4.8 Article

Electron Transfer Across Multiple Hydrogen Bonds: The Case of Ureapyrimidinedione-Substituted Vinyl Ruthenium and Osmium Complexes

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 131, 期 13, 页码 4892-4903

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja809566g

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Wi 1262/7-1, 436 TSE 113/45/0-1]
  2. Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic [KAN 100400702]
  3. Ministry of Education of the Czech Republic [COST OC 139]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ruthenium and osmium complexes 2a,b and 3a,b featuring the N-4,6-dioxo-5,5-dibutyl- or the N-4,6-dioxo-5,5-di-(2-propenyl)-1,4,5,6-tetrahydropyrimidin-2-yl-N'(4-ethenylphenyl)-urea ligand dimerize by a self-complementary quadruply hydrogen-bonding donor/donor/acceptor/acceptor (DDAA) motif. We provide evidence that the dimeric structures are maintained in nonpolar solvents and in 0.1 M NBu4PF6/CH2Cl2 supporting electrolyte solution. All complexes are reversibly oxidized in two consecutive two-electron oxidations (Delta E-1/2 approximate to 500 mV) without any discernible potential splitting for the oxidation of the individual hydrogen-bridged redox active moieties. IR and UV/vis/NIR spectroelectrochemistry show a one-step conversion of the neutral to the dication without any discernible features of an intermediate monooxidized radical cation. Oxidation-induced IR changes of the NH and CO groups that are involved in hydrogen bonding are restricted to the styryl-bonded urea NH function. IR band assignments are aided by quantum chemical calculations. Our experimental findings clearly show that, at least in the present systems, the ureapyrimidinedione (Upy) DDAA hydrogen-bonding motif does not support electron transfer. The apparent reason is that neither of the hydrogen-bonding functionalities contributes to the occupied frontier levels. This results in nearly degenerate pairs of MOs representing the in-phase and out-of-phase combinations of the individual monomeric building blocks.

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

4.8
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