Premium
Ten‐Electron Donor Indenyl Anion in Binuclear Transition‐Metal Sandwich Complexes: Electronic Structure and Bonding Analysis
Author(s) -
Zendaoui SaberMustapha,
Saillard JeanYves,
Zouchoune Bachir
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
chemistryselect
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.437
H-Index - 34
ISSN - 2365-6549
DOI - 10.1002/slct.201600309
Subject(s) - chemistry , valence electron , metal , crystallography , ligand (biochemistry) , transition metal , electron configuration , diamagnetism , valence (chemistry) , azulene , electron , ion , computational chemistry , photochemistry , physics , catalysis , organic chemistry , biochemistry , receptor , magnetic field , quantum mechanics
Whereas dinuclear sandwich complexes of pentalene, azulene and naphthalene are not uncommon, their bis‐indenyl counterparts are scarce, with only two M 2 (indenyl) 2 examples known so far. This paper investigates by the means of DFT calculations the possibility for such compounds to exist for the M=Sc−Ni and Y‐(Re)‐Pd series. Stable diamagnetic species are predicted for total valence electron counts (TNE) of 34 and 40. The most favored situation corresponds to TNE = 34. For this electron count, which exhibits full ligand hapticity, no formal metal‐metal bond exists, but only weak non‐bonding attraction. Adding supplementary electrons (TNE > 34) results in partial ligand decoordination. When TNE < 34, metal‐metal bonding is predicted to compensate electron deficiency, with the largest formal bond order for TNE = 26. However, in the case of the series of the first‐row metals, the metal‐metal interaction is rather weak, thus favoring the existence of low‐lying high‐spin states. On the other hand, all the second‐row (and Re) complexes are computed to be diamagnetic. It is concluded that there is no specific reason for M 2 (indenyl) 2 complexes not being isolable.