Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A series of structurally characterized copper complexes of two pyridazine-spaced cryptands in redox states + (I,I), (II,I), (II), (II,II) are reported. The hexaimine cryptand L(I) [formed by the 2 + 3 condensation of 3,6-diformylpyridazine with tris(2-aminoethyl)amine (tren)] is able to accommodate two non-stereochemically demanding copper(I) ions, resulting in [Cu(I)(2)L(I)](BF(4))(2) 1, or one stereochemically demanding copper(II) ion, resulting in [Cu(II)L(I)()](BF(4))(2) 3. Complex 3 crystallizes in two forms, 3a and 3b, with differing copper(II) ion coordination geometries. Addition of copper(I) to the monometallic complex 3 results in the mixed-valence complex [Cu(I)Cu(II)L(I)](X)(3) (X = PF(6)(-), 2a; X = BF(4)(-), 2b) which is well stabilized within this cryptand as indicated by electrochemical studies (K(com) = 2.1 x 10(11)). The structurally characterized, octaamine cryptand L(A), prepared by sodium borohydride reduction of L(I), is more flexible than L(I) and can accommodate two stereochemically demanding copper(II) ions, generating the dicopper(II) cryptate [Cu(II)(2)L(A)](BF(4))(4) 4. Electrochemical studies indicate that L(A) stabilizes the copper(II) oxidation state more effectively than L(I); no copper redox state lower than II,II has been isolated in the solid state using this ligand.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brooker et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: