Three-coordinate terminal imidoiron(III) complexes: Structure, spectroscopy, and mechanism of formation

Article abstract of DOI:10.1021/ic100846b

Reaction of 1-adamantyl azide with iron(I) diketiminate precursors gives metastable but isolable imidoiron(III) complexes LFe - NAd (L = bulky β-diketiminate ligand; Ad = 1-adamantyl). This paper addresses (1) the spectroscopic and structural characterization of the Fe - N multiple bond in these interesting three-coordinate iron imido complexes, and (2) the mechanism through which the imido complexes form. The iron(III) imido complexes have been examined by ¹H NMR and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopies and temperature-dependent magnetic susceptibility (SQUID), and structurally characterized by crystallography and/or extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) measurements. These data show that the imido complexes have quartet ground states and short (1.68 ± 0.01 A) iron?nitrogen bonds. The formation of the imido complexes proceeds through unobserved iron?N₃R intermediates, which are indicated by QM/MM computations to be best described as iron(II) with an N₃R radical anion. The radical character on the organoazide bends its NNN linkage to enable easy N₂ loss and imido complex formation. The product distribution between imidoiron(III) products and hexazene-bridged diiron(II) products is solvent-dependent, and the solvent dependence can be explained by coordination of certain solvents to the iron(I) precursor prior to interaction with the organoazide.

Full text of DOI:10.1021/ic100846b

6172 Inorg. Chem. 2010, 49, 6172–6187
DOI: 10.1021/ic100846b
Three-Coordinate Terminal Imidoiron(III) Complexes: Structure, Spectroscopy,
and Mechanism of Formation
Ryan E. Cowley,† Nathan J. DeYonker,‡ Nathan A. Eckert,† Thomas R. Cundari,*,‡ Serena DeBeer,*,§
Eckhard Bill,*,|| Xavier Ottenwaelder,^ Christine Flaschenriem,† and Patrick L. Holland*,†
†Department of Chemistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, ‡Department of Chemistry,
Center for Advanced Scientific Computing and Modeling (CASCaM), University of North Texas, Denton,
Texas 76203, §Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Baker Laboratory, Cornell University, Ithaca,
New York, 14853, ||Max-Planck-Institut fu€r Bioanorganische Chemie, Mu€lheim an der Ruhr D45470, Germany,
^
ꢀ
and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec H4B 1R6, Canada
Received April 28, 2010
Reaction of 1-adamantyl azide with iron(I) diketiminate precursors gives metastable but isolable imidoiron(III)
complexes LFedNAd (L = bulky β-diketiminate ligand; Ad = 1-adamantyl). This paper addresses (1) the spectro-
scopic and structural characterization of the FedN multiple bond in these interesting three-coordinate iron imido
complexes, and (2) the mechanism through which the imido complexes form. The iron(III) imido complexes have been
1
examined by H NMR and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopies and temperature-dependent
magnetic susceptibility (SQUID), and structurally characterized by crystallography and/or extended X-ray absorption
fine structure (EXAFS) measurements. These data show that the imido complexes have quartet ground states and
˚
short (1.68 ( 0.01 A) iron-nitrogen bonds. The formation of the imido complexes proceeds through unobserved
iron-N3R intermediates, which are indicated by QM/MM computations to be best described as iron(II) with an N3R
radical anion. The radical character on the organoazide bends its NNN linkage to enable easy N2 loss and imido
complex formation. The product distribution between imidoiron(III) products and hexazene-bridged diiron(II) products
is solvent-dependent, and the solvent dependence can be explained by coordination of certain solvents to the iron(I)
precursor prior to interaction with the organoazide.
Introduction
and nitrogen pπ orbitals are filled.3 Thus, late transition
metals in the most common geometries typically form weaker
bonds with imido fragments, and structurally characterized
imido complexes of the late transition metals are uncommon.
Though isolating them is difficult, understanding these
species is potentially beneficial because the weaker metal-
nitrogen bond can enable thermodynamically favorable
nitrene transfer to organic compounds, and can also lower
the activation barriers to stoichiometric and catalytic reac-
tions. Thus, these “electrophilic” late transition metal imido
complexes4 are of great interest as intermediates in catalytic
Imido (RN2-) ligands form strong bonds with the transi-
tion metals in groups 3-7, particularly those in high formal
oxidation states. As a result, imidos often act as unreactive
spectator ligands in early metal complexes, for example, in
the molybdenum olefin metathesis catalysts of Schrock and
co-workers.1 This strong interaction is a result of π-donation
from the two filled nitrogen p orbitals into empty metal d
orbitals, which results in a formal bond order of up to three.2
In late transition metals (groups 8-11), on the other hand,
the metal-nitrogen π-interactions are usually destabilized,
because in octahedral complexes the antibonding metal dπ
(4) Note that some imide transfer reactions have been achieved with
early transition metals, for example: (a) Breslow, R.; Gellman, S. H. Chem.
Commun. 1982, 1400–1401. (b) Katsuki, T. Synlett 2003, 281–297. (c) Nishikori,
H.; Katsuki, T. Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 9245–9248. (d) Noda, K.; Hosoya,
N.; Irie, R.; Ito, Y.; Katsuki, T. Synlett 1993, 469–471. (e) Lai, T.-S.; Kwong,
H.-L.; Che, C.-M.; Peng, S.-M. Chem. Commun. 1997, 2373–2374. (f) Simonato,
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: holland@
chem.rochester.edu (P.L.H.), Thomas.Cundari@unt.edu (T.R.C.), sdg63@
cornell.edu (S.D.), bill@mpi-muelheim.mpg.de (E.B.).
(1) (a) Schrock, R. R. Chem. Rev. 2009, 109, 3211–3226. (b) Schrock, R. R.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 3748–3759. (c) Schrock, R. R. J. Mol. Catal.
A: Chem. 2004, 213, 21–30. (d) Schrock, R. R.; Hoveyda, A. H. Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. 2003, 42, 4592–4633. (e) Schrock, R. R. Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 8141–
8153. (f) Schrock, R. R. Pure Appl. Chem. 1994, 66, 1447–1454.
ꢀ
J.-P.; Pecaut, J.; Scheidt, R.; Marchon, J.-C. Chem. Commun. 1999, 989–990.
(g) Du Bois, J.; Tomooka, C. S.; Hong, J.; Carreira, E. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1997, 119, 3179–3180. (h) Yu, X.-Q.; Huang, J.-S.; Zhu, N.; Che, C.-M. Org. Lett.
2000, 2, 2233–2236. (i) Yang, J.; Weinberg, R.; Breslow, R. Chem. Commun.
2000, 531–532. (j) Kohmura, Y.; Katsuki, T. Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 3339–
3342.
(2) (a) Nugent, W. A.; Mayer, J. M. Metal-Ligand Multiple Bonds; Wiley:
New York, 1988. (b) Wigley, D. E. Prog. Inorg. Chem. 1994, 42, 239–482.
(3) Mayer, J. M. Comments Inorg. Chem. 1988, 8, 125–135.
r
pubs.acs.org/IC
Published on Web 06/04/2010
2010 American Chemical Society

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6173
nitrene transfer reactions, particularly aminations5 and
aziridinations.6
complexes have never been completely characterized, and
the assignments remain in doubt. In the late 1980s and early
1990s, work by Bergman and others generated Os,9 Ir,10 and
Ru11 half-sandwich complexes with terminal imido ligands,
which were characterized using X-ray crystallography. In the
last 10 years, several research groups have published isolable
first-row transition metal complexes with terminal imido
ligands including those of FeII,12 FeIII,13 FeIV,14 FeV,15
CoIII,16 NiII,17 and NiIII.18 All of these isolated group 8-10
complexes with terminal imido ligands feature bulky ligands
that enforce a coordinatively unsaturated metal center. A low
coordination number at the metal has emerged as an impor-
tant feature, as tetrahedral and trigonal metal centers have
π-symmetry orbitals that are not doubly occupied.19 Thus, even
metals with a high formal d-electron count can form stabilizing
π-interactions with donors such as NR2- by appropriately
manipulating the geometry using the supporting ligands.
The recent successes in isolating late-metal complexes with
terminal imido ligands should not lead one to underestimate
the difficulty in preparing them. A few have been generated
by deprotonation17a or hydrogen atom abstraction16e from
amido complexes, which requires judicious choice of a
reagent that can remove the strongly bonded hydrogen
without destroying the complex. However, most of the late-
metal imido complexes described above arise from the addi-
tion of an organoazide to a low-valent, unsaturated metal
precursor. This reaction is exothermic and exergonic by
virtue of forming N2 as a byproduct. However, the barrier
to breaking the N-N bonds of organoazides is usually high,
and the addition of organoazides to late transition metal
complexes often leads to an organoazide complex in which
the N-N bonds have not been cleaved.17b,20 Understanding the
mechanism and selectivity for N2 extrusion from metal-orga-
noazide complexes is a current research challenge.21 Proulx and
Bergman invoked a four-centered triazametallacyclobutane
There have been several innovations in stabilizing late
transition metal complexes with terminal imido ligands.7 Stone
and co-workers reported in the 1960s and 1970s that several
IrI, RhI, Ru0, and Os0 compounds react with fluoroalkylazides
to give crystalline products, and these were formulated as
fluoroalkylimido complexes on the basis of IR, NMR, and
elemental analysis data.8 However, these putative imido
(5) For recent reviews on catalytic C-H amination reactions, see:
€
(a) Muller, P.; Fruit, C. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 2905–2919. (b) Dauban, P.;
Dodd, R. H. Synlett 2003, 11, 1571–1586. (c) Davies, H. M. L.; Long, M. S.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 3518–3520. (d) Halfen, J. A. Curr. Org.
Chem. 2005, 9, 657–669. (e) Cenini, S.; Gallo, E.; Caselli, A.; Ragaini, F.;
Fantauzzi, S.; Piangiolino, C. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2006, 250, 1234–1253.
(f) Compain, P.; Toumieux, S. “Catalytic intramolecular C-H aminations: a
powerful tool for the synthesis of various heterocyclic systems,” in Targets in
Heterocyclic Systems; Attanasi, O. A.; Spinelli, D., Eds.; Italian Society of
Chemistry: Rome, 2007. (g) Davies, H. M. L.; Manning, J. R. Nature 2008, 451,
417–424. (h) Von Zezschwitz, P. Nachr. Chem. 2008, 56, 897–901. (i) Collet, F.;
Dodd, R. H.; Dauban, P. Chem. Commun. 2009, 5061–5074. (j) Fantauzzi, S.;
Caselli, A.; Gallo, E. Dalton Trans. 2009, 5434–5443.
(6) For recent reviews on aziridines and catalytic aziridination reactions,
€
see: (a) Muller, P.; Fruit, C. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 2905–2919. (b) Halfen, J. A.
Curr. Org. Chem. 2005, 9, 657–669. (c) Tanner, D. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
Engl. 1994, 33, 599–619. (d) Osborn, H. M. I.; Sweeney, J. Tetrahedron:
Asymmetry 1997, 8, 1693–1715. (e) Sweeney, J. B. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2003, 31,
247–258.
(7) Bimetallic group 9-11 complexes featuring bridging imido ligands are
also well-studied, for example see: (a) Sharp, P. R.; Ge, Y.-W. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1987, 109, 3796–3797. (b) Ge, Y.-W.; Sharp, P. R. Organometallics 1988, 7,
2234–2236. (c) Ge, Y.-W.; Peng, F.; Sharp, P. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112,
2632–2640. (d) Ge, Y.-W.; Sharp, P. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 3667–
3668. (e) Ramamoorthy, V.; Sharp, P. R. Inorg. Chem. 1990, 29, 3336–3339.
(f) Ge, Y.-W.; Sharp, P. R. Inorg. Chem. 1992, 31, 379–384. (g) Ge, Y.-W.; Sharp,
P. R. Inorg. Chem. 1993, 32, 94–100. (h) Sharp, P. R.; Yi, Y.; Wu, Z.; Ramamoorthy,
V. Spec. Publ. - R. Soc. Chem. 1993, 131, 198–201. (i) Ge, Y.-W.; Ye, Y.; Sharp,
P. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 8384–8385. (j) Ye, C.; Sharp, P. R. Inorg.
Chem. 1995, 34, 55–59. (k) Li, J. J.; Li, W.; James, A. J.; Holbert, T.; Sharp, T. P.;
Sharp, P. R. Inorg. Chem. 1999, 38, 1563–1572. (l) Sharp, P. R. Comments Inorg.
Chem. 1999, 21, 85–114. (m) Sharp, P. R. Dalton 2000, 2647–2657. (n) Anandhi,
U.; Holbert, T.; Lueng, D.; Sharp, P. R. Inorg. Chem. 2003, 42, 1282–1295.
(o) Singh, A.; Anandhi, U.; Cinellu, M. A.; Sharp, P. R. Dalton Trans. 2008, 2314–
2327. (p) Dobbs, D. A.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 3836–3837.
(q) Dobbs, D. A.; Bergman, R. G. Organometallics 1994, 13, 4594–4605.
(r) Danopoulos, A. A.; Wilkinson, G.; Sweet, T. K. N.; Hursthouse, M. B.
J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. 1996, 3771–3778. (s) Arita, H.; Ishiwata, K.;
Kuwata, S.; Ikariya, T. Organometallics 2008, 27, 493–496. (t) Ishiwata, K.;
Kuwata, S.; Ikariya, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 5001–5009. (u) Nichols,
P. J.; Fallon, G. D.; Murray, K. S.; West, B. O. Inorg. Chem. 1988, 27, 2795–2800.
(v) Ohki, Y.; Takikawa, Y.; Hatanaka, T.; Tatsumi, K. Organometallics 2006, 25,
3111–3113. (w) Takemoto, S.; Ogura, S.-I.; Yo, H.; Hosokoshi, Y.; Kamikawa, K.;
Matsuzaka, H. Inorg. Chem. 2006, 45, 4871–4873. (x) Zart, M. K.; Powell, D.;
Borovik, A. S. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2007, 360, 2397–2402. (y) Lee, S. W.; Trogler,
W. C. Inorg. Chem. 1990, 29, 1099–1102. (z) Oro, L. A.; Ciriano, M. A.; Tejel,
C.; Bordonaba, M.; Graiff, C.; Tiripicchio, A. Chem.;Eur. J. 2004, 10, 708–
715. (aa) Takemoto, S.; Morita, H.; Kamikawa, K.; Matsuzaka, H. Chem.
Commun. 2006, 1328–1330. (bb) Allan, R. E.; Beswick, M. A.; Paver, M. A.;
Raithby, P. R.; Steiner, A.; Wright, D. S. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1996, 35,
208–209. (cc) Reib, P.; Fenske, D. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 2000, 626, 2245–2247.
(dd) Reiss, P.; Fenske, D. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 2000, 626, 1317–1331. (ee)
Badiei, Y. M.; Krishnaswamy, A.; Melzer, M. M.; Warren, T. H. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2006, 128, 15056–15057. (ff) Badiei, Y. M.; Dinescu, A.; Dai, X.; Palomino,
R. M.; Heinemann, F. W.; Cundari, T. R.; Warren, T. H. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2008, 47, 9961–9964. (gg) Cundari, T. R.; Dinescu, A.; Kazi, A. B. Inorg. Chem.
2008, 47, 10067–10072.
(11) (a) Danopoulos, A. A.; Wilkinson, G.; Hussain-Bates, B.; Hursthouse,
M. B. Polyhedron 1992, 11, 2961–2964. (b) Burrell, A. K.; Steedman, A. J.
Organometallics 1997, 16, 1203–1208.
(12) Brown, S. D.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 1913–1923.
(13) (a) Brown, S. D.; Betley, T. A.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003,
125, 322–323. (b) Betley, T. A.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125,
10782–10783. (c) Bart, S. C.; Lobkovsky, E.; Bill, E.; Chirik, P. J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2006, 128, 5302–5303. (d) Mehn, M. P.; Brown, S. D.; Jenkins, D. M.;
Peters, J. C.; Que, L. Inorg. Chem. 2006, 45, 7417–7427. (e) Lu, C. C.; Saouma,
C. T.; Day, M. W.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 4–5. (f) Scepaniak,
J. J.; Young, J. A.; Bontchev, R. P.; Smith, J. M. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48,
3158–3160.
(14) (a) Verma, A. K.; Nazif, T. N.; Achim, C.; Lee, S. C. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2000, 122, 11013. (b) Thomas, C. M.; Mankad, N. P.; Peters, J. C. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 4956–4957. (c) Nieto, I.; Ding, F.; Bontchev, R. P.; Wang,
H.; Smith, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 2716–2717.
(15) Ni, C.; Fettinger, J. C.; Long, G. J.; Brynda, M.; Power, P. P. Chem.
Commun. 2008, 6045–6047.
(16) (a) Jenkins, D. M.; Betley, T. A.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002,
124, 11238–11239. (b) Hu, X.; Meyer, K. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 16322–
16323. (c) Dai, X.; Kapoor, P.; Warren, T. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 4798–
4799. (d) Shay, D. T.; Yap, G. P. A.; Zakharov, L. N.; Rheingold, A. L.; Theopold,
K. H. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 1508-1510; erratum: 2006, 45, 7870.
(e) Cowley, R. E.; Bontchev, R. P.; Sorrell, J.; Sarracino, O.; Feng, Y.; Wang, H.;
Smith, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 2424–2425. (f) Jones, C.; Schulten,
C.; Rose, R. P.; Stasch, A.; Aldridge, S.; Woodul, W. D.; Murray, K. S.;
Moubaraki, B.; Brynda, M.; La Macchia, G.; Gagliardi, L. Angew. Chem., Int.
Ed. 2009, 48, 7406–7410.
(17) (a) Mindiola, D. J.; Hillhouse, G. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
4623–4624. (b) Waterman, R.; Hillhouse, G. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130,
12628–12629.
(18) Kogut, E.; Wiencko, H. L.; Zhang, L.; Cordeau, D. E.; Warren, T. H.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 11248–11249.
(19) Holland, P. L. Acc. Chem. Res. 2008, 41, 905–914.
(8) (a) Ashley-Smith, J.; Green, M.; Mayne, N.; Stone, F. G. A. Chem.
Commun. 1969, 409. (b) McGlinchey, M. J.; Stone, F. G. A. Chem. Commun.
1970, 1265.
(9) Michelman, R. I.; Andersen, R. A.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1991, 113, 5100–5102.
(10) (a) Glueck, D. S.; Hollander, F. J.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1989, 111, 2719–2721. (b) Glueck, D. S.; Wu, J.; Hollander, F. J.; Bergman, R. G.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 2041–2054.

6174 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
Scheme 1
Figure 1. β-Diketiminate ligands used in this study.
intermediate to explain how a coordinated phenylazide ligand
extruded N2 to afford an imidotantalum complex.20b Recent
density functional theory (DFT)-based simulations have also
addressed possible mechanisms for N2 loss from organoazide
complexes.22 Hillhouse recently described the isolation of a
nickel-organoazide complex that loses N2 to form an imido-
nickel complex upon warming.17b
In this contribution, evidence is presented for the forma-
tion of a transient formally iron(I) organoazide complex on
the way to an isolable iron(III) imido complex. In a novel
feature, the metal-N3R species has significant radical char-
acter on the organoazide ligand. It is shown that the addition
of donor ligands controls the selectivity between several
potential products obtained from organoazide addition. In
addition, the geometric and electronic structure of the first
structurally characterized three-coordinate iron(III) imido
complex is explored in detail using crystallography, electron
paramagnetic resonance (EPR), NMR, magnetic susceptibi-
lity, X-ray absorption, and computational chemistry techni-
ques. These combined studies lead to new insight about the
mechanism of formation of a late-metal imido complex, as
well as its bonding and charge distribution.
Table 1. Solvent Dependence of the Outcome of the Reaction between
L
MeFeNNFeLMe and 2.0 equiv N3Ada
yield
yield
approximate
ratio 2:1d
solvent
of 1 (%)b of 2 (%)c
pentane
Et2O
2,5-dimethyl-THF
toluene
77
64
63
52
47
20
10
9
14
25
28
41
43
59
68
80
1:6
1:3
1:2
1:1
1:1
3:1
7:1
9:1
benzene
PhCF3
pentane þ4 equiv of 4-tBu-pyridine
Results
THF
Products from Iron(I) and Adamantyl Azide. The diiron
,
a Each reaction performed at [Fe] = 15 mM. b Isolated powder.
c Detected in 1H NMR spectrum of crude reaction product. d Rounded
to the nearest whole number in the ratio.
dinitrogen complexes LRFeNNFeLR (LR = LMe or LtBu
Figure 1) have been shown to be convenient sources of the
evanescent two-coordinate iron(I) fragment “LFe” in reac-
tions with alkynes, alkenes, CO, isocyanides, S8, phosphines,
and benzo[c]cinnoline.23b,24 Therefore, it was hypothesized
that LMeFeNNFeLMe and LtBuFeNNFeLtBu would serve as
useful iron(I) precursors in building imidoiron(III) com-
plexes. However, addition of 2 equiv of 1-adamantyl azide
(N3Ad) to a pentane solution of LMeFeNNFeLMe did not
produce the imido complex as the major product, but instead
led to an unusual “hexazene” complex LMeFe(μ-η2:η2-Ad-
NNNNNNAd-1κ2N1,N4:2κ2N3,N6)FeLMe (1) in 74% yield
(Scheme 1).25 This product is conceptually derived from
addition of two “LMeFe” fragments to two molecules of
N3Ad or, alternatively, the dimerization of two LMeFe-
(N3Ad) complexes. The characterization of 1 was reported
(20) (a) Proulx, G.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 6382–
6383. (b) Proulx, G.; Bergman, R. G. Organometallics 1996, 15, 684–692.
(c) Fickes, M. G.; Davis, W. M.; Cummins, C. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117,
6384–6385. (d) Guillemot, G.; Solari, E.; Floriani, C.; Rizzoli, C. Organome-
tallics 2001, 20, 607–615. (e) Dias, H. V. R.; Polach, S. A.; Goh, S.-K.;
Archibong, E. F.; Marynick, D. S. Inorg. Chem. 2000, 39, 3894–3901. (f) Hanna,
T. A.; Baranger, A. M.; Bergman, R. G. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1996, 35,
653–655. (g) Barz, M.; Herdtweck, E.; Thiel, W. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1998,
37, 2262–2265. (h) Albertin, G.; Antoniutti, S.; Baldan, D.; Castro, J.; García-
€
recently, and Mossbauer spectroscopy and magnetic studies
were used to show that 1 is best described as being composed
of two iron(II) centers and a dianionic [Ad2N6]2- ligand.25
Therefore, 1 derives from reductive coupling of two N3Ad
groups through their terminal nitrogen atoms. The related
compound LMeMg(μ-η2:η2-AdNNNNNNAd)MgLMe was
recently reported by Jones, Stasch, and co-workers, and it
was similarly prepared through reductive coupling of N3Ad
ꢀ
Fontan, S. Inorg. Chem. 2008, 47, 742–748.
(21) Cenini, S.; La Monica, G. Inorg. Chim. Acta 1976, 18, 279–293.
(22) (a) Wu, H.; Hall, M. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 16452–16453.
(b) Cundari, T. R.; Morello, G. R. J. Org. Chem. 2009, 74, 5711–5714.
(23) (a) Smith, J. M.; Lachicotte, R. J.; Pittard, K. A.; Cundari, T. R.;
Lukat-Rodgers, G.; Rodgers, K. R.; Holland, P. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001,
123, 9222–9223. (b) Smith, J. M.; Sadique, A. R.; Cundari, T. R.; Rodgers, K. R.;
Lukat-Rodgers, G.; Lachicotte, R. J.; Flaschenriem, C. J.; Vela, J.; Holland, P. L.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 756–769.
by the magnesium(I) precursor LMeMgMgLMe 26
.
When performing the above reaction in pentane, sig-
nals for the desired LMeFeNAd (2) (characterized below)
are observed in the 1H NMR spectrum of crude reaction
mixtures, but 2 is formed in only 14% yield. The relative
amounts of 1 and 2 are highly dependent on the solvent
used in the reaction (Table 1). In each reaction, the
€
(24) (a) Vela, J.; Stoian, S.; Flaschenriem, C. J.; Munck, E.; Holland, P. L.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 4522–4523. (b) Stoian, S. A.; Yu, Y.; Smith, J. M.;
Holland, P. L.; Bominaar, E. L.; M€unck, E. Inorg. Chem. 2005, 44, 4915–4922.
(c) Yu, Y.; Smith, J. M.; Flaschenriem, C. J.; Holland, P. L. Inorg. Chem. 2006, 45,
5724–5751. (d) Yu, Y.; Sadique, A. R.; Smith, J. M.; Dugan, T. R.; Cowley, R. E.;
Brennessel, W. W.; Flaschenriem, C. J.; Bill, E.; Cundari, T. R.; Holland, P. L.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 6624–6638. (e) Sadique, A. R.; Brennessel, W. W.;
Holland, P. L. Inorg. Chem. 2008, 47, 784–786.
(25) Cowley, R. E.; Elhaık, J.; Eckert, N. A.; Brennessel, W. W.; Bill, E.;
Holland, P. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 6074–6075.
(26) Bonyhady, S. J.; Green, S. P.; Jones, C.; Nembenna, S.; Stasch, A.
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 2973–2977.

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6175
hexazene complex 1 is poorly soluble, and thus the yield of
1 was easily determined by filtration of the crude reaction
mixture. The yield of imido complex 2 was determined
1
based on H NMR integration against an internal stan-
dard. The yield of imido 2 was lowest (<30%) in non-
coordinating solvents (pentane, diethyl ether, and 2,5-
dimethyltetrahydrofuran (Me2THF)), intermediate (40-
68%) in aromatic solvents (benzene, toluene, and R,R,R-
trifluorotoluene (PhCF3)), and highest (80%) in THF. In
each of these reactions, the combined yields of hexazene 1
and imido 2 was 79-93% based on iron.27
Because it gave the highest conversion to 2, tetra-
hydrofuran (THF) was chosen for the isolation of pure
samples of 2. Addition of a THF solution of N3Ad to a
royal purple solution of 0.5 equiv of LMeFeNNFeLMe in
THF produces vigorous effervescence and an immediate
color change to deep yellow. Removal of THF and
crystallization of the residue from pentane at low tem-
perature produced a yellow-brown crystalline product in
61% isolated yield. Crystals of 2 are stable for more than
2 weeks in the solid state at -45 ꢀC, and this level of
stability enabled spectroscopic and crystallographic char-
acterization. At 25 ꢀC, C6D6 solutions of redissolved
crystals of 2 are metastable with t1/2 ∼ 48 h. We initially
reported the generation of 2 in the presence of 4-tert-
butylpyridine (tBupy), but under these conditions t1/2 was
only about 0.5 h at 25 ꢀC, and crystallographic characteri-
zation was not possible.28
X-ray Crystal Structure of 2. Single crystals of 2 were
grown from a saturated pentane solution at -45 ꢀC, and
the X-ray crystal structure is shown in Figure 2a. The
short FedN bond length (1.6699(15) A) and nearly linear
geometry at nitrogen (—FedN-C = 170.40(13)ꢀ) highlight
the FedN multiple bond character. These values are in
the range observed in known terminal imidoiron com-
pounds for FedN bond lengths (1.61-1.73 A) and
FedN-C angles (159-179ꢀ).29 The three-coordinate iron
center is planar (sum of N-Fe-N angles is 360.0(1)ꢀ), and
slightly bent from ideal Y-shaped geometry, as evidenced
by the difference in NimidodFe-Ndiketiminate angles
(126.82(6)ꢀ and 139.16(6)ꢀ). The Fe-Ndiketiminate bond
Figure 2. Molecular structures of (a) LMeFedNAd (2), and (b) LMeFe-
NHAd (3) using 50% probability thermal ellipsoids. Hydrogen atoms
except the amido hydrogen are omitted. Selected bond distances [A] and
bond angles [deg] for LMeFedNAd (2): Fe1-N14, 1.6699(15); Fe1-N11,
1.9285(13); Fe1-N21, 1.9177(13), Fe1-N14-C14, 170.40(13); N11-
Fe1-N14, 139.16(6); N21-Fe1-N14, 126.82(6); N11-Fe1-N21,
94.02(6). Selected bond distances [A] and bond angles [deg] for LMeFeN-
HAd (3): Fe1-N14, 1.860(2); Fe1-N11, 1.974(2); Fe1-N21, 1.986(2),
Fe1-N14-C14, 134.7(2); N11-Fe1-N14, 145.86(8); N21-Fe1-N14,
121.04(8); N11-Fe1-N21, 93.09(7).
lengths (1.9285(13), 1.9177(13) A) are significantly shorter
than those in three-coordinate iron(II) diketiminate com-
plexes (average 1.98(2) A),30 consistent with the assign-
ment of the iron oxidation state in 2 as iron(III).
(27) During the synthesis of 2 from LMeFeNNFeLMe and 2 equiv N3Ad,
trace amounts (2-5%) of the tetrazene complex LMeFe(AdNNNNAd-
κ2N1N4) (5) are unavoidably present in crude reaction mixtures, presumably
because the cycloaddition reaction of 2 with AdN3 is kinetically competitive
with imido formation. Fortunately, 5 is much less soluble in pentane than 2,
and extraction of the crude material into pentane is usually sufficient to
reduce the amount of 5 contaminant in 2 to <1%, as judged by 1H NMR
spectroscopy. Also, note that 5 was originally obtained by reaction of
The structure of the iron(III) imido complex can be
-
compared to the analogous iron(II) amido complex LMe
FeNHAd (3) (Figure 2b), which can be generated inde-
pendently via anion metathesis of [LMeFeCl]2 with 2 equiv
of LiNHAd in a manner similar to other (β-diketiminato)-
FeII(amido) complexes.31 The Fe-Namido distance of
1.841(2) A in 3 is typical of its congeners with NH-
(p-tolyl), NH(2,6-diisopropylphenyl), and NH(tBu)
ligands,31 and is 0.171(3) A longer than the FedN multi-
ple bond in 2. The geometry at iron in the structure of 3 is
2
tBupy with 1 equiv of N3Ad (see reference 48). We have noticed that the
3
reaction proceeds qualitatively faster when base-free 2 is used instead of
tBupy, consistent with a mechanism that involves rate-limiting tBupy
2
3
dissociation to form 2, and subsequent cycloaddition of N3Ad to the FedN
bond. Complex 5 can be also obtained in 81% yield in one step from
L
MeFeNNFeLMe and 4 equiv N3Ad in THF, without the use of pyridine in
midway between Y-shaped and T-shaped, with Nimido
d
the reaction. Details of this simplified synthesis are given in the Experimental
Fe-Ndiketiminate angles of 145.88(8)ꢀ and 121.03(8)ꢀ.
Also, the Fe-Ndiketiminate lengths in 3 (1.974(2) and
1.985(2) A) are ∼0.05 A longer than the corresponding
bond lengths in 2 because of the lower oxidation state,
and are consistent with other three-coordinate iron(II)
diketiminate complexes.30
Section.
(28) Eckert, N. A.; Vaddadi, S.; Stoian, S.; Lachicotte, R. J.; Cundari,
T. R.; Holland, P. L. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 6868–6871.
(29) The average FedN bond length is 1.65(3) A, and the average
FedN-C angle is 173(5)ꢀ, calculated from the 15 imidoiron compounds
with terminal imido ligands in the Cambridge Structural Database, v. 5.30
(Feb 2009 update). Allen, F. H. Acta Crystallogr. 2002, B58, 380–388.
(30) The large library of 3- and 4-coordinate iron-diketiminate com-
plexes in the Cambridge Crystallographic Structure Database has allowed us
to determine average Fe-Ndiketiminate bond lengths as a function of coordi-
nation number and oxidation state; see SI for details.
(31) Eckert, N. A.; Smith, J. M.; Lachicotte, R. J.; Holland, P. L. Inorg.
Chem. 2004, 43, 3306–3321.

6176 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
Scheme 3
tBupy peaks at δ 15.1 and δ 9.3 ppm disappeared
(Supporting Information, Figure S-2). Five aromatic H
Figure 3. 1H NMR spectra of 2 (C6D6, 25 ꢀC) at the specified concen-
trations oftBupy. The 11 peaksassignedto2(marked with *)areindicated
in the bottom spectrum. The small peaks with δH independent of [tBupy]
are due to trace contamination with the iron-tetrazene complex 5.27
1
NMR resonances were observed (δ 6.4 to 8.3 ppm), con-
sistent with the formation of the borane-pyridine adduct
tBupy BPh3.32
The solutions of 2 Bupy were unstable because the
3
t
Scheme 2
3
four-coordinate species undergoes intramolecular hydro-
gen atom abstraction (HAA) from the isopropyl C-H of
the diketiminate ligand, with t1/2 on the order of ∼0.5 h at
25 ꢀC. This HAA reaction was reported previously,28 and
mechanistic details of this reaction shall be explored in
detail elsewhere.33 The addition of BPh3 to solutions of
t
2 Bupy greatly improved the stability of the complex, as
3
t1/2 for decomposition of the mixture increased to ∼36 h
at 25 ꢀC, similar to that for 2 prepared in THF and
without tBupy.
Coordination of Lewis Bases to the Imido Complex 2.
The ability of THF to steer the reaction between LMe
-
Effect of Diketiminate Size on the Outcome of the
Reaction. We also investigated the imidoiron complex
supported by the bulkier LtBu ligand. This imido complex
was obtained by adding 2 equiv of N3Ad to a solution of
FeNNFeLMe and N3Ad toward the imidoiron(III) pro-
duct 2 suggests that Lewis bases are beneficial. Consistent
with this idea, performing the reaction in pentane in the
presence of at least 4 equiv of tBupy gave a much higher
yield of 2 and less than 10% of 1 (Table 1). To investigate
L
tBuFeNNFeLtBu (Scheme 3). At room temperature in
pentane, the target imidoiron(III) complex LtBuFeNAd
(4) was generated in >80% spectroscopic yield,34 which
differs significantly from the low conversion to the LMe
analogue 2 (14% yield of imido in pentane). The hexazene
complex {LtBuFe}2(Ad2N6) is also formed, but only in
<2% crude yield. Larger amounts of hexazene complex
(>20% isolated) were only obtained when the reaction
was performed at -78 ꢀC.25 Therefore, the use of the
bulkier LtBu ligand greatly decreases the formation of the
hexazene byproduct.
t
the equilibrium between 2 and 2 Bupy (Scheme 2), we
3
added 1-20 equiv of tBupy to a C6D6 solution of 2 that
had been previously crystallized. When tBupy was added,
the color immediately changed from yellow-brown to
dark red-orange. The 1H NMR spectrum of the mixture
showed 11 paramagnetic peaks qualitatively similar to
that of pyridine-free 2, as well as three broad peaks that
t
are consistent with Bupy coordination. In contrast,
addition of 100 equiv of THF to a C6D6 solution of 2
did not shift the 1H NMR resonances more than 0.2 ppm
or produce a color change, suggesting that THF does not
coordinate to 2.
Although we have not been able to obtain single
crystals of 4 for crystallography, the assignment of 4 is
supported by NMR spectroscopy. As shown in Figure 4,
1
1
the H NMR spectra of 2 and 4 are qualitatively very
The positions of all peaks in the H NMR spectra of
mixtures of 2 and tBupy are dependent on the concentra-
tion of Bupy (Figure 3), indicating that there is an
similar, suggesting they have similar geometries and
electronic structures. The most significant difference
between the two spectra is the chemical shift of the peaks
attributed to the different ligand backbone substituent
t
equilibrium between three-coordinate LMeFeNAd (2)
t
and four-coordinate LMeFe(NAd)(tBupy) (2 Bupy) that
3
1
is rapid on the H NMR time scale. To confirm this
t
hypothesis, the in situ-generated 2 Bupy was treated with
(32) The same compound “tBupy BPh3” is obtained from tBupy þ BPh3
3
3
in the absence of any Fe complex; see SI for details.
(33) Cowley, R. E.; Eckert, N. A.; Vaddadi, S.; Figg, T.; Cundari, T. R.;
Holland, P. L. manuscript in preparation.
a stoichiometric amount of BPh3 to scavenge the Lewis
base from solution. This treatment shifted the paramag-
t
netic 1H NMR resonances for 2 Bupy to become identical
(34) Cowley, R. E.; Eckert, N. A.; Elhaık, J.; Holland, P. L. Chem.
Commun. 2009, 1760–1762.
3
to those in crystallized 2, and the exchange-broadened

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6177
Figure 4. 1H NMR spectra for 2 (bottom) and 4 (top)34 on the same
scale. The 11 peaks assigned to each complex are marked with filled circles
(2) or open circles (4). Residual solvent signals are marked with “s”. The
spectrum of 4 is recorded in the presence of excess 1,4-cyclohexadiene and
4-tert-butylpyridine (marked with “x”) to show that it does not react.
Figure 6. k3-weighted EXAFS data and the corresponding fits for 2, 3,
and 4.
Figure 7. Non-phase shift corrected FT (Fourier transformed) data for
2, 3, and 4.
we obtained Fe K-edge X-ray absorption spectroscopy
(XAS) data on imidoiron(III) complexes 2 and 4, as well
as on the amidoiron(II) complex 3. XAS data for each
compound were obtained in the solid state as dilutions in
boron nitride.35 A comparison of the Fe K-edges for 2 and
3 are shown in Figure 5. The rising edge is at higher energy
in the imidoiron(III) complex 2 than in the amidoiron(II)
complex 3, consistent with the higher oxidation state.
There is essentially no change in the pre-edge energies on
going from 2 to 3, but the pre-edge intensity is somewhat
larger for 2 than 3. A tentative interpretation is that the
overall ligand field is similar, but there is greater cova-
lency in the imido complex 2.
The EXAFS data for 2, 3, and 4 (together with the
corresponding fits) are shown in Figure 6. The non-phase-
shift-corrected Fourier-transformed (FT) data are shown
in Figure 7. The overall EXAFS beat pattern, as well as
the FTs, for imido complexes 2 and 4 are very similar. On
the other hand, for the amido complex 3 there is a
Figure 5. Comparison of the normalized Fe K-edge XAS data for 2 and
3. The inset shows the pre-edge feature at greater magnification.
t
(Me in 2 at δ -24 ppm; Bu in 4 at δ þ20 ppm). The
similarity between features in the X-band EPR spectra
and extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS)
fits of 2 and 4 will also become evident below.
In other ways, compound 4 differs from 2. LtBuFeNAd
(4) does not coordinate exogenous donors such as tBupy,
and does not react with H• sources such as 1,4-cyclohexa-
diene or indene that react with 2.28 Despite its greater
steric protection, 4 is less stable than 2 in solution,
decomposing to a mixture of products with t1/2 of ap-
proximately 1 h at 25 ꢀC. Therefore, it has been handled
only in solution at low temperatures. However, we have
been able to isolate a solid containing LtBuFeNAd in
50-70% purity for EXAFS measurements (see below).
The nature of the decomposition products is unknown.
EXAFS Characterization of Imido Complexes. To
further confirm the identity of the two imido complexes,
(35) Frozen solutions gave somewhat different spectra, probably from
greater decomposition. See Supporting Information for details.

6178 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
Table 2. EXAFS Fit Results
2
3
4
r (A)
σ2 (A2)
r (A)
σ2 (A2)
0.0067
0.0075
r (A)
σ2 (A2)
2 Fe-N
1 Fe-N
6 Fe-N-C
ΔE0 (eV)
errora
1.94
1.69
2.89
-8.60
0.079
0.0039
0.0052
0.0038
3 Fe-N/O
2.00
2.5 Fe-N
0.5 Fe-N
6 Fe-N-C
ΔE0 (eV)
errora
1.99
1.69
2.91
-7.71
0.069
0.0062
0.0045
0.0028
6 Fe-N-C
ΔE0 (eV)
errora
2.97
-4.45
0.189
P
P
a Error is given by [(χobsd - χcalcd)2k6]/ [(χobsd2 k6].
distinctly different beat pattern and a broader first shell
feature in the FT. The data for 2 were successfully
modeled with two nitrogen atoms at 1.94 A, and one
nitrogen atom at 1.69 A (Table 2). These are assigned as
Fe-Ndiketiminate and FedNimido bonds since they closely
match the corresponding bond lengths from the crystal
structure (1.93 and 1.67 A, respectively). The fit was
significantly poorer if the short FedN distance was
omitted from the model, with the error increasing from
0.079 to 0.316. Although there is no distinct peak in the
Fourier-transformed spectrum that corresponds to the
short Fe-N scatterer, a similar trend has been noted for
other complexes with short Fe-N bonds; the lack of a
distinct peak arises from an interference effect that results
in a narrower peak in the FT in the presence of a short
Fe-N vector (see Figure 7).36 Hence, the EXAFS data
corroborate the short FedN distance observed in the
X-ray crystal structure.37
The EXAFS data for 4 are of particular interest be-
cause this compound has not been subjected to crystal-
lographic characterization. In this case, the data fit to
2.5 nitrogen atoms at 1.99 A and 0.5 nitrogen atoms at
1.69 A, distances similar to those in the fit for 2. Inclusion
of 1 Fe-N at 1.69 A resulted in an unreasonably large σ2
value (0.032 A2), suggesting that the imido complex 4
represents only ∼1/2 of the species present. Since 4 was
not purified through crystallization and is less stable than
2, it is not surprising that the imido complex is less pure.
However, the EXAFS data for 2 and 4 are still quite
similar, and both show short (<1.7 A) FedN distances,
suggesting that they both contain imido ligands.
Figure 8. Variable-temperature magnetic susceptibility of crystalline 2
recorded with a field of B = 1 T. The solid red line represents the best fit
achieved by adding the values for 20% of an unknown paramagnetic
impurity with S = 2, D = 2 cm-1, gav = 2 to the result of a spin
Hamiltonian simulation (PI, dotted blue line, assuming same molar
mass). The optimized simulation parameters for the target compound
with S = 3/2 are gav = 2.15, |D| = 65 cm-1, and E/D = 0.33. Inset:
Multiple-field variable-temperature measurements at B = 1, 4, and 7 T
and simulation with the same parameters (red, green, and blue traces,
respectively).
very weakly, as indicated also by the NMR experiments
described above.
Crystalline 2 was also evaluated by magnetic suscepti-
bility measurements. The variable-temperature magnetic
susceptibility data (μeff) for solid 2 are shown in Figure 8.
The high-temperature limit, corresponding to an effective
magnetic moment of ∼4.6 μB, exceeds the spin-only value
for S = 3/2 (3.87 μB), but it is consistent with the effective
magnetic moment measured in C6D6 solution (Evans
method, 25 ꢀC) of μeff = 4.4 ( 0.3 μB. The deviation is
most likely due to the presence of an unknown paramag-
Magnetism of 2. We previously described the X-band
t
EPR spectra of solution-generated 434 and 2 Bupy.38 The
3
rhombic signal for each of these compounds is similar
(geff = 7.0, 1.8, 1.3 for 4; geff = 6.1, 1.9, 1.4 for 2 Bupy)
t
netic contaminant, which is EPR-silent. In previous
€
3
t
Mossbauer studies of 2 Bupy, variable amounts of iron-
and indicates an S = 3/2 spin system with E/D ∼ 0.33.
The X-band EPR spectrum of a solution of pyridine-free,
crystalline 2 (Supporting Information, Figure S-11) was
very similar (geff = 6.3, 1.9, 1.5) to that reported pre-
3
(II) impurities were observed,28 and some decomposition
is expected because of the metastable nature of 2. By
assuming that the impurity is an iron(II) species in 20%
abundance with spin S = 2 and roughly the same molar
mass, the magnetic data could be successfully fitted to an
S = 3/2 model with gav = 2.15 and |D| = 65(5) cm-1, and
E/D = 0.33. The rhombicity parameter of E/D = 0.33
was taken from simulations of the EPR spectrum men-
tioned above, whereas D and the average g value were
refined to fit the magnetic susceptibility data. The refine-
ment gave g = 2.15, which is close to that found for the
EPR solution sample (gav = 2.07). The remarkably large
value for D was corroborated by variable-temperature
measurements at multiple fields (inset of Figure 8).
Although the global fit of these traces using the same
parameters and including the same S = 2 impurity is not
t
viously for 2 Bupy,28 showing that 2 and tBupy interact
3
(36) (a) Aliaga-Alcalde, N.; DeBeer George, S.; Mienert, B.; Bill, E.;
Wieghardt, K.; Neese, F. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 2908–2912.
(b) Berry, F.; Bill, E.; Bothe, E.; DeBeer George, S.; Mienert, B.; Neese, F.;
Wieghardt, K. Science 2006, 312, 1937–1941.
(37) It is also important to note that the EXAFS data of the amido
complex 3 show no evidence of a short Fe-N bond; the data are best fit by
inclusion of three Fe-N interactions at 2.00 A. Attempts to separate the first
shell into shorter 1.8 A and longer 2.0 A components, as indicated by the
crystal structure, resulted in the two distance components converging to the
same value. This suggests that the separation of these components is beyond
the resolution of the EXAFS data.
(38) The EPR signal assigned to 2 in reference 28 was present in ∼70%
yield based on integration.

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6179
perfect, it shows clearly that the very small nesting of iso-
field curves can be reproduced only with |D| > 50 cm-1
for E/D ≈ 0.3 (or -D > 35 cm-1 for free E/D = 0),
because only with such large zero-field splitting are the
ms-sublevels of the S = 3/2 manifold sufficiently isolated
to exhibit the observed field-independent behavior of the
magnetization curves M(μBB/kT).39 In summary, the
ability to fit both EPR and magnetic data to a self-
consistent quartet model strongly supports a description
of 2 having an S = 3/2 ground state. This conclusion is
also consistent with the quartet spin state being lowest by
10 kcal/mol in DFT computations.28
Computations On a Putative Iron(I)-Adamantylazide
Intermediate. Next, we considered the mechanism through
which LMeFeNNFeLMe might form 1 and 2. Because
L
MeFeNNFeLMe reacts with Lewis bases to form mono-
meric iron(I) adducts LMeFe(Lewis base),23b,24b-24d it is
reasonable to hypothesize a 1:1 adduct LMeFe(N3Ad) as
the first species formed. Other transition metal-organoazide
complexes thermally convert to metal-imido com-
plexes.17b,20a-c No intermediate species are observed
by 1H NMR spectroscopy during the very rapid reaction of
the iron-N2 complex with N3Ad, even at cold temperatures.
Therefore, the characteristics and reactions of the putative
organoazide species were evaluated using quantum me-
chanics/molecular mechanics (QM/MM) computations
with classical treatment (Universal Force Field) of the 2,6-
diisopropylphenyl and methyl substituents of the β-diketi-
minate ligand and the adamantyl group with the exception
of the carbon atom that is directly bonded to nitrogen. The
core of the complex was modeled via density functional
theory (DFT) at the B3LYP/6-311þG(d) level of theory.
All doublet states were considerably higher in energy
(>13 kcal/mol) than quartet and sextet states, and are
not described here.
Figure 9. Examples of different coordination modes of N3Ad from
.
literature complexes.17b,40c
Azide Coordination Mode in LMeFe(N3Ad). Since N3Ad
is known to bind metals in three different coordination
modes (Figure 9), we first sought to identify the lowest-
energy linkage isomer of LMeFe(N3Ad) and elucidate its
electronic structure. Isomers of LMeFe(N3Ad) were evalu-
ated with the azide group bonded at the internal nitrogen
(LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1)), the terminal nitrogen (LMeFe(N3Ad-
κN3)), and side-on (LMeFe(η2-N3Ad)), in both quartet (IS)
and sextet (HS) spin states. The triazametallacyclobutene
isomer LMeFe(N3Ad-κ2N1,N3) was also evaluated, but quar-
tet and sextet models were each found to be considerably
(>30 kcal/mol) higher in energy than the other low-energy
linkage isomers, and were not considered further.
Figure 10. QM/MM optimized geometries of three low energy linkage
isomers of LMeFe(N3Ad): (a) sextet (κN1), (b) quartet (κN3), and (c)
quartet η2. QM atoms are shown as spheres, and MM atoms are shown in
wireframe. Hydrogens omitted from figure for clarity.
The optimized geometries for the lowest spin state of
each isomer are shown in Figure 10, and the relative
energies of all isomer/spin state combinations are sum-
marized in Table 3. Though sextet LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) is
the lowest energy linkage isomer, the LMeFe(N3Ad-κN3)
and LMeFe(η2-N3Ad) linkage isomers are close in energy
(lowest spin states þ5.0 and þ7.1 kcal/mol relative to
6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1)). In mechanistic discussions below,
we shall assume that the different low-energy linkage
isomers can interconvert easily.
1.96 A and the NNN angle is very bent (127ꢀ). This is
significantly different than in a crystallographically charac-
terized N3R-κN1 complex of copper that has a longer Cu-N
distance of 2.079(2) A and a nearly linear NNN angle of
174.5(2)ꢀ.40b Other crystallographically characterized N3-
R-κN1 complexes also have virtually linear NNN angles
(170-178ꢀ).40 The bent NNN angle in particular provided
an initial structural hint that the adamantyl azide ligand in
Geometry and Electronic Structure of LMeFe(N3Ad). The
calculated Fe-Nazido bond length in 6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) is
(40) (a) Albertin, G.; Antoniutti, S.; Baldan, D.; Castro, J.; Garcıa-
´
ꢀ
Fontan, S. Inorg. Chem. 2008, 47, 742–748. (b) Barz, M.; Herdtweck, E.;
Theil, W. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1998, 37, 2262–2265. (c) Dias, H. V. R.;
Polach, S. A.; Goh, S.-K.; Archibong, E. F.; Marynick, D. S. Inorg. Chem. 2000,
39, 3894–3901.
(39) Trautwein, A. X.; Bill, E.; Bominaar, E. L.; Winkler, H. Struct.
Bonding 1991, 78, 1–95.

6180 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
Table 3. Calculated Lowest Energy Linkage Isomers of LMeFe(N3Ad)a
b
isomer
multiplicity
ΔGrel
κN1
κN1
κN3
κN3
η2
4
6
4
6
4
6
0.4
0.0
5.0
16.5
7.1
c
η2
a Calculated at the B3LYP/6-311þG(d):UFF level of theory. b Re-
lative to the lowest energy linkage isomer in kcal/mol (1 atm, 298.15 K).
c A stationary point corresponding to a sextet η2 complex was not found
at this level of theory;QM/MM geometry optimizations convertedto the
sextet κN1 isomer.
Figure 12. Transition state for N2 loss from quartet LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1).
Hydrogens omitted from figure for clarity. Relevant distances and angles
in the Fe-N-N-N core in the quartet transition state: Fe-N1, 1.91 A;
Fe-N3, 3.31 A; N1-N2, 1.60 A; N2-N3, 1.14 A; Fe-N1-N2, 118ꢀ;
N1-N2-N3, 127ꢀ. The corresponding sextet transition state is geome-
trically similar: Fe-N1, 1.94 A; Fe-N3, 3.19 A; N1-N2, 1.69 A; N2-N3,
1.14 A; Fe-N1-N2, 113ꢀ; N1-N2-N3, 123ꢀ.
ground state and transition state geometries in conjunc-
tion with the exothermicity of N2 loss suggests an “early”
transition state. The calculated barrier for N2 loss is
6
ΔGq = 12.0 kcal/mol from LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1), where
the TS is a quartet. The extrusion of N2 is exergonic, with
ΔG = -43.2 kcal/mol from LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) to 2 þ
6
N2. Thus, as expected from previous results,41 expulsion
of the stable N2 and strengthening of the metal-nitrogen
linkage provide considerable thermodynamic driving
force for imido formation. The overall reaction from
0.5 equiv of LMeFeNNFeLMe to form the corresponding
imide (2) is exergonic, ΔG = -49.8 kcal/mol.
Figure 11. Lewis structures for the two lowest energy isomers of quartet
L
MeFe(N3Ad) implied by the spin density.
these complexes might be reduced to the radical anion.
Indeed, separate geometry optimization of the radical anion
of N3Ad leads to a NNN angle (131ꢀ) similar to that
observed in 6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) (127ꢀ). Consistent with this
electronic description, the DFT model of LMeFe(N3Ad) has
substantial spin density on the organoazide ligand. For the
lowest energy sextet-κN1 isomer, substantial spin density is
found on the terminal (0.75 e-) and central (0.24 e-) azide
nitrogen atoms, along with ∼3.8 e- on the iron center and
the remaining 0.2 e- on the β-diketiminate nitrogen atoms.
For the quartet 4LMeFe(N3Ad-κN3) isomer (ΔGrel=5.0kcal/
mol, Table 3) there are nearly equal amounts of negative spin
density (0.42 e-) on each of the two nitrogen atoms closest to
the iron center, with the remainder almost entirely on the iron
center (3.59 e-). Finally, for the quartet-η2 isomer the spin
density is almost entirely on the iron atom with very little on
the organoazide moiety. Figure 11 catalogues the best Lewis
structure descriptions of these states derived from the electro-
nic structure analysis.
Pyridine Coordination to Form LMeFe(py)1,2 or LMeFe-
(N3Ad)(py). To explore why coordinating solvents such as
pyridine greatly improved the yield of imido complex 2
relative to the hexazene complex 1, we next endeavored to
understand the influence of pyridine coordination on the
geometry and relative reaction barriers for N2 elimination
from the Fe-organoazide intermediate. Ligating pyridine
to each of the linkage isomers of LMeFe(N3Ad) gave
adducts with pyridine coordinated in the apical position
of a trigonal pyramid whose base is defined by the nitro-
gens of the β-diketiminate and the ligating nitrogen of the
1-adamantylazide ligand. For the pyridine-coordinated
4
system, the LMeFe(N3Ad-κN3)(py) isomer is lowest in
energy (Supporting Information, Table S-3 and Figure
S-7), which contrasts with “pyridine-free” LMeFe(N3Ad),
in which 6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) was lowest. Hence, the co-
ordination of pyridine results in a change in preferred
AdN3 coordination mode and spin state. Although it is
mildly exothermic, the calculated binding of pyridine is
Elimination of N2 from LMeFe(N3Ad). Two transition
states for N2 elimination were examined, and they dif-
fered only by spin state (quartet or sextet). These transi-
tion states are close in energy (ΔΔGq = 1.0 kcal/mol with
quartet lower in energy) and are similar in geometry,
suggesting facile spin crossover between the quartet and
sextet potential energy surfaces. The quartet transition
state is depicted in Figure 12, and the sextet transition
state is similar. The primary motion from ground state
6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1) to the transition state is N1-N2 bond
lengthening from 1.40 A to 1.60 A. The calculated Fe-N1
bond length in the transition state (1.91 A, Figure 12) is
only ∼0.05 A shorter than the corresponding calculated
bond length for the ground state, and none of the core
bond angles changed by more than (3ꢀ. This similarity of
calculated to be overall slightly endergonic (ΔGbind
=
þ4.2 kcal/mol) upon including entropy contributions.42
Hence, the calculations suggest that binding of pyridine
to form LMeFe(N3Ad)(py) is slightly unfavorable, and
that it is expected to be formed only in very small
concentrations.
(41) (a) Cundari, T. R.; Pierpont, A. W.; Vaddadi, S. J. Organomet.
Chem. 2007, 692, 4551–4559. (b) Harrold, N. D.; Waterman, R.; Hillhouse, G. L.;
Cundari, T. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 12872–12873.
(42) Note that this binding energy is not the same as the experimental
pyridine binding earlier in the paper; Figure 3 describes the binding of
pyridine to the imido complex rather than the organoazide complex.

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6181
Scheme 4
( μ-N3SiMe3-1κ2-N1,N3:2κ-N3)Al(CH(SiMe3)2)2 has been
characterized,44 and assuming the aluminum(III) oxidation
state suggests that the bridge is dianionic, as postulated in
the calculated diiron intermediate. More recently, the bulky
terphenyl group R* (R*=2,6-bis(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)-
phenyl) was used to support R*Cr(μ-N3Ad-1κ2-N1,N3:2κ-
N3)CrR*, in which the bridging 1-adamantylazide is again
dianionic.45 The core angles and distances in the crystal
structures of these molecules are similar to those in the
computational model of the diiron intermediate (see Support-
ing Information, Figure S-4). The four-membered FeNNN
ring of LMeFe(μ-N3Ad-1κ2-N1,N3:2κ-N3)FeLMe also bears a
striking resemblance to that in the previously characterized
iron(II) triazenido complex LtBuFe(AdNNNH-κ2-N1,N3) (6,
see diagram in Scheme 4).24d
During attempts to crystallize 4 (with the bulkier LtBu
ligand), we fortuitously obtained a crystal structure (Sup-
porting Information, Figure S-3) of LtBuFe(μ-N3Ad)-
FeLtBu, which has the core structure of the second
hypothetical intermediate.46 Although we have not been
able to generate this species reproducibly for further
characterization, and the crystal was of poor quality,
the preliminary observation of a species with this con-
nectivity supports the feasibility of bimolecular organo-
azide-bridged intermediates in the LMe system.
Even though binding pyridine is energetically uphill, we
considered the possibility that LMeFe(N3Ad)(py) could
eliminate N2 more rapidly than LMeFe(N3Ad), explaining
the greater yield of 2 in the presence of pyridine discussed
above. The calculated barrier to N2 elimination from
4LMeFe(N3Ad-κN3)(py) (the lowest energy linkage iso-
mer) is calculated to be ΔGq = þ9.8 kcal/mol.43 Thus, the
total barrier for N2 elimination from 6LMeFe(N3Ad-κN1)
through a pathway involving pyridine coordination is
ΔGq = þ14 kcal/mol, which is similar to that without
pyridine (ΔGq = þ12 kcal/mol). Therefore, there is no
compelling computational evidence that coordination of
a donor to LMeFe(N3Ad) facilitates N2 loss.
The computations indicate that the diiron organoazide
complex is capable of leading to the final hexazene
product (1). Addition of an additional 0.5 N3Ad to 0.5
L
MeFe(μ-N3Ad)FeLMe to give 0.5 equiv of 1 is slightly
exergonic, ΔG = -1.7 kcal/mol. The overall reaction
from 0.5 LMeFeNNFeLMe to 0.5 equiv 1 is exergonic
as well, ΔG = -7.6 kcal/mol. The potential energy
surface showing the relative energies of these species is
shown in Scheme 4.
We also evaluated the energetics of LMeFe(py) and
L
MeFe(py)2, the potential products of AdN3 displacement
by pyridine. Both LMeFe(py) and LMeFe(py)2 are 11-12
kcal/mol uphill from LMeFe(N3Ad) (see Supporting In-
formation, Figure S-9), suggesting that these species are
unlikely to be formed if an organoazide is present.
Diiron Intermediates Leading to Hexazene 1. Instead of
forming a 1:1 Fe/organoazide intermediate, another pos-
Discussion
In the synthesis of late transition metal imido complexes,
organoazides are an excellent source of the “nitrene” fragment
because N2 is the only byproduct, and because organoazides are
generally easy to synthesize. In this work, we used the addition
of 1-adamantyl azide to an iron(I) synthon to create a well-
characterized iron(III) imido complex with a trigonal planar
geometry. Similar reactions have been used to generate isolable
three-coordinate cobalt(III) and nickel(III) imido complexes
of a smaller β-diketiminate ligand, though studies on the
mechanism of these interesting reactions have not yet been
reported.16c,18 Our computational and synthetic studies suggest
that interaction of diketiminate-iron(I) species with organo-
azide forms an iron-organoazide complex LMeFe(N3Ad).
Comparison of LMeFe(N3Ad) to Literature Organoazide
Complexes. Vaddadi et al. have complemented the
experimental studies of Hillhouse17b by investigating
the mechanism of decomposition of coordinated orga-
noazides via DFT calculations on (dhpe)Ni(N3Me) and
(dhpe)Ni(N3Ns) (Ns = p-nitrophenylsulfonyl) model
sibility is that N3Ad reacts with the iron(I) dimer LMe
-
FeNNFeLMe to give a diiron-organoazide intermediate.
The possible intermediates LMeFe( μ-N2-1κ-N1:2κ-N2)-
( μ-N3Ad-1κ-N1:2κ-N3)FeLMe and LMeFe( μ-N3Ad-1κ2-
N1,N3:2κ-N3)FeLMe (shown in Scheme 4) were thus in-
vestigated; energies below are calculated as 0.5 equivalent
of dimer to maintain consistent energy accounting rela-
tive to the monomeric iron complexes in other mechanisms.
The formation of LMeFe(μ-N2-1κ-N1:2κ-N2)(μ-N3Ad-
1κ-N1:2κ-N3)FeLMe from LMeFeNNFeLMe and N3Ad is
mildly endergonic (ΔG = þ4.2 kcal/mol), and loss of N2
from this species to give LMeFe(μ-N3Ad-1κ2-N1,N3:2κ-N3)-
FeLMe is exergonic (ΔG = -10.1 kcal/mol). Consistent with
a formulation as a diiron(II) complex and a dianionic
2-
AdN3 ligand, the spin density in LMeFe(μ-N3Ad-1κ2-N1,
N3:2κ-N3)FeLMe is primarily on the iron atoms.
Though bimetallic complexes with organoazides in the
μ-1κ2-N1,N3:2κ-N3 mode are rare, two examples in the lite-
rature with crystallographic characterization support the
feasibility of dianionic bridging organoazides with the same
coordination. The dialuminum complex ((Me3Si)2HC)2Al-
(44) Uhl, W.; Gerding, R.; Pohl, S.; Saak, W. Chem. Ber. 1995, 128, 81–85.
(45) Ni, C.; Ellis, B. D.; Long, G. J.; Power, P. P. Chem. Commun. 2009,
2332–2334.
(46) This structure resulted from an unsuccessful attempt to isolate 4.
Concentrated pentane solutions of LtBuFeNNFeLtBu and N3Ad (1:2) were
added together at -45 ꢀC and kept at -45 ꢀC overnight, resulting in the
deposition of an amorphous red-brown solid and a very small quantity of
(43) A potential energy surface showing the relative energies of LMeFe-
(N3Ad), LMeFe(N3Ad)(py), and the N2 elimination transition states is given
in Supporting Information, Figure S-7.
well-formed orange crystals of LtBuFe(μ-N3Ad)FeLtBu
.

6182 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
systems, dhpe = H2PCH2CH2PH2.47 Morello and
Cundari have extended this computational research
to the study of the decomposition of prototypical
nitrene transfer reagents used in organic synthesis,
such as tosyl azides, Chloramine-T, and iodonium
imides.22b For a d10 CuI-scorpionate complex, a κN3
linkage isomer has been structurally characterized by
Dias and co-workers (Figure 9a).40c In this complex,
the CuNN and NNN angles are observed to be nearly
linear by X-ray crystallography, suggesting a neutral
organoazide ligand. Most other examples of κN3 co-
ordination also have essentially linear NNN angles,40 and
computations40c support the assignment of a neutral N3R
ligand. These late transition metal complexes are dis-
tinct from the κN3 organoazides ligated to complexes
of earlier transition metals, such as the tantalum(V)
and vanadium(V) organoazide complexes reported by
the groups of Bergman20a,b and Cummins,20c respec-
tively. In these complexes, the short M-N bond and
bent NNN and NNC angles are suggestive of a pre-
vailing diazenylimido (LnMdN-NdN-R) bonding
description with a dianionic ligand.
In this work, we describe computations that support
the best description of LMeFe(N3Ad) with a form of
coordinated organoazide that is different than those
described above. In the complex, the organoazide is best
described as a one-electron reduced N3Ad•- ligand,
which is coordinated through the internal nitrogen atom
(κN1). The assignment as a radical anion ligand is based
on the bond lengths and N-N-N bond angle that are
very similar to those calculated for the free N3Ad•- anion,
and by the observation of roughly one electron of spin
density on the coordinated organoazide. This assignment
implies that the iron is in the iron(II) oxidation state.
High-spin iron(II) can magnetically couple with the or-
ganoazide radical to give overall quartet or sextet states,
and the nearly identical energies calculated for these two
states suggests a very small value of the exchange coupling
J despite the short distance between the two paramagnetic
subsites. Because the species so rapidly reacts to give
other products, we were not able to evaluate its properties
experimentally except through the distribution of pro-
ducts derived therefrom (see below).
0.77 e- on the organoazide, suggesting the assignment of
a monoanionic N3Ad ligand.49
Another useful comparison is to complexes (dtbpe)-
Ni(η2-N3R) (dtbpe = bis(di-tert-butylphosphino)ethane;
R = Ad, Mes; see Figure 9c), which were structurally
characterized and spontaneously convert into the stable
imido complexes (dtbpe)Ni=NR.17b The crystal struc-
tures of (dtbpe)Ni(N3R) each show the η2-N3R isomer, in
contrast to LMeFe(N3Ad), in which the κN1 isomer has
the lowest energy by DFT. It is interesting to note the
difference in preferred coordination mode, despite both
(dbtpe)Ni(N3R) and LMeFe(N3Ad) utilizing bulky biden-
tate supporting ligands.
Mechanism of Forming Hexazene Products. The hexa-
zene complex 1 is conceptually derived from reductive
coupling of two N3Ad molecules to give an Ad2N6
2-
bridge.25 Given the computational results that indicate
L
MeFe(N3Ad) has substantial unpaired spin density on
the organoazide ligand when coordinated η1, we initially
considered that formation of the diiron(II) hexazene
complex could result from simple radical dimerization
of two molecules of LMeFe(N3Ad•). However, QM/MM
computations presented above indicate that there is not a
significant thermodynamic driving force for this dimer-
ization (ΔG = -0.6 kcal/mol per Fe), especially in com-
parison to the formation of the imido product 2 (ΔG =
-42.8 kcal/mol) in which the barrier height is calculated
to be low (ΔGq = 12 kcal/mol). Although the dimeriza-
tion of LMeFe(N3Ad) molecules may be a contributing
mechanism, the mechanism involving diiron intermedi-
ates (Scheme 4) is also reasonable, and more easily
explains the solvent dependence of the product distribu-
tion (see below). The feasibility of bimetallic intermedi-
ates of the type {LFe}2(μ-N3Ad) is shown by the fortui-
tous crystallization of LtBuFe(μ-N3Ad)FeLtBu, although
rational synthesis and characterization of this compound
has not been achieved at this time.
Why is a Coordinating Solvent Needed during the Synth-
esis of 2? We now turn our attention to the solvent effect
on the outcome of the reaction LMeFeNNFeLMe þ 2
N3Ad. The most coordinating solvents (THF, pyridine,
or arenes50) gave the highest yields of imido product 2 and
lowest conversion to hexazene 1 (Table 1). The domi-
nance of solvent coordination (rather than polarity) is
most convincingly demonstrated by the difference be-
tween the outcomes of reactions performed in THF and
2,5-dimethyl-THF. This pair of solvents has previously
been used to distinguish between rate effects of polarity
(the solvents have similar polarities) versus coordination
(dimethyl-THF is sterically prevented from coordinat-
ing).51 In THF, the yield of 2 is 80% (9:1 imido/hexazene),
while in the much less coordinating 2,5-dimethyl-THF
the yield of 2 is only 28% (1:2 imido/hexazene). Likewise,
PhCF3 gives more imido complex (59% yield, 3:1 imido/
hexazene) than toluene (41% yield, 1:1 imido/hexazene)
because it is a better π-acceptor, and should bind more
strongly to iron(I).24c,50
The one-electron reduction of a coordinated ligand by
the “LMeFe” fragment has ample precedent. In the tetra-
zene complex LMeFe(AdNNNNAd-κ2N1,N4) (5), mag-
netic and spectroscopic studies showed that the tetrazene
ligand exists as a radical anion coordinated to iron(II).48
Similarly, a combination of spectroscopic and computa-
tional studies showed that LMeFe(alkyne) complexes
have one electron localized in a π* orbital of the alkyne
fragment.24b In bimetallic examples, the dinitrogen com-
plex LMeFeNNFeLMe is best described as a diiron(II)
2-
complex of the N2 anion, and reaction of the iron(I)
fragment with acetophenone gives pinacol coupling.23b In
an analogy to the radical organoazide ion postulated
here, Peters recently reported an iron complex with
N3Ad-κN3 coordination and an NNN angle of 147(4)ꢀ,
for which DFT computations showed a spin density of
€
(49) Mankad, N. P.; Muller, P.; Peters, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132,
4083–4085.
(50) Arenes are competitive ligands for iron(I) because of the strength of
backbonding from Fe to π* orbitals of the arene fragment. References 24b and
24c contain examples of diketiminate-supported iron(I)-arene complexes.
(51) Wax, M. J.; Bergman, R. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1981, 103, 7028–7030.
(47) Cundari, T. R.; Vaddadi, S. THEOCHEM 2006, 801, 47–53.
(48) Cowley, R. E.; Bill, E.; Neese, F.; Brennessel, W. W.; Holland, P. L.
Inorg. Chem. 2009, 48, 4828–4836.

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6183
Scheme 5
Hypothesis 1: Donor Solvents Compete with Organo-
through different mechanisms: one mechanism from the
bridging N2 complex LMeFeNNFeLMe that leads to hexa-
zene 1 in the absence of a donor solvent, and another
mechanism from the mononuclear LMeFe(solvent) species
that leads to imido 2. This explanation is fully consistent with
the computational results. First, AdN3 is capable of
displacing donor solvents and N2 because it binds
strongly. Second, computations show that dinuclear
azide for Coordination. We first considered an explana-
tion in which donor solvents displace organoazide
from LMeFe(N3Ad), decreasing the concentration of this
key intermediate. Because conversion of LMeFe(N3Ad) to
1 is bimolecular and to 2 is unimolecular, any decrease in
the concentration of LMeFe(N3Ad) from a donor solvent
would disfavor coupling to form 1. This is consistent with
the production of 2 in donor solvents and 1 in other
solvents. To test this idea, we used computations to gauge
the influence of pyridine, one of the most effective donors,
on potential intermediate species. However, the QM/MM
calculations show that pyridine is not capable of displacing
organoazide from LMeFe(N3Ad); the exchange is calculated
to be uphill by ΔG = þ12 kcal/mol. The displacement of
organoazide should be even less favorable for weaker donors
such as THF. Therefore, the computations cast significant
doubt on the verity of this hypothesis.
L
MeFeNNFeLMe can access an energetically favorable
bimetallic reaction with AdN3 that leads directly to
hexazene 1. The bimetallic mechanism proceeds without
formation of LMeFe(N3Ad) (Scheme 3), and requires
no coordinating solvent. Coordination of solvent would
partially or completely displace N2 in LMeFeNNFeLMe
,
eliminating the bimetallic mechanism that gives 1,
and opening up the monometallic mechanism through
L
MeFe(N3Ad) to 2.
Overall Mechanistic Picture of the Reaction of Adamantyl
Azide with Low-Valent Iron. The most consistent mechanistic
Hypothesis 2: Lewis Bases Catalyze Imido Formation.
In a second potential explanation, we hypothesized that
donor solvents catalyze N2 loss to form 2 by binding to the
picture relating 1, 2, 2 solvent, and LMeFe(N3Ad) is given in
Scheme 5, which starts in the upper left with a mixture of
3
L
MeFe(N3Ad) intermediate and transiently forming the
L
MeFeNNFeLMe and LMeFe(solvent)n. Adamantyl azide
more crowded complex LMeFe(N3Ad)(solvent). If this bind-
ing were to lower the barrier to N2 elimination, a donor
solvent would accelerate imido formation relative to hexa-
zene formation. However, computations indicated that addi-
tion of pyridine does not lower the barrier to N2 elimination
(ΔGq = þ12 kcal/mol from LMeFe(N3Ad), and ΔGq =
þ14 kcal/mol from LMeFe(N3Ad)(py)). Alternatively, the
rate of dimerization of LMeFe(N3Ad)(solvent) giving hexa-
zene 1 should be slower than the dimerization of LMeFe-
(N3Ad) since the terminal N is less exposed in the solvent-
coordinated complex. However, LMeFe(N3Ad)(py) is
computed to be þ4.2 kcal/mol higher in energy than
either displaces the N2 ligand in LMeFeNNFeLMe, forming
L
L
MeFe( μ-N3Ad)FeLMe (pathway A), or displaces solvent in
MeFe(solvent)n, forming LMeFe(N3Ad) (pathway B).
Neither iron-organoazide intermediate is observed during
the reaction. In noncoordinating solvents such as pentane,
iron is only present as the bimetallic N2 complex, which
primarily proceeds along pathway A to give the diiron
organoazide species LMeFe( μ-N3Ad)FeLMe, and leads to
the diiron(II) hexazene product 1 upon addition of the
second N3Ad molecule. A small amount of 2 is also formed
through crossover to pathway B, which is accessed if any
of the dimers are cleaved (the blue “minor pathway” in
Scheme 5). In coordinating solvents such as THF or pyridine,
the diiron-N2 complex is in equilibrium with the solvated
iron(I) compound LMeFe(solvent)n, and the exergonic addi-
tion of N3Ad gives discrete monomeric LMeFe(N3Ad) or
L
MeFe(N3Ad), and thus the concentration of LMeFe-
(N3Ad)(py) would not be significant enough to slow down
the rate of hexazene formation. Thus, neither displacement
of N3Ad by solvent forming LMeFe(solvent) nor coordina-
tion of pyridine forming LMeFe(N3Ad)(solvent) adequately
explains the observed solvent effect.
Hypothesis 3: Separate Pathways to Hexazene and Imido.
Elimination of the two aforementioned explanations leaves
the possibility that hexazene and imido products proceed
L
MeFe(N3Ad)(solvent) along pathway B, leading to 2 as the
major product. Formation of small amounts of 1 could
occur through radical coupling of LMeFe(N3Ad) (marked
“minor pathway” in Scheme 5), or from conversion of
L
MeFe(N3Ad) to LMeFe(μ-N3Ad)FeLMe
.

6184 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
Once formed, complex 2 also reversibly coordinates
pyridines such as Bupy, forming small amounts of
iron(III) complex. This is the result of the intermediate-
spin (S = 3/2) ground state of the iron(III) ion, which has
fairly low-lying excited states that enable rapid electronic
relaxation and hence slow nuclear relaxation.52 The
quartet ground state was inferred from X-band EPR
spectra of mixtures containing 2 in previous studies,28 and
is now supported by magnetic susceptibility studies on
crystalline 2, as well as X-band EPR spectra of purified 2.
Structural Trends in Fe, Co, and Ni Imido Complexes.
As a result of the recent successes in stabilizing imido
complexes of the late first-row transition metals,12-18
there now exist enough structurally characterized exam-
ples (Supporting Information, Table S-6) to begin to
evaluate trends.
The first notable feature is that the isolable Fe, Co, and
Ni imido complexes always have coordination numbers
of three or four.53 This generalization can be rationalized
by examining the ligand field splitting, which shows that
trigonal-planar and tetrahedral geometries (as well as
square-planar if not low-spin) lead to incomplete occupa-
tion of the d-orbitals that have the correct symmetry for
π-bonding with the imido group.12,13,16,18,19,28 The inter-
action of empty (or partially empty) d orbitals with
p-orbitals of sp-hybridized nitrogen in the imido ligand
leads to π-bonding. In low-spin octahedral and square-
planar geometries, the appropriate d orbitals are filled,
and there can be no stabilizing π-interactions.3
t
t
2 Bupy. This is important, since four-coordinate imido
3
t
complex 2 Bupy is much more reactive to sources of H•
3
than 2.28,33 The fast reaction of 2 Bupy with 1,4-cyclo-
t
3
hexadiene (CHD) to afford the amido species LMeFe-
(NHAd)(tBupy) (3 Bupy)28 is a convenient test of
t
3
whether 1 can transiently form 2 in solution. Complex 1
did not form detectable quantities of 3 Bupy by 1H
t
3
NMR spectroscopy when heated to 80 ꢀC in the presence
of 100 equiv of 1,4-cyclohexadiene and 10 equiv of tBupy.
Therefore, the formation of 1 is irreversible and cannot
access the imido complex 2.
The most synthetically useful solvent for the prepara-
tion of 2 has proven to be THF, since it is coordinating
enough to steer the product distribution mostly away
from hexazene 1, but does not coordinate to the imido
t
product. Although small amounts of Bupy also gave a
desirable imido/hexazene ratio (7:1), the presence of
pyridine catalyzes the decomposition of 2 by “turning
on” hydrogen atom abstraction (HAA) pathways.28,33
Implications For the Larger LtBu System. The mechan-
istic picture relating 1, 2, and LMeFe(N3Ad) in Scheme 5 is
explicit only for the LMe system. Using LtBu as the
supporting ligand leads to a good yield of imido complex
4 even in pentane, and thus coordinating solvents are not
necessary to avoid hexazene formation at room tempera-
ture. This observation can be accommodated within the
mechanistic picture in Scheme 5 using different rela-
tive rates of the individual steps. We speculate that in
the LtBuFe system, the reaction begins along the diiron
pathway A (as for the LMe system in pentane), giving
Further details can be gleaned from a search of the
Cambridge Crystallographic Database. Figure 13 shows
a scatter plot of MdN bond length versus MdN-C bond
angle for all known structurally characterized examples
of terminal imido complexes of Fe, Co, and Ni, organized
by both metal and coordination geometry.54
L
tBuFe(μ-N3Ad)FeLtBu (see above) as a key intermediate.
Since the added steric bulk of the LtBu ligand destabilizes
the diiron intermediates at the top of Scheme 5, the frag-
mentation to LtBuFe(N3Ad) (red “minor pathway”) would
be more rapid, and the attack of a second azide (giving
hexazene) would be slower than in the LMe system. This
corresponds to crossover from the bimetallic manifold A to
the monoiron manifold B (i.e., the red downward “minor
pathway” arrow in Scheme 5 becomes the major pathway).
Though the inability to characterize intermediates prevents
us from further supporting this mechanistic scheme for the
Although there is significant scatter in the data, a few
points are worth mentioning. First, there is little correla-
tion between MdN bond length and MdN-C bond
angle, an observation which has also been noted in early
transition metal imido complexes.55 Second, neither the
average MdN bond length (Fe, 1.64(3) A (n = 19); Co,
1.65(2) A (n = 9); Ni, 1.69(2) A (n = 4)) nor the MdN-C
bond angle (Fe, 172(7)ꢀ; Co, 173(6)ꢀ; Ni, 168(8)ꢀ) are
dependent on the identity of the metal. Third, Figure 13b
does suggest that the bond metrics are dependent on the
coordination geometry of the metal. Thus, tetrahedral
imido complexes have a more linear MdN-C angle
(176(3)ꢀ, n = 21) than trigonal (166(7)ꢀ, n = 9) imido
complexes (p=0.0017), and also have a more linear angle
than square-planar (162(5)ꢀ, n = 2) imido complexes
( p = 0.11). Tetrahedral complexes can give two MdN
π-bonds (metal-nitrogen triple bond), but partial occu-
pation of MdN π* orbitals in the planar complexes gives
less metal-nitrogen π bonding.12,13,16,18,19 It is reason-
able that the MdN-C angle would be the metrical
L
can rationalize all the trends in the reaction outcomes for
tBu system, it is important that a single mechanistic scheme
both LMe and LtBu complexes.
Properties of Imidoiron(III) Complex 2. Though 2 is
only metastable (solids or solutions must be kept at
reduced temperature to have lifetimes of more than a
few hours), it has been crystallized and characterized
through several methods. Crystallographic data show a
short iron-nitrogen bond similar to those in other iron(III)-
imido complexes (further analysis below). These data
are supported by X-ray absorption studies, which
also show similar features in the uncrystallized LtBuFe-
NAd (4). Therefore, the spectroscopic evidence gleaned
(52) La Mar, G. N.; Horrocks, W. D.; Holm, R. H. NMR of Paramagnetic
Molecules, Academic Press, New York, 1973.
(53) Treating the six-electron donors Cp* or arene as three “electron
pairs” is necessary to account for the imido complexes in refs 9-11. See also:
Glueck, D. S.; Green, J. C.; Michelman, R. I.; Wright, I. N. Organometallics
1992, 11, 4221–4225.
t
from solutions of 2 Bupy28 and 434 in previous commu-
3
nications are now supported by compelling structural
data.
(54) Included in the analysis are all the examples included up to the Feb
2010 update of the CSD (v. 5.31), the structure reported in reference 16f, and
compound 2 in this work. See SI for details.
(55) Cundari, T. R.; Russo, M. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 281–
287.
The greater purity of 2 has enabled the use of additional
physical techniques. For example, 1H NMR spectra show
that 2 reversibly binds pyridine but not THF. Note that
the 1H NMR spectra of 2 are surprisingly narrow for an

Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6185
Figure 13. Correlation of MdN bond lengths with MdN-C bond angle in literature Fe, Co, Ni complexes with terminal imido ligands, organized by
(a) metal and (b) coordination geometry. For crystal structures with multiple molecules in the asymmetric unit, the average bond parameters are used. The
data are tabulated in Supporting Information, Table S-6. Compound 2 in this work is indicated with the arrow.
parameter that is most responsive to this effect because
computational studies have shown that bending the imido
ligand at nitrogen is “soft” (i.e., not energetically costly).2,55
It is interesting to note that the most reactive Fe, Co,
and Ni imido complexes feature a trigonal or square-
planar ligand field, the same geometry that gives some-
what more acute MdN-C angles. The only catalytic
reactions that have been reported using isolable Fe, Co,
or Ni imido complexes are organoazide hydrogenation
with a square-planar Fe(III) imido complex,13c and for-
mation of carbodiimides and isocyanates by trigonally
coordinated iron34 and nickel56 imido complexes. Trigo-
nal copper-imido/copper-nitrene complexes have been
implicated as the active intermediates in catalytic C-H
amination reactions and catalytic diazene formation re-
ported by Warren and co-workers.7ff,57 Therefore, the
MdN-C bending seen in planar imido complexes may
correlate with an increase in their reactivity. On the other
hand, Peters recently showed catalytic diazene formation
through a spectroscopically characterized, presumably
trigonal-bipyramidal, imidoiron(III) species.49 Also, Gallo
recently reported porphyrin-cobalt complexes that cata-
lyze amination.58 Thus, putative higher-coordinate imido
species can be reactive as well.
Though reactive and unstable, this imidoiron complex has
been characterized in great detail. X-ray absorption and
diffraction experiments demonstrate that the FedN bond is
short, in the range of a double bond. Solid-state magnetic
susceptibility and solution EPR spectroscopy of 2 show that
it has an isolated quartet ground state, consistent with
computational studies.28 Comparison to literature iron-imido
species suggests that a planar geometry at the metal, as found
here, may be responsible for the bending of the MdN-C
angle and heightened reactivity.
The reaction to form LMeFeNAd is complicated by for-
mation of the diiron hexazene complex {LMeFe}2(N6Ad2)
(1). The ratio of imido and hexazene products is solvent
dependent, with coordinating solvents (THF, tBupy) steering
the reaction toward imido formation. Computational studies
led to a mechanistic scheme in which donor solvents separate
the bimetallic complex LMeFeNNFeLMe into monometallic
units, which are less likely to undergo a bimetallic reaction
pathway toward hexazene. We have shown that the tradi-
tional synthesis of imidometal complexes from organoazide
and a low-valent metal can be hampered by unexpected side
reactions such as organoazide coupling, and that making
subtle adjustments to the reaction (THF vs pentane solvent)
can greatly influence the outcome. These insights contribute
to the burgeoning field of late transition metal imido com-
plexes, and help to shed light on the formation and properties
of these catalytically active species.
Conclusions
The reaction of adamantyl azide with the iron(I) precursors
LRFeNNFeLR (LR = bulky β-diketiminate ligand) gives
several unusual results. DFT analysis of the putative metal-
organoazide complex LMeFe(N3Ad) shows that LMeFeII-
(N3Ad•-) is the best valence description. The bending of the
NNN unit in the organoazide complex leads to facile N2 loss
Experimental Section
General Considerations. All manipulations were performed
under a nitrogen atmosphere in an MBraun glovebox main-
tained at or below 1 ppm of O2 and H2O. 1-Adamantyl azide was
purchased from Aldrich and crystallized twice from pentane
prior to use. 1,4-Cyclohexadiene was purchased from Aldrich,
vacuum distilled from calcium chloride, and stored over acti-
vated 3 A molecular sieves. 4-tert-Butylpyridine was purchased
from Aldrich, vacuum distilled from CaH2, and stored over
activated 3 A molecular sieves. The compounds [LMeFeCl]2,31
and formation of a trigonal iron(III) imido complex LMe
-
FedNAd (2).
LMeFeNNFeLMe 23 and LtBuFedNAd34 were prepared as pre-
,
(56) Laskowski, C. A.; Hillhouse, G. L. Organometallics 2009, 28, 6114–
6120.
(57) For a theoretical study on these Cu-nitrene complexes, see: Cundari,
T. R.; Dinescu, A.; Kazi, A. B. Inorg. Chem. 2008, 47, 10067–10072.
(58) Fantauzzi, S.; Caselli, A.; Gallo, E. Dalton Trans. 2009, 5434–5443.
viously described. Pentane, diethyl ether, THF, and toluene were
purified by passage through activated alumina and Q5 columns
from Glass Contour Co. (Laguna Beach, CA). Benzene-d6 was

6186 Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010
Cowley et al.
dried over flame-activated alumina. Toluene-d8 and THF-d8 were
vacuum transferred from purple sodium benzophenone ketyl solu-
tions. THF and THF-d8 were stored over Na metal. Before use, an
aliquot of each solvent was tested with a drop of sodium benzo-
phenone ketyl in THF. Celite was dried at 250 ꢀC overnight under
vacuum. All glassware was dried overnight in a 150 ꢀC oven. NMR
data were collected on either a Bruker Avance 400 or Bruker
Avance 500 spectrometer and spectra are referenced to residual
C6D5H (δ 7.16 ppm), C4D7HO (δ 3.58 ppm), or C7D7H (δ 2.08
ppm). The NMR probe temperature was calibrated using
either ethylene glycol or methanol.59 IR data were recorded on a
Shimadzu 8400S spectrometer using KBr. UV-vis spectra
were recorded on a Cary 50 spectrometer using screw-cap or
Schlenk-adapted cuvettes. Elemental analysis was determined by
Columbia Analytical Services, Tucson, AZ. Room temperature
solution magnetic susceptibilities were determined by the Evans
method.60
LMeFe(AdNNNNAd) (5). We have previously shown that 5 is
formed from LMeFeNNFeLMe and 4 equiv of N3Ad in the
presence of tert-butylpyridine.48 This compound can also be
prepared from isolated 2, or from LMeFeNNFeLMe and N3Ad
in THF instead of tert-butylpyridine via the following methods.
Method A (From Isolated 2). A vial was loaded with 2 (19.2
mg, 30.8 μmol) and pentane (2 mL), giving a dark yellow-brown
solution. A solution of N3Ad (5.5 mg, 31 μmol) in pentane (1 mL)
was added, and the resulting mixture was stirred for 2 h, during
which the color changed to a dark olive-brown and a dark
precipitate was evident. The mixture was cooled to -45 ꢀC, and
the olive-green precipitate was collected and washed with 3 mL
of cold (-45 ꢀC) pentane, affording spectroscopically pure 5
(19.2 mg, 78%).
Method B (From LMeFeNNFeLMe in THF). A simpler proce-
dure is given for the preparation of LMeFe(AdNNNNAd)
without the use of tert-butylpyridine. A vial was loaded with
LMeFeNNFeLMe (61.4 mg, 63.0 μmol) and THF (5 mL) to give a
royal purple solution. A solution of N3Ad in THF (1 mL) was
added, causing effervescence and a color change to dark yellow-
brown. The reaction was stirred for 12 h, and the volatile
materials were removed under vacuum. The residue was slurried
in cold (-45 ꢀC) pentane, and an olive-green powder was
collected on a glass fritted funnel and washed with 5 mL of cold
pentane to afford spectroscopically pure 5 (82 mg, 81%). Full
characterization of this complex has been reported previously.48
X-ray Absorption Spectroscopy. XAS data were recorded at
the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL) on
focused beamline 9-3, under ring conditions of 3 GeV and
60-100 mA. A Si(220) double-crystal monochromator was used
for energy selection, and a Rh-coated mirror (set to an energy
cutoff of 10 keV) was used for harmonic rejection. Internal
energy calibration was performed by assigning the first inflec-
tion point of the Fe foil spectrum to 7111.2 eV. The solid samples
were prepared by dilution in boron nitride, pressed into a pellet,
and sealed between 38 μm Kapton tape windows in a 1 mm
aluminum spacer. The solution samples were prepared by dilu-
tion in toluene (∼10-15 mM) and loaded into a Delrin XAS
sample holder, with a 38 μm Kapton window. All samples were
maintained at 10 K during data collection using an Oxford
Instruments CF1208 continuous flow liquid helium cryostat.
Data were measured in transmission and fluorescence mode
(using a Canberra Ge 30-element array detector), respectively.
XAS data were measured to k = 15 A-1. The data were
calibrated and averaged using EXAFSPAK.61 Pre-edge sub-
LMeFeNAd (2). A 20 mL scintillation vial was loaded with
LMeFeNNFeLMe (298 mg, 0.306 mmol) and THF (15 mL) to
give a royal purple solution. A solution of N3Ad (108 mg, 0.611
mmol) in THF (2 mL) was added dropwise causing efferves-
cence and a color change to dark yellow-brown. The reaction
was stirred for 15 min, and the volatile materials were removed
under vacuum. The residue was redissolved in pentane (∼8 mL),
the solution was filtered through Celite, and the volatile materi-
als were removed under vacuum. The residue was dissolved in a
minimum amount of pentane (∼4 mL) and cooled to -45 ꢀC,
giving crystalline 2 in two crops (231 mg, 61%). 1H NMR (500
MHz, C6D6): δ 84.4 (6H, Ad-HR), 53.4 (1H, R-CH), 37.4 (3H,
Ad-Hβ or Ad-Hγ), 34.5 (3H, Ad-Hβ or Ad-Hγ), 24.2 (3H, Ad-Hβ
or Ad-Hγ), -10.1 (12H, CH(CH3)2), -14.8 (4H, m-Ar or CH-
(CH3)2), -24.0 (6H, Me), -28.1 (2H, p-Ar), -58.4 (12H, CH-
(CH3)2), -74.6 (4H, m-Ar or CH(CH3)2) ppm. IR: 3056 (w),
2958 (s), 2920 (s), 2900 (s), 2865 (m), 2845 (m), 1522 (s), 1458 (m),
1437 (m), 1384 (s), 1319 (s), 1260 (w), 1177 (w), 1100 (w), 1056 (w),
1027 (w), 936 (w), 797 (m), 757 (m) cm-1. UV/vis (pentane): 323
(19mM-1 cm-1), 410(4.0mM-1 cm-1), 480 (sh, ∼2mM-1 cm-1),
580 (sh, ∼0.4 mM-1 cm-1) nm. μeff (C6D6, 25 ꢀC): 4.4 ( 0.3 μB.
L
MeFeNHAd (3). Method A (from LMeFeNAd (1) and 1,4-
Cyclohexadiene). A J-Young NMR tube was loaded with 2
(11.7 mg, 18.8 μmol) and C6D6 (0.6 mL). 1,4-Cyclohexadiene
(17.8 μL, 188 μmol) was added, and the reaction was monitored
by 1H NMR spectroscopy at 23 ꢀC. After 90 min no 2 remained
and LMeFeNHAd was formed in 83% yield as measured by
integration against an internal integration standard (sealed
capillary of Cp2Co in C6D6).
traction and splining were carried out using PYSPLINE.62
A
three-region cubic spline of order 2, 3, 3 was used to model
the smooth background above the edge. Normalization of
the data was achieved by subtracting the spline and normal-
izing the postedge region to 1. The resultant EXAFS was
k3-weighted to enhance the impact of high-k data. Theore-
tical EXAFS signals χ(k) were calculated using FEFF
(version 7.0)63 and fit to the data using EXAFSPAK.62 The
non-structural parameter E0 was also allowed to vary but was
restricted to a common value for every component in a given
fit. The structural parameters varied during the refinements
were the bond distance (R) and the bond variance (σ2). The σ2
is related to the Debye-Waller factor, which is a measure of
thermal vibration and to static disorder of the absorbers/
scatterers. Coordination numbers were systematically varied
in the course of the analysis, but they were not allowed to
vary within a given fit.
Method B (from [LMeFeCl]2 and LiNHAd). [LMeFeCl]2 (1.1 g,
1.08 mmol) and LiNHAd (343 mg, 2.18 mmol) were stirred in
pentane (40 mL) for 8 h. The brown mixture was filtered and
concentrated under vacuum to 20 mL. The brown pentane solution
was cooled to -35 ꢀC, and yellow crystals of LMeFeNHAd were
1
isolated in good yield (1.2 g, 90%). H NMR δH (C6D6): 125
(1, backbone), 98 (6, Me or Ad-R), 63(3, Ad-βor Ad-γ), 41 (3, Ad-β
or Ad-γ), 31 (3, Ad-β or Ad-γ), 19 (6, Me or Ad-R), -19 (4, m-Ar or
CH(CH3)2), -36 (12, CH(CH3)2), -78 (2, p-Ar), -115 (12, CH-
(CH3)2), -125 (4, m-Ar or CH(CH3)2) ppm. 1H NMR δH (THF-
d8): 70 (6, Me or Ad-R), 52 (3, Ad-β or Ad-γ), 31 (3, Ad-β or Ad-γ),
25 (3, Ad-βor Ad-γ), 12(6, MeorAd-R), -12(12, CH(CH3)2), -16
(4, m-Ar or CH(CH3)2), -65 (2, p-Ar), -86 (12, CH(CH3)2), -96
(4, m-Ar or CH(CH3)2) ppm. UV/vis (pentane): 240 (15 mM-1
cm-1), 300 (12 mM-1 cm-1), 330 (14 mM-1 cm-1) nm. μeff (C6D6,
25 ꢀC): 4.8 ( 0.3 μB. Elem Anal. Calcd: C, 75.10; H, 9.21; N, 6.74.
Found: C, 74.66; H, 7.55; N, 6.28.
(61) George, G. N. EXAFSPAK, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory,
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University: Stanford, CA.
(62) Tenderholt, A. PySpline, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory,
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University: Stanford, CA.
(63) (a) Mustre de Leon, J.; Rehr, J. J.; Zabinsky, S. I.; Albers, R. C. Phys.
Rev. B 1991, 44, 4146–4156. (b) Rehr, J. J.; Mustre de Leon, J.; Zabinsky, S. I.;
Albers, R. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 5135–5140.
(59) (a) Ammann, C.; Meier, P.; Merbach, A. E. J. Magn. Reson. 1982, 46,
319–321. (b) Kaplan, M. L.; Bovey, F. A.; Cheng, H. N. Anal. Chem. 1975, 47,
1703–1705.
(60) (a) Baker, M. V.; Field, L. D.; Hambley, T. W. Inorg. Chem. 1988, 27,
2872–2876. (b) Schubert, E. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 62.

Article
Magnetic Susceptibility. Magnetic susceptibility data were
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 13, 2010 6187
For the QM/MM calculations, the classical region (Universal
Force Field) contained the 2,6-diisopropylphenyl and methyl
substituents of the β-diketiminate ligand and the adamantyl
group with the exception of the carbon that is directly bonded to
nitrogen. The remainder of the complex was modeled at the
B3LYP/6-311þG(d) level of theory. The ONIOM methodology
of Morokuma and co-workers was used for all quantum/classical
hybrid simulations.68
All open shell species were modeled within the unrestricted
Kohn-Sham formalism. Inspection of total spin expectation
values suggested some degree of spin contamination for the
quartet states, so results should be viewed with this caveat.
All models (full and truncated) were geometry optimized with-
out symmetry constraint using gradient methods. The energy
Hessian was evaluated at all stationary points to designate them
as either minima or transition states at the pertinent levels of
theory. Reported free energies are at 298.15 K and 1 atm and are
calculated with unscaled vibrational frequencies.
measured from powder samples of solid material in the tem-
perature range 2-300 K by using a SQUID susceptometer with
a field of 1.0 T (MPMS-7, Quantum Design, calibrated with
standard palladium reference sample, error <2%). Multiple-
field variable-temperature magnetization measurements were
done at 1 T, 4 T, and 7 T with the magnetization equidistantly
sampled on a 1/T temperature scale. The experimental data were
corrected for underlying diamagnetism by use of tabulated
Pascal’s constants,64 as well as for temperature-independent
paramagnetism. The susceptibility and magnetization data were
simulated with our own package julX for exchange coupled
systems.65 The simulations are based on the usual spin-Hamilton
operator for mononuclear complexes:
2
2
2
^
^
^
^
^
H ¼ gβSB BB þ D½Sz - 1=3SðS þ 1Þ þ E=DðSx - SyÞꢀ ð1Þ
3
where S is the total spin, g is the average electronic g value, and D is
the axial zero-field splitting parameter, and E/D is the rhombicity
of the zero-field splitting. Diagonalization of the Hamiltonian was
performed with the routine ZHEEV from the LAPACK Library,
and the magnetic moments were obtained from first order
numerical derivative dE/dB of the eigenvalues. Intermolecular
interactions were considered by using a Weiss temperature, ΘW,
asperturbationofthetemperature scale, kT0 = k(T- ΘW) for the
calculation. Powder summations were done by using a 16-point
Lebedev grid.
Acknowledgment. The authors acknowledge financial sup-
port from the Petroleum Research Fund (44942-AC to P.L.H.),
the Department of Energy (DE-FG02-03ER15387 to T.R.C.),
the National Science Foundation (CHE-0911314 to P.L.H.;
Graduate Research Fellowship to R.E.C.), and the Department
of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Cornell University (S.D.).
SSRL operations are funded by the Department of Energy, Office
of Basic Energy Sciences. The Structural Molecular Biology pro-
gram is supported by the National Institutes of Health, National
Center for Research Resources, Biomedical Technology Program
and by the Department of Energy, Office of Biological and
Environmental Research. Calculations employed the UNT
computational chemistry resource, for which T.R.C. and
N.J.D. acknowledge the NSF for support through CRIF
Grant CHE-0741936. We thank Dr. William Brennessel for
assistance with X-ray crystallography.
Computational Details. All computations employed the
Gaussian03 suite of programs.66 Whether quantum (truncated
models) or hybrid quantum/classical (full experimental models)
simulations, all calculations utilize the B3LYP hybrid density
functional67 and the extended Pople basis set, 6-311þG(d),
which incorporates diffuse and polarization basis sets on main
group elements, and an f-polarization function on iron.
(64) (a) O’Connor, C. J. Prog. Inorg. Chem. 1982, 29, 203–283. (b) Weast,
R. C.; Astle, M. J. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, CRC Press Inc.,
Boca Raton, FL, 1979.
Supporting Information Available: Spectroscopic and crystallo-
graphic details, additional computational results, compiled data
from the Cambridge Structural Database, and full list of authors for
ref 66. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at
http://pubs.acs.org.
(65) Available from E.B.: http://ewww.mpi-muelheim.mpg.de/bac/lo-
gins/bill/julX_en.php
(66) Frisch, M. J. et al., Gaussian 03, Revision D.02, Gaussian, Inc.,
Wallingford CT, 2004.
(67) (a) Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648–5652. (b) Lee, C.; Yang,
W.; Parr, R. G. Phys. Rev. B 1988, 37, 785–789.
(68) Svensson, M.; Humbel, S.; Froese, R. D. J.; Matsubara, T.; Sieber,
S.; Morokuma, K. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 19357–19363.