Transition‐Metal Complexes of Tetrylones [(CO)5W‐E(PPh3)2] and Tetrylenes [(CO)5W‐NHE] (E=C–Pb): A Theoretical Study

Quantum chemical calculations at the BP86/TZVPP//BP86/SVP level are performed for the tetrylone complexes [W(CO)₅‐E(PPh₃)₂] ( W‐1 E ) and the tetrylene complexes [W(CO)₅‐NHE] ( W‐2 E ) with E=C–Pb. The bonding is analyzed using charge and energy decomposition methods. The carbone ligand C(PPh₃) is bonded head‐on to the metal in W‐1 C , but the tetrylone ligands E(PPh₃)₂ are bonded side‐on in the heavier homologues W‐1 Si to W‐1 Pb . The W? E bond dissociation energies (BDEs) increase from the lighter to the heavier homologues ( W‐1 C : D_e=25.1 kcal mol^?1; W‐1 Pb : D_e=44.6 kcal mol^?1). The W(CO)₅←C(PPh₃)₂ donation in W‐1 C comes from the σ lone‐pair orbital of C(PPh₃)₂, whereas the W(CO)₅←E(PPh₃)₂ donation in the side‐on bonded complexes with E=Si–Pb arises from the π lone‐pair orbital of E(PPh₃)₂ (the HOMO of the free ligand). The π‐HOMO energy level rises continuously for the heavier homologues, and the hybridization has greater p character, making the heavier tetrylones stronger donors than the lighter systems, because tetrylones have two lone‐pair orbitals available for donation. Energy decomposition analysis (EDA) in conjunction with natural orbital for chemical valence (NOCV) suggests that the W? E BDE trend in W‐1 E comes from the increase in W(CO)₅←E(PPh₃)₂ donation and from stronger electrostatic attraction, and that the E(PPh₃)₂ ligands are strong σ‐donors and weak π‐donors. The NHE ligands in the W‐2 E complexes are bonded end‐on for E=C, Si, and Ge, but side‐on for E=Sn and Pb. The W? E BDE trend is opposite to that of the W‐1 E complexes. The NHE ligands are strong σ‐donors and weak π‐acceptors. The observed trend arises because the hybridization of the donor orbital at atom E in W‐2 E has much greater s character than that in W‐1 E , and even increases for heavier atoms, because the tetrylenes have only one lone‐pair orbital available for donation. In addition, the W? E bonds of the heavier systems W‐2 E are strongly polarized toward atom E, so the electrostatic attraction with the tungsten atom is weak. The BDEs calculated for the W? E bonds in W‐1 E , W‐2 E and the less bulky tetrylone complexes [W(CO)₅‐E(PH₃)₂] ( W‐3 E ) show that the effect of bulky ligands may obscure the intrinsic W? E bond strength.     

Dehydrogenative Double C−H Bond Activation in a Germylene-Rhodium Complex**

Transition metal tetrylene complexes offer great opportunities for molecular cooperation due to the ambiphilic character of the group 14 element. Here we focus on the coordination of germylene [(Ar^Mes2)₂Ge :] (Ar^Mes=C₆H₃-2,6-(C₆H₂-2,4,6-Me₃)₂) to [RhCl(COD)]₂ (COD=1,5-cyclooctadiene), which yields a neutral germyl complex in which the rhodium center exhibits both η⁶- and η²-coordination to two mesityl rings in an unusual pincer-type structure. Chloride abstraction from this species triggers a singular dehydrogenative double C−H bond activation across the Ge/Rh motif. We have isolated and fully characterized three rhodium-germyl species associated to three C−H cleavage events along this process. The reaction mechanism has been further investigated by computational means, supporting the key cooperative action of rhodium and germanium centers.     

Tetrylenes chelated by bifunctional β‐diketiminate ligand: structure and possible applications

The synthesis and structure of heteroleptic tetrylenes containing bifunctional β‐diketiminate ligand are reported. Compounds were prepared via a protolytic reaction of free β‐diketimine {N‐[(2‐MeO)C₆H₅]}N═C(Me)CH═C(Me)N(H){N′‐[(2‐MeO)C₆H₅]} (L^COH) and {N‐[(2‐MeO)C₆H₅]}N?CHCH?CHN(H){N′‐[(2‐MeO)C₆H₅]} (L^HOH), respectively, with corresponding bis(amide) – M[N(SiMe₃)₂]₂ (M = Ge, Sn, Pb) – in equimolar ratio or via the salt elimination route from lithium precursors generated from L^HOH/L^COH species and slight excess of SnCl₂ or GeCl₂.dioxane complex. Only heteroleptic complexes were obtained by the mentioned methods. Products were characterized by multinuclear NMR spectroscopy techniques and structures of four of them have been determined by X‐ray diffraction methods. Complexes L^HOGeCl and L^COSnN(SiMe₃)₂ crystallize as monomers with the three‐coordinated metal centres by one chloro or amido ligand and one bidentate β‐diketiminato unit, in contrast to the structure of L^COSnCl, which reveals a dimeric character and compound L^COPbN(SiMe₃)₂, where the central atom of lead is five‐coordinated by methoxy groups of the ligand. Complex L^COSnN(SiMe₃)₂ was tested as a catalyst for polymerization of various epoxides_. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.