmol) anddiacetyl-pyridine (0.50
g, 3.1 mmol) were dissolved in 30 mL of degassed MeCN in a 500 mL
Schlenk round-bottom flask. The pale-orange solution was treated dropwise
with 3,3′-diaminodipropylamine (0.41 g, 3.1 mmol) in 5 mL of
water (degassed) via addition funnel, and the solution turned slightly
darker orange. The addition funnel was replaced under a stream of
N2 with a reflux condenser and heated to boiling upon which
it turned from pale orange to very dark purple-red. The solution was
refluxed overnight and afterward cooled to room temperature. The reflux
condenser was replaced under a stream of N2 with a new
addition funnel and was treated dropwise with NaBPh4 (2.00
g, 5.8 mmol) in 20 mL MeCN/H2O (1:3) solution. The reaction
mixture was exposed to vacuum andbrought into a glovebox (wet-box)
and treated with 40 mL of water, causing the precipitation of purple-red
crystals which were isolated on a frit and washed one time with water
and dried until a free-flowing powder. The solid was used to prepare
a saturated MeCN solution (160 mL) of the compound and was recrystallized
by slow diffusion of Et2O, which yielded the pure compound
as dark purple-black needles. The crystals were isolated on a glass
fritted funnel and dried to constant weight at room temperature and
analyzed as [CoIINH(MeCN)2][BPh4]2 (yield
2.47 g = 78%). Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoIINH(MeCN)2][BPh4]2, C67H68B2CoN6: %C 77.54 (77.05); %H 6.60 (6.55) %N 8.10
(8.06). When one equivalent (rather than excess) of NaBPh4 was used in the synthesis, the product was obtained in 33% crystalline
yield. Anal. Calcd (found) for [CoIINH(MeCN)2][BPh4]2, C67H68B2CoN6: %C 77.54 (77.40); %H 6.60 (6.47) %N 8.10 (8.17). Spectroscopic
measurements matched those obtained for [CoIINH(MeCN)][OTf][BPh4].
Authors: Zuofeng Chen; Chuncheng Chen; David R Weinberg; Peng Kang; Javier J Concepcion; Daniel P Harrison; Maurice S Brookhart; Thomas J Meyer Journal: Chem Commun (Camb) Date: 2011-10-14 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Elisenda Lopez-Manzano; Andrea A Cronican; Kristin L Frawley; Jim Peterson; Linda L Pearce Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Luis M Aguirre Quintana; Samantha I Johnson; Sydney L Corona; Walther Villatoro; William A Goddard; Michael K Takase; David G VanderVelde; Jay R Winkler; Harry B Gray; James D Blakemore Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-05-24 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Eva M Nichols; Jeffrey S Derrick; Sepand K Nistanaki; Peter T Smith; Christopher J Chang Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 9.825
Authors: Sabrina Gonglach; Shounik Paul; Michael Haas; Felix Pillwein; Sreekumar S Sreejith; Soumitra Barman; Ratnadip De; Stefan Müllegger; Philipp Gerschel; Ulf-Peter Apfel; Halime Coskun; Abdalaziz Aljabour; Philipp Stadler; Wolfgang Schöfberger; Soumyajit Roy Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 14.919