| Literature DB >> 25294978 |
Kirandeep Kaur1, Minati Baral1.
Abstract
A hexadentate Schiff baseEntities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25294978 PMCID: PMC4176642 DOI: 10.1155/2014/915457
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioinorg Chem Appl Impact factor: 7.778
Figure 1(a) Molecular structure of trenhynaph; (b) least strain energy structure of ligand obtained from semiempirical PM6 method showing presence of hydrogen bonding.
Figure 2Scheme for the synthesis of trenhynaph.
Scheme 1Keto-enol forms of trenhynaph.
Figure 3(a) Theoretical electronic spectra of ligand trenhynaph by ZINDO using INDO/S parameters after reoptimizing geometry with MOPAC PM5 and (b) experimental electronic spectra of the ligand (1 × 10−5 M in DMSO/H2O, 5/95).
Experimental and theoretical IR spectral data of ligand.
| IR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (OOP) | Asymmetric | Symmetric | |||||
| Experimental (cm−1) | 1622 | 1350 | 3055 | 764 | 2940 | 2821 | 1622 |
| Theoretical (cm−1) | 1683 | 1384 | 3105 | 772 | 2967 | 2853 | 1683 |
Figure 4Potentiometric titration curves: (I) 1 × 10−3 M trenhynaph (L), 1 × 10−3 M [trenhynaph][M(III)] (1 : 1 molar ratio) [(II)-Al, (III)-Cr, (IV)-Fe], T = 25 ± 1°C, 0.1 M KCl, and “a” is the moles of base added per mole of ligand/complex.
Protonation constants (logK) of the ligand and trenhynaph at T = 25 ± 1°C and µ = 0.1 M KCl in DMSO/H2O (5/95) calculated using Hyperquad 2006 [31].
| Equilibrium | logK | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Assignments | Potentiometry | Spectrophotometry | |
| L + H ⇌ HL | O–H | 9.03 ± 0.01 | 9.04 ± 0.05 |
| HL + H ⇌ H2L | O–H | 8.02 ± 0.03 | 8.01 ± 0.06 |
| H2L + H⇌H3L | O–H | 7.12 ± 0.02 | 7.13 ± 0.09 |
Figure 5pH dependent electronic spectra as a function of absorbance and wavelength for (a) trenhynaph, (b) 1 : 1 solution of Fe(III), (c) Cr(III), and (d) Al(III) and trenhynaph, [trenhynaph] = [M(III)] = 1 × 10−5 M, T = 25 ± 1°C, 0.1 M KCl in DMSO/H2O (5 : 95).
Figure 6Species distribution curves computed from the (a) protonation constants for trenghynaph and (b) formation constants for [trenhynaph: Fe(III)], (c) Cr(III), and (d) Al(III).
Overall (logβ) for the metal complexes formed by the ligand at T = 25 ± 1°C and µ = 0.1 M KCl by potentiometry and spectrophotometry.
| log | MLH3 | MLH2 | MLH | ML | MLH−1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fe(III) | A | 39.79 ± 0.02 | 35.39 ± 0.04 | 31.91 ± 0.09 | 29.37 ± 0.01 | 17.28 ± 0.01 |
| B | 39.78 ± 0.06 | 35.38 ± 0.07 | 31.90 ± 0.10 | 29.36 ± 0.02 | 17.26 ± 0.09 | |
|
| ||||||
| Cr(III) | A | 38.68 ± 0.05 | 33.54 ± 0.01 | 26.98 ± 0.09 | 20.94 ± 0.06 | 8.54 ± 0.03 |
| B | 38.68 ± 0.08 | 33.57 ± 0.09 | 26.94 ± 0.08 | 20.93 ± 0.08 | 8.57 ± 0.05 | |
|
| ||||||
| Al(III) | A | 34.10 ± 0.07 | — | — | 20.49 ± 0.06 | 9.83 ± 0.09 |
| B | 34.11 ± 0.09 | — | — | 20.47 ± 0.07 | 9.81 ± 0.08 | |
Figure 7Suggested coordination modes of ligand with Fe(III), Cr(III), and Al(III).
Figure 8pH versus pM graph: pM was calculated for [L] = 5 × 10−4 and [M] = 5 × 10−5 using protonation constant of ligands and complexation constants β 11.
The calculated total energies for the various metal complexes formed in solution and structural parameters of M–L type complex through semiempirical PM6 method.
| Species | Fe(III) | Cr(III) | Al(III) | Properties | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| Fe(III)–L | Cr(III)–L | Al(III)–L | ||
| MLH3 | −420.4531 | −2517.6750 | −2419.9876 | Bond length | 2.133 | 2.129 | 2.143 |
| MLH2 | −1032.6754 | −9832.6785 | — | Bond length | 2.021 | 2.042 | 2.078 |
| MLH | −5832.4516 | −5130.5612 | — | Bond length | 2.133 | 2.129 | 2.143 |
| ML | −9529.8324 | −9246.1048 | −8348.1312 | Δ | −167.43 | −142.15 | −128.93 |
| MLH−1 | −890.4563 | −720.6745 | −960.3451 | Bond angle | 91.34 | 91.99 | 92.01 |
Figure 9Least strain structures of ML type metal complexes for (a) Fe(III), (b) Cr(III), and (c) Al(III) using semiempirical PM6 method at Hatree-Fock algorithms.