Koordinativ ungesättigte Dieisenkomplexe: Synthese und Kristallstrukturen von [Fe2(CO)4(μ‐H)(μ‐PtBu2)(μ‐Ph2PCH2PPh2)] und [Fe2(CO)4(μ‐CH2)(μ‐H)(μ‐PtBu2)(μ‐Ph2PCH2PPh2)]

Coordinatively Unsaturated Diiron Complexes: Synthesis and Crystal Structures of [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂)] and [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐CH₂)(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂)] [Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₆(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)] ( 1 ) reacts spontaneously with dppm (dppm = Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂) to give [Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 2 c ). By thermolysis or photolysis, 2 c loses very easily one carbonyl ligand and yields the corresponding electronically and coordinatively unsaturated complex [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 3 ). 3 exhibits a Fe–Fe double bond which could be confirmed by the addition of methylene to the corresponding dimetallacyclopropane [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐CH₂)(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 4 ). The reaction of 1 with dppe (Ph₂PC₂H₄PPh₂) affords [Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppe)] ( 5 ). In contrast to the thermolysis of 2 c , yielding 3 , the heating of 5 in toluene leads rapidly to complete decomposition. The reaction of 1 with PPh₃ yields [Fe₂(CO)₆(H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(PPh₃)] ( 6 a ), while with ^tBu₂PH the compound [Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₅(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(^tBu₂PH)] ( 6 b ) is formed. The thermolysis of 6 b affords [Fe₂(CO)₅(μ‐P^tBu₂)₂] and the degradation products [Fe(CO)₃(^tBu₂PH)₂] and [Fe(CO)₄(^tBu₂PH)]. The molecular structures of 3 , 4 and 6 b were determined by X‐ray crystal structure analyses.     

[Fe2(μsb‐CO)(CO)3(NO)(μ‐PtBu2)(μ‐Ph2PCH2PPh2)]: Synthese,Kristallstruktur und Koordinationsisomerie

[Fe₂(μ_sb‐CO)(CO)₃(NO)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂)]: Synthesis, X‐ray Crystal Structure and Isomerization Na[Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₆(μ‐P^tBu₂)] ( 1 ) reacts with [NO][BF₄] at —60 °C in THF to the nitrosyl complex [Fe₂(CO)₆(NO)(μ‐P^tBu₂)] ( 2 ). The subsequent reaction of 2 with phosphanes (L) under mild conditions affords the complexes [Fe₂(CO)₅(NO)L(μ‐P^tBu₂)], L = PPh₃, ( 3a ); η‐dppm (dppm = Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂), ( 3b ). In this case the phosphane substitutes one carbonyl ligand at the iron tetracarbonyl fragment in 2 , which was confirmed by the X‐ray crystal structure analysis of 3a . In solution 3b loses one CO ligand very easily to give dppm as bridging ligand on the Fe‐Fe bond. The thus formed compound [Fe₂(CO)₄(NO)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 4 ) occurs in solution in different solvents and over a wide temperature range as a mixture of the two isomers [Fe₂(μ_sb‐CO)(CO)₃(NO)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 4a ) and [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐NO)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 4b ). 4a was unambiguously characterized by single‐crystal X‐ray structure analysis while 4b was confirmed both by NMR investigations in solution as well as by means of DFT calculations. Furthermore, the spontaneous reaction of [Fe₂(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 5 ) with NO at —60 °C in toluene yields a complicated mixture of products containing [Fe₂(μ‐CO)(CO)₄(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐dppm)] ( 6 ) as main product beside the isomers 4a and 4b occuring in very low yields.     

Electron‐Rich Diferrous–Phosphane–Thiolates Relevant to Fe‐only Hydrogenase: Is Cyanide “Nature's Trimethylphosphane”?

The two‐step one‐pot oxidative decarbonylation of [Fe₂(S₂C₂H₄)(CO)₄(PMe₃)₂] ( 1 ) with [FeCp₂]PF₆, followed by addition of phosphane ligands, led to a series of diferrous dithiolato carbonyls 2 – 6 , containing three or four phosphane ligands. In situ measurements indicate efficient formation of 1 ²⁺ as the initial intermediate of the oxidation of 1 , even when a deficiency of the oxidant was employed. Subsequent addition of PR₃ gave rise to [Fe₂(S₂C₂H₄)(μ‐CO)(CO)₃(PMe₃)₃]²⁺ ( 2 ) and [Fe₂(S₂C₂H₄)(μ‐CO)(CO)₂(PMe₃)₂(PR₃)₂]²⁺ (R=Me 3 , OMe 4 ) as principal products. One terminal CO ligand in these complexes was readily substituted by MeCN, and [Fe₂(S₂C₂H₄)(μ‐CO)(CO)₂(PMe₃)₃(MeCN)]²⁺ ( 5 ) and [Fe₂(S₂C₂H₄)(μ‐CO)(CO)(PMe₃)₄(MeCN)]²⁺ ( 6 ) were fully characterized. Relevant to the H_red state of the active site of Fe‐only hydrogenases, the unsymmetrical derivatives 5 and 6 feature a semibridging CO ligand trans to a labile coordination site.     

{1,1′‐(Dimethylsilylene)bis[methanechalcogenolato]}diiron Complexes [2Fe2E(Si)] (E=S,Se, Te) – [FeFe] Hydrogenase Models

(Bis‐selenolato) and (bis‐tellurolato)diiron complexes [2Fe2E(Si)] were prepared and compared with the known (bis‐thiolato)diiron complex A to assess their ability to produce hydrogen from protons. Treatment of [Fe₃(CO)₁₂] with 4,4‐dimethyl‐1,2,4‐diselenasilolane ( 1 ) in boiling toluene afforded hexacarbonyl{μ‐{[1,1′‐(dimethylsilylene)bis[methaneselenolato‐κSe : κSe]](2 ?)}}diiron(Fe? Fe) ( 2 ). The analog bis‐tellurolato complex hexacarbonyl{μ‐{[1,1′‐(dimethylsilylene)bis[methanetellurolato‐κTe : κTe]](2 ?)}}diiron(Fe? Fe) ( 3 ) was obtained by treatment of [Fe₃(CO)₁₂] with dimethylbis(tellurocyanatomethyl)dimethylsilane, which was prepared in situ. All compounds were characterized by NMR, IR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, elemental analysis and single‐crystal X‐ray analysis. The electrocatalytic properties of the [2Fe2X(Si)] (X=S, Se, Te) model complexes A, 1 , and 2 towards hydrogen formation were evaluated.     

Binuclear Iron(I) Complex Containing Bridging Phenanthrene‐4,5‐dithiolate Ligand: Preparation,Spectroscopy, Crystal Structure,and Electrochemistry

A diiron hexacarbonyl complex containing bridging phenanthrene‐4,5‐dithiolate ligand is prepared by oxidative addition of Phenanthro[4,5‐cde][1,2]dithiin to Fe₂(CO)₉. The complex is investigated as a model for the active site of the [Fe–Fe] hydrogenase enzyme. The compound, [(μ‐PNT)Fe₂(CO)₆]; (PNT = phenanthrene‐4,5‐dithiolate), was characterized by spectroscopic methods (IR, UV/Vis and NMR) and X‐ray crystallography. The IR and proton NMR spectra of [(μ‐PNT)Fe₂(CO)₆] ( 4 ) are in agreement with a PNT ligand attached to a Fe₂(CO)₆ core. The infrared spectrum of 4 recorded in dichloromethane contains three peaks at 2001, 2040, and 2075 cm^–1 corresponding to the stretching frequency of terminal metal carbonyls. X‐ray crystallographic study unequivocally confirms the structure of the complex having a butterfly shape with an Fe–Fe bond length of 2.5365 Å close to that of the enzyme (2.6 Å). Electrochemical properties of [(μ‐PNT)Fe₂(CO)₆] have been investigated by cyclic voltammetry. The cyclic voltammogram of [(μ‐PNT)Fe₂(CO)₆] recorded in acetonitrile contains one quasi‐irreversible reduction (E_1/2 = –0.84 V vs. Ag/AgCl, I_pc/I_pa = 0.6, ΔE_p = 131 V at 0.1 V · s^–1) and one irreversible oxidation (E_pa = 0.86 V vs. Ag/AgCl). The redox of [(μ‐PNT)Fe₂(CO)₆] at E_1/2 = –0.84 V can be assigned to the one‐electron transfer processes; [Fe^I–Fe^I] → [Fe^I–Fe⁰] and [Fe^I–Fe⁰] → [Fe^I–Fe^I].     

Syntheses of Novel Fe/S Clusters with μ‐Aminocarbyne Ligands

The reaction of Fe₃(CO)₁₂ with (C₃H₅)₂NCS₂K in THF at room temperature afforded a red‐brown solution. Treatment of the thus‐obtained solution with MeI and PhCH₂Br afforded clusters 1 , (μ‐MeS)Fe₂(CO)₆(μ₄‐S)Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐CN(C₃H₅)₂), and 2 , (μ‐PhCH₂CO)Fe₂(CO)₆(μ₄‐S)Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐CN(C₃H₅)₂). Their structures were unambiguously determined by X‐ray crystallography. Therefore, this methodology provides a novel route for the syntheses of spiro‐S Fe/S clusters with aminocarbyne ligands.     

Formation of Unusual Complexes from the Reaction of [C(NMe2)3][(CO)4Fe{C(O)NMe2}] with InMe3; Crystal Structures of [C(NMe2)3]3[Fe2(CO)6(μ‐CO){μ‐InFe(CO)4(μ‐O2CNMe2)InFe(CO)4}] and [C(NMe2)3]2[{(CO)4Fe}2In(O2CNMe2)]·THF

The carbamoyl complex [C(NMe₂)₃][(CO)₄Fe{C(O)NMe₂}] ( 1 ) reacts with InMe₃ under loss of the methyl groups to produce a variety of compounds from which only the anionic cluster complexes [C(NMe₂)₃]₃[Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐CO){μ‐InFe(CO)₄(μ‐O₂CNMe₂)InFe(CO)₄}] ([C N ₃]₃[ 2 ]) and [C(NMe₂)₃]₂[{(CO)₄Fe}₂In(O₂CNMe₂)]·THF ([C N ₃]₂[ 3 ]·THF) could be crystallized and characterized by X‐ray analyses. The anion [ 2 ]^3? has a Fe₂(CO)₉‐like structure and both anions contain the carbaminato ligand either in a bridging or in a chelating function.     

Heteronuclear Nickel‐Iron Complexes and the Crystal Structure of [Fe2(CO)6(μ3‐S)2{Ni(dppe)}]

A series of heteronuclear nickel‐iron complexes [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐SH)(μ₃‐S){NiCl(PPh₃)₂}] ( 1 ), [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐SH)(μ₃‐S){NiCl(dppe)}] ( 2 ), [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ₃‐S)₂{Ni(PPh₃)₂}] ( 3 ), [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ₃‐S)₂{Ni(dppe)}] ( 4 ) and [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐SPh)(μ₃‐S){NiCl(dppe)}] ( 5 ) have been prepared. The structure of 4 has been determined by X‐ray crystallography. The central metal‐sulfur core of 4 has a trigonal bipyramidal shape with a NiFe₂ base plane with two axial sulfur atoms. Each iron atom is 5‐coordinate forming a distorted square pyramid; the nickel is square planar coordinated by two sulfur atoms and two phosphorus atoms.     

Preparation,Spectroscopic Properties,and Crystal Structures of Fe2(CO)6(μ‐CO)(μ‐CF2)2, Fe2(CO)6(μ‐CO)2(μ‐CF2), and Fe2(CO)6(μ‐CF2)(PPh3)2 – Theoretical Studies of Methylenic vs. Carbonyl Bridges in Diiron Complexes

The reaction of Na₂[Fe(CO)₄] with Br₂CF₂ in n‐pentane generates a mixture of the compounds (CO)₃Fe(μ‐CO)_3–n(μ‐CF₂)_nFe(CO)₃ ( 2 , n = 2; 3 , n = 1) in low yields with 3 as the main product. 3 is obtained free from 2 by reacting Br₂CF₂ with Na₂[Fe₂(CO)₈]. The non‐isolable monomeric complex (CO)₄Fe=CF₂ ( 1 ) can probably considered as the precursor for 2 . 3 reacts with PPh₃ with replacement of two CO ligands to form Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐CF₂)(PPh₃)₂ ( 4 ). The complexes 2 – 4 were characterized by single crystal X‐ray diffraction. While the structure of 2 is strictly similar to that of Fe₂(CO)₉, the structure of 3 can better be described as a resulting from superposition of the two enantiomers 3 a and 3 b with two semibridging CO groups. Quantum chemical DFT calculations for the series (CO)₃Fe(μCO)_3–n(μ‐CF₂)_nFe(CO)₃ (n = 0, 1, 2, 3) as well as for the corresponding (μ‐CH₂) derivatives indicate that the progressively larger σ donor and π acceptor properties for the bridging ligands, in the order CO < CF₂ < CH₂, favor a stronger Fe–Fe bond.     

First‐Row Transition‐Metal–Diborane and –Borylene Complexes

A combined experimental and quantum chemical study of Group 7 borane, trimetallic triply bridged borylene and boride complexes has been undertaken. Treatment of [{Cp*CoCl}₂] (Cp*=1,2,3,4,5‐pentamethylcyclopentadienyl) with LiBH₄ ? thf at ?78 °C, followed by room‐temperature reaction with three equivalents of [Mn₂(CO)₁₀] yielded a manganese hexahydridodiborate compound [{(OC)₄Mn}(η⁶‐B₂H₆){Mn(CO)₃}₂(μ‐H)] ( 1 ) and a triply bridged borylene complex [(μ₃‐BH)(Cp*Co)₂(μ‐CO)(μ‐H)₂MnH(CO)₃] ( 2 ). In a similar fashion, [Re₂(CO)₁₀] generated [(μ₃‐BH)(Cp*Co)₂(μ‐CO)(μ‐H)₂ReH(CO)₃] ( 3 ) and [(μ₃‐BH)(Cp*Co)₂(μ‐CO)₂(μ‐H)Co(CO)₃] ( 4 ) in modest yields. In contrast, [Ru₃(CO)₁₂] under similar reaction conditions yielded a heterometallic semi‐interstitial boride cluster [(Cp*Co)(μ‐H)₃Ru₃(CO)₉B] ( 5 ). The solid‐state X‐ray structure of compound 1 shows a significantly shorter boron–boron bond length. The detailed spectroscopic data of 1 and the unusual structural and bonding features have been described. All the complexes have been characterized by using ¹H, ¹¹B, ¹³C NMR spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and X‐ray diffraction analysis. The DFT computations were used to shed light on the bonding and electronic structures of these new compounds. The study reveals a dominant B?H?Mn, a weak B?B?Mn interaction, and an enhanced B?B bonding in 1 .     

(Carbonyl)Iron‐Selenolates: New Synthetic Methods and Reactions with Electrophiles. Crystal Structures of [(CO)6Fe2(μ‐SeR)2]; R = Me3SiCH2 and p‐O2NC6H4CH2, {(CO)6Fe2[μ‐η2‐Se,Se′‐o‐(SeCH2C6H4CH2Se)]}, and [(CO)6Fe2(μ‐SeFe(CO)2cp)2]

The reactions of Fe(CO)₅ or Fe₃(CO)₁₂ with NaBEt₃H or KB[CH(CH₃)C₂H₅]₃H, respectively and treatment of the resulting carbonylates M₂Fe(CO)₄, M = Na, K with elemental selenium in appropriate ratios lead to the formation of M₂[Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐Se)₂]. Subsequent reactions with organo halides or the complex fragment cpFe(CO)₂⁺, cp = η⁵‐C₅H₅ afforded the selenolato complexes [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐SeR)₂], R = CH₂SiMe₃ ( 1 ), CH₂Ph ( 2 ), p‐CH₂C₆H₄NO₂ ( 3 ), o‐CH₂C₆H₄CH₂ ( 4 ) and cpFe(CO)₂⁺ ( 5 ) in moderate to good yields. A similar reaction employing Ru₃(CO)₁₂, Se and p‐O₂NC₆H₄CH₂Br leads to the formation of the corresponding organic diselenide. The X‐ray structures of 1 , 3 , 4 and 5 were determined and revealed butterfly structures of the Fe₂Se₂ cores. The substituents in 1 , 3  and 5 adopt different conformations depending on their steric demand. In 4 , the conformation is fixed because of the chelate effect of the ligand. The Fe–Se bond lengths lie in the range 235 to 240 pm, with corresponding Fe–Fe bond lengths of 254 to 256 pm. The ⁷⁷Se NMR data of the new complexes are discussed and compared with the corresponding data of related complexes.     

Crystal and electronic structure of a hexacarbonyldiiron cluster tethered to naphthalene‐2‐thiolate ligands

The structure of the previously reported complex bis(μ‐naphthalene‐2‐thiolato‐κ²S:S)bis(tricarbonyliron)(Fe—Fe), [Fe₂(C₁₀H₇S)₂(CO)₆], has been characterized by X‐ray diffraction. In the solid state, the dinuclear complex adopts a butterfly‐like shape, with an equatorial–axial spatial orientation of the naphthalene groups covalently coupled to the [S₂Fe₂(CO)₆] unit. The asymmetric unit contains three independent [(μ‐naphthalene‐2‐thiolato)₂Fe₂(CO)₆] molecules. These molecules show intermolecular π–π stacking interactions between the naphthalene rings, which was confirmed by Hirshfield surface analysis. The electronic spectrum of the complex recorded in acetonitrile shows a band centered at 350 nm (ϵ = 4.6 × 10³ M⁻¹ cm⁻¹) and tailing into the visible region. This absorption can be attributed to a π→π* electronic transition within the naphthalene moiety and a metal‐based d→d transition.     

Die Reaktion von tBu2P‐P=P(Me)tBu2 mit [Fe2(CO)9] und [(η2‐C8H14)2Fe(CO)3]

^tBu₂P‐P=P(Me)^tBu₂ reacts with [Fe₂(CO)₉] to give [μ‐(1, 2, 3:4‐η‐^tBu₂P¹‐P²‐P³‐P^4tBu₂){Fe(CO)₃}{Fe(CO)₄}] ( 1 ) and [trans‐(^tBu₂MeP)₂Fe(CO)₃]( 2 ). With [(η²‐C₈H₁₄)₂Fe(CO)₃] in addition to [μ‐(1, 2, 3:4‐η‐^tBu₂P¹‐P²‐P³‐P^4tBu₂){Fe(CO)₂PMe^tBu₂}‐{Fe(CO)₄}] ( 10 ) and 2 also [(μ‐P^tBu₂){μ‐P‐Fe(CO)₃‐PMe^tBu₂}‐{Fe(CO)₃}₂(Fe‐Fe)]( 9 ) is formed. 1 crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P2₁/c with a = 875.0(2), b = 1073.2(2), c = 3162.6(6) pm and β = 94.64(3)?. 2 crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P2₁/c with a = 1643.4(7), b = 1240.29(6), c = 2667.0(5) pm and β = 97.42(2)?. 9 crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P2₁/n with a = 1407.5(5), b = 1649.7(5), c = 1557.9(16) pm and β = 112.87(2)?.     

Aktivierung von Schwefelkohlenstoff an Trirutheniumclustern: Synthese und Kristallstruktur von [Ru3(CO)5(μ‐H)2(μ‐PCy2)(μ‐Ph2PCH2PPh2){μ‐η2‐PCy2C(S)}(μ3‐S)] und [Ru3(CO)5(CS)(μ‐H)(μ‐PtBu2)(μ‐PCy2)2(μ3‐S)]

Activation of Carbon Disulfide on Triruthenium Clusters: Synthesis and X‐Ray Crystal Structure Analysis of [Ru₃(CO)₅(μ‐H)₂(μ‐PCy₂)(μ‐Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂){μ‐η²‐PCy₂C(S)}(μ₃‐S)] and [Ru₃(CO)₅(CS)(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐PCy₂)₂(μ₃‐S)] [Ru₃(CO)₆(μ‐H)₂(μ‐PCy₂)₂(μ‐dppm)] ( 1 ) (dppm = Ph₂PCH₂PPh₂) reacts under mild conditions with CS₂ and yields by oxidative decarbonylation and insertion of CS into one phosphido bridge the opened 50 VE‐cluster [Ru₃(CO)₅(μ‐H)₂(μ‐PCy₂)(μ‐dppm){μ‐η²‐PCy₂C(S)}(μ₃‐S)] ( 2 ) with only two M–M bonds. The compound 2 crystallizes in the triclinic space group P 1 with a = 19.093(3), b = 12.2883(12), c = 20.098(3) Å; α = 84.65(3), β = 77.21(3), γ = 81.87(3)° and V = 2790.7(11) ų. The reaction of [Ru₃(CO)₇(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐PCy₂)₂] ( 3 ) with CS₂ in refluxing toluene affords the 50 VE‐cluster [Ru₃(CO)₅(CS)(μ‐H)(μ‐P^tBu₂)(μ‐PCy₂)₂(μ₃‐S)] ( 4 ). The compound cristallizes in the monoclinic space group P 2₁/a with a = 19.093(3), b = 12.2883(12), c = 20.098(3) Å; β = 104.223(16)° and V = 4570.9(10) ų. Although in the solid state structure one elongated Ru–Ru bond has been found the complex 4 can be considered by means of the ³¹P‐NMR data as an electron‐rich metal cluster.     

Solvent‐Free Ball‐Milling Subcomponent Synthesis of Metallosupramolecular Complexes

Subcomponent self‐assembly from components A , B , C , D , and Fe²⁺ under solvent‐free conditions by self‐sorting leads to the construction of three structurally different metallosupramolecular iron(II) complexes. Under carefully selected ball‐milling conditions, tetranuclear [Fe₄( AD ₂)₆]^4? 22‐component cage 1 , dinuclear [Fe₂( BD ₂)₃]^2? 11‐component helicate 2 , and 5‐component mononuclear [Fe( CD ₃)]²⁺ complex 3 were prepared simultaneously in a one‐pot reaction from 38 components. Through subcomponent substitution reaction by adding subcomponent B , the [Fe₄( AD ₂)₆]^4? cage converts quantitatively to the [Fe₂( BD ₂)₃]^2? helicate, which, in turn, upon addition of subcomponent C , transforms to [Fe( CD ₃)]²⁺, following the hierarchical preference based on the thermodynamic stability of the complexes.     

Chelating and Tellurolate Ligand‐Transfer Studies of the Complex fac‐[Fe(CO)3(TePh)3]−: Crystal Structures of Heterodinuclear (CO)3Mn(μ‐TePh)3Fe(CO)3 and CpNi(TePh)(PPh3)

Complex fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(TePh)₃]^? was employed as a “metallo chelating” ligand to synthesize the neutral (CO)₃Mn(μ‐TePh)₃Fe(CO)₃ obtained in a one‐step synthesis by treating fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(TePh)₃]^? with fac‐[Mn‐(CO)₃(CH₃CN)₃]⁺. It seems reasonable to conclude that the d⁶ Fe(II) [(CO)₃Fe(TePh)₃]^? fragment is isolobal with the d⁶ Mn(I) [(CO)₃Mn(TePh)₃]^2? fragment in complex (CO)₃Mn(μ‐TePh)₃Fe(CO)₃. Addition of fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(TePh)₃]^? to the CpNi(I)(PPh₃) in THF resulted in formation of the neutral CpNi(TePh)(PPh₃) also obtained from reaction of CpNi(I)(PPh₃) and [Na][TePh] in MeOH. This investigation shows that fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(TePh)₃]^? serves as a tridentate metallo ligand and tellurolate ligand‐transfer reagent. The study also indicated that the fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(SePh)₃]^? may serve as a better tridentate metallo ligand and chalcogenolate ligand‐transfer reagent than fac‐[Fe(CO)₃(TePh)₃]^? in the syntheses of heterometallic chalcogenolate complexes.     

Protonation and Proton‐Coupled Electron Transfer at S‐Ligated [4Fe‐4S] Clusters

Biological [Fe‐S] clusters are increasingly recognized to undergo proton‐coupled electron transfer (PCET), but the site of protonation, mechanism, and role for PCET remains largely unknown. Here we explore this reactivity with synthetic model clusters. Protonation of the arylthiolate‐ligated [4Fe‐4S] cluster [Fe₄S₄(SAr)₄]^2? ( 1 , SAr=S‐2,4‐6‐(iPr)₃C₆H₂) leads to thiol dissociation, reversibly forming [Fe₄S₄(SAr)₃L]^1? ( 2 ) and ArSH (L=solvent, and/or conjugate base). Solutions of 2 +ArSH react with the nitroxyl radical TEMPO to give [Fe₄S₄(SAr)₄]^1? ( 1_ox ) and TEMPOH. This reaction involves PCET coupled to thiolate association and may proceed via the unobserved protonated cluster [Fe₄S₄(SAr)₃(HSAr)]^1? ( 1‐H ). Similar reactions with this and related clusters proceed comparably. An understanding of the PCET thermochemistry of this cluster system has been developed, encompassing three different redox levels and two protonation states.     

Iron carbonyl complex containing bis[2‐(diphenylphosphino)phenyl]ether enhancing efficiency in the palladium‐catalyzed Suzuki–Miyaura reaction

The reaction of [Fe₃(CO)₁₂] with bis[2‐(diphenylphosphino)phenyl]ether (DPEphos) in refluxing THF afforded a mononuclear complex, [Fe(CO)₄(η¹‐P‐DPEphos)] (1), as major product and a binuclear complex, [Fe₂(CO)₆(μ‐CO)(μ‐P,P‐DPEphos)] (2), as minor product respectively. The DPEphos ligand acts as a terminal P‐donor in complex 1 and a bridging P,P‐donor in complex 2. Complexes 1 and 2 were characterized by elemental analysis, fast atom bombardment mass spectrometry, FT‐IR, ¹H and ³¹P{¹H} NMR spectroscopy. The structure of complex 1 has been tentatively assigned by density functional theory calculations and its analogy with reported complexes. Combination of complex 1 and PdCl₂ furnished an active catalyst for the Suzuki–Miyaura cross‐coupling reactions of various aryl halides with arylboronic acids. Interestingly, under the same experimental condition, complex 1/PdCl₂ as catalyst showed superior activity over the DPEphos/PdCl₂ system. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Using polyethyleneimine (PEI) as a scaffold to construct mimicking systems of [FeFe]‐hydrogenase: preparation,characterization of PEI‐based materials,and their catalysis on proton reduction

Ten branched polymeric materials (PEI‐P‐Fe₂s) derived from polyethyleneimine (PEI) functionalized with [Fe₂(CO)₅]‐units to mimic [FeFe]‐hydrogenase were prepared. Before the functionalization, PEI was first premodified using diphenylphosphinamine (NPPh₂) group. In the premodification, three approaches were employed: (i) using PEI with an average molecular weight of 1800 and 600, respectively; (ii) grafting NPPh₂ group by either direct reaction of chlorodiphenylphosphine with PEI or Br(CH₂)₁₁OPPh₂; and (iii) further premodification with BrCH₂COOH after immobilization of the NPPh₂ group. Reaction of the premodified PEI with diiron hexacarbonyl complexes, [Fe₂(μ‐S)₂(CO)₆] (1), or [Fe₂(μ‐S₂C₂H₄)(CO)₆] (3) produced 10 functionalized materials, PEI‐P‐Fe₂s. These materials were characterized using a variety of spectroscopic techniques, FTIR, NMR, TGA, and cyclic voltammetry. Spectral comparison with two control complexes, [Fe₂(μ‐S)₂(CO)₅PPh₃] (2) and [Fe₂(μ‐S₂C₂H₄)(CO)₅PPh₃] (4), suggested that the immobilized diiron units of PEI‐P‐Fe₂s were dominantly pentacarbonyl analogous to complexes 2 and 4, although tetracarbonyl units may also exist because the amine groups of PEI could also be involved in substituting CO, as was the NPPh₂ group. The catalysis of these materials on proton reduction was examined in 0.1 mol l^?1 [NBut₄]BF₄/DMF containing acetic acid by using cyclic voltammetry. Our results indicated that both the presence of carboxylic acid and dangling the diiron units at the end of a long aliphatic chain improved catalytic efficiency by one‐fold. The improvement was attributed to the increase in flexibility of the catalytic center and enhancement of proton transfer during the catalysis. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.