Synthesis, characterization and structure of some arylantimony ferrocenylacrylates

Article abstract of DOI:10.1016/j.ica.2003.12.012

A series of arylantimony ferrocenylacrylates with the formula (C ₅H₅FeC₅H₄CH=CHCO₂) _nSbAr_(5-n) (n=1, 2; Ar =C₆H₅, 4-CH₃C₆H₄, 3-CH₃C₆H ₄, 2-CH₃C₆H₄, 4-FC₆H ₄) have been synthesized and characterized by elemental analysis, IR, ¹H NMR and mass spectra. The crystal structures of C ₅H₅FeC₅H₄CH=CHCO ₂Sb(C₆H₅)₄ (I₁) and (C₅H₅FeC₅H₄CH=CHCO₂) ₂Sb(C₆H₅)₃ (II₁) have been determined by X-ray diffraction.

Full text of DOI:10.1016/j.ica.2003.12.012

Inorganica Chimica Acta 357 (2004) 2176–2180
www.elsevier.com/locate/ica
Note
Synthesis, characterization and structure of some arylantimony
ferrocenylacrylates
*
Jin-Shan Li , Run-Chang Liu, Xin-Bao Chi, Guo-Cang Wang, Qun-Shen Guo
State Key Laboratory of Elemento-Organic Chemistry, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, PeopleÕs Republic of China
Received 2 July 2003; accepted 13 December 2003
Abstract
A series of arylantimony ferrocenylacrylates with the formula (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)nSbArð5ꢀnÞ (n ¼ 1, 2; Ar @C6H5, 4-
1
CH3C6H4, 3-CH3C6H4, 2-CH3C6H4, 4-FC6H4) have been synthesized and characterized by elemental analysis, IR, H NMR and
mass spectra. The crystal structures of C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2Sb(C6H5)4 (I1) and (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(C6H5)3 (II1)
have been determined by X-ray diffraction.
Ó 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Arylantimony; Ferrocenylacrylate; Crystal structure; Coordination; Distorted octahedron; Pentagonal bipyramid
1. Introduction
on a Yanaco CHN Corder MT-3 elemental analyzer. IR
spectra were recorded on a Bruker Equinox 55 spec-
trometer in KBr discs. H NMR spectra were measured
1
A great number of references describing synthesis and
biological activities of organoantimony carboxylates
with the general formula RnSbX5ꢀn (R ¼ alkyl, aryl;
n ¼ 3, 4; X ¼ carboxylate) have already appeared in the
literature [1–19]. The published data on the antitumor
activity of these compounds, however, are relatively
limited [20,21]. In recent years the antitumor activity of
some ferrocene derivatives has been reported [22,23]. In
the present paper we have prepared a series of arylan-
timony derivatives of ferrocenylacrylic acid, which are
hetero-dinuclear or hetero-trinuclear complexes. We are
interested in studying the nature of bonding and struc-
tural information of these compounds.
on a Bruker AC-200 spectrometer in CDCl3 solution
with TMS as internal standard. Mass spectra (EI) were
recorded on a HP-5988A at 70 eV; the ionization tem-
perature was 200 °C.
Ferrocenylacrylic acid was synthesized by the method
reported by Nemeroff and co-workers [24]. Ar3SbBr2
was prepared by the method reported by Lice and co-
workers [25]. Ar4SbBr was prepared by the literature
[20].
2.1. Synthesis of the title compounds
3-Ferrocenylacrylic acid (1 mmol) and triethylamine
(0.8 ml) were added to a stirred suspension of Ar4SbBr
(1 mmol) or Ar3SbBr2 (0.5 mmol) in toluene (40 ml).
The reaction mixture was stirred at room temperature
for 24 h and filtered. The filtrate was evaporated in
vacuo. The obtained red solid was recrystallized from
CH2Cl2-petroleum ether to afford the title compounds.
2. Experimental
All the reactions involving metal halides were carried
out under anhydrous and oxygen-free argon atmo-
sphere. Solvents were purified, dried, and stored by lit-
erature methods. Elemental analyses were determined
2.1.1. C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2Sb(C6H5)4 (I1)
Yield: 73%. Red solid. M.p. 122–124 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C37H31FeO2Sb: C, 64.85; H, 4.56. Found: C, 64.40;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-22-2350-4230; fax: +86-22-2350-
3438.
E-mail address: jinshan_li2001@yahoo.com (J.-S. Li).
1
H, 4.80%. H NMR: d 7.22–7.71 (m, 20H, C6H5); 7.64.
0020-1693/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ica.2003.12.012

J.-S. Li et al. / Inorganica Chimica Acta 357 (2004) 2176–2180
2177
6.14 (d, d, 1H, 1H, CH@CH); 4.44, 4.41 (s, s, 2H, 2H,
C5H4); 4.22 (s, 5H, C5H5) ppm. IR: masy(CO2) 1643 (s),
2.1.7. (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(2-CH3C6H4)3
(II4)
m
sym(CO2) 1386 (s), Dm(CO2) 257; masy(Sb–C) 485 (m)
Yield: 55%. Red solid. M.p. 145–148 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C47H43Fe2O4Sb: C, 62.36; H, 4.79. Found: C, 62.06;
H, 5.24%. H NMR: d 7.46–8.13 (m, 12H, C6H4); 7.68,
cmꢀ1. MS (M=z) [Fragment, Intensity (%)]: 532, 530
[(M-2C6H5)þ, 2.7, 3.5]; 431, 429 [(C6H5)4Sbþ, 38, 52];
200, 198 [C6H5Sbþ, 67, 100].
1
6.16(d, d, 2H, 2H, CH@CH); 4.37, 4.34 (s, s, 4H, 4H,
C5H4); 4.12 (s, 10H, C5H5); 2.48 (s, 9H, 2-CH3) ppm.
IR: masy(CO2) 1650 (s), msym(CO2) 1384 (s), Dm(CO2) 266;
2.1.2. C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2Sb(4-CH3C6H4)4 (I2)
Yield: 81%. Red solid. M.p. 158–160 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C41H39FeO2Sb: C, 66.43; H, 5.30. Found: C, 66.07;
m
asy(Sb–C) 485 (m) cmꢀ1
.
1
H, 5.46%. H NMR: 7.26–7.76 (m, 16H, C6H4); 7.62,
2.1.8. (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(4-FC6H4)3 (II5)
Yield: 68%. Red solid. M.p. 175–177 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C44H34F3Fe2O4Sb: C, 57.61; H, 3.74. Found: C,
58.15; H, 4.04%. 1H NMR: d 7.50–8.11 (m, 12H, C6H4);
7.65, 6.18(d, d, 2H, 2H, CH@CH); 4.38, 4.34 (s, s, 4H,
4H, C5H4); 4.10 (s, 10H, C5H5) ppm. IR: masy(CO2) 1651
(s), msym(CO2) 1385 (s), Dm(CO2) 266; masy(Sb–C) 488 (m)
6.12 (d, d, 1H, 1H, CH@CH); 4.46, 4.41 (s, s, 2H, 2H,
C5H4); 4.20 (s, 5H, C5H5); 2.38 (s, 12H, 4-CH3) ppm.
IR: masy(CO2) 1635 (s), msym(CO2) 1387 (s), Dm(CO2) 248;
m
asy(Sb–C) 485 (m) cmꢀ1
.
2.1.3. C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2Sb(4-FC6H4)4 (I3)
Yield: 74%. Red solid. M.p. 221–222 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C37H27F4FeO2Sb: C, 58.69; H, 3.59. Found: C,
58.49; H, 3.70%. 1H NMR: d 7.24–7.81 (m, 16H, C6H4);
7.64, 6.12 (d, d, 1H, 1H, CH@CH); 4.41, 4.35 (s, s, 2H,
2H, C5H4); 4.18 (s, 5H, C5H5) ppm. IR: masy(CO2) 1654
(s), msym(CO2) 1386 (s), Dm(CO2) 268; masy(Sb–C) 470 (w)
cmꢀ1
.
2.2. Structure determination of complexes I1 and II1
Crystals of I1 and II1 suitable for X-ray analysis were
obtained from a CH2Cl2-petroleum ether solution at
room temperature. Intensity data were collected on a
Bruker Smart 1000 diffractometer (graphite-monochro-
cmꢀ1
.
ꢀ
2.1.4. (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(C6H5)3 (II1)
Yield: 51%. Red solid. M.p. 198–202 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C44H37Fe2O4Sb: C, 61.22; H, 4.32. Found: C, 61.02;
H, 4.37%. H NMR: d 7.58–8.18 (m, 15H, C6H5); 7.64,
6.05 (d, d, 2H, 2H, CH@CH); 4.41, 4.38 (s, s, 4H, 4H,
C5H4); 4.12 (s, 10H, C5H5) ppm. IR: masy(CO2) 1645 (s),
matized Mo Ka radiation, k ¼ 0:71073 A) at 298 K
using the x–2h scan technique. An empirical absorption
correction was applied to intensity data. The structure
was solved by heavy atom method and refined by a full-
matrix least square procedure based on F 2. Non- hy-
drogen atoms were refined with anisotropic thermal
parameters. Crystal data are summarized in Table 1.
1
m
sym(CO2) 1374 (s), Dm(CO2) 271; masy(Sb–C) 461 (w)
cmꢀ1
.
Table 1
Crystal data for complexes I1 and II1
2.1.5. (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(4-CH3C6H4)3
(II2)
Compound I1
Compound II1
Yield: 74%. Red solid. M.p. 110–112 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C47H43Fe2O4Sb: C, 62.36; H, 4.79. Found: C, 62.46;
H, 5.21%. H NMR: d 7.56–8.12 (m, 12H, C6H4); 7.66,
Empirical formula
Mr
Temperature (K)
Crystal system
Space group
Cell parameter
C37H31FeO2Sb
685.26
298
C44H37Fe2O4Sb
863.22
298
1
monoclinic
P21=c
monoclinic
C2=c
6.02 (d, d, 2H, 2H, CH@CH); 4.40, 4.37 (s, s, 4H, 4H,
C5H4); 4.13 (s, 10H, C5H5); 2.38 (s, 9H, 4-CH3) ppm.
IR: masy(CO2) 1642 (s), msym(CO2) 1389 (s), Dm(CO2) 253;
ꢀ
a (A)
15.188 (5)
19.364 (6)
11.070 (4)
99.835 (7)
3207.6 (18)
4
25.622 (70)
10.500 (3)
13.754 (4)
101.116 (5)
3630.8 (17)
4
asy(Sb–C) 500 (m) cmꢀ1. MS (M=z) [Fragment, Inten-
ꢀ
m
b (A)
sity (%)]: 649 (Mþ, 1); 396, 394 [(CH3C6H4)3Sbþ, 6.5, 9];
305, 303 [(CH3C6H4)2Sbþ, 5.5, 8]; 214, 212
(CH3C6H4Sbþ, 77, 100).
c (A)
ꢀ
b (°)
3
ꢀ
V (A )
Z
Dcalc: (Mg mꢀ3
Absorption coefficient
)
1.419
1.324
1.579
1.571
2.1.6. (C5H5FeC5H4CH@CHCO2)2Sb(3-CH3C6H4)3
(II3)
(mmꢀ1
)
F (0 0 0)
1384
1744
Yield: 63%. Red solid. M.p. 126–129 °C. Anal. Calc.
for C47H43Fe2O4Sb: C, 62.36; H, 4.79. Found: C, 61.81;
H, 4.67%. H NMR: d 7.48–8.11 (m, 12H, C6H4); 7.61,
Crystal size (mm)
Reflections measured
Reflections observed
[I P 2rðIÞ]
0.30 ꢁ 0.25 ꢁ 0.20 0.35 ꢁ 0.30 ꢁ 0.25
13325
5666
7429
3210
1
5.95(d, d, 2H, 2H, CH@CH); 4.36, 4.30 (s, s, 4H, 4H,
C5H4); 4.05 (s, 10H, C5H5); 2.57 (s, 9H, 3-CH3) ppm.
IR: masy(CO2) 1623 (s), msym(CO2) 1379 (s), Dm(CO2) 244;
Final R, Rw
0.0450 and 0.0878 0.0512 and 0.0901
371
0.986
Parameters
Goodness-of-fit
232
0.963
m
asy(Sb–C) 468 (m) cmꢀ1
.

2178
J.-S. Li et al. / Inorganica Chimica Acta 357 (2004) 2176–2180
3. Results and discussion
gration curve tallies with what was expected from the
molecular formula.
3.1. Synthesis and characterization of the title complexes
The mass spectra of complexes I1 and II2 show that
the molecular ion peak of compound II2 is observed
while there is no molecular ion peak in compound I1,
but the fragment ions of I1 are agreement with its
structure expected. Decarboxylation and dearylation
from antimony atom are main breakdown patterns for
the two compounds. In addition, the fragment ions
containing the two isotopes of antimony (121Sb and
123Sb) are all observed in the two compounds.
The title complexes were prepared by the reaction
between 3-ferrocenylacrylic acid and arylantimony
bromide in toluene suspension in the presence of tri-
ethylamine at room temperature in relatively good yields
(Scheme 1). All complexes are red crystalline solids and
stable under ordinary conditions. They are soluble in
organic solvents such as benzene, toluene, chloroform,
and dimethylsulfoxide, but not soluble in water, ether,
methanol, ethanol, and petroleum ether.
3.2. Crystal structures of complexes I1 and II1
The IR spectra of the title complexes have been
recorded in the range of 4000–400 cmꢀ1. The absorption
bands can be assigned on the basis of the earlier
publications.
The molecular structure of complex I1 determined by
crystal X-ray diffraction is presented in Fig. 1. Selected
bond lengths and angles are shown in Table 2. The
crystal structure of compound I1 can be reported as
monomer. The most important feature in this structure
is the very strong secondary interaction between anti-
mony and the formally non-bonded oxygen of the car-
boxylate group. This is the very interaction which makes
the coordination geometry of antimony to be converted
The infrared spectroscopic data provide further sup-
port for the molecular constitution of the title complexes.
In majority of organoantimony(V) compounds the an-
timony has generally a coordination number of five.
Because the vacant 5d orbital of antimony atom can
accept lone electron pairs of ligands, in some cases the
antimony may have a coordination number of six [5,6] or
seven [7,20]. The IR stretching vibration frequencies of
carbonyl groups in organoantimony carboxylates are
very important for determining their structures: When
there are interactions between the antimony atom and
the carbonyl oxygen atoms of the carboxylate groups,
the asymmetric absorption vibration frequencies
[masy(CO2)] of carbonyl groups decrease and the sym-
metric absorption vibration frequencies [msym(CO2)] of
carbonyl groups increase. Therefore their differences
[Dm(CO2)] decrease [3,8,9]. In the IR spectra of the title
complexes the carboxylate bands are observed in the
characteristic regions: masy(CO2) between 1654 and 1623
cmꢀ1 and msym(CO2) between 1389 and 1374 cmꢀ1. The
Dm(CO2) values of these complexes are between 271 and
244 cmꢀ1. So we can assume that there are coordination
interactions between the antimony atom and the car-
bonyl oxygen atom of the carboxylate group (See the
crystal structures of complexes I1 and II1). In addition,
the frequencies masy(Sb–C) appear between 500 and 461
cmꢀ1, this is consistent with the literature [8].
from
a
trigonal bipyramid {for example, in
CH3CO2SbPh4 [13] and Ph3GeCH(Ph)CH2CO2SbPh4
[20]} to a distorted octahedron. The atoms Sb(1), O(1),
ꢀ
O(2), C(20) and C(26) are coplanar within 0.0205 A. The
apical Sb(1)–C(14) and Sb(1)–C(32) distances [2.173(7)
ꢀ
and 2.175(8) A, respectively] are almost equal and the
equatorial Sb(1)–C(20) and Sb(1)–C(26) distances
ꢀ
[2.143(7) and 2.130(8) A, respectively] are slightly dif-
ferent from each other. All these Sb–C distances are
slightly different from those in CH3CO2SbPh4 and in
Ph3GeCH(Ph)CH2CO2SbPh4. The Sb(1)–O(1) and
ꢀ
Sb(1)–O(2) distances [2.269(4) and 2.400(5) A, respec-
tively] are also different from those in CH3CO2SbPh4
ꢀ
[2.235(4) and 2.585(5) A, respectively] and in
ꢀ
Ph3GeCH(Ph)CH2CO2SbPh4 [2.289(3) and 3.233(3) A,
respectively]. This indicates that there is very strong
coordination interaction between the carbonyl oxygen
and the antimony atom. The C(14)–Sb(1)–C(32) angle is
1
The H NMR spectra of all complexes show that all
the protons in the compounds have been identified and
the total number of protons calculated from the inte-
Fig. 1. The molecular structure of complex I1.
Scheme 1.

J.-S. Li et al. / Inorganica Chimica Acta 357 (2004) 2176–2180
2179
Table 2
Table 3
ꢀ
ꢀ
Selected bond lengths (A) and angles (°) for I1
Selected bond lengths (A) and angles (°) for II1
Bond lengths
Bond lengths
Sb(1)–C(14)
Sb(1)–C(20)
Sb(1)–C(26)
Sb(1)–C(32)
Sb(1)–O(1)
Sb(1)–O(2)
C(13)–O(1)
C(13)–O(2)
C(13)–C(12)
C(12)–C(11)
2.173(7)
2.143(7)
2.130(8)
2.175(8)
2.269(4)
2.400(5)
1.293(8)
1.259(9)
1.457(9)
1.311(9)
C(11)–C(1)
C(1)–C(2)
C(2)–C(3)
Fe(1)–C(1)
Fe(1)–C(2)
Fe(1)–C(3)
Fe(1)–C(4)
Fe(1)–C(5)
Fe(1)–C(6)
Fe(1)–C(9)
1.448(9)
1.410(10)
1.415(11)
2.025(7)
2.053(8)
2.030(8)
2.013(8)
2.039(8)
2.001(15)
1.986(12)
Sb(1)–C(14)
Sb(1)–C(18)
Sb(1)–C(18A)
Sb(1)–O(1)
Sb(1)–O(2)
Sb(1)–O(1A)
Sb(1)–O(2A)
O(1)–C(13)
O(2)–C(13)
C(13)–C(12)
C(12)–C(11)
C(11)–C(10)
C(10)–C(9)
C(9)–C(8)
2.085(8)
2.109(6)
2.109(6)
2.111(4)
2.952(8)
2.111(4)
2.952(8)
1.319(7)
1.203(8)
C(8)–C(7)
C(7)–C(6)
C(6)–C(10)
Fe(1)–C(10)
Fe(1)–C(9)
Fe(1)–C(8)
Fe(1)–C(7)
Fe(1)–C(6)
Fe(1)–C(5)
1.380(15)
1.394(14)
1.401(11)
2.044(7)
2.017(9)
2.029(10)
2.033(10)
2.012(8)
2.041(9)
2.026(9)
2.014(10)
2.032(10)
2.030(10)
1.480(11) Fe(1)–C(4)
1.302(10) Fe(1)–C(3)
1.469(10) Fe(1)–C(2)
1.403(12) Fe(1)–C(1)
1.418(11)
Bond angles
C(20)–Sb(1)–C(26)
C(26)–Sb(1)–O(1)
C(20)–Sb(1)–O(2)
O(1)–Sb(1)–O(2)
C(14)–Sb(1)–C(20)
C(14)–Sb(1)–C(26)
C(14)–Sb(1)–C(32)
C(14)–Sb(1)–O(1)
C(14)–Sb(1)–O(2)
C(32)–Sb(1)–C(20)
C(32)–Sb(1)–C(26)
103.4(3)
93.0(2)
107.3(2)
C(32)–Sb(1)–O(1)
C(32)–Sb(1)–O(2)
Sb(1)–O(1)–C(13)
81.7(2)
78.3(2)
94.7(5)
89.6(5)
119.4(7)
119.9(8)
120.7(8)
121.0(8)
126.7(8)
174.1(9)
40.5(3)
56.22(17) Sb(1)–O(2)–C(13)
Bond angles
94.6(3)
98.7(3)
156.8(3)
81.5(2)
79.0(2)
97.0(3)
98.0(3)
O(1)–C(13)–O(2)
O(1)–C(13)–C(12)
O(2)–C(13)–C(12)
C(13)–C(12)–C(11)
C(12)–C(11)–C(1)
C(1)–Fe(1)–C(9)
C(1)–Fe(1)–C(2)
C(14)–Sb(1)–C(18)
C(14)–Sb(1)–C(18A) 112.0(6)
112.0(6)
C(13)–C(12)–C(11) 125.7(8)
C(12)–C(11)–C(10) 127.4(9)
85.77(12) C(11)–C(10)–Fe(1) 125.7(5)
C(14)–Sb(1)–O(1)
C(14)–Sb(1)–O(1A)
O(1)–Sb(1)–O(1A)
85.77(12) C(11)–C(10)–C(9)
127.5(9)
126.5(11)
105.9(8)
163.3(5)
40.4(3)
171.5(2)
C(11)–C(10)–C(6)
C(6)–C(10)–C(9)
C(10)–Fe(1)–C(3)
C(10)–Fe(1)–C(9)
C(10)–Fe(1)–C(6)
C(18)–Sb(1)–C(18A) 135.9(4)
C(18)–Sb(1)–O(1)
C(18)–Sb(1)–O(1A)
C(18A)–Sb(1)–O(1)
90.9(2)
92.3(2)
92.3(2)
40.4(3)
C(18A)–Sb(1)–O(1A) 90.9(2)
O(1)–C(13)–O(2)
O(1)–C(13)–C(12)
O(2)–C(13)–C(12)
125.3(8)
114.2(8)
120.4(7)
156.8(3)°, which is larger than the corresponding angle
in CH3CO2SbPh4 [152.6(2)°]. The Fe–C distances are
consistent with the literature [26].
The molecular structure of complex II1 is presented in
Fig. 2. Selected bond lengths and angles are shown in
Table 3.
ꢀ
O(1) and Sb(1)–O(1A) distances are all 2.111(4) A. The
ꢀ
Sb(1)–O(2) and Sb(1)–O(2A) distances are all 2.952(8) A,
Carboxylates are versatile ligands which can be either
unidentate or bidentate. The molecule of compound II1
consists of a monomer with a seven-coordinated anti-
mony atom surrounded by four oxygens and three phenyl
groups. The coordination geometry of antimony can be
described as a distorted pentagonal bipyramid with the
plane being defined by four oxygens from two symmet-
rically chelating carboxylate groups and one carbon
atom from one phenyl group, while other phenyl groups
occupying the axial positions. The atoms Sb(1), O(1),
O(2), O(1A), O(2A) and C(14) are coplanar within 0.0952
ꢀ
which are considerably shorter than the sum (3.60 A) of
the van der Waals radii of antimony and oxygen atoms
ꢀ
(2.2 and 1.40 A, respectively) [27]. This indicates that
there are weak coordination interactions between the
carbonyl oxygens of the two symmetrical ferrocenylac-
rylate groups and the antimony atom. The apical Sb(1)–
ꢀ
C(18) and Sb(1)–C(18A) distances are all 2.109(6) A. The
C(13)–O(1) distance is equal to the C(13A)–O(1A) dis-
ꢀ
tance [1.319(7) A]. The C(13)–O(2) distance is equal to
ꢀ
the C(13A)–O(2A) distance [1.203(8) A]. The C(18)–
Sb(1)–C(18A) angle is 135.9(4)°, which is smaller than the
corresponding angle in [Ph3GeCH2CH(CH3)CO2]2Sb(4-
ClC6H4)3 [149.86(19)°] [20].
ꢀ
ꢀ
A. The Sb(1)–C(14) distance is 2.085(8) A. The Sb(1)–
4. Supplementary material
Crystallographic data for the structures in this paper
have been deposited with the Cambridge Crystallo-
graphic Data Centre, CCDC no. 204594 for compound
I1 and CCDC no. 204595 for compound II1. Copies of
this information may be obtained free of charge from
The Director, CCDC, 12 Union Road, Cambridge, CB2
1EZ, UK (Fax: +44-1223-336033; e-mail: de-
posit@ccdc.cam.ac.uk or http://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk).
Fig. 2. The molecular structure of complex II1.

2180
J.-S. Li et al. / Inorganica Chimica Acta 357 (2004) 2176–2180
[13] S.P. Bone, D.B. Sowerby, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Silicon 45 (1989)
23.
Acknowledgements
[14] R. Ruether, F. Huber, H. Preut, J. Organomet. Chem. 295 (1985)
21.
We thank Professor Hong-Gen Wang, Professor Hai-
Bin Song and assistant Professor Xue-Bin Leng for their
support of the crystallographic study.
[15] C. Brabant, B. Blanck, A.L. Beauchamp, J. Organomet. Chem. 82
(1974) 231.
[16] V.A. Lebedev, R.I. Bochkova, E.A. Kuzmin, V.V. Sharutin, N.V.
Belov, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 260 (1981) 1124.
[17] G. Ferguson, C. Glidewell, D. Lloyd, S. Metcalfe, J. Chem. Soc.
Perkin Trans. II (1988) 731.
References
[18] J.S. Li, G.Q. Huang, Y.T. Wei, C.H. Xiong, D.Q. Zhu, Q.L. Xie,
Appl. Organomet. Chem. 12 (1998) 31.
[1] A.E. Goddard, J. Chem. Soc. 123 (1923) 2315.
[2] K. Bajpai, R. Singhal, R.C. Strivastava, Indian J. Chem. 18A
(1979) 73.
[19] M.N. Gibbons, D.B. Sowerby, J. Organomet. Chem. 555 (1998)
271.
[20] Y.Q. Ma, J.S. Li, Z.A. Xuan, R.C. Liu, J. Organomet. Chem. 620
(2001) 235.
[3] K. Singhal, R. Rastogi, P. Raj Indian, J. Chem. 26A (1987) 146.
[4] W.E. Mcewen, G.H. Briles, B.E. Giddings, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 91
(1969) 7079.
[21] J.S. Li, Y.Q. Ma, J.R. Cui, R.Q. Wang, Appl. Organomet. Chem.
15 (2001) 639.
[5] K. Hartke, H.M. Wolff, Chem. Ber. 113 (1980) 1394.
[6] P.L. Millington, D.B. Sowerby, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans.
(1992) 1199.
[22] W.G. Lu, J.X. Tao, X.Y. Li, Y.Z. Wang, Yingyong Huaxue 17
(2000) 126 (in Chinese).
[23] L.V. Snegur, Y.S. Nekrasov, V.V. Gumenyuk, Z.V. Zhilina, N.B.
Morozova, I.K. Skviridova, I.A. Rodina, N.S. Sergeeva, K.G.
Shchitkov, V.N. Babin, Ross. Khim. Zh. 42 (1998) 178 (in
Russian).
[7] M. Dogamala, F. Huber, H. Preut, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 571
(1989) 130.
[8] G.O. Doak, G.G. Long, L.D. Freedman, J. Organomet. Chem. 4
(1965) 82.
[24] N.H. Nemeroff, M.E. McDonnell, J.M. Axten, L.J. Buckley,
Synthetic Commun. 22 (1992) 3271.
[9] A. Glowacki, F. Huber, H. Preut, Recl. Trav. Chim. Pays-Bas.
107 (1988) 278.
[25] W.J. Lice, R.S. Menzies, J. Chem. Soc. (1950) 617.
[26] P. Seiler, J.D. Dunitz, Acta Crystallogr. Sect. B 38 (1982) 1741.
[27] J.A. Dean, LangeÕs Handbook of Chemistry, twelfth ed.,
McGraw-Hill Book Company Press, New York, 1979, pp. 3–
120; 3–123.
[10] A.L. Beauchamp, M.J. Bennett, F.A. Cotton, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
91 (1969) 297.
[11] K. Shen, W.E. McEwen, L.J. LaPlaca, W.C. Hamilton, A.P.
Wolf, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 90 (1968) 1718.
[12] S.P. Bone, D.B. Sowerby, J. Chem. Res. 82 (S) (1979) 1029(M).