4.5 Article

Palladacycles with C,N-bidentate and N,C,N '-tridentate ligands: Structures, spectral study and catalytic methanolysis of P = S pesticides

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORGANOMETALLIC CHEMISTRY
卷 695, 期 19-20, 页码 2191-2200

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jorganchem.2010.06.002

关键词

Palladacycle; Crystal structure; Methanolysis; Pesticides; Kinetics

资金

  1. Beijing Normal University [107026]
  2. Beijing Municipal Commission of Education, China
  3. Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars [213006]
  4. Program for New Century Excellent Talents at Universities, The Ministry of Education, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Palladacycles 2-4 with C,N-bidentate and N,C,N'-tridentate ligands were prepared and characterized. The X-ray crystal structures of [2,6-bis(N,N-dimethylaminomethyl)phenyl-N,C(1),N'-](aqua)palladium(II) triflate (2), (N,N-dimethylaminobenzyl-C(1),N)(4-trifluoromethylpyridine)(aqua)palladium(II) triflate (3), and (N,N-dimethylaminobenzyl-C(1),N)(4-N,N-dimethylaminopyridine)(aqua)palladium(II) triflate (4), were determined. While 2 is much less active, 3 and 4 effectively catalyze the methanolysis of the P=S pesticides. The catalytic activities were higher with the trifluoromethylpyridine co-ligand as compared to palladacycles containing 4-N, N-dimethylaminopyridine and pyridine co-ligands. (1)H NMR spectra and the catalytic kinetic dependences on concentration and pH revealed that the active species was a pallada-cycle containing one methoxide and one pyridine in the coordination sphere. A plot of the catalytic activity vs. free [pyridine] indicated the participation of a common species. The proposed catalytic mechanism involves a pre-equilibrium binding of the P=S pesticide to palladium(II) center followed by dissociation of the pyridine and subsequent cleavage of the PeOAr unit through the intramolecular displacement on phosphorus by the adjacent Pd-coordinated methoxide. (C) 2010 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved. ss

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据