New Strategies to Phosphino–Phosphonium Cations and Zwitterions

By employing strategies based on frustrated Lewis pair chemistry, new routes to phosphino‐phosphonium cations and zwitterions have been developed. B(C₆F₅)₃ is shown to react with H₂ and P₂tBu₄ to effect heterolytic hydrogen activation yielding the phosphino‐phosphonium borate salt [(tBu₂P)PHtBu₂] [HB(C₆F₅)₃] ( 1 ). Alternatively, alkenylphosphino‐phosphonium borate zwitterions are accessible by reaction of B(C₆F₅)₃ and PhC?CH with P₂Ph₄, P₄Cy₄, or P₅Ph₅ affording the species [(Ph₂P)P(Ph)₂C(Ph)?C(H)B(C₆F₅)₃] ( 2 ), [(P₃Cy₃)P(Cy)C(Ph)?C(H)B(C₆F₅)₃] ( 3 ), and [(P₄Ph₄)P(Ph)C(Ph)?C(H)B(C₆F₅)₃] ( 4 ). A related phosphino‐phosphonium borate species—[(Ph₄P₄)P(Ph)C₆F₄B(F)(C₆F₅)₂] ( 5 ) is also isolated from the thermolysis of B(C₆F₅)₃ and P₅Ph₅.     

Reaction of Frustrated Lewis Pairs with Ketones and Esters

The frustrated Lewis pair (FLP) Mes₂PCH₂CH₂B(C₆F₅)₂ ( 1 ) reacts with an enolizable conjugated ynone by 1,4‐addition involving enolate tautomerization to give an eight‐membered zwitterionic heterocycle. The conjugated endione PhCO‐CH?CH‐COPh reacts with the intermolecular FLP tBu₃P/B(C₆F₅)₃ by a simple 1,4‐addition to an enone subunit. The same substrate undergoes a more complex reaction with the FLP 1 that involves internal acetal formation to give a heterobicyclic zwitterionic product. FLP 1 reacts with dimethyl maleate by selective overall addition to the C?C double bond to give a six‐membered heterocycle. It adds analogously to the triple bond of an acetylenic ester to give a similarly structured six‐membered heterocycle. The intermolecular FLP P(o‐tolyl)₃/B(C₆F₅)₃ reacts analogously with acetylenic ester by trans‐addition to the carbon–carbon triple bond. An excess of the intermolecular FLP tBu₃P/B(C₆F₅)₃, which contains a more nucleophilic phosphane, reacts differently with acetylenic ester examples, namely by O? C(alkyl) bond cleavage to give the {R‐CO₂[B(C₆F₅)₃]₂^?}[alkyl‐PtBu₃⁺] salts. Simple aryl or alkyl esters react analogously by using the borane‐stabilized carboxylates as good leaving groups. All essential products were characterized by X‐ray diffraction.     

Promoting Difficult Carbon–Carbon Couplings: Which Ligand Does Best?

A Pd complex, cis‐[Pd(C₆F₅)₂(THF)₂] ( 1 ), is proposed as a useful touchstone for direct and simple experimental measurement of the relative ability of ancillary ligands to induce C?C coupling. Interestingly, 1 is also a good alternative to other precatalysts used to produce Pd⁰L. Complex 1 ranks the coupling ability of some popular ligands in the order P^tBu₃>o‐TolPEWO‐F≈tBuXPhos>P(C₆F₅)₃≈PhPEWO‐F>P(o‐Tol)₃≈THF≈tBuBrettPhos?Xantphos≈PhPEWO‐H?PPh₃ according to their initial coupling rates, whereas their efficiency, depending on competitive hydrolysis, is ranked tBuXPhos≈P^tBu₃≈o‐TolPEWO‐F>PhPEWO‐F>P(C₆F₅)₃?tBuBrettPhos>THF≈P(o‐Tol)₃>Xantphos>PhPEWO‐H?PPh₃. This “meter” also detects some other possible virtues or complications of ligands such as tBuXPhos or tBuBrettPhos.     

Organonickel(II) Complexes with Anionic N-Donor Ligands. Hydration of coordinated nitriles at a nickel(II) site

The hydroxo complex (Bu₄N)₂[Ni₂(C₆F₅)₄(μ-OH)₂]reacts with 2,3,4,5,6-pentafluoro benzenamine (C₆F₅-NH₂), 1,3-diaryltriaz-1-enes (ArNH? N=N? Ar, Ar = Ph, 4-MeC₆H₄, 4-MeOC₆H₄), 7-aza-1H-indole (= 1H-pyrrolo[2.3-b]pyridine; Hazind), N-phenylpyridin-2-amine(pyNHPh), and N-phenylpyridine-2-carboxamide (py-CONHPh) at room temperature in acetone to give the binuclear complexes (Bu₄N)₂[Ni₂(C₆F₅)₄(μ-C₆F₅NH)₂] ( 1 ) and (Bu₄N)₂[{Ni(C₆F₅)₂} 2(μ-OH)(μ-azind)] ( 2 ) and the mononuclear complexes Bu₄N[Ni(C₆F₅)2(ArN₃Ar)] ( 3 – 5 ), Bu₄N[Ni(C₆F₅)₂(pyNPh)] ( 6 ), and Bu₄N[Ni(C₆F₅)₂(pyCONPh)] ( 7 ). The hydroxo.complex (Bu₄N)₂[{Ni(C₆F₅)2-(μ-OH)}₂] promotes the nucleophilic addition of water to pyridine-2-carbonitrile, 2-aminoacetonitrile, and 2-(dimethylamino)acetonitrile, and complexes 8 – 10 containing pyridine-2-carboxamidato, 2-aminoacetamidato and 2-(dimethylamino)acetamidato ligands are formed. Analytical (C, H, N) and spectroscopic (IR, ¹H and ¹⁹F-NMR, and FAB-MS) data were used for structural assignments. A single-crystal X-ray diffraction study of (Bu₄N)₂[{Ni(C₆F₅)₂}₂(μ-OH)(μ-azind)] ( 2 ) established the binuclear nature of the anion; the two Ni-atoms are bridged by an OH group and a 7-aza-7H-indol-7-yl group, but the central Ni? O? Ni? N? C? N ring is not planar, the dihedral angle between the Ni? O? Ni and Ni? N? C? N? Ni planes being 84.4°.     

Komplexchemie P-reicher Phosphane und Silylphosphane. XIV. Phosphinophosphiniden tBu2P?P als Ligand in den Pt-Komplexen [η2-{tBu2P?P}Pt(PPh3)2] und [η2-{tBu2P?P}Pt(PEtPh2)2]

Coordination Chemistry of P-rich Phosphanes and Silylphasphanes. XIV. The Phosphinophosphinidene ^tBu₂P? P as a Ligand in the Pt Complexes [η²-{^tBu₂P? P}Pt(PPh₃)₂] and [η²-{^tBu₂P? P}Pt(PEtPh₂)₂] [η²-{^tBu₂P? P}Pt(PPh₃)₂ 1 and [η²-{^tBu₂P? P}Pt(PEtPh₂)₂] 2 are the first complex compounds of ^tBu₂P? P 5 . They are formed in the reaction of ^tBu₂P? P ? P(Me)^tBu₂ 3 with [η²-{H₂C ? CH₂}Pt(PPh₃)₂] 6 or [η²-{H₂C ? CH₂}Pt(PEtPh₂)₂] 7 , respectively. Compound 1 is less stable than 2 and reacts on to [η²-{^tBu₂P? P} Pt(PPh₃)(P^tBu₂Me)] 10 with the coincidently formed ^tBu₂PMe. The molecular structures of 1 and 2 were derived from their ¹H and ³¹P-NMR spectra, 2 was additionally characterized by a X ray structure determination. 2 crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P2₁/n with a = 1222.36(7) pm, b = 1770.7(1) pm, c = 1729.7(1) pm, β = 108.653(6)°.     

[Co(g5‐Me5C5)(g3‐tBu2PPCH–CH3)] aus [Co(g5‐Me5C5)(g2‐C2H4)2] und tBu2P–P=P(Me)tBu2

Coordination Chemistry of P‐rich Phosphanes and Silylphosphanes. XVII [1] [Co(g⁵‐Me₅C₅)(g³‐^tBu₂PPCH–CH₃)] from [Co(g⁵‐Me₅C₅)(g²‐C₂H₄)₂] and ^tBu₂P–P=P(Me)^tBu₂ [Co(η⁵‐Me₅C₅)(η³‐^tBu₂PPCH–CH₃)] 1 is formed in the reaction of [Co(η⁵‐Me₅C₅)(η²‐C₂H₄)₂] 2 with ^tBu₂P–P 4 (generated from ^tBu₂P–P=P(Me)^tBu₂ 3 ) by elimination of one C₂H₄ ligand and coupling of the phosphinophosphinidene with the second one. The structure of 1 is proven by ³¹P, ¹³C, ¹H NMR spectra and the X‐ray structure analysis. Within the ligand ^tBu₂P¹P²C¹H–CH₃ in 1 , the angle P1–P2–C1 amounts to 90°. The Co, P1, P2, C1 atoms in 1 look like a „butterfly”︁. The reaction of 2 with a mixture of ^tBu₂P–P=P(Me)^tBu₂ 3 and ^tBu–C?P 5 yields [Co(η⁵‐Me₅C₅){η⁴‐(^tBuCP)₂}] 6 and 1 . While 6 is spontaneously formed, 1 appears only after complete consumption of 5 .     

Homolytic C−H Bond Activation by Phosphine−Quinone-Based Radical Ion Pairs

Herein, we present the formation of transient radical ion pairs (RIPs) by single-electron transfer (SET) in phosphine−quinone systems and explore their potential for the activation of C−H bonds. PMes₃ (Mes=2,4,6-Me₃C₆H₂) reacts with DDQ (2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-1,4-benzoquinone) with formation of the P−O bonded zwitterionic adduct Mes₃P−DDQ ( 1 ), while the reaction with the sterically more crowded PTip₃ (Tip=2,4,6-iPr₃C₆H₂) afforded C−H bond activation product Tip₂P(H)(2-[CMe₂(DDQ)]-4,6-iPr₂-C₆H₂) ( 2 ). UV/Vis and EPR spectroscopic studies showed that the latter reaction proceeds via initial SET, forming RIP [PTip₃]⋅⁺[DDQ]⋅⁻, and subsequent homolytic C−H bond activation, which was supported by DFT calculations. The isolation of analogous products, Tip₂P(H)(2-[CMe₂{TCQ−B(C₆F₅)₃}]-4,6-iPr₂-C₆H₂) ( 4 , TCQ=tetrachloro-1,4-benzoquinone) and Tip₂P(H)(2-[CMe₂{oQ^tBu−B(C₆F₅)₃}]-4,6-iPr₂-C₆H₂) ( 8 , oQ^tBu=3,5-di-tert-butyl-1,2-benzoquinone), from reactions of PTip₃ with Lewis-acid activated quinones, TCQ−B(C₆F₅)₃ and oQ^tBu−B(C₆F₅)₃, respectively, further supports the proposed radical mechanism. As such, this study presents key mechanistic insights into the homolytic C−H bond activation by the synergistic action of radical ion pairs.     

Reactivity of the Latent 12‐Electron Fragment [Rh(PiBu3)2]+ with Aryl Bromides: Aryl?Br and Phosphine Ligand C?H Activation

Oxidative addition of aryl bromides to 12‐electron [Rh(PiBu₃)₂][BAr^F₄] (Ar^F=3,5‐(CF₃)₂C₆H₃) forms a variety of products. With p‐tolyl bromides, Rh^III dimeric complexes result [Rh(PiBu₃)₂(o/p‐MeC₆H₄)(μ‐Br)]₂[BAr^F₄]₂. Similarly, reaction with p‐ClC₆H₄Br gives [Rh(PiBu₃)₂(p‐ClC₆H₄)(μ‐Br)]₂[BAr^F₄]₂. In contrast, the use of o‐BrC₆H₄Me leads to a product in which toluene has been eliminated and an isobutyl phosphine has undergone C? H activation: [Rh{PiBu₂(CH₂CHCH₃C H₂)}(PiBu₃)(μ‐Br)]₂[BAr^F₄]₂. Trapping experiments with ortho‐bromo anisole or ortho‐bromo thioanisole indicate that a possible intermediate for this process is a low‐coordinate Rh^III complex that then undergoes C? H activation. The anisole and thioanisole complexes have been isolated and their structures show OMe or SMe interactions with the metal centre alongside supporting agostic interactions, [Rh(PiBu₃)₂(C₆H₄O Me)Br][BAr^F₄] (the solid‐state structure of the 5‐methyl substituted analogue is reported) and [Rh(PiBu₃)₂(C₆H₄S Me)Br][BAr^F₄]. The anisole‐derived complex proceeds to give [Rh{PiBu₂(CH₂CHCH₃C H₂)}(PiBu₃)(μ‐Br)]₂[BAr^F₄]₂, whereas the thioanisole complex is unreactive. The isolation of [Rh(PiBu₃)₂(C₆H₄O Me)Br][BAr^F₄] and its onward reactivity to give the products of C? H activation and aryl elimination suggest that it is implicated on the pathway of a σ‐bond metathesis reaction, a hypothesis strengthened by DFT calculations. Calculations also suggest that C? H bond cleavage through phosphine‐assisted deprotonation of a non‐agostic bond is also competitive, although the subsequent protonation of the aryl ligand is too high in energy to account for product formation. C? H activation through oxidative addition is also ruled out on the basis of these calculations. These new complexes have been characterised by solution NMR/ESIMS techniques and in the solid‐state by X‐ray crystallography.     

Dative Au→Al Interactions: Crystallographic Characterization and Computational Analysis

Hitherto unknown Au→Al interactions have been evidenced upon coordination of the geminal phosphorus–aluminum Lewis pair Mes₂PC(?CHPh)AltBu₂ (Mes=2,4,6‐trimethylphenyl). Four different gold(I) complexes featuring alkyl (Me), aryl (Ph, C₆F₅), and alkynyl (C?CPh) co‐ligands have been prepared. X‐ray diffraction analyses show that P→Au→Al bridging coordination induces noticeable bending of the ligand (the PCAl bond angle shrinks by 13°). This new type of transition metal→Lewis acid interaction has been analyzed by DFT calculations.     

Exploring the Limits of Frustrated Lewis Pair Chemistry with Alkynes: Detection of a System that Favors 1,1‐Carboboration over Cooperative 1,2‐P/B‐Addition

The zirconocene complex [{(C₆F₅)₂B‐(CH₂)₃‐Cp}(Cp‐PtBu₂)ZrCl₂] ( 6 ; Cp=cyclo‐C₅H₄) was prepared by hydroboration of [(allyl‐Cp)(Cp‐PtBu₂)ZrCl₂] ( 5 ) with HB(C₆F₅)₂ (“Piers’ borane”). It represents a frustrated Lewis pair (FLP) in which both the Lewis acid and the Lewis base were attached at the metallocene framework. Its reaction with 1‐pentyne did not result in the 1,2‐addition of or deprotonation reaction by the FLP, but rather in the 1,1‐carboboration of the triple bond, thereby obtaining a Z/E mixture (1.2:1) of the respective organometallic substituted alkenes 7 . The analogous reaction of 1‐pentyne with the phosphorous‐free system [{(C₆F₅)₂B‐(CH₂)₃‐Cp)}CpZrCl₂] ( 9 ) gave the respective 1,1‐carboboration products ( Z‐10 / E‐10 ≈1.3:1).     

How Frustrated Lewis Acid/Base Systems Pass through Transition‐State Regions: H2 Cleavage by [tBu3P/B(C6F5)3]

We investigate the transition‐state (TS) region of the potential energy surface (PES) of the reaction tBu₃P+H₂+B(C₆F₅)₃→tBu₃P‐H⁽⁺⁾+^(?)H?B(C₆F₅)₃ and the dynamics of the TS passage at room temperature. Owing to the conformational inertia of the phosphane???borane pocket involving heavy tBu₃P and B(C₆F₅)₃ species and features of the PES E(P???H, B???H | B???P) as a function of P???H, B???H, and B???P distances, a typical reactive scenario for this reaction is a trajectory that is trapped in the TS region for a period of time (about 350 fs on average across all calculated trajectories) in a quasi‐bound state (scattering resonance). The relationship between the timescale of the TS passage and the effective conformational inertia of the phosphane???borane pocket leads to a prediction that isotopically heavier Lewis base/Lewis acid pairs and normal counterparts could give measurably different reaction rates. Herein, the predicted quasi‐bound state could be verified in molecular collision experiments involving femtosecond spectroscopy.     

β‐Diketiminate‐Stabilized Magnesium(I) Dimers and Magnesium(II) Hydride Complexes: Synthesis,Characterization, Adduct Formation,and Reactivity Studies

The preparation and characterization of a series of magnesium(II) iodide complexes incorporating β‐diketiminate ligands of varying steric bulk and denticity, namely, [(ArNCMe)₂CH]^? (Ar=phenyl, (^PhNacnac), mesityl (^MesNacnac), or 2,6‐diisopropylphenyl (Dipp, ^DippNacnac)), [(DippNCtBu)₂CH]^? (^tBuNacnac), and [(DippNCMe)(Me₂NCH₂CH₂NCMe)CH]^? (^DmedaNacnac) are reported. The complexes [(^PhNacnac)MgI(OEt₂)], [(^MesNacnac)MgI(OEt₂)], [(^DmedaNacnac)MgI(OEt₂)], [(^MesNacnac)MgI(thf)], [(^DippNacnac)MgI(thf)], [(^tBuNacnac)MgI], and [(^tBuNacnac)MgI(DMAP)] (DMAP=4‐dimethylaminopyridine) were shown to be monomeric by X‐ray crystallography. In addition, the related β‐diketiminato beryllium and calcium iodide complexes, [(^MesNacnac)BeI] and [{(^DippNacnac)CaI(OEt₂)}₂] were prepared and crystallographically characterized. The reductions of all metal(II) iodide complexes by using various reagents were attempted. In two cases these reactions led to the magnesium(I) dimers, [(^MesNacnac)MgMg(^MesNacnac)] and [(^tBuNacnac)MgMg(^tBuNacnac)]. The reduction of a 1:1 mixture of [(^DippNacnac)MgI(OEt₂)] and [(^MesNacnac)MgI(OEt₂)] with potassium gave a low yield of the crystallographically characterized complex [(^DippNacnac)Mg(μ‐H)(μ‐I)Mg(^MesNacnac)]. All attempts to form beryllium(I) or calcium(I) dimers by reductions of [(^MesNacnac)BeI], [{(^DippNacnac)CaI(OEt₂)}₂], or [{(^tBuNacnac)CaI(thf)}₂] have so far been unsuccessful. The further reactivity of the magnesium(I) complexes [(^MesNacnac)MgMg(^MesNacnac)] and [(^tBuNacnac)MgMg(^tBuNacnac)] towards a variety of Lewis bases and unsaturated organic substrates was explored. These studies led to the complexes [(^MesNacnac)Mg(L)Mg(L)(^MesNacnac)] (L=THF or DMAP), [(^MesNacnac)Mg(μ‐AdN₆Ad)Mg(^MesNacnac)] (Ad=1‐adamantyl), [(^tBuNacnac)Mg(μ‐AdN₆Ad)Mg(^tBuNacnac)], and [(^MesNacnac)Mg(μ‐tBu₂N₂C₂O₂)Mg(^MesNacnac)] and revealed that, in general, the reactivity of the magnesium(I) dimers is inversely proportional to their steric bulk. The preparation and characterization of [(^tBuNacnac)Mg(μ‐H)₂Mg(^tBuNacnac)] has shown the compound to have different structural and physical properties to [(^tBuNacnac)MgMg(^tBuNacnac)]. Treatment of the former with DMAP has given [(^tBuNacnac)Mg(H)(DMAP)], the X‐ray crystal structure of which disclosed it to be the first structurally authenticated terminal magnesium hydride complex. Although attempts to prepare [(^MesNacnac)Mg(μ‐H)₂Mg(^MesNacnac)] were not successful, a neutron diffraction study of the corresponding magnesium(I) complex, [(^MesNacnac)MgMg(^MesNacnac)] confirmed that the compound is devoid of hydride ligands.     

Bifunctional Behavior of Unsaturated Intramolecular Phosphane–Borane Frustrated Lewis Pairs Derived from Uncatalyzed 1,4‐Hydrophosphination of a Dienylborane

Three unsaturated C₄‐bridged phospane/borane frustrated Lewis pairs (P/B FLPs) are prepared by uncatalyzed hydrophosphination of a dienylborane. The systems are bifunctional. Consequently, two examples undergo clean hydroboration reactions with HB(C₆F₅)₂ to yield B/B/P systems. The 1,4‐P/B system (C₆F₅)₂B?CH₂CH?CMeCH₂PMes₂ reacts with benzaldehyde initially by allylborane addition, followed by internal P/B FLP addition to the pendant C?C double bond, to yield a bicyclic product. The corresponding reaction of (C₆F₅)₂B?CH₂CH?CMeCH₂PtBu₂ stops at the allylborane/benzaldehyde addition product. The related system (C₆F₅)₂B?CH₂CH?CMeCH₂PPh₂ shows a similar bifunctional reaction pattern, whereby allylborane addition to benzaldehyde is combined with P/B addition to a second aldehyde equivalent to form the eight‐membered heterocyclic 1:2 addition product.     

Molybdenum(VI) Bis(imido) Complexes: From Frustrated Lewis Pairs to Weakly Coordinating Cations

Molybdenum(VI) bis(imido) complexes [Mo(NtBu)₂(L^R)₂] (R=H 1 a ; R=CF₃ 1 b ) combined with B(C₆F₅)₃ ( 1 a /B(C₆F₅)₃, 1 b /B(C₆F₅)₃) exhibit a frustrated Lewis pair (FLP) character that can heterolytically split H−H, Si−H and O−H bonds. Cleavage of H₂ and Et₃SiH affords ion pairs [Mo(NtBu)(NHtBu)(L^R)₂][HB(C₆F₅)₃] (R=H 2 a ; R=CF₃ 2 b ) composed of a Mo(VI) amido imido cation and a hydridoborate anion, while reaction with H₂O leads to [Mo(NtBu)(NHtBu)(L^R)₂][(HO)B(C₆F₅)₃] (R=H 3 a ; R=CF₃ 3 b ). Ion pairs 2 a and 2 b are catalysts for the hydrosilylation of aldehydes with triethylsilane, with 2 b being more active than 2 a . Mechanistic elucidation revealed insertion of the aldehyde into the B−H bond of [HB(C₆F₅)₃]⁻. We were able to isolate and fully characterize, including by single-crystal X-ray diffraction analysis, the inserted products Mo(NtBu)(NHtBu)(L^R)₂][{PhCH₂O}B(C₆F₅)₃] (R=H 4 a ; R=CF₃ 4 b ). Catalysis occurs at [HB(C₆F₅)₃]⁻ while [Mo(NtBu)(NHtBu)(L^R)₂]⁺ (R=H or CF₃) act as the cationic counterions. However, the striking difference in reactivity gives ample evidence that molybdenum cations behave as weakly coordinating cations (WCC).     

Reactions of iridium bis(phosphinite) pincer complexes with protic acids

Iridium pincer complexes [C₆H₃-2,6-(OPBu^t ₂)₂]Ir(H)Cl (10) and [4-EtOOCC₆H₂-2,6-(OPBu^t ₂)₂]Ir(H)Cl (11) react with protic acids undergoing metallation of one of the tert-butyl groups to form double cyclometallated products [4-R-C₆H₂-2-(OPBu^t ₂)-6-(OP(Bu^t)CMe₂CH₂)]IrCl (12, R = H; 13, R = COOEt), which are stable in air. Complex 12 reacts with CO and Bu^tNC giving the corresponding 18-electron complexes [C₆H₃-2-(OP-Bu^t ₂)-6-(OP(Bu^t)CMe₂CH₂)]Ir(L)Cl (14, L = CO; 15, L = CNBu^t). The structure of compound 14 was established by X-ray diffraction analysis.     

Reaktionen von (tBu)2P?PP(Br)tBu2 mit LiP(SiMe3)2, LiPMe2 und LiMe,LitBu, LinBu

Reactions of (tBu)₂P? P?P(Br)tBu₂ with LiP(SiMe₃)₂, LiPMe₂ and LiMe, LitBu and LinBu The reactions of (tBu)₂P? P?P(Br)tBu₂ 1 with LiP(SiMe₃)₂ 2 yield (Me₃Si)₂P? P(SiMe₃)₂ 4 and P[P(tBu)₂]₂P(SiMe₃)₂ 5 , whereas 1 with LiPMe₂ 2 yields P₂Me₄ 6 and P[(tBu)₂]₂PMe₂ 7 . 1 with LiMe yields the ylid tBu₂P? P?P(Me)tBu₂ (main product) and [tBu₂P]₂PMe 15 . In the reaction of 1 with tBuLi [tBu₂P]₂PH 11 is the main product and also tBuP? P?P(R)tBu₂ 21 is formed. The reaction of 1 with nBuLi leads to [tBu₂P]₂PnBu 17 (main product) and tBu₂P? P?P(nBu)tBu₂ 22 (secondary product).     

Promoting Difficult Carbon–Carbon Couplings: Which Ligand Does Best?

A Pd complex, cis‐[Pd(C₆F₅)₂(THF)₂] ( 1 ), is proposed as a useful touchstone for direct and simple experimental measurement of the relative ability of ancillary ligands to induce C−C coupling. Interestingly, 1 is also a good alternative to other precatalysts used to produce Pd⁰L. Complex 1 ranks the coupling ability of some popular ligands in the order P^tBu₃>o‐TolPEWO‐F≈tBuXPhos>P(C₆F₅)₃≈PhPEWO‐F>P(o‐Tol)₃≈THF≈tBuBrettPhos≫Xantphos≈PhPEWO‐H≫PPh₃ according to their initial coupling rates, whereas their efficiency, depending on competitive hydrolysis, is ranked tBuXPhos≈P^tBu₃≈o‐TolPEWO‐F>PhPEWO‐F>P(C₆F₅)₃≫tBuBrettPhos>THF≈P(o‐Tol)₃>Xantphos>PhPEWO‐H≫PPh₃. This “meter” also detects some other possible virtues or complications of ligands such as tBuXPhos or tBuBrettPhos.     

Synthesis,Spectroscopy, and Hydroformylation Activity of Sterically Demanding,Phosphite‐Modified Cobalt Catalysts

The dinuclear complex [Co₂(CO)₆{P(O‐2,4‐t‐Bu₂C₆H₃)₃}₂] ( 6 ) has been synthesised and fully characterised. X‐Ray crystal‐structure analysis revealed a trans‐diaxial geometry, no bridging carbonyls, and Co? Co and Co? P bond lengths of 2.706(5) and 2.134(4) Å, respectively. The hydroformylation of pent‐1‐ene in the presence of 6 was studied at 120–180° at pressures between 20 and 80 bar Syngas. High‐pressure (HP) spectroscopy (IR, NMR) was used to detect potential hydride intermediates. HP‐IR Studies revealed the formation of [CoH(CO)₃{P(O‐2,4‐t‐Bu₂C₆H₃)₃}] ( 2 ) at ca. 105°, with no significant amount of [CoH(CO)₄] detectable. The intermediate 2 was synthesised and characterised. The formation of the undesired complex [CoH(CO)₂{P(O‐2,4‐t‐Bu₂C₆H₃)₃}₂] was completely suppressed due to the large cone angle of the sterically demanding phosphite.     

Synthesis and Structure of Amido‐ and Imido(pentafluorophenyl)borane Zirconocene and Hafnocene Complexes: N?H and B?H Activation

Treatment of Me₂S ? B(C₆F₅)_nH_3?n (n=1 or 2) with ammonia yields the corresponding adducts. H₃N ? B(C₆F₅)H₂ dimerises in the solid state through N? H???H? B dihydrogen interactions. The adducts can be deprotonated to give lithium amidoboranes Li[NH₂B(C₆F₅)_nH_3?n]. Reaction of the n=2 reagent with [Cp₂ZrCl₂] leads to disubstitution, but [Cp₂Zr{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}₂] is in equilibrium with the product of β‐hydride elimination [Cp₂Zr(H){NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}], which proves to be the major isolated solid. The analogous reaction with [Cp₂HfCl₂] gives a mixture of [Cp₂Hf{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}₂] and the N? H activation product [Cp₂Hf{NHB(C₆F₅)₂H}]. [Cp₂Zr{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}₂] ? PhMe and [Cp₂Hf{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}₂] ? 4(thf) exhibit β‐B‐agostic chelate bonding of one of the two amidoborane ligands in the solid state. The agostic hydride is invariably coordinated to the outside of the metallocene wedge. Exceptionally, [Cp₂Hf{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}₂] ? PhMe has a structure in which the two amidoborane ligands adopt an intermediate coordination mode, in which neither is definitively agostic. [Cp₂Hf{NHB(C₆F₅)₂H}] has a formally dianionic imidoborane ligand chelating through an agostic interaction, but the bond‐length distribution suggests a contribution from a zwitterionic amidoborane resonance structure. Treatment of the zwitterions [Cp₂MMe(μ‐Me)B(C₆F₅)₃] (M=Zr, Hf) with Li[NH₂B(C₆F₅)_nH_3?n] (n=2) results in [Cp₂MMe{NH₂B(C₆F₅)₂H}] complexes, for which the spectroscopic data, particularly ¹J(B,H), again suggest β‐B‐agostic interactions. The reactions proceed similarly for the structurally encumbered [Cp′′₂ZrMe(μ‐Me)B(C₆F₅)₃] precursor (Cp′′=1,3‐C₅H₃(SiMe₃)₂, n=1 or 2) to give [Cp′′₂ZrMe{NH₂B(C₆F₅)_nH_3?n}], both of which have been structurally characterised and show chelating, agostic amidoborane coordination. In contrast, the analogous hafnium chemistry leads to the recovery of [Cp′′₂HfMe₂] and the formation of Li[HB(C₆F₅)₃] through hydride abstraction.     

The Hydride‐Ion Affinity of Borenium Cations and Their Propensity to Activate H2 in Frustrated Lewis Pairs

A range of frustrated Lewis pairs (FLPs) containing borenium cations have been synthesised. The catechol (Cat)‐ligated borenium cation [CatB(PtBu₃)]⁺ has a lower hydride‐ion affinity (HIA) than B(C₆F₅)₃. This resulted in H₂ activation being energetically unfavourable in a FLP with the strong base PtBu₃. However, ligand disproportionation of CatBH(PtBu₃) at 100 °C enabled trapping of H₂ activation products. DFT calculations at the M06‐2X/6‐311G(d,p)/PCM (CH₂Cl₂) level revealed that replacing catechol with chlorides significantly increases the chloride‐ion affinity (CIA) and HIA. Dichloro–borenium cations, [Cl₂B(amine)]⁺, were calculated to have considerably greater HIA than B(C₆F₅)₃. Control reactions confirmed that the HIA calculations can be used to successfully predict hydride‐transfer reactivity between borenium cations and neutral boranes. The borenium cations [Y(Cl)B(2,6‐lutidine)]⁺ (Y=Cl or Ph) form FLPs with P(mesityl)₃ that undergo slow deprotonation of an ortho‐methyl of lutidine at 20 °C to form the four‐membered boracycles [(CH₂{NC₅H₃Me})B(Cl)Y] and [HPMes₃]⁺. When equimolar [Y(Cl)B(2,6‐lutidine)]⁺/P(mesityl)₃ was heated under H₂ (4 atm), heterolytic cleavage of dihydrogen was competitive with boracycle formation.