Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
When the cycloheptatriene iridium(iii) pincer complex (PCP)Ir(CO)(H)(Cl) (3) (PCP = 2,7-(CH(2)P(t)Bu(2))(2)C(7)H(5)) is treated with the bases NaH, 1,8-diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene (DBU) and lithium 2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidide (LiTMP) under various conditions different products are obtained. At elevated temperatures and with DBU or LiTMP as a base the trans dihydride (PCP')Ir(CO)(H)(2) (PCP' = 2-(CHP(t)Bu(2))-7-(CH(2)P(t)Bu(2))C(7)H(4)) (5) is formed where the pi-system extends into one of the phosphine bridges. This compound loses H(2) to give the square-planar iridium(I) carbonyl complex (PCP'IrCO). The dihydride 5 can also rearrange to the new isomeric iridium(I) carbonyl 6 (PCP''IrCO, PCP'' = 2,7-(CH(2)P(t)Bu(2))(2)C(7)H(5)). Thus the two hydrides have moved into the ligand backbone creating a methylene group in the 3-position of the cycloheptatriene ring. Alternatively, 6 is formed by a rearrangement from 6a which differs from 6 by having the methylene group in the 4-position of the cycloheptatriene ring. The iridium(I) carbonyl 6a in turn is made from 3 by treatment with DBU at room temperature. Interestingly, when compound is heated to reflux in THF the hydrogen bound at the metal carbon is shifted to a carbon atom in the cycloheptatriene ring generating a ring methylene group (3a). From this complex HCl is eliminated upon chromatography forming 6 as the final product. Quantum chemical calculations at various levels of theory illustrate the relative energetic stabilities of all iridium complexes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Winter et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: