Five new monocationic dihydrogen complexes of ruthenium of the type trans-[RuCl(eta(2)-H(2))(PP)(2)][BF(4)] (PP = bis-1,2(diarylphosphino)ethane, aryl = p-fluorobenzyl, 1a, benzyl, 2a, m-methylbenzyl, 3a, p-methylbenzyl, 4a, p-isopropylbenzyl, 5a) have been prepared by protonating the precursor hydride complexes trans-[RuCl(H)(PP)(2)] using HBF(4).OEt(2). The dihydrogen complexes are quite stable and have been isolated in the solid state. The intact nature of the H-H bond in these derivatives has been established from the short spin-lattice relaxation times (T1, ms) and observation of substantial H, D couplings in the HD isotopomers. The H-H bond distances (dHH, A) increase systematically from 0.97 to 1.03 A as the electron-donor ability of the substituent on the diphosphine ligand increases from the p-fluorobenzyl to the p-isopropylbenzyl moiety. The d(HH) in trans-[Ru(eta(2)-H(2))(Cl)((C(6)H(5)CH(2))(2)PCH(2)CH(2)P(CH(2)C(6)H(5))(2))(2)][BF(4)], 2a, was found to be 1.08(5) A by X-ray crystallography. In addition, two new 16-electron dicationic dihydrogen complexes of the type [Ru(eta(2)-H(2))(PP)(2)][OTf](2) (PP = (ArCH(2))(2)PCH(2)CH(2)P(CH(2)Ar)(2), Ar = m-CH(3)C(6)H(4-), 6a, p-CH(3)C(6)H(4)-, 7a) have also been prepared and characterized. These derivatives were found to possess elongated dihydrogen ligands.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dutta et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: