2214
O.G. Adeyemi et al. / Journal of Organometallic Chemistry 689 (2004) 2207–2215
choice of the metal M, the ring-substituent R and the
ligand L do not appear to be the factors that by them-
selves determine the direction of the reaction, nor whe-
ther the reaction will proceed or not [19]. The only
property that correlates with the direction of the solid-
state isomerisation reaction of (g5-C5H4R)M(CO)2(L)I
(1) (M ¼ W, Mo) is the melting point of the cis and trans
isomers [4b]. The favoured reaction direction is always
from the low melting point isomer to the high melting
point isomer; when the differences are small, isomer
mixtures are formed. This suggests that the intermolec-
ular interactions cannot simply relate to cis/trans inter-
molecular polar effects in the solid state. Even this
melting point information is no guarantee that a reac-
tion will proceed [4b], which suggests that the ‘shape’ of
the molecule and the way in which it sterically interacts
with its nearest neighbours will determine the preferred
solid-state isomer.
4. Conclusions
The trans and cis isomers of the tungsten and mo-
lybdenum complexes (g5-C5H4R)M(CO)2(L)I (M ¼ W,
t
R ¼ Me, Bu, L ¼ P(OiPr)3, PPh3; M ¼ Mo, R ¼ Me,
L ¼ PPh3) have been synthesised and fully characterised
by elemental analysis and IR and NMR spectroscopy.
Unlike the rhenium complexes (g5-C5H4R)Re(CO)-
(L)X2, the tungsten and molybdenum complexes (g5-
C5H4R)M(CO)2(L)I undergo a bidirectional thermal
solid-state isomerisation reaction. A key finding was the
discovery that the direction of the reaction could not be
correlated with a particular isomer. The only correlation
noted is that the direction of the isomerisation reaction
is determined by melting points, i.e., the reaction pref-
erentially goes from the low melting point isomer to the
high melting point isomer.
The intermolecular forces that dominate in the solid
phase could thus be both steric (phase rebuilding [20],
topotatic [21]) or electronic in nature. Thus, an under-
standing of the reaction is possible from solid state
packing information [22]. However, no significant inter-
molecular interactions were observed between the mol-
ecules in the unit cells.
Acknowledgements
We thank the NRF (GUN #2059698), THRIP and
the University for financial support.
References
In earlier studies we determined that the cis–trans
isomerisation reaction of Re complexes was consistent
with a Turnstile type mechanism (this could involve
rotation of two or three of the small ligands (CO, X)).
The same could apply here. The single crystals became
opaque as the isomerisation reaction proceeded, even-
tually disintegrating into small crystallites.
[1] (a) G. Wilkinson, F.G.A. Stone, E.W. Abel (Eds.), Comprehen-
sive Organometallic Chemistry, Pergamon Press, New York, 1982;
(b) E.W. Abel, F.G.A. Stone, G. Wilkinson (Eds.), Comprehen-
sive Organometallic Chemistry, Pergamon Press, New York, 1994.
[2] Y. Ohashi, Acc. Chem. Res. 21 (1988) 268.
[3] (a) D.L. Beach, K.W. Barnett, J. Organomet. Chem. 97 (1975)
C27;
However, the structural analysis provided informa-
tion via the disorder content. Part of this disorder re-
lated to the presence of cis isomer (11%) in the trans
isomer. This would suggest that at low conversions, the
cis isomer is accommodated within the unit cell of the
trans isomer. This phenomenon of a major structural
isomer determining the structure of a minor isomer has
precedent in the work of Sacconi et al. [23] and has
been referred to as ‘structure mimicry’. Disorder in the
cyclopentadienyl ring is indicative of the strain that
must be built up (50% disorder) as the reaction
progresses.
(b) R.B. King, R.H. Reimann, Inorg. Chem. 12 (1976) 183;
(c) R.B. King, R.H. Reimann, D.J. Darensbourg, J. Organomet.
Chem. 93 (1975) C23.
[4] (a) L. Cheng, N.J. Coville, J. Organomet. Chem. 571 (1998) 149;
(b) N.J. Coville, D.C. Levendis, Eur.J. Inorg. Chem. (2002) 3067;
(c) R. Bogadi, D.C. Levendis, N.J. Coville, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
124 (2002) 1104.
[5] O.G. Adeyemi, M.A. Fernandes, L. Cheng, U.B. Eke, D.C.
Levendis, N.J. Coville, C. R. Chimie 5 (2002) 387.
[6] D.L. Beach, M. Dattilo, K.W. Barnett, J. Organomet. Chem. 140
(1977) 47.
[7] A.C. Filipou, J.G. Winter, M. Feist, G. Kociok, I. Hinz,
Polyhedron 17 (1998) 1103.
[8] R.B. King (Ed.), Organometallic Synthesis, vol. 1, Academic
Press, New York, NY, 1955.
Further, even though both unit cells are monoclinic,
the arrangement of atoms within the unit cells of the two
isomers is different.
[9] (a) D.J. Blumer, K.W. Barnett, T.L. Brown, J. Organomet.
Chem. 71 (1979) 173;
(b) N.J. Coville, M.S. Loonat, L. Carlton, S. Afr. J. Chem. 45
(1992) 63;
The proposed mechanism suggests that in the early
stages of reaction, a cis–trans isomerisation reaction
occurs prior to inter-molecule rearrangement. Eventu-
ally the rearrangement of molecules will result in inter-
molecular stresses in the unit cell and subsequent break
up of the crystalline phase. Whether indeed the cis iso-
mer formed in the trans–cis reaction is a poymorph of
the cis isomer formed by crystallisation procedures
cannot be addressed by the data at hand.
(c) M.O. Albers, N.J. Coville, Coord. Chem. Rev. 53 (1984)
227.
[10] F.W. Faller, A.S. Anderson, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 92 (1970) 5852.
[11] Bruker, SAINT+, Version 6.02 (includes XPREP and SADABS),
Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, WI, 1999.
[12] G.M. Sheldrick, SHELX 97 (includes SHELXS 97, SHELXL 97 and
CIFTAB), Programs for Crystal Structure Analysis (Release 97-2),
€
University of Gottingen, Germany, 1997.
[13] L.J. Farrugia, J. Appl. Cryst. 32 (1999) 837.