Reaction of 2,6-difluoropyridine with 2 equiv of indazole and NaH at room temperature affords a mixture of 2,6-bis(indazol-1-yl)pyridine (1-bip), 2-(indazol-1-yl)-6-(indazol-2-yl)pyridine (1,2-bip), and 2,6-bis(indazol-2-yl)pyridine (2-bip), which can be separated by solvent extraction. A two-step procedure using the same conditions also affords both 2-(indazol-1-yl)-6-(pyrazol-1-yl)pyridine (1-ipp) and 2-(indazol-2-yl)-6-(pyrazol-1-yl)pyridine (2-ipp). These are all annelated analogues of 2,6-di(pyrazol-1-yl)pyridine, an important ligand for spin-crossover complexes. Iron(II) complexes [Fe(1-bip)2](2+), [Fe(1,2-bip)2](2+), and [Fe(1-ipp)2](2+) are low-spin at room temperature, reflecting sterically imposed conformational rigidity of the 1-indazolyl ligands. In contrast, the 2-indazolyl complexes [Fe(2-bip)2](2+) and [Fe(2-ipp)2](2+) are high-spin in solution at room temperature, whereas salts of [Fe(2-bip)2](2+) exhibit thermal spin transitions in the solid state. Notably, [Fe(2-bip)2][BF4]2·2MeNO2 adopts a terpyridine embrace lattice structure and undergoes a spin transition near room temperature after annealing, resulting in thermal hysteresis that is wider than previously observed for this structure type (T1/2 = 266 K, ΔT = 16-20 K). This reflects enhanced mechanical coupling between the cations in the lattice through interdigitation of their ligand arms, which supports a previously proposed structure/function relationship for spin-crossover materials with this form of crystal packing. All of the compounds in this work exhibit blue fluorescence in solution under ambient conditions. In most cases, the ligand-based emission maxima are slightly red shifted upon complexation, but there is no detectable correlation between the emission maximum and the spin state of the iron centers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santoro et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: