COMMUNICATION
Figure 2. T1 measurement graphs for the 19F NMR signals of fluorine-
containing complexes and 4-fluoroiodobenzene.
CH2Cl2 (2.23 and 2.42 Å). The hydrogen bonding was
proposed to alleviate the strong π-donation properties of the
fluorides in their late-transition-metal complexes.11 The Pd-F
distances in 2a of 2.040(13) and 2.058(13) Å are only slightly
shorter than that in 2c [2.065(3) Å].7 There are also relatively
short distances between the fluoro ligands and the cyclohexyl
H atoms of the phosphine ligand. The P1-Pd-P2 angle is
expectedly smaller than that in 2c [87.37(2) vs 96.22(8)°].
Although the Pd-Ph complexes 4a and 4b easily undergo
the Ph-I reductive elimination with XeF2, using the 4-FC6H4
group instead of an unsubstituted phenyl group was found
to be helpful in a number of transformations at a metal center
due to the presence of a fluorine tag in the 19F NMR spectra.12
Surprisingly, the ratio between the 4-FC6H4I signal in the
19F NMR spectrum and the signal of 2 was found to be less
than 30% when 1 was reacted with XeF2 in a CH2Cl2
solution. Because no other product was detected in the
reaction mixture, we investigated the relaxation times of the
fluorine signal in 2 and aromatic aryl fluorides. We found
that the fluorine signal relaxation times in 2 were significantly
faster (several orders of magnitude) than those in 4-FC6H4I
(Figure 2). Increasing the delay time between the scans to
20 s gave the spectra with a correct integration ratio between
the products. Significant differences in the relaxation times
were also observed for the starting materials 3 and organic
Figure 1. Single-crystal ORTEP (thermal ellipsoids drawn at 50%
probability) structure of 2a. H atoms, with the exception of the atoms of
CH2Cl2, are omitted for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles
(deg): Pd-F1 2.0401(13), Pd-F2 2.058(13), Pd-P1 2.2061(6), Pd-P2
2.2177(6), F1-H28A 2.14, F1-H29A 2.23, F2-H27B 2.04, F2-H29B
2.42, F1-Pd-F2 90.62(5), P1-Pd-P2 87.37(2), F1-Pd-P2 92.87(4), F1-
Pd-P1 174.90(4).
low temperatures.7 The reaction appears to be quite general
with regard to the aryl group involved in the reductive
elimination. PdII complexes 4 and 5 also underwent smooth
Ar-I reductive elimination upon treatment with XeF2.
Importantly, even the strong C6F5-Pd bond was readily
cleaved under these conditions and C6F5-I was quantitively
formed together with 2. To our knowledge, the C6F5-X
reductive elimination is unprecedented.9
We were able to obtain transparent colorless prisms of
dcpePdF2 from a CH2Cl2/pentane solvent mixture at -30
°C.10 This crystal structure of 2a is only the second reported
for monomeric palladium(II) difluoro complexes.7 The X-ray
structure of 2a shows a square-planar arrangement at the
metal center, with two fluoro ligands involved in strong
hydrogen-bond interactions with three dichloromethane
molecules (Figure 1). No such interactions, however, were
observed in the crystal structure of the previously reported
2c, also crystallized from CH2Cl2. Coordination of three
CH2Cl2 molecules to fluoro ligands in a dimeric PdII system
has been described.11 The “terminal” solvent molecules show
relatively strong hydrogen-bond interactions with the fluoro
ligands (2.04 and 2.14 Å) compared with the bridging
1
fluorides, in both the 19F and H NMR spectra. Thus, the
NMR relaxation times of certain PdII complexes can be by
several orders of magnitude shorter than those of simple
aromatic molecules, and caution should be exercised when
assigning the product ratio based on the integration of the
NMR signals, even in the presence of an internal reference
compound.
It was proposed that XeF2 reacts with square-planar d8
metal complexes in an SN2-type mechanism, giving the trans
oxidative addition product.13 Organometallic palladium(IV)
phosphine complexes have so far eluded isolation; however,
(9) In fact, only a few Pd-catalyzed reactions involving the electron-
accepting C6F5 group are known: (a) Albeniz, A. C.; Espinet, P.;
Martin-Ruiz, B.; Milstein, D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 11504.
(b) Korenaga, T.; Kosaki, T.; Fukumura, R.; Ema, T.; Sakai, T. Org.
Lett. 2005, 7, 4915. (c) Frohn, H.-J.; Adonin, N. Y.; Bardin, V. V.;
Starichenko, V. F. Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 43, 8111.
(10) X-ray structure data for 2a: C26H48F2P2Pd‚3CH2Cl2, M ) 821.76,
0.4 × 0.3 × 0.25 mm3, monoclinic, space group P21/c, a ) 12.34840-
(10) Å, b ) 14.20860(10) Å, c ) 21.0151(3) Å, â ) 103.3032(4)°, V
) 3588.23(6) Å3, Z ) 4, Nonius Kappa CCD, Mo KR radiation (λ )
0.710 73 Å), graphite monochromator, T ) 110(2) K, 8587 collected
reflections, 7142 unique reflections (Rint ) 0.0360). The structure was
determined by direct methods (SIR-97) and refined anisotropically by
least squares on F 2 data (SHELXL-97; 361 parameters with no
restraints). R1 ) 0.0356, wR2 ) 0.0466 for 11 587 data with I >
2σ(I) and R1 ) 0.0902, wR2 ) 0.0978 for all unique data.
(11) Grushin, V. V.; Marshall, W. J. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2002, 41,
4476.
(12) (a) Yahav, A.; Goldberg, I.; Vigalok, A. Inorg. Chem. 2005, 44, 1547.
(b) Yahav, A.; Goldberg, I.; Vigalok, A. Organometallics 2005, 24,
5654.
(13) Cockman, R. W.; Ebsworth, E. A. V.; Holloway, J. H.; Murdoch, H.;
Robertson, N.; Watson, P. G. In Fluorine Chemistry (Toward the 21st
Century); Thrasher, J. S., Strauss, S. H., Eds.; American Chemical
Society: Washington, DC, 1994; Chapter 20, p 327.
6
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 47, No. 1, 2008