Three Cu(II) coordination polymers, {[Cu( l -cysteate)(1,4-Bix)(H 2 O)]·H 2 O} n ( 1 ), {[Cu( l -aspartate)(1,4-Bix) 0.5 ]·H 2 O} n ( 2 ), and {[Cu( l -aspartate)(4,4′-Bpy) 0.5 ]H 2 O} n ( 3 ), have been synthesized solvothermally, employing enantiopure l -amino acids and bidentate N-donor ligands, 1,4-bis(imidazol-1-ylmethyl)benzene (1,4-Bix) and 4,4′-bipyridyl(4,4′-Bpy), to yield 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D helical coordination polymers, respectively. All the three neutral frameworks are well-characterized by various physicochemical methods (C,H,N analysis, IR, TGA) including the single crystal X-ray diffraction technique. The chiral nature of complexes 2 and 3 was established using solid state CD spectra. Structural investigation of complex 1 revealed 1-D helical chains, whereas that of complex 2 confirms a chiral and helical two-dimensional 6 3 -hcb net, with helicity propagating in both the dimensions. Cu(II) nodes with the mixed ligands in complex 3 generate a three-dimensional framework by the pillaring of Cu( l -aspartate) 2-D helical layers by 4,4′-Bpy units, identified as a (3,4)-coordinated binodal net with (6 3 )(6 5 .8) -ins topology. The temperature-dependent magnetic properties of the l -aspartic acid derived for complexes 2 and 3 were studied in detail. Complex 2 showed weak antiferromagnetic behavior, which matches well with the crystallographic parameters ( syn−anti conformation of carboxylate bridged Cu(II), with lowest Cu−Cu distance 5.367 Å). Similarly, complex 3, with a shorter and rigid N-donor ligand, 4,4′-Bpy, and the carboxylate group of the amino acid moiety linking the adjacent metal centers in the syn − anti conformation, also displayed a weak antiferromagnetic behavior at lower temperatures, showing the weak exchange couplings between Cu(II) centers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kathalikkattil et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: