Reaction of MnII and pyridine derivatives such as 4-methylpyridine (4-Mepy) and 4-ethylpyridine (4-Etpy) led to the new two-dimensional systems trans-[Mn(4-Mepy)2(N3)2]n (1) and trans-[Mn(4-Etpy)2(N3)2]n (2). Compound 1 crystallizes in the triclinic system, P1 group (a = 9.269(2) A, b = 9.635(3) A, c = 18.860(4) A, Z = 4), and compound 2 crystallizes in the monoclinic system, P2(1)/c group (a = 14.416(3) A, b = 8.515(2) A, c = 15.728(4) A, Z = 4). The two compounds show honeycomb structures based on dinuclear Mn-(mu-N3)2-Mn subunits linked to the four nearest-neighbor similar subunits by four end-to-end single azido bridges, but whereas the subunits of compound 1 show the end-to-end Mn-(mu 1,3-N3)2-Mn kind of bridges, compound 2 prefers the end-on Mn-(mu 1,1-N3)2-Mn fragment. Magnetically, compound 1 is an alternating 2-D system with two different antiferromagnetic interactions, whereas compound 2 corresponds to a two-dimensional ferro-antiferromagnetic system showing spin canting and permanent magnetization below 20 K. The coupling constant parameters J1 = -10.1 cm-1, J2 = -4.7 cm-1, and g = 2.019 for 1 and J1 = -5.3 cm-1, J2 = 2.9 cm-1, and g = 2.016 for 2 have been obtained from calculations using the Monte Carlo method based on the Metropolis algorithm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Escuer et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: