Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
To explore the influence of six structurally different polycarboxylate ligands H 2 L 1 to H 4 L 6 in the system Zn(II)/btmx, six coordination polymers, formulated as [Zn(btmx)(L 1 )] n ( 1 ), {[Zn(btmx)(L 2 )]·2H 2 O} n ( 2 ), {[Zn(btmx)(L 3 )]·1.5H 2 O} n ( 3 ), [Zn(btmx)(L 4 )] n ( 4 ), {[Zn 4 (btmx) 3 (L 5 ) 4 (H 2 O) 2 ]·4H 2 O} n ( 5 ), and [Zn(btmx)(H 2 L 6 )] n ( 6 ), have been obtained under similar conditions (btmx = 1,4-bis(1,2,4-triazol-1-ylmethyl)-2,3,5,6-tetramethylbenzene, H 2 L 1 = 1,3-benzenedicarboxylic acid, H 2 L 2 = 1,4-benzenedicarboxylic acid, H 2 L 3 = 1,3-adamantanedicarboxylic acid, H 2 L 4 = 1,3-adamantanediacetic acid, H 2 L 5 = 4,4′-oxidibenzoic acid, and H 4 L 6 = 3,3′,4,4′-benzophenone tetracarboxylic acid). The structure determination reveals that complexes 1 and 4 are two-dimensional (2D) layered networks and exhibit typical (4,4) topological nets. Complex 2 shows an undulating 2D (4,4)-network with 2-fold interpenetration. Complex 3 possesses a three-dimensional (3D) 3-fold interpenetrating 4-connected framework of 6 6 - dia topology. Both 5 and 6 have different 3D interpenetrated motifs generated by 2D → 3D interpenetration. Complex 5 belongs to a 3D framework built from the interpenetration of 2D bilayers in an inclined mode, while 6 involves a parallel interpenetration between the adjacent 2D (4,4) layers. This work markedly indicates that the effect of polycarboxylate ligands is significant in the construction of these networks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mu et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: