Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Di-μ-alkoxo-bridged binuclear copper(II) complexes, Cu(py-3-3-nno)X, Cu(py-3-2-nso)X, and Cu(py-3-3-nso)X (X=Cl, Br, ClO4, NO3, PF6, BF4), have been synthesized and characterized, where Hpy-3-3-nno, Hpy-3-2-nso, and Hpy-3-3-nso denote 3-[2-(2-pyridyl)ethylamino]-1-propanol, 2-[2-(2-pyridyl)ethylthio]ethanol, and 3-[2-(2-pyridyl)ethylthio]-1-propanol, respectively. It was found that 2-[2-(2-pyridyl)ethylamino]ethanol (Hpy-3-2-nno) cannot form di-μ-alkoxo-bridged binuclear copper(II) complexes owing to the high strain in the fused ring system. These complexes exhibited a band at 22000–27000 cm−1 characteristic of the di-μ-alkoxo-bridged structure, the bands for Cu(py-3-2-nso)X and Cu(py-3-3-nso)X being lower in frequency compared with those for Cu(py-3-3-nno)X. Antiferromagnetic interaction was stronger and reduction potential (Cu(II)–Cu(II)→Cu(I)–Cu(I)) was higher for Cu(py-3-3-nso)X than those for Cu(py-3-3-nno)X. Cu(py-3-3-nso)Cl and Cu-(py-3-2-nso)Br showed two reduction waves at about +0.15 and −0.4 V vs. SCE. These results were discussed in terms of the structure in solution on the basis of conductivity measurements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nakamura et al. (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: