Reactions of a Ruthenium Complex with Substituted N‐Propargyl Pyrroles

In an investigation into the chemical reactions of N‐propargyl pyrroles 1 a – c , containing aldehyde, keto, and ester groups on the pyrrole ring, with [Ru]?Cl ([Ru]=Cp(PPh₃)₂Ru; Cp=C₅H₅), an aldehyde group in the pyrrole ring is found to play a crucial role in stimulating the cyclization reaction. The reaction of 1 a , containing an aldehyde group, with [Ru]?Cl in the presence of NH₄PF₆ yields the vinylidene complex 2 a , which further reacts with allyl amine to give the carbene complex 6 a with a pyrrolizine group. However, if 1 a is first reacted with allyl amine to yield the iminenyne 8 a , then the reaction of 8 a with [Ru]?Cl in the presence of NH₄PF₆ yields the ruthenium complex 9 a , containing a cationic pyrrolopyrazinium group, which has been fully characterized by XRD analysis. These results can be adequately explained by coordination of the triple bond of the propargyl group to the ruthenium metal center first, followed by two processes, that is, formation of a vinylidene intermediate or direct nucleophilic attack. Additionally, the deprotonation of 2 a by R₄NOH yields the neutral acetylide complex 3 a . In the presence of NH₄PF₆, the attempted alkylation of 3 a resulted in the formation the Fischer‐type amino–carbene complex 5 a as a result of the presence of NH₃, which served as a nucleophile. With KPF₆, the alkylation of 3 a with ethyl and benzyl bromoacetates afforded the disubstituted vinylidene complexes 10 a and 11 a , containing ester groups, which underwent deprotonation reactions to give the furyl complexes 12 a and 13 a , respectively. For 13 a , containing an O‐benzyl group, subsequent 1,3‐migration of the benzyl group was observed to yield product 14 a with a lactone unit. Similar reactivity was not observed for the corresponding N‐propargyl pyrroles 1 b and 1 c , which contained keto and ester groups, respectively, on the pyrrole ring.     

Reactions of Propargyl Compounds Containing a Cyclobutyl Group Induced by a Ruthenium Complex

Reactions of [Ru]Cl ([Ru]={Cp(PPh₃)₂Ru}; Cp=cyclopentadienyl) with three alkynyl compounds, 1 , 5 , and 8 , each containing a cyclobutyl group, are explored. For 1 , the reaction gives the vinylidene complex 2 , with a cyclobutylidene group, through dehydration at C_δH and C_γOH. With an additional methylene group, compound 5 reacts with [Ru]Cl to afford the cyclic oxacarbene complex 6 . The reaction proceeds via a vinylidene intermediate followed by an intramolecular cyclization reaction through nucleophilic addition of the hydroxy group onto C_α of the vinylidene ligand. Deprotonation of 2 with NaOMe produces the acetylide complex 3 and alkylations of 3 by allyl iodide, methyl iodide, and ethyl iodoacetate generate 4 a – c , respectively, each with a stable cyclobutyl group. Dehydration of 1 is catalyzed by the cationic ruthenium acetonitrile complex at 70 °C to form the 1,3‐enyne 7 . The epoxidation reaction of the double bond of 7 yields oxirane 8 . Ring expansion of the cyclobutyl group of 8 is readily induced by the acidic salt NH₄PF₆ to afford the 2‐ethynyl‐substituted cyclopentanone 9 . The same ring expansion is also seen in the reaction of [Ru]Cl with 8 in CH₂Cl₂, affording the vinylidene complex 10 , which can also be obtained from 9 and [Ru]Cl. However, in MeOH, the same reaction of [Ru]Cl with 8 affords the bicyclic oxacarbene complex 12 a through an additional cyclization reaction. Transformation of 10 into 12 a is readily achieved in MeOH/HBF₄, but, in MeOH alone, acetylide complex 11 is produced from 10 . In the absence of MeOH, cyclization of 10 , induced by HBF₄, is followed by fluorination to afford complex 13 . Crystal structures of 6 and 12 a ′ were determined by single‐crystal diffraction analysis.     

η4‐HBCC‐σ,π‐Borataallyl Complexes of Ruthenium Comprising an Agostic Interaction

Thermolysis of [Cp*Ru(PPh₂(CH₂)PPh₂)BH₂(L₂)] 1 (Cp*=η⁵‐C₅Me₅; L=C₇H₄NS₂), with terminal alkynes led to the formation of η⁴‐σ,π‐borataallyl complexes [Cp*Ru(μ‐H)B{R‐C=CH₂}(L)₂] ( 2 a – c ) and η²‐vinylborane complexes [Cp*Ru(R‐C=CH₂)BH(L)₂] ( 3 a – c ) ( 2 a , 3 a : R=Ph; 2 b , 3 b : R=COOCH₃; 2 c , 3 c : R=p‐CH₃‐C₆H₄; L=C₇H₄NS₂) through hydroboration reaction. Ruthenium and the HBCC unit of the vinylborane moiety in 2 a – c are linked by a unique η⁴‐interaction. Conversions of 1 into 3 a – c proceed through the formation of intermediates 2 a – c . Furthermore, in an attempt to expand the library of these novel complexes, chemistry of σ‐borane complex [Cp*RuCO(μ‐H)BH₂L] 4 (L=C₇H₄NS₂) was investigated with both internal and terminal alkynes. Interestingly, under photolytic conditions, 4 reacts with methyl propiolate to generate the η⁴‐σ,π‐borataallyl complexes [Cp*Ru(μ‐H)BH{R‐C=CH₂}(L)] 5 and [Cp*Ru(μ‐H)BH{HC=CH‐R}(L)] 6 (R=COOCH₃; L=C₇H₄NS₂) by Markovnikov and anti‐Markovnikov hydroboration. In an extension, photolysis of 4 in the presence of dimethyl acetylenedicarboxylate yielded η⁴‐σ,π‐borataallyl complex [Cp*Ru(μ‐H)BH{R‐C=CH‐R}(L)] 7 (R=COOCH₃; L=C₇H₄NS₂). An agostic interaction was also found to be present in 2 a – c and 5 – 7 , which is rare among the borataallyl complexes. All the new compounds have been characterized in solution by IR, ¹H, ¹¹B, ¹³C NMR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry and the structural types were unequivocally established by crystallographic analysis of 2 b , 3 a – c and 5 – 7 . DFT calculations were performed to evaluate possible bonding and electronic structures of the new compounds.     

Further Evidence for ‘Extended’ Cumulene Complexes: Derivatives from Reactions with Halide Anions and Water

Reactions of [Ru{C=C(H)-1,4-C₆H₄C≡CH}(PPh₃)₂Cp]BF₄ ([ 1 a ]BF₄) with hydrohalic acids, HX, results in the formation of [Ru{C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C(X)=CH₂}(PPh₃)₂Cp] [X=Cl ( 2 a-Cl ), Br ( 2 a-Br )], arising from facile Markovnikov addition of halide anions to the putative quinoidal cumulene cation [Ru(=C=C=C₆H₄=C=CH₂)(PPh₃)₂Cp]⁺. Similarly, [M{C=C(H)-1,4-C₆H₄-C≡CH}(LL)Cp ]BF₄ [M(LL)Cp’=Ru(PPh₃)₂Cp ([ 1 a ]BF₄); Ru(dppe)Cp* ([ 1 b ]BF₄); Fe(dppe)Cp ([ 1 c ]BF₄); Fe(dppe)Cp* ([ 1 d ]BF₄)] react with H⁺/H₂O to give the acyl-functionalised phenylacetylide complexes [M{C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C(=O)CH₃}(LL)Cp’] ( 3 a – d ) after workup. The Markovnikov addition of the nucleophile to the remote alkyne in the cations [ 1 a–d ]⁺ is difficult to rationalise from the vinylidene form of the precursor and is much more satisfactorily explained from initial isomerisation to the quinoidal cumulene complexes [M(=C=C=C₆H₄=C=CH₂)(LL)Cp’]⁺ prior to attack at the more exposed, remote quaternary carbon. Thus, whilst representative acetylide complexes [Ru(C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C≡CH)(PPh₃)₂Cp] ( 4 a ) and [Ru(C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C≡CH)(dppe)Cp*] ( 4 b ) reacted with the relatively small electrophiles [CN]⁺ and [C₇H₇]⁺ at the β-carbon to give the expected vinylidene complexes, the bulky trityl ([CPh₃]⁺) electrophile reacted with [M(C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C≡CH)(LL)Cp’] [M(LL)Cp’=Ru(PPh₃)₂Cp ( 4 a ); Ru(dppe)Cp* ( 4 b ); Fe(dppe)Cp ( 4 c ); Fe(dppe)Cp* ( 4 d )] at the more exposed remote end of the carbon-rich ligand to give the putative quinoidal cumulene complexes [M{C=C=C₆H₄=C=C(H)CPh₃}(LL)Cp’]⁺, which were isolated as the water adducts [M{C≡C-1,4-C₆H₄-C(=O)CH₂CPh₃}(LL)Cp’] ( 6 a–d ). Evincing the scope of the formation of such extended cumulenes from ethynyl-substituted arylvinylene precursors, the rather reactive half-sandwich (5-ethynyl-2-thienyl)vinylidene complexes [M{C=C(H)-2,5-^cC₄H₂S-C≡CH}(LL)Cp’]BF₄ ([ 7 a – d ]BF₄ add water readily to give [M{C≡C-2,5-^cC₄H₂S-C(=O)CH₃}(LL)Cp’] ( 8 a – d )].     

Hydroboration of Alkynes with Zwitterionic Ruthenium–Borate Complexes: Novel Vinylborane Complexes

Building upon previous studies on the synthesis of bis(sigma)borate and agostic complexes of ruthenium, the chemistry of nido‐[(Cp*Ru)₂B₃H₉] ( 1 ) with other ligand systems was explored. In this regard, mild thermolysis of nido‐ 1 with 2‐mercaptobenzothiazole (2‐mbzt), 2‐mercaptobenzoxazole (2‐mbzo) and 2‐mercaptobenzimidazole (2‐mbzi) ligands were performed which led to the isolation of bis(sigma)borate complexes [Cp*RuBH₃L] ( 2 a – c ) and β‐agostic complexes [Cp*RuBH₂L₂] ( 3 a – c ; 2 a , 3 a : L=C₇H₄NS₂; 2 b , 3 b : L=C₇H₄NSO; 2 c , 3 c : L=C₇H₅N₂S). Further, the chemistry of these novel complexes towards various diphosphine ligands was investigated. Room temperature treatment of 3 a with [PPh₂(CH₂)_nPPh₂] (n=1–3) yielded [Cp*Ru(PPh₂(CH₂)_nPPh₂)‐BH₂(L₂)] ( 4 a – c ; 4 a : n=1; 4 b : n=2; 4 c : n=3; L=C₇H₄NS₂). Mild thermolysis of 2 a with [PPh₂(CH₂)_nPPh₂] (n=1–3) led to the isolation of [Cp*Ru(PPh₂(CH₂)_nPPh₂)(L)] (L=C₇H₄NS₂ 5 a – c ; 5 a : n=1; 5 b : n=2; 5 c : n=3). Treatment of 4 a with terminal alkynes causes a hydroboration reaction to generate vinylborane complexes [Cp*Ru(R?C?CH₂)BH(L₂)] ( 6 and 7 ; 6 : R=Ph; 7 : R=COOCH₃; L=C₇H₄NS₂). Complexes 6 and 7 can also be viewed as η‐alkene complexes of ruthenium that feature a dative bond to the ruthenium centre from the vinylinic double bond. In addition, DFT computations were performed to shed light on the bonding and electronic structures of the new compounds.     

Reactions of Ruthenium Complexes Containing Pentatetraenylidene Ligand

Two ruthenium acetylide complexes [Ru]?C≡C?C≡C?C(OR)(C₃H₅)₂ ( 2 , R=H and 2 a , R=CH₃; [Ru]=Cp(PPh₃)₂Ru) each with two cyclopropyl rings were synthesized from TMS?C≡C?C≡C?C(OH)(C₃H₅)₂ ( 1 ; TMS=trimethylsilyl). Treatments of 2 and 2 a with allyl halide in the presence of KPF₆ afforded the vinylidene complexes 3 and 3 a , respectively. When NH₄PF₆ was used, instead of KPF₆, additional ring‐opening reaction took place on one of the three‐membered ring. Treatment of [Ru]Cl with 1,3‐butadiyne ( 6 ), bearing an epoxide ring, afforded acetylide complex 7 with a furyl ring. Treatment of 2 a with Ph₃CPF₆ presumably afforded pentatetraenylidene complex {[Ru]=C=C=C=C=C(C₃H₅)₂}[PF₆] ( 10 ), which was not isolated. Additions of various alcohols in a solution of 10 generated a number of disubstituted allenylidene complexes {[Ru]=C=C=C(OR)?C=C(C₃H₅)₂}[PF₆] ( 11 ). Treatment of 11 with K₂CO₃ afforded the acetylide complex 12 bearing a carbonyl group, characterized by single X‐ray diffraction analysis. Addition of a primary amine to 10 caused cleavage of the farthermost C=C bond and several allenylidene complexes {[Ru]=C=C=C(Me)(NHR)}[PF₆] ( 18 ) were isolated.     

Reactions of Aromatic S‐ and O‐Enynes with Two Methyl Substituents on the Olefinic Unit Assisted by a Ruthenium Complex: Tandem Cyclization and Product Selectivity

Ruthenium‐assisted cyclizations of two enynes, HC≡CCH(OH)(C₆H₄)X? CH₂CH?CMe₂ (X=S ( 1a ), O ( 1b )), each of which contains two terminal methyl substituents on the olefinic parts, are explored. The reaction of 1a in CH₂Cl₂ gives the vinylidene complex 2a from the first cyclization and two side products, 3a and the carbene complex 4a with a benzothiophene ligand. The same reaction in the presence of HBF₄ affords 4a exclusively. Air oxidation of 4a in the presence of Et₃N readily gives an aldehyde product. In MeOH, tandem cyclizations of 1a generate a mixture of the benzothiochromene compound 10a and the carbene complex 7a also with a benzothiochromene ligand. First, cyclization of 1b likewise proceeds in CH₂Cl₂ to give 2b . Tandem cyclization of 1b in MeOH yields comparable products 10b and 7b with benzochromene moieties, yet with no other side product. The reaction of [Ru]Cl with HC≡CCH(OH)(C₆H₄)S? CH₂CH?CH₂ ( 1c ), which contains no methyl substituent in the olefinic part, in MeOH gives the carbene complex 15c with an unsubstituted thiochromene by means of a C? S bond formation. Structures of 3a and 15c are confirmed by X‐ray diffraction analysis. The presence of methyl groups of enynes 1a and 1b promotes sequential cyclization reactions that involve C? C bond formation through carbocationic species.     

Reactions of [Cp*Ru(H2O)(NBD)]+ with alkynes

Formal [2 + 2 + 2] addition reactions of [Cp*Ru(H₂O)(NBD)]BF₄ (NBD = norbornadiene) with PhC?CR (R = H, COOEt) give [Cp*Ru(η⁶‐C₆H₅? C₉H₈R)] BF₄ (1a, R = H; 2a, R = COOEt). Treatment of [Cp*Ru(H₂O)(NBD)]BF₄ with PhC?C? C?CPh does not give [2 + 2 + 2] addition product, but [Cp*Ru(η⁶‐C₆H₅? C?C? C?CPh)] BF₄(3a). Treatment of 1a, 2a, 3a with NaBPh₄ affords [Cp*Ru(η⁶‐C₆H₅? C₉H₈R)] BPh₄ (1b, R = H; 2b, R = COOEt) and [Cp*Ru(η⁶‐C₆H₅? C?C? C?CPh)] BPh₄(3b). The structures of 1b, 2b and 3b were determined by X‐ray crystallography. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

One‐Pot Syntheses of 2‐(2‐Sulfanyl‐4H‐3,1‐benzothiazin‐4‐yl)acetic Acid Derivatives via Reactions of 3‐(2‐Isothiocyanatophenyl)prop‐2‐enoic Acid Derivatives with Thiols or Sodium Sulfide

Two efficient methods for the preparation of 2‐(2‐sulfanyl‐4H‐3,1‐benzothiazin‐4‐yl)acetic acid derivatives 3 under mild conditions have been developed. The first method is based on the reaction of 3‐(2‐isothiocyanatophenyl)prop‐2‐enoates 1a – 1c with thiols in the presence of Et₃N in THF at room temperature, leading to the corresponding dithiocarbamate intermediates 2 , which underwent spontaneous cyclization at the same temperature by an attack of the S‐atom at the prop‐2‐enoyl moiety in a 1,4‐addition manner (Michael addition) to give 2‐(2‐sulfanyl‐4H‐3,1‐benzothiazin‐4‐yl)acetates in one pot. The second method involves treatment of 3‐(2‐isothiocyanatophenyl)prop‐2‐enoic acid derivatives 1b – 1d with Na₂S leading to the formation of 2‐(2‐sodiosulfanyl‐4H‐3,1‐benzothiazin‐4‐yl)acetic acid intermediates 5 by a similar addition/cyclization sequence, which are then allowed to react with alkyl or aryl halides to afford derivatives 3 . 2‐(2‐Thioxo‐4H‐3,1‐benzothiazin‐4‐yl)acetic acid derivatives 6 can be obtained by omitting the addition of halides.     

Reactions of Ruthenium–Allenylidene Complexes Tethering a Cyclopropyl Group

Two cyclopropyl allenylidene complexes [Ru]=CCC(R)(C₃H₅) ([Ru]=[RuCp(PPh₃)₂], Cp=Cyclopentadienyl; R=thiophene ( 2a ) and R=Ph ( 2b )) are prepared from the reactions of [Ru]Cl with the corresponding 1‐cyclopropyl‐2‐propyn‐1‐ol in the presence of KPF₆. Thermal treatment, halide‐anion addition, and palladium‐catalyzed reactions of 2a and 2b all lead to a ring expansion of the cyclopropyl group, giving the vinylidene complexes 4a and 4b , respectively, each with a five‐membered ring. This ring expansion proceeds by C C bond formation between Cβ of the cumulative double bond and a methylene group of the cyclopropyl ring. In the reaction of 2a with pyrrole, consecutive formation of two C C bonds, one between C‐2 of pyrrole and Cγ of 2a and the other between C‐3 of pyrrole and Cα, results in the formation of 6a . The reaction proceeds by addition of pyrrole and 1,3‐proton shifts. The hydrogenation of 2a by NaBH₄ is carried out in different solvents. The cumulative double bonds are reduced regioselectively to give a mixture of 7a and 8a . Interestingly, use of different solvents leads to different ratios of 7a and 8a . Presence of a protic solvent like methanol in dichloromethane or chloroform solution increases the yield of 8a , thus revealing that both the rates of hydroboration and deboronation increase. The structures of two new complexes 4a and 6a have been firmly established by X‐ray diffraction analysis.     

Transformation of a Cp*–Iridium(III) Precatalyst for Water Oxidation when Exposed to Oxidative Stress

The reaction of [Cp*Ir(bzpy)NO₃] ( 1 ; bzpy=2‐benzoylpyridine, Cp*=pentamethylcyclopentadienyl anion), a competent water‐oxidation catalyst, with several oxidants (H₂O₂, NaIO₄, cerium ammonium nitrate (CAN)) was studied to intercept and characterize possible intermediates of the oxidative transformation. NMR spectroscopy and ESI‐MS techniques provided evidence for the formation of many species that all had the intact Ir–bzpy moiety and a gradually more oxidized Cp* ligand. Initially, an oxygen atom is trapped in between two carbon atoms of Cp* and iridium, which gives an oxygen–Ir coordinated epoxide, whereas the remaining three carbon atoms of Cp* are involved in a η³ interaction with iridium ( 2 a ). Formal addition of H₂O to 2 a or H₂O₂ to 1 leads to 2 b , in which a double MeCOH functionalization of Cp* is present with one MeCOH engaged in an interaction with iridium. The structure of 2 b was unambiguously determined in the solid state and in solution by X‐ray single‐crystal diffractometry and advanced NMR spectroscopic techniques, respectively. Further oxidation led to the opening of Cp* and transformation of the diol into a diketone with one carbonyl coordinated at the metal ( 2 c ). A η³ interaction between the three non‐oxygenated carbons of “ex‐Cp*” and iridium is also present in both 2 b and 2 c . Isolated 2 b and mixtures of 2 a – c species were tested in water‐oxidation catalysis by using CAN as sacrificial oxidant. They showed substantially the same activity than 1 (turnover frequency values ranged from 9 to 14 min^?1).     

Oxygenation of Ruthenium Carbene Complexes Containing Naphthothiophene or Naphthofuran: Spectroscopic and DFT Studies

The aryl propargylic alcohol 1‐[2‐(thiophen‐3‐yl)phenyl]prop‐2‐yn‐1‐ol ( 1a ) is readily prepared from 2‐(thiophen‐3‐yl)benzaldehyde. In the presence of visible light, treatment of 1a with one‐half mole equivalent of [Ru]Cl ([Ru]?Cp(dppe)Ru) (dppe=1,2‐bis(diphenylphosphino)ethane) and NH₄PF₆ in O₂ affords the naphtha[2,1‐b]thiophene‐4‐carbaldehyde ( 4a ) in high yields. The cyclization reaction of 1a proceeds through the formation of the carbene complex 2a that contains the naphtha[2,1‐b]thiophene ring, which is isolated in a 1:1 stoichiometric reaction. The C? C bond formation between the inner carbon of the terminal triple bond and the heterocyclic ring is confirmed by structure determination of 2a using single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction analysis. Facile oxygenation of 2a by O₂ yields the aldehyde product 4a accompanied by the formation of phosphine oxide of dppe. Oxygen is most likely activated by coordination to the ruthenium center when one PPh₂ unit of the dppe ligand dissociates. This dissociated PPh₂ unit then reacts with the coordinated oxygen nearby to generate half‐oxidized dppe ligand and an unobserved oxo–carbene intermediate. Coupling of the oxo/carbene ligands followed by demetalation then yields 4a . Presumably the resulting complex with the half‐oxidized dppe ligand continuously promotes cyclization/oxygenation of 1a to yield the second aldehyde molecule. In alcohol such as MeOH or EtOH, the oxygenation reaction affords a mixture of 4a and the corresponding esters 5a or 5a' . Four other aryl propargylic alcohols 1b , 1c , 1d , 1e , which contain thiophen‐2‐yl, isopropenyl, fur‐3‐yl, and fur‐2‐yl, respectively, on the aryl ring are also prepared. Analogous aldehydes 4b , 4c , 4d , 4e are similarly prepared from 1b , 1c , 1d , 1e , respectively. For oxygenations of 1b , 1d , and 1e in alcohol, mixtures of aldehyde 4 , ester 5 , and acetal 8 are obtained. The carbene complex 2b obtained from 1b was also characterized by single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction analysis. The UV/Vis spectra of 2a and 2b consist of absorption bands with a high extinction coefficient. From DFT calculations on 2a and 2b , the visible light is found to populate the LUMO antibonding orbital of mainly Ru?C bonds, thereby weakening the Ru?C bond and promoting the oxygenation/demetalation reactions of 2 .     

Intramolecular Vinyl Radical Cyclization Reactions of cyclohexadienes derived from sequential additions to (arene)(tricarbonyl)chromium complexes. Preliminary communication

Cyclohexa-1,3-dienes 7–10 with a 1,5,6-substitution pattern were prepared in a one-pot reaction sequence by sequential addition of MeLi and propargyl bromides to the tricarbonylchromium complex 1a . These products were subjected to radical cyclization procedures. Vinyl radical generation by Bu₃Sn addition to the propargyl group in 7–10 was followed by regio- and diastereoselective intramolecular ring closure. Two different 5-exo-trig cyclizations are possible via different vinyl radical intermediates and cyclization to one or the other of the termini of the cyclohexadiene moiety. Internal alkynes reacted to yield exclusively the cis-fused hexahydroindene products 12–14 , whereas the terminal alkyne yielded bicyclo[3.2.1]octenes 11 as sole products.     

Esters as Radical Acceptors: β‐NHC‐Borylalkenyl Radicals Induce Lactonization by C−C Bond Formation/Cleavage on Esters

Substituted propargyl acetates are converted into 4‐boryl‐2(5H)‐furanones upon thermolysis in the presence of an N‐heterocyclic carbene borane (NHC‐borane) and di‐tert‐butyl peroxide. The acetyl methyl group is lost during the reaction as methane. Evidence suggests that the reaction proceeds by a sequence of radical events including: 1) addition of an NHC‐boryl radical to the triple bond; 2) cyclization of the resultant β‐borylalkenyl radical to the ester carbonyl group; 3) β‐scission of the so‐formed alkoxy radical to provide the 4‐boryl‐2(5H)‐furanone and a methyl radical; and 4) hydrogen abstraction from the NHC‐borane to return the initial NHC‐boryl radical and methane.     

Three ruthenocene derivatives: (η5‐4,7‐dimethylindenyl)(η5‐pentamethylcyclopentadienyl)ruthenium(II), [η5‐[2](4,7)indeno[2]paracyclophanyl](η5‐pentamethylcyclopentadienyl)ruthenium(II) and bis[η5‐[2](4,7)indeno[2]paracyclophanyl]­ruthenium(II)

In the title compounds, [Ru(C₁₀H₁₅)(C₁₁H₁₁)], (III), [Ru(C₁₀H₁₅)(C₁₉H₁₇)], (IV), and [Ru(C₁₉H₁₇)₂], (V), respectively, the coordinating ring systems are planar and parallel, with the Ru atoms lying at perpendicular distances of Ru–Cp* 1.790 (1) Å and Ru–indenyl 1.836 (1) Å in (III), Ru–Cp* 1.791 (1) Å and Ru–indenyl 1.837 (1) Å in (IV), and Ru–indenyl 1.812 (1) Å and 1.809 (1) Å in (V) (Cp* is penta­methyl­cyclo­penta­dienyl). The ring conformations are eclipsed for (III), staggered for (IV) and intermediate for (V). All three compounds show short intermolecular contacts from C—H groups to some ring centroids; these could be regarded as C—H?π hydrogen bonds. The mol­ecules of each compound are thus connected via the 2₁ screw axis to form layers parallel to the xy plane.     

Chemistry of Diruthenium and Dirhodium Analogues of Pentaborane(9): Synthesis and Characterization of Metal N,S‐Heterocyclic Carbene and B‐Agostic Complexes

Building upon our earlier results on the synthesis of electron‐precise transition‐metal–boron complexes, we continue to investigate the reactivity of pentaborane(9) and tetraborane(10) analogues of ruthenium and rhodium towards thiazolyl and oxazolyl ligands. Thus, mild thermolysis of nido‐[(Cp*RuH)₂B₃H₇] ( 1 ) with 2‐mercaptobenzothiazole (2‐mbtz) and 2‐mercaptobenzoxazole (2‐mboz) led to the isolation of Cp*‐based (Cp*=η⁵‐C₅Me₅) borate complexes 5 a , b [Cp*RuBH₃L] ( 5 a : L=C₇H₄NS₂; 5 b : L=C₇H₄NOS)) and agostic complexes 7 a , b [Cp*RuBH₂(L)₂], ( 7 a : L=C₇H₄NS₂; 7 b : L=C₇H₄NOS). In a similar fashion, a rhodium analogue of pentaborane(9), nido‐[(Cp*Rh)₂B₃H₇] ( 2 ) yielded rhodaboratrane [Cp*RhBH(L)₂], 10 (L=C₇H₄NS₂). Interestingly, when the reaction was performed with an excess of 2‐mbtz, it led to the formation of the first structurally characterized N,S‐heterocyclic rhodium‐carbene complex [(Cp*Rh)(L₂)(1‐benzothiazol‐2‐ylidene)] ( 11 ) (L=C₇H₄NS₂). Furthermore, to evaluate the scope of this new route, we extended this chemistry towards the diruthenium analogue of tetraborane(10), arachno‐[(Cp*RuCO)₂B₂H₆] ( 3 ), in which the metal center possesses different ancillary ligands.     

Dreiecksdodekaedrische Heterotri‐ und ‐tetrametall‐Eisen–Ruthenium‐Cluster mit CpR‐ und Pn‐Liganden (n = 5, 4)

Triangulated Dodecahedral Heterotrimetallic‐ and ‐tetrametallic Iron–Ruthenium Clusters with Cp^R and P_n Ligands (n = 5, 4) The cothermolysis of [Cp*Fe(η⁵‐P₅)] ( 1 ) and [{Cp″(OC)₂Ru}₂](Ru–Ru) ( 2 ), Cp″ = C₅H₃But₂‐1,3, affords low yields of [Cp″Ru(η⁵‐P₅)] ( 3 ) and [{Cp″Ru}₂P₄] ( 4 ) as well as the triangulated dodecahedral hetero‐ and homotrimetallic clusters [{Cp″Ru}₂{Cp*Fe}P₅] ( 5 ), [{Cp″Ru}₃P₅] ( 6 ), [{Cp*Fe}₂{Cp″Ru}P₅] ( 7 ) and the tetranuclear compound [{Cp″Ru}₃{Cp*Fe}P₄] ( 8 ). X‐ray crystallographic studies show that the P₅ ligand in the distorted M₂M′P₅‐triangulated dodecahedra of 5 and 7 offers an unusual novel coordination mode derived from the educt 1 .     

Zur Reaktivität von Titanocenkomplexen [Ti(Cp′)2(η2‐Me3SiC≡CSiMe3)] (Cp′ = Cp,Cp*) gegenüber Benzoldicarbonsäuren

On the Reactivity of Titanocene Complexes [Ti(Cp′)₂(η²‐Me₃SiC≡CSiMe₃)] (Cp′ = Cp, Cp*) towards Benzenedicarboxylic Acids Titanocene complexes [Ti(Cp′)₂(BTMSA)] ( 1a , Cp′ = Cp = η⁵‐C₅H₅; 1b , Cp′ = Cp* = η⁵‐C₅Me₅; BTMSA = Me₃SiC≡CSiMe₃) were found to react with iodine and methyl iodide yielding [Ti(Cp′)₂(μ‐I)₂] ( 2a / b ; a refers to Cp′ = Cp and b to Cp′ = Cp*), [Ti(Cp′)₂I₂] ( 3a / b ) and [Ti(Cp′)₂(Me)I] ( 4a / b ), respectively. In contrast to 2a , complex 2b proved to be highly moisture sensitive yielding with cleavage of HCp* [{Ti(Cp*)I}₂(μ‐O)] ( 7 ). The corresponding reactions of 1a / b with p‐cresol and thiophenol resulted in the formation of [Ti(Cp′)₂{O(p‐Tol)}₂] ( 5a / b ) and [Ti(Cp′)₂(SPh)₂] ( 6a / b ), respectively. Reactions of 1a and 1b with 1,n‐benzenedicarboxylic acids (n = 2–4) resulted in the formation of dinuclear titanium(III) complexes of the type [{Ti(Cp′)₂}₂{μ‐1,n‐(O₂C)₂C₆H₄}] (n = 2, 8a / b ; n = 3, 9a / b ; n = 4, 10a / b ). All complexes were fully characterized analytically and spectroscopically. Furthermore, complexes 7 , 8b , 9a ·THF, 10a / b were also be characterized by single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction analyses.     

Structural Studies of Some Compounds Containing C2 Fragments Attached to Various Metal‐Ligand End‐Groups

The preparation, characterisation and single‐crystal XRD molecular structure determinations of four complexes containing –CC–ML_n end‐groups, namely Ru{C≡CFc′(I)}(dppe)Cp ( 1 ), the vinylidene [Os(=C=CH₂)(PPh₃)₂Cp]PF₆ ( 2 ), trans‐Pt(C≡CC₆H₄‐4‐C≡CPh){C≡CC₆H₄‐4‐C₂Ph[Co₂(μ‐dppm)(CO)₄]}(PPh₃)₂ ( 3 ), and C₆H₄{μ₃‐C₂[AuRu₃(CO)₉(PPh₃)]}₂‐1,4 ( 4 ) are reported. In these compounds a range of –CC– environments is found, extending from the σ‐bonded alkynyl group in 1 to examples where the C₂ unit interacts with either a proton (in vinylidene 2 ), by bridging a dicobalt carbonyl moiety (in 3 ) or the AuRu₃ cluster in 4 . Changes in geometry are rationalised by considering the various bonding modes.     

Simple Synthesis of Ruthenium π Complexes of Aromatic Amino Acids and Small Peptides

The interaction of [Ru(η⁶‐C₁₀H₈)(Cp)]⁺ (Cp=C₅H₅) with aromatic amino acids (L ‐phenylalanine, L ‐tyrosine, L ‐tryptophane, D ‐phenylglycine, and L ‐threo‐3‐phenylserine) under visible‐light irradiation gives the corresponding [Ru(η⁶‐amino acid)(Cp)]⁺ complexes in near‐quantitative yield. The reaction proceeds in air at room temperature in water and tolerates the presence of non‐aromatic amino acids (except those which are sulfur containing), monosaccharides, and nucleotides. The complex [Ru(η⁶‐C₁₀H₈)(Cp)]⁺ was also used for selective labeling of Tyr and Phe residues of small peptides, namely, angiotensin I and II derivatives.