P.A. Abramov et al. / Inorganica Chimica Acta 375 (2011) 314–319
319
Table 5
Peak potential variations (Ep and
DEp) as function of scan rate.
2
3
v/(V sꢁ1
)
Ep aI1/V
Ep aII1/V
Epa2/V
Epa3/V
Epc1/V
Epc2/V
Epc3/V
D
Ep (a2–c2)
D
Ep (a3–c3)
0.005
0.01
0.025
0.05
0.1
0.250
0.350
0.5
0.009
0.0043
0.000
ꢁ0.005
ꢁ0.011
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
ꢁ0.623
ꢁ0.620
ꢁ0.627
ꢁ0.621
ꢁ0.620
ꢁ0.604
ꢁ0.598
ꢁ0.589
ꢁ0.567
–
–
–
–
ꢁ0.333
ꢁ0.322
ꢁ0.362
ꢁ0.415
ꢁ0.445
–
–
–
–
ꢁ0.705
ꢁ0.697
ꢁ0.702
ꢁ0.697
ꢁ0.689
ꢁ0.686
ꢁ0.698
ꢁ0.708
ꢁ0.731
ꢁ0.881
ꢁ0.883
ꢁ0.880
ꢁ0.883
ꢁ0.894
ꢁ0.907
ꢁ0.905
ꢁ0.917
ꢁ0.939
0.082
0.077
0.075
0.076
0.074
0.082
0.100
0.119
0.164
–
–
–
–
ꢁ0.184
ꢁ0.166
ꢁ0.126
ꢁ0.114
ꢁ0.096
ꢁ0.071
ꢁ0.812
ꢁ0.811
ꢁ0.801
ꢁ0.798
ꢁ0.768
0.082
0.096
0.104
0.119
0.171
0.7
basins have common borders with the V(Mo, Mo, Mo) basin and
the difference between ELF values at the turning points and at
the attractors is 0.02 (Fig. 3). Thus, as it was suggested in [21], it
is more chemically meaningful to consider the union of the corre-
sponding basins rather than the individual basins themselves. Sim-
ilar bonding picture was observed in model sulfide cluster
Acknowledgments
The work was supported by RFBR Grant 09-03-00413, State
Contract No. 02.740.11.0628, and Haldor Topsøe. Also this work
was partially supported by Grant of FFP ‘‘SSESIR 2009-2013’’
(2010-1.2.2-210-004-036).
[Mo3(l3-S)(l
2-S)3(PH3)6Cl3]+ [22].
Appendix A. Supplementary material
3.1. Cyclic voltammetry
CCDC 786056 contains the supplementary crystallographic data
for this paper. These data can be obtained free of charge from The
Fig. 4 shows CV for freshly prepared solution of 1 in DMF at dif-
ferent scan rate. Three cathodic peaks (c1, c2 and c3) and four ano-
dic peaks (aI1, aII1, a2 and a3) are observed at low scan rates.
Increase in the scan rate causes gradual disappearance of c1 and
aI1, as can be better seen in Fig. 5, where normalized current value
(i.e., divided by v1/2), is given. Fig. 6 shows square wave voltamme-
try results. Clearly distinguishable are two reversible peaks in the
negative area and one quasi reversible peak in the positive area.
The negative peaks agree well with the two most negative peaks
in the CV. All the results are summarized in Table 5, where the val-
References
[1] R. Hernandez-Molina, M. Sokolov, A.G. Sykes, Acc. Chem. Res. 34 (2001) 223.
[2] R. Llusar, S. Uriel, Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. (2003) 1271.
[3] V.E. Fedorov, Y.V. Mironov, N.G. Naumov, M.N. Sokolov, V.P. Fedin, Usp. Khim.
76 (2007) 571.
[4] D.T. Richens, The Chemistry of Aqua Ions, Wiley, 1997.
[5] M.N. Sokolov, V.P. Fedin, A.G. Sykes, Comp. Coord. Chem. 2 (4) (2003) 761.
[6] P.A. Abramov, M.N. Sokolov, A.V. Virovets, E.V. Peresypkina, V.P. Fedin, J. Clust.
Sci. 18 (3) (2007) 597.
[7] ADF2008, SCM, Theoretical Chemistry, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The
[8] G. Schreckenbach, T. Ziegler, J. Phys. Chem. 99 (1995) 606.
[9] D. Becke, Phys. Rev. A 38 (1988) 3098.
ues of
D
Ep (Ea ꢁ Ec ) are also given. From all these observations we
p
p
can conclude that c2/a2 and c3/a3 couples correspond to quasi
reversible processes. At low scan rates the peak potentials are vir-
tually the same in both cases, however,
DEp is higher than is re-
quired for a perfectly reversible couple. Increase in scan rates
displaces the potentials to more negative, and more positive val-
uꢃes, respectively. Standard redox potentials for both systems,
Eredox, were determined as ꢁ0.650 0.005 V and ꢁ0.855 0.002 V,
respectively. In agreement with the published electrochemical
[10] J.P. Perdew, Phys. Rev. B 33 (12) (1986) 8822.
[11] H. Vosko, L. Wilk, M. Nusair, Can. J. Phys. 58 (1980) 1200.
[12] E. Van Lenthe, A.E. Ehlers, E.J. Baerends, J. Chem. Phys. 110 (1999) 8943.
[13] V. Bereau, J.A. Ibers, C.R. Acad. Sci. Ser. IIc: Chim. 3 (2000) 123.
[14] M.N. Sokolov, A.L. Gushchin, D.Yu. Naumov, O.A. Gerasko, V.P. Fedin, Inorg.
Chem. 44 (2005) 2431.
[15] SHELXTL (Version 6.12), Bruker Advanced X-ray Solutions, Bruker AXS Inc.,
Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 2004.
[16] APEX2 (Version 1.08), SAINT (Version 7.03), and SADABS (Version 2.11), Bruker
Advanced X-ray Solutions, Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 2004.
[17] V.E. Fedorov, S.V. Tkachev, N.G. Naumov, Yu.V. Mironov, Yu.I. Mironov, Russ. J.
Inorg. Chem. 43 (1998) 1683.
[18] F. Bottomley, R.W. Day, Organometallics 10 (1991) 2560.
[19] R. Hernández-Molina, W. Clegg, P. Esparza, A. Mederos, Inorg. Chim. Acta 331
(2002) 52.
[20] W.N. Lipscomb, Acc. Chem. Res. 6 (8) (1973) 257.
[21] B. Silvi, J. Mol. Struct. 614 (2002) 3.
[22] M. Feliz, R. Llusar, J. Andres, S. Berski, B. Silvi, New J. Chem. 26 (2002) 844.
[23] T. Shibahara, H. Akashi, S. Nagahata, H. Hattori, H. Kuroya, Inorg. Chem. 28
(1989) 362.
4+
behavior of various M3Q4 clusters, including those with the clo-
sely related {Mo3(l3-S)(l
2-O)3}4+ core [23], we can assign the neg-
ative potential waves to two consecutive one-electron reductions
in the cluster core:
Mo3IVSeO34þ ! Mo2IVMoIIISeO34þ ! MoIVMo2IIISeO43þ
:
In [Mo3Se4(acac)3(py)3]+ corresponding processes were observed at
E1/2 ꢁ0.85 and ꢁ0.98 V, respectively [19]. As could be expected,
when more electronegative oxide ligands replace selenides in the
cluster core, the latter becomes more easily reducible. The c1 and
aI1 peaks can be tentatively assigned to cluster core oxidation
which gives unstable species.