| Literature DB >> 34308079 |
Kazuhiro Uemura1, Erina Yasuda1, Yuko Sugiyama1.
Abstract
The highest occupied moleEntities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34308079 PMCID: PMC8296546 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.1c02634
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Figure 1Crystal structures of (a) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH3)4}2](PF6)4·6nH2O (1) and (b) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2CH3)4}2](PF6)4 (2).
Scheme 1Heterometallic 1D Chains Constructed by HOMO–LUMO Interaction at d Orbitals with Variable Metal Alignments
Scheme 2Synthetic Route for Heterometallic 1D Hexanuclear Complexes 1–5
Figure 2(a) Crystal structure of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C2H5)4}2](PF6)4 (3). (b) Stacking fashion between rhodium dinuclear complex and platinum dinuclear complex in 3. (c) Packing view of 3. The hydrogen atoms and anions are omitted for clarity.
Scheme 3Angles (θ) through Metal–Metal Bonds, Torsional Twist Angles (ϕ), and Dihedral Angles (τ) in Heterometallic Hexanuclear Complexes
Figure 3(a) Crystal structure of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C3H7)4}2](PF6)3(ClO4) (4). (b) Stacking fashion between rhodium dinuclear complex and platinum dinuclear complex in 4. (c) Packing view of 4. The hydrogen atoms and anions are omitted for clarity.
Figure 4(a) Crystal structure of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C4H9)4}2](ClO4)4 (5). (b) Stacking fashion between rhodium dinuclear complex and platinum dinuclear complex in 5. (c) Packing view of 5. The hydrogen atoms and anions are omitted for clarity.
Comparison of Selected Bond Distances (Å) and Angles (deg) between 1, 2, [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C2H5)4}2](PF6)4 (3), [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C3H7)4}2](PF6)3(ClO4) (4), and [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C4H9)4}2](ClO4)4 (5)
| compounds | Rh–Rh (Å) | Rh–Pt (Å) | Pt–Pt (Å) | θ1 (deg) | θ2 (deg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.3832(17) | 2.7460(10) | 2.9376(7) | 177.75(6) | 156.45(3) | |
| 2.3779(17) | 2.7493(12) | 2.9929(10) | 177.04(5) | 156.93(2) | |
| 2.3935(8) | 2.8321(5) | 3.0008(4) | 176.68(3) | 159.303(11) | |
| 2.3903(9) | 2.7536(6) | 2.9356(4) | 177.04(3) | 159.361(14) | |
| 2.3920(18) | 2.8030(11) | 3.0167(10) | 174.96(6) | 151.84(2) |
Average of four angles.
Figure 5Optimized structures (left), LUMO (middle), and HOMO (right) obtained by DFT calculations based on the model of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2CH3)4}2]4+, (a) 2a, (b) 2b under the rigid condition of Pt and Rh coordinates, and (c) 2c under the rigid condition of Pt, Rh, O, and N coordinates.
Figure 7Results of DFT calculation based on the model of (a) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2CH3)4}2]4+ (2c), (b) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2C2H5)4}2]4+ (3c), (c) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2C3H7)4}2]4+ (4c), and (d) [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2C4H9)4}2]4+ (5c).
Figure 6Result of DFT calculation based on the model of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2CH3)4}2]4+ (2c) under the rigid condition of Pt, Rh, O, and N coordinates.
Figure 8Diffuse reflectance spectra of (a) 1, (b) 2, (c) 3, (d) 4, and (e) 5 with MgO at room temperature.
Figure 9Diffuse reflectance spectra of 5 with schematic electronic structure. Green, blue, and red bars show the results of TD-DFT calculation for 5a, 5b, and 5c, respectively.
Figure 10ESI-MS (positive) spectra for (a) 4 and (b) 5 measured by dilution in MeOH. Selected peaks are simulated with isotope patterns as bars.
Figure 11UV–vis spectra of 0.05 mM CH2Cl2 solution containing (a) 4 and (c) 5. Diffuse reflectance spectra of (b) 4 and (d) 5 with MgO at room temperature. Green, blue, and red bars show the results of TD-DFT calculation for na, nb, and nc, respectively. Photograph courtesy of “Kazuhiro Uemura”. Copyright 2021.
Figure 121H NMR spectrum (600 MHz in CD2Cl2, 0.5 mM) of 5.
Figure 13(a) 1H NMR spectra (600 MHz in CD2Cl2, 0.5 mM) of 5 with 0, 1, 2, and 3 equiv [Pt2(piam)2(NH2C4H9)4](PF6)2. (b) UV–vis spectra of 0.05 mM CH2Cl2 solution containing 5 with 0, 0.25, 0.5, ..., and 3.0 equiv [Pt2(piam)2(NH2C4H9)4](PF6)2.
Scheme 4Alkyl Moieties Support the Maintaining of Hexanuclear Backbone in Hydrophobic Solvents
Figure 14Cyclic voltammograms of (a) [Rh2(O2CCH3)4(CH3CN)2] in CH3CN, (b) 4, and (c) 5 in CH2Cl2 in the presence of 0.1 M Bu4NPF6 as the supporting electrolyte (scan rate: 100 mV s–1). The values are given with regard to Fc/Fc+, which has been used as internal standard for calibration of the Ag/AgCl reference electrode.
Figure 15Result of DFT calculation based on the model of [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(NHCOCH3)2(NH2CH3)4}2]5+ (2c) under the rigid condition of Pt, Rh, O, and N coordinates.
Crystallographic Data and Structure Refinements for [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C2H5)4}2](PF6)4 (3), [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C3H7)4}2](PF6)3(ClO4) (4), and [{Rh2(O2CCH3)4}{Pt2(piam)2(NH2C4H9)4}2](ClO4)4 (5)
| empirical formula | C44H108F24N12O12P4Pt4Rh2 | C52H124F18N12O14P3Pt4Rh2 | C60H140Cl4N12O28Pt4Rh2 |
| formula weight | 2563.48 | 2562.71 | 2605.81 |
| crystal system | monoclinic | triclinic | triclinic |
| space group | |||
| 35.658(4) | 12.6800(16) | 10.799(3) | |
| 12.1247(13) | 12.8383(15) | 14.482(4) | |
| c (Å) | 20.754(3) | 15.356(2) | 15.787(5) |
| α (deg) | 90 | 80.918(5) | 77.164(9) |
| β (deg) | 119.4765(14) | 89.778(6) | 89.966(11) |
| γ (deg) | 90 | 64.518(3) | 77.378(8) |
| 7811.6(16) | 2222.5(5) | 2346.1(12) | |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | |
| temperature (K) | 123 | 123 | 123 |
| 2.180 | 1.915 | 1.844 | |
| absorption coefficient (mm–1) | 7.745 | 6.781 | 6.471 |
| 4920 | 1241 | 1278 | |
| crystal size (mm3) | 0.30 × 0.20 × 0.10 | 0.30 × 0.25 × 0.10 | 0.20 ×0.10 × 0.10 |
| measured reflections | 30 945 | 17 778 | 19 015 |
| independent reflections | 8941 [ | 10 024 [ | 10 576 [ |
| data/restraints/parameters | 8941/0/474 | 10024/0/482 | 10576/0/508 |
| goodness of fit
on | 1.066 | 1.105 | 1.199 |
| 0.0347 | 0.0450 | 0.0620 | |
| 0.0387 | 0.0521 | 0.0935 |