4.4 Article

Transformation of 1,1′-biphosphirane-M(CO)5 (M = Mo, Cr, W) complexes: Possible mechanisms and reactivity of active intermediates

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.comptc.2021.113420

关键词

Phosphinidene; DFT calculations; Mechanism; Chemoselectivity; Electrophilicity

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21773214]
  2. Training Plan for Young Key Teachers in Colleges and Universities in Henan Province [2020GGJS016]
  3. 111 Project [D20003]
  4. National Super-computing Center in Zhengzhou

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanisms of transformations of biphosphirane-M(CO)5 (M = Mo, Cr) complexes were studied through a combined DFT and experimental approach. Three possible pathways were identified, with both stepwise pathways being energetically more favorable than the concerted pathway. The electrophilicity of the active intermediates was studied, showing that the phosphorus atoms can act as electrophilic sites.
The possible mechanisms of transformations of biphosphirane-M(CO)5 (M = Mo, Cr) complexes have been investigated by performing a combined density functional theory (DFT) and experimental study. According to calculated results, these kinds of reactions contain three possible pathways, including two pathways (i.e. the concerted and stepwise pathways) leading to 3,4-dihydro-1,2-diphosphete intermediate and one stepwise pathway leading to diphosphorus intermediate. Computational results reveal that both stepwise pathways are more energetically favorable than the concerted pathway in kinetics, and both two intermediates could be obtained in the experiments. Then we systematically studied the electrophilicity of two intermediates with coordination of different M(CO)5 (M = Mo, Cr, W). Further molecular electrostatic potential (MEP) demonstrates that two phosphorus atoms in the active intermediates can work as electrophilic sites. The obtained insights should be useful for rational design on novel reactions involving two active intermediates in future.

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

4.4
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