4726 Organometallics, Vol. 26, No. 19, 2007
ShaVer et al.
Scheme 2. Decomposition Pathways for R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2Bn
by an entirely organometallic pathway. This mechanism works
on the same principles as a reversible addition-cleavage
mechanism, with the transition metal acting as a reversible spin-
trap. OMRP offers control over polymerizations based on the
reversible homolytic cleavage of the weak bond between an
alkyl group and a metal catalyst. Cobalt systems supported by
judiciously chosen ligands have been shown to yield high
molecular weight acrylate polymers with very low polydisper-
sities (Mw/Mn ≈ 1.1).9,10 Recently this work has expanded to
include the controlled polymerization of vinyl acetate. While
Co(acac)2 is unable to mediate the polymerization of acrylate
monomers, it can effectively control the polymerization of vinyl
acetate in bulk11 and suspension12 and has led to the develop-
ment of end-functionalized13 and block copolymers14 of poly-
(vinyl acetate) and poly(vinyl alcohol).
A few systems have been reported to display both ATRP and
OMRP behavior. The polymerization of styrene by the half-
sandwich molybdenum compounds15,16 CpMoCl2(PMe3)2 and
CpMoCl2(dppe) proceed via ATRP, generating polystyrene with
moderate polydispersities (PDIs) (ca. 1.5) and molecular weights
that increase linearly with conversion. The same catalysts can
also function in the OMRP of styrene, where the polymer
molecular weights, though higher than those predicted on the
basis of monomer to initiator ratios, increase linearly with
conversion and have PDIs (1.3-1.7) indicative of controlled
behavior. Other examples of catalysts that are capable of
Complexes
favor Fe(III) complexes of high spin-state and generate halogen
end-capped polymers via ATRP. Here, we report the results of
our investigations into the capacity of R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2 catalysts
to engage in OMRP and a study of the factors that influence
the mechanistic pathways, ATRP versus OMRP, followed in
these reactions.
Results
Formation and Stability of Fe(III)-Alkyl Species. Our
earlier studies have shown that incorporating electron-withdraw-
ing groups at the 2,3 positions of R-diimine ligands promotes a
switch in polymerization mechanism from ATRP to CCT.6,8 This
switch also correlates with a change in the spin-state of the
parent Fe(III) complexes, from S ) 5/2 to S ) 3/2. But what
effect does this spin-state change have on the stability and
function of R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2(P) intermediates in the polymeri-
zation?
In order to gain further understanding of the role of organo-
metallic intermediates in these polymerization systems, the
reactivity of a family of R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl3 (Scheme 2) complexes
toward Grignard reagents was investigated. The stability of the
product R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2R complexes can provide an indication
of the relative carbophilicity of the parent R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2
catalysts. Initially, the mono-benzyl Fe(III) catalysts were
targeted via treatment of R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl3 with BnMgCl (Bn )
C6H5CH2) at -78 °C. There are two possible decomposition
pathways for the alkyl complexes so generated, as shown in
Scheme 2. If the R′,R′′[N,N]FeCl2Bn is thermally unstable, then
it would be anticipated to decompose by homolytic Fe-C bond
cleavage to generate benzyl radicals, which can couple to give
bibenzyl (Bn2, PhCH2CH2Ph). If there is enhanced stability for
the iron alkyl species, it will decompose at a higher temperature.
Then, quenching the reaction with H2O below its decomposition
temperature would be expected to generate toluene via proto-
nolysis of the Fe-C bond.
controlling polymerization through both ATRP and OMRP
17,18
mechanisms include Cp2TiCl2
and OsCl2(PPh3)3.19 These
findings suggest that, under ATRP conditions, the radical
concentration is regulated not only by the atom-transfer equi-
librium but also via the trapping of radicals by the lower
oxidation state metal species. The interplay of these various one-
electron processes has recently been reviewed.20
In an earlier study we detailed the synthesis, characterization,
and styrene polymerization behavior of a family of 2,3-
substituted R-diimine iron catalysts.8 Electron-withdrawing
substituents favor Fe(III) complexes with intermediate spin-
states and generate low molecular weight vinylene-terminated
products characteristic of a CCT mechanism. Electron-donating
substituents, such as alkyl groups or 4-(dimethylamino)phenyl,
(7) While the term halogenophilicity has been previously employed to
describe the reaction of a metal complex with a halide ion (see Macro-
molecules 2004, 9768), the terms halogenophilicity and carbophilicity are
used here to describe the relative predilection for a complex to form metal-
halogen and metal-carbon bonds, respectively.
(8) Allan, L. E. N.; Shaver, M. P.; White, A. J. P.; Gibson, V. C. Inorg.
Chem., in press.
(9) Wayland, B. B.; Poszmik, G.; Mukerjee, S. L.; Fryd, M. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1994, 116, 7943.
Addition of BnMgCl at -78 °C to the high-spin complex 1
produced an immediate color change from yellow to deep
purple, and Cy,H[N,N]FeCl2 was isolated from the reaction
mixture. GC analysis of the reaction products indicated the
formation of Bn2 via the reductive alkylation of 1. Similarly,
alkylation of 2, also a high-spin complex, produced Bn2 at -78
°C. In both of these cases, the iron-alkyl species is unstable at
-78 °C; the Fe-C bond cleaves homolytically to generate
carbon radicals in solution, which couple to form Bn2. The
reaction of 3 and 4 with BnMgCl at -78 °C produced very
different results. GC analysis of quenched aliquots showed that
toluene (T) was the major product, not bibenzyl. As the solution
was warmed to -30 °C, a red-brown to purple color change
coincided with Bn2 becoming the major decomposition product
(Figure 1). Thus, it is apparent that radical coupling occurs at
a higher temperature, implying that the Fe-alkyl complexes
derived from 3 and 4 have improved stability. This corresponds
(10) Davis, T. P.; Kukulj, D.; Haddleton, D. M.; Maloney, D. R. Trends
Polym. Sci. 1995, 3, 7943.
(11) Debuigne, A.; Caille, J.-R.; Je´roˆme, R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2005,
44, 1101.
(12) Debuigne, A.; Caille, J.-R.; Detrembleur, C.; Je´roˆme, R. Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 3439.
(13) Debuigne, A.; Caille, J.-R.; Willet, N.; Je´roˆme, R. Macromolecules
2005, 38, 5452.
(14) Debuigne, A.; Caille, J.-R.; Willet, N.; Je´roˆme, R. Macromolecules
2005, 38, 9488.
(15) Grognec, E. L.; Claverie, J.; Poli, R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
9513.
(16) Stoffelbach, F.; Poli, R.; Richard, P. J. Organomet. Chem. 2002,
663, 269.
(17) Grishin, D. F.; Semyonycheva, L. L.; Telegina, E. V.; Smirnov, A.
S.; Nevodchikovc, V. I. Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2003, 52, 505.
(18) Grishin, D. F.; Ignatov, S. K.; Shchepalov, A. A.; Razuvaev, A. G.
Appl. Organomet. Chem. 2004, 18, 271.
(19) Braunecker, W. A.; Itami, Y.; Matyjaszewski, K. Macromolecules
2005, 38, 9402.
(20) Poli, R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 5058.