A R T I C L E S
Sola et al.
The adoption of such unfavorable structures can be combated
through ligand design. An obvious strategy toward this end is
to use polydentate rigid ligands such as the fac-coordinating
Cp and Tp,7 much of whose success in catalysis might be
attributed to their ability to confine reactive ligands and
coordination vacancies mutually cis.8 A second alternative, a
priori compatible with different ligand types and coordination
modes, would be based on ancillary ligands more trans-directing
than those referred to above as reactive. Following generally
accepted conclusions on this subject,2,9 this would only be within
the reach of anionic ligands such as carbine, sulfide, oxide,
nitride, bent nitrosyl, stannyl, silyl, or boryl. Among them,
stannyl,10 silyl,11 and boryl12 ligands could indeed engender a
variety of stereoelectronic environments attractive for catalysis,
although, due to their high reactivity, a stabilization rendering
them ancillary would be necessary. This has already been found
feasible for silyl moieties within polydentate ligands of the types
κ-P,P,Si (biPSi)13,14 and κ-N,N,Si15 which, in addition, have
emerged capable of stabilizing coordinatively unsaturated
compounds and catalysts.16
The above considerations suggest that this type of silyl-
containing ligands is likely to confer kinetic advantages to their
complexes and drive genuine reactivities and catalytic properties.
In order to substantiate these potential pros and characterize
possible cons, we have conducted this study on the five-
coordinate d6 complexes [IrXH(biPSi)] (X ) halogenide; biPSi
) κ-P,P,Si-Si(Me){(CH2)3PPh2}2) focusing on basic aspects of
their chemistry that are likely affected by the peculiar charac-
teristics of the biPSi pincer ligand:17 structure, coordination
properties, and dynamic behavior in solution. The study confirms
that the silyl entity can indeed induce distinctive, more reactive,
ground-state structures in five-coordinate hydride, alkenyl, and
alkyl iridium(III) complexes but also concludes other less-
anticipated features. Thus, the severe weakening of the bonds
trans to silicon intensifies the relative impact of steric factors
over coordination, enabling effective discriminations from
otherwise negligible differences. Also worth mentioning is the
accessibility of agostic Ir-(η2-SiH) transition states (TSs), a
genuine reactivity resource that widens and simplifies the
chemistry of hydride derivatives.
Results and Discussion
Isomers of [IrXH(biPSi)] and Structures. The complex
[IrClH(biPSi)] (1) was previously reported to result from the
reaction between dimer [Ir(µ-Cl)(cod)]2 and the biPSi ligand
precursor HSi(Me){(CH2)3PPh2}2.13 On the basis of the NMR
data obtained from freshly prepared solutions in CDCl3, 1 was
described as a single isomer displaying an anti orientation of
the hydride ligand relative to the methyl group at silicon (1-
anti, eq 1). Nevertheless, we have now observed that, after
several days at room temperature, these solutions evolve
equilibrium mixtures of the two isomers, 1-anti and 1-syn. The
position of the 1-anti:1-syn equilibrium is 93:7 in C6D6 or
toluene-d8, irrespective of the temperature, but slightly dimin-
ishes to ca. 83:17 in solvents such as CDCl3 or CD2Cl2. The 1H
NOESY NMR spectra of these mixtures display clear cross-
peaks between the hydride and methyl signals of the minor
isomer, thus confirming the relative syn orientation of these
groups (eq 1).
(7) Trofimenko, S. Scorpionates. The Coordination Chemistry of Poly-
pyrazolylborate Ligands; Imperial College Press: London, 1999.
(8) Best examples are in olefin polymerizations catalyzed by group 4
metalocenes. See: Resconi, L.; Chadwick, J. C.; Cavallo, L. In
ComprehensiVe Organometallic Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Mingos, D. M. P.,
Crabtree, R. H., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2006; Vol. 4, pp 1006-
1166.
Analogues of 1 with bromide and iodide ligands instead of
chloride have been obtained by reaction of CH2Cl2 solutions of
1 with the corresponding sodium halogenide in excess. The
compounds [IrBrH(biPSi)] (2) and [IrIH(biPSi)] (3) have also
been isolated as kinetic mixtures of anti and syn isomers, the
compositions of which depend on the actual reaction conditions
and isolation procedures. As for 1, these kinetic mixtures have
been observed to slowly evolve solvent-dependent anti:syn
equilibria. The bromide complex 2 behaves similarly to its
chloride precursor, affording anti:syn equilibria of molar
compositions 92:8 and 82:18 in C6D6 and CDCl3, respectively.
The equilibrium proportion of the syn isomer is larger for the
iodide compound 3, which gives rise to nearly equimolar
mixtures in C6D6, 45:55, but enriched in the syn isomer in
CD2Cl2 or CDCl3, ca. 22:78.
The X-ray structures of the two isomeric bromide complexes,
2-anti and 2-syn, are shown in Figure 1. Relevant bond distances
and angles of these two structures, together with those of 3-syn,
can be found as Supporting Information. Both isomers 2 display
distorted square-based pyramidal structures in which the vacant
position sits trans to silicon. This is in contrast with the
structures adopted by isoelectronic analogues of 2 coordinating
other pincer diphosphines with sp2 carbon or nitrogen donor
atoms, in which the vacant site is trans to hydride.18 Then the
structures confirm that, as expected, the trans influence of the
sp3 silicon dominates over that of hydride, rendering isoelec-
tronic five-coordinate d6 complexes non-isostructural.
(9) Zhu, J.; Lin, Z.; Marder, T. B. Inorg. Chem. 2005, 44, 9384–9390.
(10) Smith, N. D.; Mancuso, J.; Lautens, M. Chem. ReV. 2000, 100, 3257–
3282.
(11) Corey, J. Y.; Braddock-Wilking, J. Chem. ReV. 1999, 99, 175–292.
(12) Irvine, G. J.; Lesley, M. J. G.; Marder, T. B.; Norman, N. C.; Rice,
C. R.; Robins, E. G.; Roper, W. R.; Whittell, G. R.; Wright, L. J.
Chem. ReV. 1998, 98, 2685–2722.
(13) Stobart, S. R.; Brost, R. D.; Bruce, G. C.; Joslin, F. L. Organometallics
1997, 16, 5669–5680.
(14) (a) Bushnell, G. W.; Casado, M. A.; Stobart, S. R. Organometallics
2001, 20, 601–603. (b) Auburn, M. J.; Holmes-Smith, R. D.; Stobart,
S. R.; Bakshi, P. K.; Cameron, T. S. Organometallics 1996, 15, 3032–
3036. (c) Grundy, S. L.; Holmes-Smith, R. D.; Stobart, S. R.; Williams,
M. A. Inorg. Chem. 1991, 30, 3333–3337. (d) MacInnis, M. C.;
MacLean, D. F.; Lundgren, R. J.; McDonald, R.; Turculet, L.
Organometallics 2007, 26, 6522–6525. (e) MacLean, D. F.; McDonald,
R.; Ferguson, M. J.; Caddell, A. J.; Turculet, L. Chem. Commun. 2008,
5146–5148. (f) Morgan, E.; MacLean, D. F.; McDonald, R.; Turculet,
L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 14234–14236.
(15) (a) Sangtrirutnugul, P.; Tilley, T. D. Organometallics 2007, 26, 5557–
5568. (b) Sangtrirutnugul, P.; Tilley, T. D. Organometallics 2008, 27,
2223–2230. (c) Sangtrirutnugul, P.; Stradiotto, M.; Tilley, T. D.
Organometallics 2006, 25, 1607–1617. (d) Stradiotto, M.; Fujdala,
K. L.; Tilley, T. D. Chem. Commun. 2001, 1200–1201.
(16) This capability has also been recognized for boryl moieties in pincer
phosphines: (a) Segawa, Y.; Yamashita, M.; Nozaki, K. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2009, 131, 9201–9203. (b) Segawa, Y.; Yamashita, M.; Nozaki,
K. Organometallics 2009, 28, 6234–6242.
(17) (a) The Chemistry of Pincer Compounds; Morales-Morales, D., Jensen,
C., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2007. (b) van der Boom, M. E.;
Milstein, D. Chem. ReV. 2003, 103, 1759–1792. (c) Albrecht, M.; van
Koten, G. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 41, 3750–3781.
The small structural differences between isomers 2 deserve
careful consideration since, as will be described below, they
9
9112 J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 132, NO. 26, 2010