ArticlePDF Available

Crystalline Diuranium-Phosphinidiide and -μ-Phosphido Complexes with Symmetric and Asymmetric UPU Cores

Wiley
Angewandte Chemie International Edition
Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Reaction of [U(TrenTIPS)(PH2)] (1, TrenTIPS = N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)3) with C6H5CH2K and [U(TrenTIPS)(THF)][BPh4] (2) afforded a rare diuranium-parent-phosphinidiide complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}2(μ-PH)] (3). Treatment of 3 with C6H5CH2K and two equivalents of benzo-15-crown-5 ether (B15C5) gave the diuranium-μ-phosphido complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}2(μ-P)][K(B15C5)2] (4). Alternatively, reaction of [U(TrenTIPS)(PH)][Na(12C4)2] (5, 12C4 = 12-crown-4 ether) with [U{N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)2CH2CH2NSi(Me)(CH2)(But)}] (6) produced the diuranium-μ-phosphido complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}(μ-P){U(TrenDMBS)}][Na(12C4)2] [7, TrenDMBS = N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)3]. Compounds 4 and 7 are unprecedented examples (outside of matrix isolation studies) of uranium-phosphido complexes that can be prepared and isolated, but they rapidly decompose in solution underscoring the paucity of uranium-phosphido complexes. Interestingly, 4 and 7 feature symmetric and asymmetric UPU cores, respectively, reflecting their differing steric profiles.
Content may be subject to copyright.
German Edition:DOI:10.1002/ange.201706002
Uranium Complexes International Edition:DOI:10.1002/anie.201706002
Crystalline Diuranium Phosphinidiide and m-PhosphidoComplexes
with Symmetric and Asymmetric UPU Cores
Thomas M. Rookes,Benedict M. Gardner,G#bor Bal#zs,Matthew Gregson, Floriana Tuna,
Ashley J. Wooles,Manfred Scheer,* and Stephen T. Liddle*
Abstract: Reaction of [U(TrenTIPS)(PH2)] (1,TrenTIPS =
N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)3)with C6H5CH2Kand [U(TrenTIPS)-
(THF)][BPh4](2)afforded arare diuranium parent phosphi-
nidiide complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}2(m-PH)] (3). Treatment of 3
with C6H5CH2Kand two equivalents of benzo-15-crown-5
ether (B15C5) gave the diuranium m-phosphido complex
[{U(TrenTIPS)}2(m-P)][K(B15C5)2](4). Alternatively,reaction
of [U(TrenTIPS)(PH)][Na(12C4)2](5,12C4 =12-crown-4
ether) with [U{N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)2CH2CH2NSi(Me)-
(CH2)(But)}] (6)produced the diuranium m-phosphido com-
plex [{U(TrenTIPS)}(m-P){U(TrenDMBS)}][Na(12C4)2][7,
TrenDMBS =N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)3]. Compounds 4and 7
are unprecedented examples of uranium phosphido complexes
outside of matrix isolation studies,and they rapidly decompose
in solution underscoring the paucity of uranium phosphido
complexes.Interestingly, 4and 7feature symmetric and
asymmetric UPU cores,respectively,reflecting their differing
steric profiles.
Inrecent years there has been burgeoning interest in the
synthesis and chemistry of uranium–ligand multiple bonds,[1]
which stems from adesire to better understand the chemical
bonding of uranium and to correlate this to observed
physicochemical properties.However,most progress has
been made regarding complexes where uranium engages in
aformal multiple bond to C-/N-/O-based donor ligands,and
examples of second row-centered, and beyond, donor ligands
generally continue to be rare.[2] Where uranium–phosphorus
multiple bonding is concerned,[3] only two structurally
authenticated phosphinidene complexes have been
reported,[4] and investigations into uranium phosphido com-
plexes are exceedingly rare and restricted to cryogenic matrix
isolation and/or computational studies.[5] Thus,there are no
reports of uranium phosphido complexes on macroscopic
scales under conditions that would permit further investiga-
tion;indeed, the phosphido linkage,whether terminal or m-
bridging,remains arelatively rare structural motif even in
transition-metal chemistry.[6]
As part of our work on actinide–ligand multiple bonds,[7]
we reported dithorium phosphido and arsenido complexes
that are supported by the very sterically demanding triamido-
amine ligand N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)3(TrenTIPS).[7a,d] Forthe
ThPThderivative this ligand combination produced aseem-
ingly optimal balance of steric shielding of the ThPThcore
versus inter-TrenTIPS steric repulsion. We therefore considered
whether the analogous diuranium complex might be acces-
sible;however,uranium has potentially deleterious and facile
redox chemistry compared to the more redox-robust thorium,
and is smaller than thorium by 0.05–0.18 c,[8] so uranium with
the same ligand set might well be too strained to form astable
UPU linkage and could very easily decompose.Herein,
however, we report two different methods for the bulk-scale
preparation and subsequent characterization of diuranium m-
phosphido complexes,utilizing Tr enTIPS and the related
TrenDMBS (TrenDMBS =N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)3)ligands,that
are the first examples of uranium phosphido complexes
outside of cryogenic spectroscopic experiments.[5b,c] These
complexes can be isolated and manipulated in the solid state,
but we find that they are indeed highly sensitive and
decompose rapidly in solution, which is in-line with the
prior absence of any synthetically accessible actinide phos-
phido complexes.Interestingly,depending on the steric
profiles of the Tren ligands that support these phosphido
complexes,symmetric and asymmetric UPU cores are
observed in the solid state structures.
Our initial approach was to target aUP(H)U core via
deprotonation/salt elimination and then effect deprotonation
to give aphosphido complex. Accordingly,sequential treat-
ment of the uranium(IV) phosphanide complex [U(TrenTIPS)-
(PH2)] (1)[4a] with benzyl potassium and then the separated
ion pair [U(TrenTIPS)(THF)][BPh4](2)[4a] afforded, after
work-up and recrystallization, dark red-brown crystals of
the diuranium(IV) parent phosphinidiide complex [{U-
(TrenTIPS)}2(m-PH)] (3)in67% isolated yield, Scheme 1.[9]
Thesynthesis of 3requires 2as elimination of KBPh4is
favorable owing to the outer sphere nature of the BPh4@anion
in 2whereas any uranium-coordinated halide is not displaced
by the relatively soft Pcenter.[4a] The 1HNMR spectrum of 3
spans the range @27 to +8ppm and the 29Si NMR spectrum
exhibits asingle resonance at +11.6 ppm, which are both
[*] T. M. Rookes, Dr.B.M.Gardner,Dr. M. Gregson, Dr.F.Tuna,
Dr.A.J.Wooles, Prof. S. T. Liddle
School of Chemistry
The University of Manchester
Oxford Road, Manchester,M13 9PL (UK)
E-mail:steve.liddle@manchester.ac.uk
Dr.G.Bal#zs, Prof. Dr.M.Scheer
Institute of Inorganic Chemistry,University of Regensburg
Universit-tsstrasse 31, 93053 Regensburg (Germany)
E-mail:manfred.scheer@ur.de
Supportinginformation and the ORCID identification number(s) for
the author(s) of this article can be found under:
https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201706002.
T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co.
KGaA. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative
Commons AttributionLicense, which permits use, distribution and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10495Angew.Chem. Int.Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500 T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA,Weinheim
consistent with the uranium(IV) formulation of 3.[10] No
31PNMR resonance could be detected for 3,most likely due
to the phosphinidiide being bonded to two uranium(IV) ions.
TheATR-IR spectrum of 3exhibits aweak, broad feature at
approximately 2169 cm@1,consistent with the presence of the
m-PH unit.[11] SQUID magnetometry on powdered 3gives
magnetic moments of 4.3 and 0.8 mBat 298 and 2K,
respectively,with asteady fall in-between these two extremes.
These data are entirely consistent with the presence of two
uranium(IV) ions in 3and alow temperature magnetic
moment that is tending to zero and dominated by temper-
ature independent paramagnetism from the spin-orbit cou-
pled ground-state multiplet of 3H4uranium. Ashoulder in the
cvs. Tdata is apparent at about 25 Kwhich is most likely due
to single-ion crystal field effects rather than any magnetic
exchange.[12] Confirmation of the formulation of 3was
provided by the solid state crystal structure,Figure 1, which
reveals U–P distances of 2.8187(12) and 2.8110(12) cthat,
considering steric profiles,compares well to aU–P distance of
2.743(1) cin [{U(C5Me5)2(OMe)}2(m-PH)][11] and the sum of
the single-bond covalent radii of uranium and phosphorus
(2.81 c).[8]
With complex 3secured, we attempted deprotonation of
the phosphinidiide group.Treatment of 3with one equivalent
of benzyl potassium in the presence of two equivalents of
benzo-15-crown-5 ether (B15C5, to completely sequester the
Kion) produced, after work-up and recrystallization, asmall
crop (<5% yield) of black crystals of the diuranium(IV) m-
phosphido complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}2(m-P)][K(B15C5)2](4),
Scheme 1.[9] Thesolid-state crystal structure of 4,Figure 1,
confirms the separated ion pair formulation and reveals U–P
Scheme 1. Synthesis of complex 3from 1and 2,the conversion into 4,
and the formation of 7from 5and 6.B15C5 =benzo-15-crown-5 ether,
12C4=12-crown-4 ether,Bn=benzyl.
Figure 1. Molecular structures of 3(top) and the anion components of
4(middle),and 7(bottom) at 150 K. Displacementellipsoids set at
40%probability and non-phosphorus-bound hydrogen atoms, minor
disorder,and cation components are omitted for clarity.Ugreen,
Ppurple, Nblue, Si yellow.Selected bond lengths [b]: 3,U1–P1 2.8187-
(12), U2–P1 2.8110(12), U1–N1 2.270(4), U1–N2 2.258(4), U1–N3
2.264(4), U1–N4 2.685(5), U2–N5 2.254(5), U2–N6 2.253(4), U2–N7
2.265(4), U2–N8 2.682(6); 4,U1–P1 2.653(4), U2–P1 2.665(4), U1–N1
2.330(8), U1–N2 2.277(10), U1–N3 2.305(9), U1–N4 2.766(9), U2–N5
2.308(8), U2–N6 2.307(12), U2–N7 2.296(10), U2–N8 2.745(9); 7,U1–
P1 2.657(2), U2–P1 2.713(2), U1–N1 2.309(4), U1–N2 2.309(5), U1–
N3 2.324(4), U1–N4 2.765(4), U2–N5 2.276(5), U2–N6 2.284(5), U2–
N7 2.263(5), U2–N8 2.840(5).[20]
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10496 www.angewandte.org T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA, Weinheim Angew.Chem.Int. Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500
distances of 2.653(4) and 2.665(4) c,which represents acon-
traction of approximately 0.15 cfrom 3.The U–P distances in
4can be considered to be short when considering the bridging
nature of the phosphido;for example,although the sum of the
covalent uranium and phosphorus double bond radii is
2.36 c,[8] the U=Pdistances in the terminal uranium(IV)
phosphinidene complexes [U(TrenTIPS)(PH)][K(B15C5)2][4a]
and [U(C5Me5)2(P-2,4,6-But3C6H2)(OPMe3)][4b] are 2.613(2)
and 2.562(3) c,respectively.Furthermore,the Th–P distances
in [{Th(TrenTIPS)}2(m-P)][Na(12C4)2](12C4 =12-crown-4
ether)[7d] are significantly longer [2.735(2)/2.740(2) c]than
the U–P distances in 4,even when factoring in the covalent
radii differences between thorium and uranium.[8] TheU
Namide distances are around 0.1 clonger than is typical for
uranium(IV) Tren complexes,[13] reflecting the anionic for-
mulation of the phosphido moiety.Wenote that the U–Namine
distances are long,which infers a trans-influence from the
phosphido ligand,[7d] but this cannot be stated with confidence
due to U@Nbond lengthening from the anionic formulation.
Complex 4decomposes in solution, which, together with
the low yield, precluded further characterization beyond the
X-ray crystal structure and elemental analyses.The reaction
that produces 4is highly capricious,and despite exhaustive
attempts the reaction conditions could not be improved;
sometimes deprotonation of 3fails,orcomplete decomposi-
tion occurs to unidentified products.Use of different organo-
alkali-metal reagents,the presence or absence of different
crown ethers,orincreasing the molar quantity of benzyl
potassium results in intractable reaction mixtures and/or
production of the known uranium(IV) cyclometallate com-
plex [U{N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)2(CH2CH2NSiPri2C(H)(Me)-
(CH2)}],[14] where the fate of the phosphorus-containing
products could not be determined.
Theabove mentioned observations likely reflect the
inherently polarized, weak, and labile nature of these U–P
linkages,asreflected by the paucity of any other macroscopic
molecular uranium phosphido complexes,and also likely
steric overloading from close proximity of two TrenTIPS
ligands.Inorder to reduce this steric strain and perhaps
obtain amore tractable phosphido complex, we adopted
adifferent strategy to introduce asterically less demanding
Tren ligand.
Reaction of the new terminal uranium(IV)-phosphini-
dene complex [U(TrenTIPS)(PH)][Na(12C4)2](5),[9] which is
only the third example of auranium phosphinidene,with the
uranium(IV) cyclometallate complex [U-
{N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)2CH2CH2NSi(Me)(CH2)(But)}] (6)[15]
proceeds by protonolysis to give the diuranium m-phosphido
complex [{U(TrenTIPS)}(m-P){U(TrenDMBS)}][Na(12C4)2](7),
isolated as dark brown crystals in 29%yield, Scheme 1.[9]
Thecrystalline yield is low due to the oily nature of 7,and the
decomposition that occurs once it is formed (see below). The
solid-state crystal structure of 7,Figure 1, is in gross terms
very similar to that of 4,noting the change of Tr en ligand and
cation component. However,the U–P distances of 2.657(2)
and 2.713(2) care notable in that the shorter is consistent
with the U–P distances in 4,but the longer is significantly
longer and mid-way to the U–P distances in 3.Interestingly,
the shorter U–P distance is found for the TrenTIPS-bound
uranium with the longer U–P distance associated with the
sterically less demanding TrenDMBS portion, and the U@N
bonds are longer in the TrenTIPSUportion of the molecule
compared to those in the TrenDMBSUfragment, perhaps
reflecting the asymmetry of the phosphido bonding.
Thepresence of uranium(IV) ions in 7was confirmed by
SQUID magnetometry on apowdered sample of 7;the
magnetic moments of 4.3 and 1.1 mBat 298 and 2K,
respectively,are consistent with the presence of uranium(IV)
ions.However the magnetic moment of 7at 2Kis higher than
the corresponding data for 3,which may represent the relative
crystal-field effects on uranium(IV) from HP2@versus P3@;the
P3@would be expected to present agreater point charge and
splitting of the paramagnetic excited states manifold, so alow-
lying group are still populated to some extent at low
temperature with ahigher-lying group at high temperature
that are more difficult to populate.This notion is consistent
with aslightly flatter magnetic trace at high temperature for 7
compared to 3and has been noted in other uranium(IV)
complexes with strong point-charge ligands.[2h,3b,7f,h,16] Inter-
estingly,counter to expectations the shoulder at about 25 K
for the magnetic data of 3is much less pronounced for 7which
is consistent with our suggestion that this feature is due to
single ion crystal field effects and not magnetic exchange,[12]
though magnetic exchange cannot be completely ruled out.
Complex 7is moderately more stable than 4,but although,
once isolated, solid state characterization methods were
feasible we find that redissolving 7results in rapid decom-
position so NMR and optical spectroscopic data were
unobtainable.Interestingly,wefind that the majority decom-
position products of 7are the uranium(IV)-cyclometallate
complex [U{N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)2(CH2CH2NSiPri2C(H)(Me)-
(CH2)}],[14] and what we deduce to be [U(TrenDMBS)(PH)]-
[Na(12C4)2], though the latter is not sufficiently sterically
protected so decomposes to unidentified products.Never-
theless,the more clear-cut nature of the decomposition of 7
compared to 4is instructive because it suggests that even with
reduced ligand steric demands the UPU unit is inherently
unstable.Interestingly,the decomposition reaction of 7
produces acyclometallate with aless-strained 5-membered
metallocyclic ring compared to the more-strained 4-mem-
bered metallocycle in 6.This aspect is also consistent with the
observation that mixing the five-membered-ring cyclometal-
late [U{N(CH2CH2NSiPri3)2(CH2CH2NSiPri2C(H)(Me)-
(CH2)}][14] and known [U(TrenTIPS)(PH)][K(B15C5)2][4a]
gives no reaction. Thus,the importance of metallocyclic
ring-strain as akey factor in driving the protonolysis reaction
to generate 7emerges.This point is underscored when
considering that on the basis of the solid-state structure the
phosphido appears to be more associated with the TrenTIPSU
fragment rather than the TrenDMBSUgroup,but it is the
TrenTIPSUfragment that is,inessence,the leaving group
during decomposition.
To gain agreater understanding of the bonding in the
UPU units of 4and 7,wecarried out DFT calculations on the
full anion components of these compounds, 4@and 7@,
respectively.Considerable difficulty was encountered obtain-
ing SCF-converged structures,which suggests that 4@and 7@
have multi-reference ground states.However, satisfactorily
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10497Angew.Chem. Int.Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500 T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.angewandte.org
converged models that provide aqualitative description of the
electronic structure of these compounds could be obtained.
Both 4@and 7@exhibit four unpaired electrons of
essentially exclusive 5f character in their a-spin manifolds
as HOMO to HOMO@3, which is consistent with the
presence of two 5f2uranium(IV) ions.HOMO@4to
HOMO@6ineach case represent the principal bonding
components in the UPU units,see Figure 2and the Support-
ing Information,[9] confirming the presence of polarized
uranium–phosphido triple bonding interactions.The uranium
spin densities of @2.31/@2.33 and @2.17/@2.22, for 4@and 7@
respectively,show donation of electron density from the
ligands to uranium and support the uranium(IV) formula-
tions.The uranium charges are high for Tr en uranium(IV)
complexes,[17] at +3.79/ +3.86 for 4@and +3.52/ +3.87 for 7@
and the phosphido charges are @2.19 and @2.35, respectively.
Interestingly,the uranium ion in 7@which has the closest
association with the phosphido,that is,TrenTIPSU, has the
highest charge and lowest spin density,and recall that the U–
Ndistances are longer for that unit than the TrenDMBSUunit;
this suggests that the Natoms are better as aunit at charge
donation to uranium than the phosphido.[18]
TheUPMayer bond orders reflect multiple,but polarized
bond interactions.Specifically,in4@they are 1.41/1.43
whereas for 7@they are 1.44/1.66 reflecting the asymmetric
UP distances and bonding in the UPU core in 7@;notably,
these UP bond orders are in-line with the situation in the
Lewis bonding scheme for these units,that is,U
=P=U. These
Mayer bond orders should be viewed in the context that the
UNamide and UNamine bond orders are 0.71 and 0.18, respec-
tively,and they are surprisingly invariant across 4@and 7@.
Thebond topological data are remarkably invariant,
showing polar, quite ionic UP bonds with 1values of 0.06
(typically 1>0.1 for covalent bonds) and bond ellipticities
that are zero or close to zero[9] reflecting the formal triple
bond interactions that constitute cylindrical distributions of
electron density with respect to the inter-nuclear axes.[19] Polar
UP bonding is also suggested by NBO analyses,which finds
UP s-bonds with 16%Uand 84%Pcharacter (U:
1:1:69:29 %7s:7p:5f:6d;P:100%3p) and UP p-bonds with
26%Uand 74%Pcharacter (U:0:1:54:45 7s:7p :5f:6d;P:
100%3p).
Thedata above unequivocally suggest that the UPU
interactions in 4@and 7@are polarized and weak, which is
consistent with the observed instability of 4and 7.Interest-
ingly,the UP bonds for 4@and 7@have higher Mayer bond
orders,exhibit more metal component, and utilize more 5f
character (relative to 6d) than the ThPbonds in [{Th-
(TrenTIPS)}2(m-P)][Na(12C4)2],[7d] consistent with the general
view that uranium engages in more covalent bonding,and
with greater 5f character,than thorium, but we note that the
bond topological data are essentially invariant for uranium
and thorium. This suggests that the instability of 4and 7is
most likely of kinetic origin.
To conclude,wehave reported two structurally authenti-
cated examples of uranium phosphido complexes.These
linkages are unprecedented outside of cryogenic matrix
isolation conditions,remain rare even in the d-block, and
indeed uranium–phosphorus multiple bonding remains
exceedingly rare overall. These complexes have been pre-
pared on macroscopic scales by two different methodologies
that could greatly expand uranium–phosphido chemistry:
1) construction of aUP(H)U unit by salt elimination and
subsequent deprotonation;or2)protonation of acyclometal-
late by aparent phosphinidene.Although both complexes can
be prepared and isolated they exhibit intrinsic instability that
is consistently reflected in quantum chemical calculations.
Low-temperature magnetism studies also suggest differences
in the relative crystal-field effects on uranium(IV) from HP2@
versus P3@.Most intriguingly,the UP bond lengths can be
perturbed by co-ligand steric demands,which suggests that
with suitably chosen co-ligands perhaps aUPU linkage,or
perhaps aUPM unit that might be prepared by method (2),
could be polarized to the point of rupture in order to produce
aterminal uranium phosphido complex under ambient
conditions.Efforts in that regard are on-going.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Royal Society (grant UF110005), EPSRC (grant
EP/M027015/1), ERC (grant CoG612724), Universities of
Manchester and Regensburg,the Deutsche Forschungsge-
meinschaft, and COST Action CM1006 for generously
supporting this work.
Figure 2. Kohn–Shamfrontier molecular orbitals of that represent the principal bonding components of the UPU unit in the anion component of
7,7@:Left, HOMO@6(403a, @1.332 eV);Middle, HOMO@5(404a, @0.997 eV);Right, HOMO@4(405a, @0.983 eV). Hydrogen atoms are
omitted for clarity.
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10498 www.angewandte.org T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA, Weinheim Angew.Chem.Int. Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500
Conflict of interest
Theauthors declare no conflict of interest.
Keywords: density functional theory ·metal–
ligand multiple bonding ·phosphido ·phosphinidiide ·uranium
Howtocite: Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500
Angew.Chem. 2017,129,10631–10636
[1] a) D. M. King,S.T.Liddle, Coord. Chem. Rev. 2014,266 –267,2;
b) T. W. Hayton, Chem. Commun. 2013,49,2956;c)T.W.
Hayton, Dalton Trans. 2010,39,1145 ;d)M.Ephritikhine,
Dalton Trans. 2006,2501.
[2] a) M. W. Rosenzweig, A. Scheurer,C.A.Lamsfus,F.W.Heine-
mann, L. Maron, J. Andrez, M. Mazzanti, K. Meyer, Chem. Sci.
2016,7,5857;b)J.Andrez, J. P8caut, R. Scopelliti,C.E.
Kefalidis,L.Maron, M. W. Rosenzweig, K. Meyer,M.Mazzanti,
Chem. Sci. 2016,7,5846;c)S.T.Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed.
2015,54,8604; Angew.Chem. 2015,127,8726;d)H.S.LaPierre,
K. Meyer, Prog.Inorg.Chem. 2014,58,303;e)D.E.Smiles,G.
Wu,T.W.Hayton, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014,136,96; f) M. B.
Jones,A.J.Gaunt, Chem. Rev. 2013,113,1137;g)J.L.Brown, S.
Fortier,G.Wu, N. Kaltsoyannis,T.W.Hayton, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2013,135,5352;h)J.L.Brown,S.Fortier, R. A. Lewis,G.Wu,
T. W. Hayton, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012,134,15468.
[3] Some polyphosphide complexes of uranium are known but these
do not contain formal UP multiple bonding interactions:
a) B. M. Gardner,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,J.McMaster, W.
Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2015,54,
7068; Angew.Chem. 2015,127,7174;b)D.Patel, F. Tu na, E. J. L.
McInnes,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int.
Ed. 2013,52,13334; Angew.Chem. 2013,125,13576;c)F.H.
Stephens, Ph.D.Thesis,Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, 2004;d)A.S.P.Frey,F.G.N.Cloke,P.B.Hitch-
cock, J. C. Green, New J. Chem. 2011,35,2022.
[4] a) B. M. Gardner,G.Bal#zs,M.Scheer,F.Tuna, E. J. L.
McInnes,J.McMaster,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle,
Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2014,53,4484; Angew.Chem. 2014,126,
4573;b)D.S.J.Arney,R.C.Schnabel, B. C. Scott, C. J. Burns, J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 1996,118,6780.
[5] a) Q.-Y.Wu, J. -H. Lan, C.-Z. Wang,Y.-L. Zhao,Z.-F.Chai, W.-
Q. Shi, J. Phys.Chem. A 2015,119,922;b)B.Vlaisavljevich, L.
Gagliardi, X. Wang,B.Liang, L. Andrews,I.Infante, Inorg.
Chem. 2010,49,9230;c)L.Andrews,X.Wang,R.Lindh, B. O.
Roos,C.J.Marsden, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2008,47,5366;
Angew.Chem. 2008,120,5446.
[6] a) A. R. Fox, C. R. Clough, N. A. Piro,C.C.Cummins, Angew.
Chem. Int. Ed. 2007,46,973; Angew.Chem. 2007,119,991;
b) N. A. Piro,C.C.Cummins, Inorg.Chem. 2007,46,7387;
c) C. C. Cummins, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2006,45,862; Angew.
Chem. 2006,118,876;d)B.P.Johnson, G. Bal#zs,M.Scheer,
Coord. Chem. Rev. 2006,250,1178;e)J.S.Figueroa, C. C.
Cummins, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2004,43,984 ; Angew.Chem.
2004,116,1002;f)M.E.Garc&a, V. Riera, M. A. Ruiz, D. S#ez,
H. Hamidov, J. C. Jeffery,T.Riis-Johannessen, J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2003,125,13044;g)F.H.Stephens,J.S.Figueroa, P. L.
Diaconescu,C.C.Cummins, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003,125,9264;
h) J. S. Figueroa, C. C. Cummins, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003,125,
4020;i)J.-P.F.Cherry,A.R.Johnson, L. M. Baraldo,Y.-C.Tsai,
C. C. Cummins,S.V.Kryatov,E.V.Rybak-Akimova, K. B.
Capps,C.D.Hoff,C.M.Haar,S.P.Nolan, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2001,123,7271;j)C.Eichhorn, O. J. Scherer,T.Sogding,G.
Wolmershauser, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2001,40,2859; Angew.
Chem. 2001,113,2944;k)M.Scheer,J.Mgller, M. Schiffer,G.
Baum, R. Winter, Chem. Eur.J.2000,6,1252 ;l)P.Kramkowski,
G. Baum, U. Radius,M.Kaupp,M.Scheer, Chem. Eur.J.1999,5,
2890;m)M.Scheer,P.Kramkowski, K. Schuster, Organometal-
lics 1999,18,2874;n)M.Scheer,J.Mgller,G.Baum, M. H-ser,
Chem. Commun. 1998,1051;o)M.Scheer, Coord. Chem. Rev.
1997,163,271;p)N.C.Mçsch-Zanetti, R. R. Schrock, W. M.
Davis,K.Wanninger, S. W. Seidel, M. B. O QDonoghue, J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1997,119,11037;q)M.J.A.Johnson, P. M. Lee,
A. L. Odom, W. M. Davis,C.C.Cummins, Angew.Chem. Int.
Ed. Engl. 1997,36,87; Angew.Chem. 1997,109,110 ;r)M.
Scheer,J.Mgller,M.H-ser, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1996,
35,2492 ; Angew.Chem. 1996,108,2637;s)C.E.Laplaza, W. M.
Davis,C.C.Cummins, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1995,34,
2042; Angew.Chem. 1995,107,2181;t)N.C.Zanetti, R. R.
Schrock, W. M. Davis, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1995,34,
2044; Angew.Chem. 1995,107,2184 ;u)M.C.Fermin, J. Ho,
D. W. Stephan, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994,116,6033.
[7] a) E. P. Wildman, G. Bal#zs,A.J.Wooles,M.Scheer,S.T.
Liddle, Nat. Commun. 2017,8,14769;b)M.Gregson,E.Lu,
D. P. Mills,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,C.Hennig,A.C.Scheinost,
J. McMaster,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,A.Kerridge,S.T.Liddle,
Nat. Commun. 2017,8,14137;c)D.M.King,P.A.Cleaves,A.J.
Wooles,B.M.Gardner,N.F.Chilton, F. Tuna, W. Lewis,E.J.L.
McInnes,S.T.Liddle, Nat. Commun. 2016,7,13773;d)E.P.
Wildman, G. Bal#zs,A.J.Wooles,M.Scheer,S.T.Liddle, Nat.
Commun. 2016,7,12884;e)M.Gregson, E. Lu, F. Tu na, E. J. L.
McInnes,C.Hennig,A.C.Scheinost, J. McMaster, W. Lewis,
A. J. Blake,A.Kerridge,S.T.Liddle, Chem. Sci. 2016,7,3286 ;
f) B. M. Gardner,G.Bal#zs,M.Scheer,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,
J. McMaster, W. Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Nat. Chem. 2015,
7,582;g)E.Lu, O. J. Cooper,J.McMaster,F.Tuna, E. J. L.
McInnes,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int.
Ed. 2014,53,6696; Angew.Chem. 2014,126,6814;h)D.M.
King,J.McMaster, F. Tu na, E. J. L. McInnes,W.Lewis,A.J.
Blake,S.T.Liddle, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014,136,5619;i)D.M.
King,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,J.McMaster, W. Lewis,A.J.
Blake,S.T.Liddle, Nat. Chem. 2013,5,482 ;j)O.J.Cooper,D.P.
Mills,J.McMaster,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,W.Lewis,A.J.
Blake,S.T.Liddle, Chem. Eur.J.2013,19,7071;k)D.M.King,F.
Tuna, J. McMaster, W. Lewis,A.J.Blake,E.J.L.McInnes,S.T.
Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int. Ed. 2013,52,4921; Angew.Chem.
2013,125,5021;l)D.M.King,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,J.
McMaster, W. Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Science 2012,337,
717;m)D.P.Mills,O.J.Cooper,F.Tuna, E. J. L. McInnes,E.S.
Davies,J.McMaster, F. Moro,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012,134,10047;n)D.P.Mills,F.Moro,J.
McMaster, J. van Slageren,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle,
Nat. Chem. 2011,3,454;o)O.J.Cooper,D.P.Mills,J.McMaster,
F. Moro,E.S.Davies,W.Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Angew.
Chem. Int. Ed. 2011,50,2383 ; Angew.Chem. 2011,123,2431.
[8] P. Pyykkç, J. Phys.Chem. A 2015,119,2326.
[9] See the SupportingInformationfor details.
[10] C. J. Windorff,W.J.Evans, Organometallics 2014,33,3786.
[11] M. R. Duttera,V.W.Day,T.J.Marks, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1984,
106,2907.
[12] B. M. Gardner,D.M.King,F.Tuna, A. J. Wo oles,N.F.Chilton,
S. T. Liddle, Chem. Sci. 2017,DOI:https ://doi.org/10.1039/SC-
EDG-05-2017-001998.
[13] B. M. Gardner,S.T.Liddle, Chem. Commun. 2015,51,10589.
[14] B. M. Gardner,P.A.Cleaves,C.E.Kefalidis,J.Fang,L.Maron,
W. Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Chem. Sci. 2014,5,2489.
[15] a) R. Boaretto,P.Roussel,N.W.Alcock, A. J. Kingsley, I. J.
Munslow,C.J.Sanders,P.Scott, J. Organomet. Chem. 1999,591,
174;b)R.Boaretto,P.Roussel,A.J.Kingsley, I. J. Munslow,
C. J. Sanders,N.W.Alcock, P. Scott, Chem. Commun. 1999,
1701.
[16] a) E. Lu, O. J. Cooper,F.Tuna, A. J. Wooles,N.Kaltsoyannis,
S. T. Liddle, Chem. Eur.J.2016,22,11559 ;b)E.Lu, F. Tu na, W.
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10499Angew.Chem. Int.Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500 T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.angewandte.org
Lewis,N.Kaltsoyannis,S.T.Liddle, Chem. Eur.J.2016,22,
11554;c)D.P.Halter,H.S.LaPierre,F.W.Heinemann, K.
Meyer, Inorg.Chem. 2014,53,8418 ;d)D.Patel, F. Moro,J.
McMaster, W. Lewis,A.J.Blake,S.T.Liddle, Angew.Chem. Int.
Ed. 2011,50,10388; Angew.Chem. 2011,123,10572.
[17] Tren uranium(IV) complexes tend to exhibit calculated MDCq
charges of approximately +2.4.
[18] Nasabetter-suited donor to Ucompared to Pwas noted in
Ref.[5c].
[19] R. F. W. Bader,T.S.Slee,D.Cremer,E.Kraka, J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1983,105,5061.
[20] CCDC 1554770, 1554771, 1554772 and 1554773 contain the
supplementary crystallographic data for this paper.These data
can be obtained free of charge from TheCambridge
Crystallographic Data Centre.All other data are available
from the corresponding authors upon request.
Manuscript received:June 13, 2017
Acceptedmanuscript online: July 5, 2017
Version of record online: July 24, 2017
A
ngewandte
Chemie
Communications
10500 www.angewandte.org T2017 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &Co. KGaA, Weinheim Angew.Chem.Int. Ed. 2017,56,10495 –10500
... [18] Apart from these observations, no systematic study on the stability of uranium phosphine complexes has been reported so far. While the nature of the bond of uranium with anionic Pbased ligands, such as phosphide, phosphinidiides and phosphinidenes has been studied in more detail in the last years, [28][29][30][31][32] bonding analyses of uranium-phosphine bonds have not been reported to the best of the authors knowledge. ...
Article
Full-text available
A series of ten uranium(III) complexes with cyclopentadienyl and monodentate phosphine ligands [UCp3(PR3)] with R=Me, Et, ⁿPr, ⁱPr, tBu, Ph, Cy, F and CF3 was investigated using density functional theory calculations. The ligand dissociation energies were calculated, as well as bonding analysis of the uranium‐phosphorus bond performed, using molecular orbitals, bond orders, quantum theory of atom in molecules (QTAIM) analysis and energy decomposition analysis with natural orbitals for chemical valence (EDA‐NOCV). It was found that the bond orders correlate well with the U−P bond lengths and phosphine cone angles, indicating a large influence of phosphine sterics on the bond properties. All bonding analyses show partial covalent character of the U−P bond, which is most pronounced for PF3 and least for PtBu3. π‐Backbonding was found for the most π‐acidic phosphine ligands. No good correlation was found between the ligand dissociation energies and bond metrics.
... [1][2][3] This is due to a combination of: (i) three amide centres that are covalent σ-and dative π-donors; (ii) the presence of a tertiary amine that can modulate the strength of its dative σ-donation to a coordinated An-ion as required by the metal and also engage in inverse-trans-influence (ITI) binding; (iii) being a quadridentate ligand that maximises kinetic and thermodynamic stability of the resulting An-complexes; (iv) varied N-silyl substitution patterns that can systematically tune the steric and electronic properties of the Tren R scaffold, including producing a well-defined pocket at the coordinated An-metal with which to stabilise novel linkages or reactivity. It is therefore the case that Tren R -ligands have supported novel Anligand multiple bonds, [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] An-metal bonds, [16][17][18][19][20][21] novel main group moieties, [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] uranyl activation, [32,33] small molecule activation, [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] single-molecule magnetism and electronic communication, [44,45] novel photochemistry, [46] insight into fundamental f-block phenomena such as disproportionation, the ITI, pushing-from-below, [47][48][49][50][51] and NMR chemical shift anisotropy covalency studies. [52,53] The above advances have all been achieved utilising a relatively small range of silyl Tren R ligands, including trimethylsilyl (Tren TMS ), dimethyl-tert-butyl-silyl (Tren DMBS ), tri-iso-propylsilyl (Tren TIPS ), tricyclohexyl-silyl (Tren TCHS ), and triphenyl-silyl (Tren TPS ). ...
Article
Full-text available
We report the synthesis and characterisation of thorium(IV), uranium(III), and uranium(IV) complexes supported by a sterically demanding triamidoamine ligand with N‐diphenyl‐tert‐butyl‐silyl substituents. Treatment of ThCl4(THF)3.5 or UCl4 with [Li3(TrenDPBS)] (TrenDPBS={N(CH2CH2NSiPh2But)3}³⁻) afforded [An(TrenDPBS)Cl] (An=Th, 1Th; U, 1U). Complexes 1An react with benzyl potassium to afford the cyclometallates (TrenDPBScyclomet) [An{N(CH2CH2NSiPh2But)2(CH2CH2NSiPhButC6H4)}] (An=Th, 2Th; U, 2U). Treatment of 1An with sodium azide affords [An(TrenDPBS)N3] (An=Th, 3Th; U, 3U). Reaction of 3Th with potassium graphite affords 2Th. In contrast, 3Th reacts with cesium graphite to afford the doubly‐cyclometallated (TrenDPBSd‐cyclomet) ate complex [Th{N(CH2CH2NSiPh2But)(CH2CH2NSiPhButC6H4)}2Cs(THF)3] (4). In contrast to 3Th, reaction of 3U with potassium graphite produces the uranium(III) complex [U(TrenDPBS)] (5), and 5 can also be prepared by reaction of potassium graphite with 1U. The loss of azide instead of conversion to nitrides contrasts to prior work when the silyl group is iso‐propyl silyl, underscoring how ligand substituents profoundly drive the reaction chemistry. Several complexes exhibit T‐shaped meta‐C−H⋅⋅⋅phenyl and staggered parallel π–π‐stacking interactions, demonstrating subtle weak interactions that drive ancillary ligand geometries. Compounds 1An–3An, 4, and 5 have been variously characterised by single crystal X‐ray diffraction, multi‐nuclear NMR spectroscopy, infrared spectroscopy, UV/Vis/NIR spectroscopy, and elemental analyses.
Article
Covalency of f-block elements is particularly important for us to understand their bonding nature of chemical bonds. In this work, a series of isostructural 4f and 5f complexes: [M(TrapenTMS)(OSiMe3)] (M...
Article
Full-text available
Single-atom (group 15 and group 16 anions) bridged dimetallic complexes of low oxidation state uranium provide a convenient route to implement multielectron transfer and promote magnetic communication in uranium chemistry,...
Article
Reaction of the cesium antimonide complex [Cs(18C6)2][SbH2] (1, 18C6 = 18-crown-6 ether) with the triamidoamine actinide separated ion pairs [An(TrenTIPS)(L)][BPh4] (TrenTIPS = {N(CH2CH2NSiⁱPr3)3}3–; An/L = Th/DME (2Th); U/THF (2U)) affords the triactinide undeca-antimontriide Zintl clusters [{An(TrenTIPS)}3(μ3-Sb11)] (An = Th (3Th), U (3U)) by dehydrocoupling. Clusters 3Th and 3U provide two new examples of the Sb113– Zintl trianion and are unprecedented examples of molecular Sb113– being coordinated to anything since all previous reports featured isolated Sb113– Zintl trianions in separated ion quadruple formulations with noncoordinating cations. Quantum chemical calculations describe dominant ionic An–Sb interactions in 3Th and 3U, though the data suggest that the latter exhibits slightly more covalent An–Sb linkages than the former. Complexes 3Th and 3U have been characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction, NMR, IR, and UV/vis/NIR spectroscopies, elemental analysis, and quantum chemical calculations.
Article
We introduce the boryloxide ligand {(HCNDipp)2BO}⁻ (NBODipp, Dipp = 2,6-di-isopropylphenyl) to actinide chemistry. Protonolysis of [U{N(SiMe3)2}3] with 3 equiv of NBODippH produced the uranium(III) tris(boryloxide) complex [U(NBODipp)3] (1). In contrast, treatment of UCl4 with 3 equiv of NBODippK in THF at room temperature or reflux conditions produced only [U(NBODipp)2(Cl)2(THF)2] (2) with 1 equiv of NBODippK remaining unreacted. However, refluxing the mixture of 2 and unreacted NBODippK in toluene instead of THF afforded the target complex [U(NBODipp)3(Cl)(THF)] (3). Two-electron oxidation of 1 with AdN3 (Ad = 1-adamantyl) afforded the uranium(V)–imido complex [U(NBODipp)3(NAd)] (4). The solid-state structure of 1 reveals a uranium–arene bonding motif, and structural, spectroscopic, and DFT calculations all suggest modest uranium–arene δ-back-bonding with approximately equal donation into the arene π4 and π5 δ-symmetry π* molecular orbitals. Complex 4 exhibits a short uranium(V)–imido distance, and computational modeling enabled its electronic structure to be compared to related uranium–imido and uranium–oxo complexes, revealing a substantial 5f-orbital crystal field splitting and extensive mixing of 5f |ml,ms⟩ states and mj projections. Complexes 1–4 have been variously characterized by single-crystal X-ray diffraction, ¹H NMR, IR, UV/vis/NIR, and EPR spectroscopies, SQUID magnetometry, elemental analysis, and CONDON, F-shell, DFT, NLMO, and QTAIM crystal field and quantum chemical calculations.
Article
Full-text available
There is continued burgeoning interest in metal–metal multiple bonding to further our understanding of chemical bonding across the periodic table. However, although polar covalent metal–metal multiple bonding is well known for the d and p blocks, it is relatively underdeveloped for actinides. Homometallic examples are found in spectroscopic or fullerene-confined species, and heterometallic variants exhibiting a polar covalent σ bond supplemented by up to two dative π bonds are more prevalent. Hence, securing polar covalent actinide double and triple metal–metal bonds under normal experimental conditions has been a fundamental target. Here we exploit the protonolysis and dehydrocoupling chemistry of the parent dihydrogen-antimonide anion, to report one-, two- and three-fold thorium–antimony bonds, thus introducing polar covalent actinide–metal multiple bonding under normal experimental conditions between some of the heaviest ions in the periodic table with little or no bulky-substituent protection at the antimony centre. This provides fundamental insights into heavy element multiple bonding, in particular the tension between orbital-energy-driven and overlap-driven covalency for the actinides in a relativistic regime.
Article
Full-text available
The coordination and organometallic chemistry of the f-elements, that is group 3, lanthanide, and actinide ions, supported by nitrogen ligands, e.g. amides, imides, and nitrides, has become well developed over many decades. In contrast, the corresponding f-element chemisty with the heavier pnictogen analogues phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, and bismuth has remained significantly underdeveloped, due largely to a lack of suitable synthetic methodologies and also the inherent hard(f-element)–soft(heavier pnictogen) acid–base mismatch, but has begun to flourish in recent years. Here, we review complexes containing chemical bonds between the f-elements and heavy pnictogens from phosphorus to bismuth that spans five decades of endeavour. We focus on complexes whose identity has been unambiguously established by structural authentication by single-crystal X-ray diffraction with respect to their synthesis, characterisation, bonding, and reactivity, in order to provide a representative overview of this burgeoning area. By highlighting that much has been achieved but that there is still much to do this review aims to inspire, focus and guide future efforts in this area.
Article
Full-text available
Structurally characterised U−Sb bonds are rare. Here, the synthesis and characterisation of [U(TrenDMBS){Sb(H)C(H)(SiMe3)2}] (5, TrenDMBS=N(CH2CH2NSiMe2But)3) and [{U(TrenTIPS)}2{Sb3(μ6‐Li)(μ‐Li[THF]2)3Sb3}] (6, TrenTIPS=N(CH2CH2NSiPrⁱ3)3) are reported. Complex 5 is an unprecedented primary stibinide actinide complex and 6 can be formulated as containing a unique triple decker 20 skeletal‐electron distorted closo tricapped Zintl cluster (Sb3Li4Sb3)²⁻ that is analogous to the D3h closo tricapped trigonal prism form of [Ge9]²⁻. Quantum chemical calculations emphasise polar U−Sb bonding in 5 and 6, and that viewing (Sb3Li4Sb3)²⁻ as a single unit rather than two distinct but contiguous (Sb3)³⁻ units, themselves unprecedented in molecular actinide chemistry, is valid due to the presence of three weak (Sb3)⋯(Sb3) (3, −1)‐bond critical points. Complexes 5 and 6 highlight the challenges of preparing polar U−Sb bonds and the underlying tendency for unpredictable cluster formation with Sb.
Article
Full-text available
Despite a major expansion of uranium–ligand multiple bond chemistry in recent years, analogous complexes involving other actinides (An) remain scarce. For thorium, under ambient conditions only a few multiple bonds to carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and chalcogenides are reported, and none to arsenic are known; indeed only two complexes with thorium–arsenic single bonds have been structurally authenticated, reflecting the challenges of stabilizing polar linkages at the large thorium ion. Here, we report thorium parent–arsenide (ThAsH2), –arsinidiides (ThAs(H)K and ThAs(H)Th) and arsenido (ThAsTh) linkages stabilized by a bulky triamidoamine ligand. The ThAs(H)K and ThAsTh linkages exhibit polarized-covalent thorium–arsenic multiple bonding interactions, hitherto restricted to cryogenic matrix isolation experiments, and the AnAs(H)An and AnAsAn linkages reported here have no precedent in f-block chemistry. 7s, 6d and 5f orbital contributions to the Th–As bonds are suggested by quantum chemical calculations, and their compositions unexpectedly appear to be tensioned differently compared to phosphorus congeners.
Article
Full-text available
Across the periodic table the trans-influence operates, whereby tightly bonded ligands selectively lengthen mutually trans metal–ligand bonds. Conversely, in high oxidation state actinide complexes the inverse-trans-influence operates, where normally cis strongly donating ligands instead reside trans and actually reinforce each other. However, because the inverse-trans-influence is restricted to high-valent actinyls and a few uranium(V/VI) complexes, it has had limited scope in an area with few unifying rules. Here we report tetravalent cerium, uranium and thorium bis(carbene) complexes with trans C=M=C cores where experimental and theoretical data suggest the presence of an inverse-trans-influence. Studies of hypothetical praseodymium(IV) and terbium(IV) analogues suggest the inverse-trans-influence may extend to these ions but it also diminishes significantly as the 4f orbitals are populated. This work suggests that the inverse-trans-influence may occur beyond high oxidation state 5f metals and hence could encompass mid-range oxidation state actinides and lanthanides. Thus, the inverse-trans-influence might be a more general f-block principle.
Article
Full-text available
Determining the electronic structure of actinide complexes is intrinsically challenging because inter-electronic repulsion, crystal field, and spin–orbit coupling effects can be of similar magnitude. Moreover, such efforts have been hampered by the lack of structurally analogous families of complexes to study. Here we report an improved method to U≡N triple bonds, and assemble a family of uranium(V) nitrides. Along with an isoelectronic oxo, we quantify the electronic structure of this 5f¹ family by magnetometry, optical and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopies and modelling. Thus, we define the relative importance of the spin–orbit and crystal field interactions, and explain the experimentally observed different ground states. We find optical absorption linewidths give a potential tool to identify spin–orbit coupled states, and show measurement of UV···UV super-exchange coupling in dimers by EPR. We show that observed slow magnetic relaxation occurs via two-phonon processes, with no obvious correlation to the crystal field.
Article
Full-text available
Despite the burgeoning field of uranium-ligand multiple bonds, analogous complexes involving other actinides remain scarce. For thorium, under ambient conditions only a few multiple bonds to carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur, selenium and tellurium are reported, and no multiple bonds to phosphorus are known, reflecting a general paucity of synthetic methodologies and also problems associated with stabilising these linkages at the large thorium ion. Here we report structurally authenticated examples of a parent thorium(IV)-phosphanide (Th-PH2), a terminal thorium(IV)-phosphinidene (Th=PH), a parent dithorium(IV)-phosphinidiide (Th-P(H)-Th) and a discrete actinide-phosphido complex under ambient conditions (Th=P=Th). Although thorium is traditionally considered to have dominant 6d-orbital contributions to its bonding, contrasting to majority 5f-orbital character for uranium, computational analyses suggests that the bonding of thorium can be more nuanced, in terms of 5f- versus 6d-orbital composition and also significant involvement of the 7s-orbital and how this affects the balance of 5f- versus 6d-orbital bonding character.
Article
Full-text available
Herein, we report the synthesis and characterization of a series of terminal uranium(iv) hydrosulfido and sulfido complexes, supported by the hexadentate, tacn-based ligand framework (Ad,MeArO)3tacn³⁻ (= trianion of 1,4,7-tris(3-(1-adamantyl)-5-methyl-2-hydroxybenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane). The hydrosulfido complex [((Ad,MeArO)3tacn)U-SH] (2) is obtained from the reaction of H2S with the uranium(iii) starting material [((Ad,MeArO)3tacn)U] (1) in THF. Subsequent deprotonation with potassium bis(trimethylsilyl)amide yields the mononuclear uranium(iv) sulfido species in good yields. With the aid of dibenzo-18-crown-6 and 2.2.2-cryptand, it was possible to isolate a terminal sulfido species, capped by the potassium counter ion, and a "free" terminal sulfido species with a well separated cation/anion pair. Spectroscopic and computational analyses provided insights into the nature of the uranium-sulfur bond in these complexes.
Article
Full-text available
The reactions of the tetrasiloxide U(iii) complexes [U(OSi(O t Bu)3)4K] and [U(OSi(O t Bu)3)4][K18c6] with 0.5 equiv. of triphenylphosphine sulfide led to reductive S-transfer reactions, affording the U(iv) sulfide complexes [SU(OSi(O t Bu)3)4K2]2, 1, and [{SU(OSi(O t Bu)3)4K2}2(μ-18c6)], 2, with concomitant formation of the U(iv) complex [U(OSi(O t Bu)3)4]. Addition of 1 equiv. of 2.2.2-cryptand to complex 1 resulted in the isolation of a terminal sulfide complex, [SU(OSi(O t Bu)3)4K][Kcryptand], 3. The crucial role of the K+ Lewis acid in these reductive sulfur transfer reactions was confirmed, since the formation of complex 3 from the reaction of the U(iii) complex [U(OSi(O t Bu)3)4][Kcryptand] and 0.5 equiv. of PPh3S was not possible. Reactivity studies of the U(iv) sulfide complexes showed that the sulfide is easily transferred to CO2 and CS2 to afford S-functionalized products. Moreover, we have found that the sulfide provides a convenient precursor for the synthesis of the corresponding U(iv) hydrosulfide, {[(SH)U(OSi(O t Bu)3)4][K18c6]}, 5, after protonation with PyHCl. Finally, DFT calculations were performed to investigate the nature of the U-S bond in complexes 1, 3 and 5. Based on various analyses, triple-bond character was suggested for the U-S bond in complexes 1 and 3, while double-bond character was determined for the U-SH bond in complex 5.
Article
Die Kurzzeitthermolyse des Schmetterlingsmoleküls [{Cp′′′(OC)2Fe}2P4] liefert neben [Cp′′′FeP5] und [{Cp′′′Fe}2P4] in 18 % Ausbeute das Diphosphadiferratetrahedran [{Cp′′′Fe}2(μ-CO)(μ-η²:η²-P2)] mit einer Fe-Fe-Doppelbindung. Bei dessen Photolyse wird unter CO-Eliminierung der P2-Baustein in zwei μ-P-Liganden gespalten. Im gebildeten Zweikernkomplex 1, dessen ³¹P-NMR-Signal extrem tieffeldverschoben ist (δ=1406.9), steht der rautenförmige Fe2P2-Vierring nahezu orthogonal zu den ekliptisch angeordneten Cp′′′-Fünfringen (siehe Bild). Cp′′′=tBu3C5H2.
Article
Uranium(IV)-carbene-imido complexes [U(BIPM(TMS) )(NCPh3 )(κ(2) -N,N'-BIPY)] (2; BIPM(TMS) =C(PPh2 NSiMe3 )2 ; BIPY=2,2-bipyridine) and [U(BIPM(TMS) )(NCPh3 )(DMAP)2 ] (3; DMAP=4-dimethylamino-pyridine) that contain unprecedented, discrete R2 C=U=NR' units are reported. These complexes complete the family of E=U=E (E=CR2 , NR, O) metalla-allenes with feasible first-row hetero-element combinations. Intriguingly, 2 and 3 contain cis- and trans-C=U=N units, respectively, representing rare examples of controllable cis/trans isomerisation in f-block chemistry. This work reveals a clear-cut example of the trans influence in a mid-valent uranium system, and thus a strong preference for the cis isomer, which is computed in a co-ligand-free truncated model-to isolate the electronic trans influence from steric contributions-to be more stable than the trans isomer by approximately 12 kJ mol(-1) with an isomerisation barrier of approximately 14 kJ mol(-1) .
Article
We report uranium(IV)-carbene-imido-amide metalla-allene complexes [U(BIPM(TMS) )(NCPh3 )(NHCPh3 )(M)] (BIPM(TMS) =C(PPh2 NSiMe3 )2 ; M=Li or K) that can be described as R2 C=U=NR' push-pull metalla-allene units, as organometallic counterparts of the well-known push-pull organic allenes. The solid-state structures reveal that the R2 C=U=NR' units adopt highly unusual cis-arrangements, which are also reproduced by gas-phase theoretical studies conducted without the alkali metals to remove their potential structure-directing roles. Computational studies confirm the double-bond nature of the U=NR' and U=CR2 interactions, the latter increasingly attenuated by potassium then lithium when compared to the hypothetical alkali-metal-free anion. Combined experimental and theoretical data show that the push-pull effect induced by the alkali metal cations and amide auxiliary gives a fundamental and tunable structural influence over the C=U(IV) =N units.