Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The reaction of the four-coordinate picket fence iron(II) porphyrin complex [Fe(TpivPP)] with cryptand-solubilized KNO 2 yields the five-coordinate porphyrin species [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )] - . The six-coordinate complexes, [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(PMS)] - and [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(Py)] -, are obtained when pentamethylene sulfide or pyridine is added anaerobically to the preformed five-coordinate porphyrin species. These novel species are characterized by UV−vis, IR, and Mössbauer spectroscopies as well as single-crystal structure determinations. The Mössbauer investigation shows that the isomer shifts and quadrupole splittings for [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(PMS)] - and [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(Py)] - are typical for six-coordinate, low-spin ( S = 0) iron(II) porphyrinate complexes. This is in distinct contrast to the unusually large quadrupole splitting of the five-coordinate species [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )] - . The molecular structures of [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(PMS)] - and [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )(Py)] - show that the nitro groups are inside the “pocket” of the porphyrin trans to the neutral sulfur- or nitrogen-donating axial ligand. In all species, the projection of the nitrite ion onto the porphyrin plane bisects a N p −Fe−N p angle. In the pyridine derivative, the dihedral angle between the two axial ligand planes is 81.4°. In the pentamethylene sulfide derivative, Fe−N p = 1.990(6) Å, Fe−N(NO 2 ) = 1.937(3) Å, and Fe−S(PMS) = 2.380(2) Å, while in the pyridine derivative Fe−N p = 1.990(15) Å, Fe−N(NO 2 ) = 1.951(5) Å, and Fe−N(Py) = 2.032(5) Å. In [Fe(TpivPP)(NO 2 )] -, Fe−N p is 1.970(4) Å while Fe−N(NO 2 ) is a very short 1.849(6) Å. The structural and spectroscopic data are interpreted as showing a significant difference in the [Fe−NO 2 ] π interaction on change in coordination number.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nasri et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: