4.6 Article

Silver Baits for The Miraculous Draught of Amphiphilic Lanthanide Helicates

期刊

CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 184-195

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/chem.201002771

关键词

helical structures; heterometallic complexes; lanthanides; molecular dynamics; polynuclear complexes; silver

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The axial connection of flexible thioalkyls chains of variable length (n = 1-12) within the segmental bis-tridentate 2-benzimidazole-8-hydroxyquinoline ligands [L12(Cn)-2H](2-) provides amphiphilic receptors designed for the synthesis of neutral dinuclear lanthanides helicates. However, the stoichiometric mixing of metals and ligands in basic media only yields intricate mixtures of poorly soluble aggregates. The addition of Ag-I in solution restores classical helicate architectures for n = 3, with the quantitative formation of the discrete D-3-symmetrical [Ln(2)Ag(2)(L12(C3)-2H)(3)](2+) complexes at millimolar concentration (Ln = La, Eu, Lu). The X-ray crystal structure supports the formation of [La2Ag2(L12(C3)-2H)(3)][OTf](2), which exists in the solid state as infinite linear polymers bridged by S-Ag-S bonds. In contrast, molecular dynamics (MD) simulations in the gas phase and in solution confirm the experimental diffusion measurements, which imply the formation of discrete molecular entities in these media, in which the sulfur atoms of each lipophilic ligand are rapidly exchanged within the Ag-I coordination sphere. Turned as a predictive tool, MD suggests that this Ag-I templating effect is efficient only for n = 1-3, while for n > 3 very loose interactions occur between Ag-I and the thioalkyl residues. The subsequent experimental demonstration that only 25% of the total ligand speciation contributes to the formation of [Ln(2)Ag(2)(L12(C12)-2H)(3)](2+) in solution puts the bases for a rational approach for the design of amphiphilic helical complexes with predetermined molecular interfaces.

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

4.6
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