Interconversion of Molybdenum Imido and Amido Complexes by Proton‐Coupled Electron Transfer

Interconversion of the molybdenum amido [(^PhTpy)(PPh₂Me)₂Mo(NHtBuAr)][BArF²⁴] (^PhTpy=4′‐Ph‐2,2′,6′,2“‐terpyridine; tBuAr=4‐tert‐butyl‐C₆H₄; ArF²⁴=(C₆H₃‐3,5‐(CF₃)₂)₄) and imido [(^PhTpy)(PPh₂Me)₂Mo(NtBuAr)][BArF²⁴] complexes has been accomplished by proton‐coupled electron transfer. The 2,4,6‐tri‐tert‐butylphenoxyl radical was used as an oxidant and the non‐classical ammine complex [(^PhTpy)(PPh₂Me)₂Mo(NH₃)][BArF²⁴] as the reductant. The N?H bond dissociation free energy (BDFE) of the amido N?H bond formed and cleaved in the sequence was experimentally bracketed between 45.8 and 52.3 kcal mol^?1, in agreement with a DFT‐computed value of 48 kcal mol^?1. The N?H BDFE in combination with electrochemical data eliminate proton transfer as the first step in the N?H bond‐forming sequence and favor initial electron transfer or concerted pathways.     

The Versatile Coordination Modes of Monophosphine‐o‐Carborane in the Formation of Iridium and Rhodium Complexes: Synthesis,Reactivity, and Characterization

Monophosphine‐o‐carborane has four competitive coordination modes when it coordinates to metal centers. To explore the structural transitions driven by these competitive coordination modes, a series of monophosphine‐o‐carborane Ir,Rh complexes were synthesized and characterized. [Cp*M(Cl)₂{1‐(PPh₂)‐1,2‐C₂B₁₀H₁₁}] (M=Ir ( 1 a ), Rh ( 1 b ); Cp*=η⁵‐C₅Me₅), [Cp*Ir(H){7‐(PPh₂)‐7,8‐C₂B₉H₁₁}] ( 2 a ), and [1‐(PPh₂)‐3‐(η⁵‐Cp*)‐3,1,2‐MC₂B₉H₁₀] (M=Ir ( 3 a ), Rh ( 3 b )) can be all prepared directly by the reaction of 1‐(PPh₂)‐1,2‐C₂B₁₀H₁₁ with dimeric complexes [(Cp*MCl₂)₂] (M=Ir, Rh) under different conditions. Compound 3 b was treated with AgOTf (OTf=CF₃SO₃^?) to afford the tetranuclear metallacarborane [Ag₂(thf)₂(OTf)₂{1‐(PPh₂)‐3‐(η⁵‐Cp*)‐3,1,2‐RhC₂B₉H₁₀}₂] ( 4 b ). The arylphosphine group in 3 a and 3 b was functionalized by elemental sulfur (1 equiv) in the presence of Et₃N to afford [1‐{(S)PPh₂}‐3‐(η⁵‐Cp*)‐3,1,2‐MC₂B₉H₁₀] (M=Ir ( 5 a ), Rh ( 5 b )). Additionally, the 1‐(PPh₂)‐1,2‐C₂B₁₀H₁₁ ligand was functionalized by elemental sulfur (2 equiv) and then treated with [(Cp*IrCl₂)₂], thus resulting in two 16‐electron complexes [Cp*Ir(7‐{(S)PPh₂}‐8‐S‐7,8‐C₂B₉H₉)] ( 6 a ) and [Cp*Ir(7‐{(S)PPh₂}‐8‐S‐9‐OCH₃‐7,8‐C₂B₉H₉)] ( 7 a ). Compound 6 a further reacted with nBuPPh₂, thereby leading to 18‐electron complex [Cp*Ir(nBuPPh₂)(7‐{(S)PPh₂}‐8‐S‐7,8‐C₂B₉H₁₀)] ( 8 a ). The influences of other factors on structural transitions or the formation of targeted compounds, including reaction temperature and solvent, were also explored.     

Interconversion of Metallabenzenes and Cyclic η2‐Allene‐Coordinated Complexes

Treatment of the osmabenzene [Os{CHC(PPh₃)CHC(PPh₃)CH} Cl₂(PPh₃)₂]Cl ( 1 ) with excess 8‐hydroxyquinoline produces monosubstituted osmabenzene [Os{CH C(PPh₃) CHC(PPh₃)CH}(C₉H₆NO)Cl(PPh₃)]Cl ( 2 ) or disubstituted osmabenzene [Os{CHC(PPh₃)CHC(PPh₃)CH} (C₉H₆NO)₂]Cl ( 3 ) under different reaction conditions. Osmabenzene 2 evolves into cyclic η²‐allene‐coordinated complex [Os{CH?C(PPh₃)CH=(η²‐C?CH₂)}(C₉H₆NO)(PPh₃)₂]Cl ( 4 ) in the presence of excess PPh₃ and NaOH, presumably involving a P? C bond cleavage of the metallacycle. Reaction of 4 with excess 8‐hydroxyquinoline under air affords the S_NAr product [(C₉H₆NO)Os{CHC(PPh₃)CHCHC} (C₉H₆NO)(PPh₃)]Cl ( 5 ). Complex 4 is fairly reactive to a nucleophile in the presence of acid, which could react with water to give carbonyl complex [Os{CH?C(PPh₃)CH?CH₂}(C₉H₆NO) (CO)(PPh₃)₂]Cl ( 6 ). Complex 4 also reacts with PPh₃ in the presence of acid and results in a transformation to [Os {CHC(PPh₃)CHCHC}(C₉H₆NO)Cl (PPh₃)₂]Cl ( 7 ) and [Os{CH?C(PPh₃) CH=(η²‐C?CH(PPh₃))}(C₉H₆NO) Cl(PPh₃)]Cl ( 8 ). Further investigation shows that the ratio of 7 and 8 is highly dependent on the amount of the acid in the reaction.     

cis‐Tetra­carbonyl­[(4‐fluoro­phenyl)di­phenyl­phosphine‐P](piperidine‐N)molybdenum(0)

The title mol­ecule, [Mo{P(C₆H₅)₂(C₆H₄F)}(HNC₅H₁₀)(CO)₄] or [Mo(C₁₈H₁₄FP)(C₅H₁₁N)(CO)₄], has irregular octahedral geometry about the Mo atom. The mol­ecules form a complicated hydrogen‐bonded network comprising C—H?O, C—H?F and C—H?π hydrogen bonds and π–π interactions. The C—H?π and π–π interactions form chains containing C—H?π/π–π dimers linked via C—H?π interactions and the chains are linked into a three‐dimensional network via C—H?O and C—H?F hydrogen bonds.     

Oxorhenium(V) Complexes with 1,3,4‐Triphenyl‐1,2,4‐triazol‐5‐ylidene

Reactions of the oxorhenium(V) complexes [ReOX₃(PPh₃)₂] (X = Cl, Br) with the N‐heterocyclic carbene (NHC) 1,3,4‐triphenyl‐1,2,4‐triazol‐5‐ylidene (L^Ph) under mild conditions and in the presence of MeOH or water give [ReOX₂(Y)(PPh₃)(L^Ph)] complexes (X = Cl, Br; Y = OMe, OH). Attempted reactions of the carbene precursor 5‐methoxy‐1,3,4‐triphenyl‐4,5‐dihydro‐1H‐1,2,4‐triazole ( 1 ) with [ReOCl₃(PPh₃)₂] or [NBu₄][ReOCl₄] in boiling xylene resulted in protonation of the intermediately formed carbene and decomposition products such as [HL^Ph][ReOCl₄(OPPh₃)], [HL^Ph][ReOCl₄(OH₂)] or [HL^Ph][ReO₄] were isolated. The neutral [ReOX₂(Y)(PPh₃)(HL^Ph)] complexes are purple, airstable solids. The bulky NHC ligands coordinate monodentate and in cis‐position to PPh₃. The relatively long Re–C bond lengths of approximate 2.1Å indicate metal‐carbon single bonds.     

C−H and C−F Bond Activation Reactions of Fluorinated Propenes at Rhodium: Distinctive Reactivity of the Refrigerant HFO‐1234yf

The reaction of [Rh(H)(PEt₃)₃] ( 1 ) with the refrigerant HFO‐1234yf (2,3,3,3‐tetrafluoropropene) affords an efficient route to obtain [Rh(F)(PEt₃)₃] ( 3 ) by C?F bond activation. Catalytic hydrodefluorinations were achieved in the presence of the silane HSiPh₃. In the presence of a fluorosilane, 3 provides a C?H bond activation followed by a 1,2‐fluorine shift to produce [Rh{(E)‐C(CF₃)=CHF}(PEt₃)₃] ( 4 ). Similar rearrangements of HFO‐1234yf were observed at [Rh(E)(PEt₃)₃] [E=Bpin ( 6 ), C₇D₇ ( 8 ), Me ( 9 )]. The ability to favor C?H bond activation using 3 and fluorosilane is also demonstrated with 3,3,3‐trifluoropropene. Studies are supported by DFT calculations.     

Synthesis,Structure, and Reactivity of Hydridoiridium Complexes Bearing a Pincer‐Type PSiP Ligand

A series of iridium tetrahydride complexes [Ir(H)₄(PSiP‐R)] bearing a tridentate pincer‐type bis(phosphino)silyl ligand ([{2‐(R₂P)C₆H₄}₂MeSi]⁻, PSiP‐R, R=Cy, iPr, or tBu) were synthesized by the reduction of [IrCl(H)(PSiP‐R)] with Me₄N ⋅ BH₄ under argon. The same reaction under a nitrogen atmosphere afforded a rare example of thermally stable iridium(III)–dinitrogen complexes, [Ir(H)₂(N₂)(PSiP‐R)]. Two isomeric dinitrogen complexes were produced, in which the PSiP ligand coordinated to the iridium center in meridional and facial orientations, respectively. Attempted substitution of the dinitrogen ligand in [Ir(H)₂(N₂)(PSiP‐Cy)] with PMe₃ required heating at 150 °C to give the expected [Ir(H)₂(PMe₃)(PSiP‐Cy)] and a trigonal bipyramidal iridium(I)–dinitrogen complex, [Ir(N₂)(PMe₃)(PSiP‐Cy)]. The reaction of [Ir(H)₄(PSiP‐Cy)] with three equivalents of 2‐norbornene (nbe) in benzene afforded [Ir^I(nbe)(PSiP‐Cy)] in a high yield, while a similar reaction of [Ir(H)₄(PSiP‐R)] with an excess of 3,3‐dimethylbutene (tbe) in benzene gave the C H bond activation product, [Ir^III(H)(Ph)(PSiP‐R)], in high yield. The oxidative addition of benzene is reversible; heating [Ir^III(H)(Ph)(PSiP‐Cy)] in the presence of PPh₃ in benzene resulted in reductive elimination of benzene, coordination of PPh₃, and activation of the C H bond of one aromatic ring in PPh₃. [Ir^III(H)(Ph)(PSiP‐R)] catalyzed a direct borylation reaction of the benzene C H bond with bis(pinacolato)diboron. Molecular structures of most of the new complexes in this study were determined by a single‐crystal X‐ray analysis.     

Synthesis and Structure of Unprecedented Samarium Complex with Bulky Bis‐iminopyrrolyl Ligand via Intramolecular C=N Bond Activation

An unprecedentate samarium complex of the molecular composition [{κ³‐{(Ph₂CH)N=CH}₂C₄H₂N)}{κ³‐{(Ph₂CHN=CH)(Ph₂CHNCH)C₄H₂N}Sm}₂] ( 2 ), which was isolated by the reaction of a potassium salt of 2,5‐bis{N‐(diphenylmethyl)‐iminomethyl}pyrrolyl ligand [K(THF)₂{(Ph₂CH)N=CH}₂C₄H₂N)] ( 1 ) with anhydrous samarium diiodide in THF at 60 °C through the in situ reduction of imine bond is presented. The homoleptic samarium complex [[κ³‐{(Ph₂CH)–N=CH}₂C₄H₂N)]₃Sm] ( 3 ) can also be obtained from the reaction of compound 1 with anhydrous samarium triiodide (SmI₃) in THF at 60 °C. The molecular structures of complexes 2 and 3 were established by single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction analysis. The molecular structure of complex 2 reveals the formation of a C–C bond in the 2,5‐bis{N‐(diphenylmethyl)iminomethyl}pyrrole ligand moiety (Ph₂Py^–). However, complex 3 is a homoleptic samarium complex of three bis‐iminopyrrolyl ligands. In complex 2 , the samarium ion adopts an octahedral arrangement, whereas in complex 3 , a distorted three face‐centered trigonal prismatic mode of nine coordination is observed around the metal ion.     

Pentadiynylidyne and Pentacarbido Complexes

The reaction of the halocarbyne [W(≡CBr)(CO)₂(Tp*)] (Tp*=hydrotris(3,5‐dimethylpyrazol‐1‐yl)borate) with trimethylsilyl‐butadiyne, mediated by [Pd(PPh₃)₄] and CuI, affords the first pentadiynylidyne complex [W(≡CC≡CC≡CSiMe₃)(CO)₂(Tp*)]. Desilylation provides a general route to heterobimetallic pentacarbido complexes, including [(Tp*)(CO)₂W(μ‐C₅)(PPh₃)₂Ru(η‐C₅H₅)] and [(Ph₃P)₂(CO)HIr{(μ‐C₅)W(CO)₂(Tp*)}₂].     

A Persistent 1,2‐Dihydrophosphasilene Adduct

The reaction of the arylchlorosilylene–NHC adduct ArSi(NHC)Cl [Ar=2,6‐Trip₂‐C₆H₃; NHC=(MeC)₂(NMe)₂C] 1 with one molar equiv of LiPH₂^.dme (dme=1,2‐dimethoxyethane) affords the first 1,2‐dihydrophosphasilene adduct 2 (ArSi(NHC)(H)?PH). The latter is labile in solution and can undergo head‐to‐tail dimerization to give [ArSi(H)PH]₂ 3 and “free” NHC. Further stabilization of 2 by complexation with {W(CO)₅} affords the isolable 1,2‐dihydrophosphasilene–tungsten complex 4 [ArSi(NHC)(H)?P(H)W(CO)₅]. Additionally, the new 1‐silyl‐2‐hydrophosphasilene ArSi(NHC)(H)?PSiMe₃ 5 could be synthesized and structurally characterized. DFT studies confirmed that the Si?P bond in 2 and 4 is mostly zwitterionic with drastically decreased double‐bond character.     

Reaction of (η5‐C5H5)Fe(CO)2I with Anionic Bidentate Phosphine Ligands PPh2(o‐C6H4NHLi) or PPh2(o‐C6H4OLi)

The o‐substituted hybrid phenylphosphines, PPh₂(o‐C₆H₄NH₂) and PPh₂(o‐C₆H₄OH), could be deprotonated with LDA or n‐BuLi to yield PPh₂(o‐C₆H₄NHLi) and PPh₂(o‐C₆H₄OLi), respectively. When added to a solution of (η⁵‐C₅H₅)Fe(CO)₂I at room temperature, these two lithiated reagents produce a chelated neutral complex 1 (η⁵‐C₅H₅)Fe(CO)[C(O)NH(o‐C₆H₄)PPh₂‐C,P‐η²] for the former and mainly a zwitterionic complex 2 , (η⁵‐C₅H₅)Fe⁺(CO)₂[PPh₂(o‐C₆H₄O^?)] for the latter. Complex 1 could easily be protonated and then decarbonylated to give 4 [(η⁵‐C₅H₅)Fe(CO){NH₂(o‐C₆H₄)PPh₂‐N,P‐η²}⁺]. Complexes 1 and 4‐I have been crystallographically characterized with X‐ray diffraction.     

Carbonyl–carbonyl and carbonyl–π interactions as directing motifs in the supramolecular structure of carbonyl(3‐oxopenta‐1,4‐diene‐1,5‐diyl)[tris(3,5‐dimethyl‐1H‐pyrazol‐1‐yl‐κN2)methane]iridium(III) trifluoromethanesulfonate

In the title complex salt, [Ir(C₅H₄O)(C₁₆H₂₂N₆)(CO)](CF₃O₃S), the Ir^III centre adopts a distorted octahedral geometry with a facial coordination of the tris(3,5‐dimethyl‐1H‐pyrazol‐1‐yl)methane ligand. The C—C distances of the iridacycle are in agreement with its iridacyclohexa‐2,5‐dien‐4‐one nature, which presents a nonsymmetric boat‐like conformation with the C—Ir—C vertex more bent than the C—C(=O)—C vertex. The supramolecular architecture is mainly directed by CO...CO and CO...π and Csp³—H...O interactions, the arrangement of which depends on the anion.     

The Nature of the UC Double Bond: Pushing the Stability of High‐Oxidation‐State Uranium Carbenes to the Limit

Treatment of [K(BIPM^MesH)] (BIPM^Mes={C(PPh₂NMes)₂}^2?; Mes=C₆H₂‐2,4,6‐Me₃) with [UCl₄(thf)₃] (1 equiv) afforded [U(BIPM^MesH)(Cl)₃(thf)] ( 1 ), which generated [U(BIPM^Mes)(Cl)₂(thf)₂] ( 2 ), following treatment with benzyl potassium. Attempts to oxidise 2 resulted in intractable mixtures, ligand scrambling to give [U(BIPM^Mes)₂] or the formation of [U(BIPM^MesH)(O)₂(Cl)(thf)] ( 3 ). The complex [U(BIPM^Dipp)(μ‐Cl)₄(Li)₂(OEt₂)(tmeda)] ( 4 ) (BIPM^Dipp={C(PPh₂NDipp)₂}^2?; Dipp=C₆H₃‐2,6‐iPr₂; tmeda=N,N,N′,N′‐tetramethylethylenediamine) was prepared from [Li₂(BIPM^Dipp)(tmeda)] and [UCl₄(thf)₃] and, following reflux in toluene, could be isolated as [U(BIPM^Dipp)(Cl)₂(thf)₂] ( 5 ). Treatment of 4 with iodine (0.5 equiv) afforded [U(BIPM^Dipp)(Cl)₂(μ‐Cl)₂(Li)(thf)₂] ( 6 ). Complex 6 resists oxidation, and treating 4 or 5 with N‐oxides gives [{U(BIPM^DippH)(O)₂‐ (μ‐Cl)₂Li(tmeda)] ( 7 ) and [{U(BIPM^DippH)(O)₂(μ‐Cl)}₂] ( 8 ). Treatment of 4 with tBuOLi (3 equiv) and I₂ (1 equiv) gives [U(BIPM^Dipp)(OtBu)₃(I)] ( 9 ), which represents an exceptionally rare example of a crystallographically authenticated uranium(VI)–carbon σ bond. Although 9 appears sterically saturated, it decomposes over time to give [U(BIPM^Dipp)(OtBu)₃]. Complex 4 reacts with PhCOtBu and Ph₂CO to form [U(BIPM^Dipp)(μ‐Cl)₄(Li)₂(tmeda)(OCPhtBu)] ( 10 ) and [U(BIPM^Dipp)(Cl)(μ‐Cl)₂(Li)(tmeda)(OCPh₂)] ( 11 ). In contrast, complex 5 does not react with PhCOtBu and Ph₂CO, which we attribute to steric blocking. However, complexes 5 and 6 react with PhCHO to afford (DippNPPh₂)₂C?C(H)Ph ( 12 ). Complex 9 does not react with PhCOtBu, Ph₂CO or PhCHO; this is attributed to steric blocking. Theoretical calculations have enabled a qualitative bracketing of the extent of covalency in early‐metal carbenes as a function of metal, oxidation state and the number of phosphanyl substituents, revealing modest covalent contributions to U?C double bonds.     

Borane‐Catalyzed Cross‐Metathesis Strategy for Facile Transformation of Cyclic (Alkyl)(Amino)Germylenes

A borane B(C₆F₅)₃‐catalyzed metathesis reaction between the Si?C bond in the cyclic (alkyl)(amino)germylene (CAAGe) 1 and the Si?H bond in a silane (R₃SiH; 2 ) is reported. Mechanistic studies propose that the initial step of the reaction involves Si?H bond activation to furnish an ionic species [ 1 ‐SiR₃]⁺[HB(C₆F₅)₃]^?, from which [Me₃Si]⁺[HB(C₆F₅)₃]^? and an azagermole intermediate are generated. The former yields Me₃SiH concomitant with the regeneration of B(C₆F₅)₃ whereas the latter undergoes isomerization to afford CAAGes bearing various silyl groups on the carbon atom next to the germylene center. This strategy allows the straightforward synthesis of eight new CAAGes starting from 1 .     

cis‐Dicarbonyl‐cis‐dichlorido‐trans‐bis(triphenylphosphine‐κP)iridium(III) tetrafluoridoborate,formed by reaction of (cycloocta‐1,5‐diene)bis(triphenylphosphine)iridium tetrafluoridoborate with carbonyl fluoride in dichloromethane solution

The reaction between carbonyl fluoride and [Ir(COD)(PPh₃)₂]BF₄ (COD is cycloocta‐1,5‐diene) in dichloromethane solution affords the novel title iridium salt, [IrCl₂(C₁₈H₁₅P)₂(CO)₂]BF₄. The cation lies across a twofold rotation axis in the space group P2₁2₁2 and its structure confirms the presence in a cis relationship of two metal‐bound chlorides, while the phosphine ligands occupy a trans pair of sites. The anion also lies across a twofold rotation axis, and the F atoms are disordered over two sets of sites.     

Dynamic Permutational Isomerism in a closo‐Cluster

Permutational isomers of trigonal bipyramidal [W₂RhIr₂(CO)₉(η⁵‐C₅H₅)₂(η⁵‐C₅HMe₄)] result from competitive capping of either a W₂Ir or a WIr₂ face of the tetrahedral cluster [W₂Ir₂(CO)₁₀(η⁵‐C₅H₅)₂] from its reaction with [Rh(CO)₂(η⁵‐C₅HMe₄)]. The permutational isomers slowly interconvert in solution by a cluster metal vertex exchange that is proposed to proceed by Rh?Ir and Rh?W bond cleavage and reformation, and via the intermediacy of an edge‐bridged tetrahedral transition state. The permutational isomers display differing chemical and physical properties: replacement of CO by PPh₃ occurs at one permutational isomer only, while the isomers display distinct optical power limiting behavior.     

Reactions of Ethyne with Some Ruthenium Cluster Complexes Containing dppm

Reactions of ethyne with [Ru₃(μ‐dppm)(CO)₁₀] have given isomeric complexes [Ru₃(μ₃‐C₆H₆)(CO)₆(dppm)], one of which, 2 , contains the dppm chelating an Ru‐atom, together with a hexatrienetriyl ligand attached to the Ru₃ cluster to form a methylideneruthenacyclohexadiene system. The second isomer 3 contains the dppm bridging an Ru−Ru bond, with the C₆H₆ ligand forming a vinylruthenacyclopentadiene system. Also isolated was the open‐chain Ru₃ complex 4 containing a ruthenacyclopentadiene attached to the central Ru‐atom; the other Ru−Ru vector is bridged by a PPh₂CHPPh₂C₄H₅ ligand, formed by a novel insertion of two ethyne molecules into an Ru−P bond. The reaction of ethyne with [Ru₃(μ‐H)(μ₃‐C₂H₂)(CO)₉] proceeded by attack at the coordinated alkyne and at the cluster to give a cluster‐bonded PPh₂CH₂PPh₂CCH system in 7 . Thermolysis of [Ru₃(μ‐H)(μ₃‐C₂SiMe₃)(μ‐dppm)(CO)₇] ( 8 ; refluxing MeOH) in the presence of KF gave [Ru₆(μ‐CCH₂)₂(μ‐dppm)₂(CO)₁₂] ( 9 ; 80%); similar reactions carried out with [RuClCp(PPh₃)₂] also present gave 9 (67%) together with [Ru₃(μ‐H)(μ₃‐C₂H)(μ‐dppm)(CO)₆(PPh₃)] ( 11 ; 23%). The molecular structures of 2 , 3 , 4 , 7 , 9 , and 11 , some as differently solvated forms, have been determined by single‐crystal X‐ray studies.     

Platinum,iridium and rhodium complexes with substituted bis-(diphenylphosphino)methane ligands Ph2PCH(R)PPh2 (R = Me,Ph or SiMe3)

Substituted phosphines of the type Ph₂PCH(R)PPh₂ and their Pt^II complexes [PtX₂{Ph₂PCH(R)PPh₂}] (R = Me, Ph or SiMe₃; X = halide) were prepared. Treatment of [PtCl₂(NCBu^t)₂] with Ph₂PCH(SiMe₃)-PPh₂ gave [PtCl₂(Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂)], while treatment with Ph₂PCH(Ph)PPh₂ gave [Pt{Ph₂PCH(Ph)PPh₂}₂]Cl₂. Reaction of p-MeC₆H₄C≡CLi or PhC≡CLi with [PtX₂{Ph₂PCH(Me)PPh₂}] gave [Pt(C≡CC₆H₄Me-p)₂-{Ph₂PCH(Me)PPh₂}] (X = I) and [Pt{Ph₂PC(Me)PPh₂}₂](X = Cl),while reaction of p-MeC₆H₄C≡CLi with [Pt{Ph₂PCH(Ph)PPh₂}₂]Cl₂ gave [Pt{Ph₂PC(Ph)PPh₂}₂]. The platinum complexes [PtMe₂(dpmMe)] or [Pt(CH₂)₄(dpmMe)] fail to undergo ring-opening on treatment with one equivalent of dpmMe [dpmMe = Ph₂PCH(Me)PPh₂]. Treatment of [Ir(CO)Cl(PPh₃)₂] with two equivalents of dpmMe gave [Ir(CO)(dpmMe)₂]Cl. The PF₆ salt was also prepared. Treatment of [Ir(CO)(dpmMe)₂]Cl with [Cu(C≡CPh)₂], [AgCl(PPh₃)] or [AuCl(PPh₃)] failed to give heterobimetallic complexes. Attempts to prepare the dinuclear rhodium complex [Rh₂(CO)₃(μ-Cl)(dpmMe)₂]BPh₄ using a procedure similar to that employed for an analogous dpm (dpm = Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂) complex were unsuccessful. Instead, the mononuclear complex [Rh(CO)(dpmMe)₂]BPh₄ was obtained. The corresponding chloride and PF₆ salts were also prepared. Attempts to prepare [Rh(CO)(dpmMe)₂]Cl in CHCl₃ gave [RhHCl(dpmMe)₂]Cl. Recrystallization of [Rh(CO)(dpmMe)₂]BPh₄ from CHCl₃/EtOH gave [RhO₂(dpmMe)₂]BPh₄. Treatment of [Rh(CO)₂Cl₂]₂ with one equivalent of dpmMe per Rh atom gave two compounds, [Rh(CO)(dpmMe)₂]Cl and a dinuclear complex that undergoes exchange at room temperature between two formulae: [Rh₂(CO)₂(μ-Cl)(μ-CO)(dpmMe)₂]Cl and [Rh₂(CO)₂-(μ-Cl)(dpmMe)₂]Cl. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

RhIAr/AuIAr′ Transmetalation: A Case of Group Exchange Pivoting on the Formation of M−M′ Bonds through Oxidative Insertion

By combining kinetic experiments, theoretical calculations, and microkinetic modeling, we show that Pf/Rf (C₆F₅/C₆Cl₂F₃) exchange between [AuPf(AsPh₃)] and trans‐[RhRf(CO)(AsPh₃)₂] does not occur by typical concerted Pf/Rf transmetalation via electron‐deficient double bridges. Instead, it involves asymmetric oxidative insertion of the Rh^I complex into the (Ph₃As)Au?Pf bond to produce a [(Ph₃As)Au?RhPfRf(CO)(AsPh₃)₂] intermediate, followed by isomerization and reductive elimination of [AuRf(AsPh₃)]. Interesting differences were found between the LAu?Ar asymmetric oxidative insertion and the classical oxidative addition process of H₂ to Vaska complexes.     

Synthesis,Structures, and Reactivities of Pincer‐Type Ruthenium Complexes Bearing Two Proton‐Responsive Pyrazole Arms

A new metal–ligand bifunctional, pincer‐type ruthenium complex [RuCl( L1‐H2 )(PPh₃)₂]Cl ( 1 ; L1‐H2 =2,6‐bis(5‐tert‐butyl‐1H‐pyrazol‐3‐yl)pyridine) featuring two proton‐delivering pyrazole arms has been synthesized. Complex 1 , derived from [RuCl₂(PPh₃)₃] with L1‐H2 , underwent reversible deprotonation with potassium carbonate to afford the pyrazolato–pyrazole complex [RuCl(L1‐H)(PPh₃)₂] ( 2 ). Further deprotonation of 1 and 2 with potassium hexamethyldisilazide in methanol resulted in the formation of the bis(pyrazolato) complex [Ru(L1)(MeOH)(PPh₃)₂] ( 3 ). Complex 3 smoothly reacted with dioxygen and dinitrogen to give the side‐on peroxo complex [Ru(L1)(O₂)(PPh₃)₂] ( 4 ) and end‐on dinitrogen complex [Ru(L1)(N₂)(PPh₃)₂] ( 5 ), respectively. On the other hand, the reaction of [RuCl₂(PPh₃)₃] with less hindered 2,6‐di(1H‐pyrazol‐3‐yl)pyridine ( L3‐H2 ) led to the formation of the dinuclear complex [{RuCl₂(PPh₃)₂}₂(μ₂‐ L3‐H2 )₂] ( 6 ), in which the pyrazole‐based ligand adopted a tautomeric form different from L1‐H2 in 1 and the central pyridine remained uncoordinated. The detailed structures of 1 , 2 , 3 , 3.MeOH , 4 , 5 , 6 were determined by X‐ray crystallography.