Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The butadienediyl-bridged complexes [(η 5 -C 5 R 5 )Fe(dppe)] 2 (μ-CH CHCH CH) (R = H, Me) and their radical cationic and dicationic forms have been prepared and characterized by cyclic voltammetry, electronic spectroscopy (UV−vis and near-IR), EPR, and X-ray crystallography (R = Me). Comparisons with each other and with the literature complexes [(η 5 -C 5 H 5 )Fe(dppm)] 2 (μ-CH CHCH CH), [(η 5 -C 5 Me 5 )Fe(dppe)] 2 (μ-C⋮CC⋮C), and [(η 5 -C 5 Me 5 )Fe(dppe)] 2 (μ-C(OMe) CHCH C(OMe)) have allowed for systematic evaluation of several structural variations (C 5 H 5 vs C 5 Me 5, dppm vs dppe, μ-CH CHCH CH vs μ-C⋮CC⋮C, and μ-CH CHCH CH vs μ-C(OMe) CHCH C(OMe)) and their effects on spectra and electronic intermetal coupling. Some of the structural changes have opposite effects on H ab, the effective coupling parameter, and K c, the comproportionation constant. The data for the mixed-valence cations are most consistent with electronic delocalization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chung et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: