Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Abstract 1H‐ and 13C‐NMR. data are reported for the complexes [Pt(1)L] and [Pt(2)L]; 1 = OC6H4CH NCH2CH2O, 2 = OC6H4CH NC6H4O; L = PR3, AsR3, C N (cyclohexyl), DMSO, pyridine, secondary amine. The molecular structures of [Pt (2) (NHEt2)] (I) and [Pt (2) (PPh3)] (II) have been determined by X‐ray analysis. Relevant bond distances for I: Pt‐N (amine) = 2.076 Å, Pt‐N (imine) = 2.017 Å, Pt‐O = 1.992 Å and 2.002 Å; for II: Pt‐P = 2.248 Å, Pt‐N = 2.064 Å, Pt‐O = 1.964 and 2.005 Å. Both the solid and solution state data are interpreted in terms of differences in the trans influence of the ligand L. The question of metal‐ligand d‐p π back bonding to the imine is discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Motschi et al. (1980) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: