Reductions with Germanium(II)
Table 3. Kinetic Data for Oxidation of Germanium(II) with I -
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 39, No. 18, 2000 4121
-
+
3
reaction is not inhibited by added I but is accelerated by H ,
5
II
+
-
-
6
-1 b
we infer that rates are being set by Ge(II)-O bond breakage.
1
0 [Ge ], M [H ], M [Cl ], M [I ], M 10 (rate), M s
+
For the [H ]-independent component we suggest sequence 10-
2
6
1
5
2
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
.8
.9
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.10
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.40
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.010
0.150
0.48
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
1.6 (1.7)
4.2 (4.1)
12 (12)
19 (20)
24 (25)
4.3 (4.1)
4.2 (4.1)
4.2 (4.1)
4.2 (4.1)
4.3 (4.1)
7.2 (7.9)
5.7 (5.3)
6.9 (6.6)
7.8 (9.0)
11 (11)
1
1,
2
3
4
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
+
0.20
and for the [H ]-proportional contribution we suggest an
analogous route (with protonation preceding scission). This
duality of paths leads to rate law 12 (algebraically equivalent
0.040
0.080
0.120
0.180
0.20
15 (15)
18 (17)
26 (23)
II
+
rate ) [Ge ](k + k [H ]/KHA)
(12)
A
HA
0.30
0.40
a
-]
to eq 9), in which rate constants kA and kHA pertain to the two
paths and KHA pertains to the protonation preequilibrium. Our
data allow calculation of the ratio kHA/KHA, but not individual
values of these parameters. We do not observe kinetic saturation
4 4 3
Reactions were run at 23.5 °C, µ ) 0.50 M (HClO /NaClO ), [I
-
6
-6
b
)
3 × 10 to 8 × 10 M. All profiles were linear. Parenthetical
II + -1
values were calculated as [Ge ](k + k′[H ]), with k ) 0.045 s and
-
1
-1
k′ ) 0.70 M
s .
+
with respect to [H ], indicating that KHA lies far above the
(
III) center, appear to be the first reported kinetic parameters
associated with this odd-electron state. Within the ranges
examined, the rate of formation of Ge(III) () 50 M
Cu ] [Cl ] at 23 °C), but not its rate of oxidation, is proportional
23
acidity range examined.
The acidic site involved in the protonation equilibrium in this
system is uncertain. Our data are consistent with a pKA below
-2
-1
II
s
[Ge ]
I
-
[
0
.0 for Ge(II)-bound H2O, i.e., more than 4 units below that
-
to [Cl ]. Neither rate is acid-dependent.
II
17
for the related Sn (aq) unit (ca. 4). This is not unreasonable,
for the acidities of aqua-substituted cations within group 14 are
unusually sensitive to cationic size. On the other hand,
-
-3
At [Cl ] ) 0.8-1.0 M and [Ge(II)] > 3 × 10 M, decay
curves become exponential, and the unimolecular loss of
Ge(II) is negligible. Combinations of parameters k7, k6, and k8
17
protonation at the unshared electron pair of Ge(II) cannot be
excluded, since nucleophilic character associated with the
-
19
(
the latter two adjusted for [Cl ]-dependence), fit the observed
-
1
-1
curves only if an additional term (0.66 M s ) pertaining to
the uncatalyzed Ge(II)-Fe(III) reaction is included in the
integrated treatment. This noncomplementary redox change very
probably passes through Ge(III) as well. As expected, the initial
step is much slower than the Fe(III)-Ge(III) reaction (k7 ) 6
10 M s ). In analogy to the In(I,III) system, the s
intermediate should be much more strongly reducing than the
parent s cation.
Oxidations by I3 . Reactions of this oxidant were carried
24
analogous halide-ligated Sn(II) has been demonstrated.
The proposed rate-determining scission at Ge(II) (eq 10) is
25
not in accord with the general view that sluggish bond-
breaking at metal complexes in aqueous solution occurs only
when activation entails a substantial loss in ligand field
stabilization. There are, however, an array of reports of
2
-1 -1
20
1
×
26
measurably slow substitutions at centers such as Ti(III),
2
27
28
Zn(II), and Al(III), which are conventionally considered to
be substitution-labile. In addition, heterolysis (eq 10) may be
considered unusual since it involves loss of a ligand from a
tricoordinate species without compensation by attendant bond-
-
-
-
out in 0.01-0.50 M iodide to minimize dissociation of I3 (I3
-
-3
21
a I2 + I ; K ) 1.4 × 10 at 25°). In analogy with reported
-
22
speciations in Sn(II)-I systems, we would expect partial
making.
-
2-
conversion to GeI3 and GeI4 in the solutions taken.
Reactions of IrCl62- and PtCl62-. Reactions of both
With Ge(II) in excess, all profiles are linear (i.e., rates do
not vary with [I3 ]). Slopes are proportional to [Ge(II)], are
independent of [I ], and rise with [H ].
hexachloro-substituted oxidants were first-order each in the
participating redox species. Conversions of the Ir(IV) center
were run with Ge(II) in excess whereas transformations of
Pt(IV) were carried out with excess oxidant to minimize
complications resulting from formation of a Pt(II)-Ge(II)
-
-
+
Kinetic data are listed in Table 3. Within the ranges studied,
rates conform to binomial expression 9. Refinement yields k )
-1
-1 -1
(
4.5 ( 0.2) × 10-2
s
and k′ ) 0.70 ( 0.02 M s .
29
adduct. Results are summarized in Table 4.
Both reactions are seen to be accelerated by chloride, pointing
to the involvement of this anion in the activation processes.
II
- 0
+
rate ) [Ge ][I ] (k + k′[H ])
(9)
3
The most unusual feature of this system, the zero-order
(23) At even higher acidities, for which satisfactory data could not be
obtained by our methods, more marked (and, as yet, inexplicable)
acceleration was perceived.
-
dependence on I3 , requires that the oxidant enter the picture
only after a pair of competing slow steps, both involving just
the reductant. We are then almost certainly dealing with rate-
determining heterolyses of Ge(II) centers at different protonation
levels (the more protonated form the more reactive), yielding
one or more coordinatively unsaturated intermediates. Since this
(
24) See, for example: (a) Holt, M. S.; MacDougall, J. J.; Mathey, F.;
Nelson, J. H. Inorg. Chem. 1984, 23, 449. (b) Herbert, I. R.; Pregosin,
P. S.; Ruegger, H. Inorg. Chim. Acta 1986, 112, 29.
(
25) See, for example: Basolo, F.; Pearson, R. G. Mechanisms of Inorganic
Reactions, 2nd ed.; Wiley: New York, 1968, Chapter 3. These authors
summarize this view and offer specific warnings against its mis-
application.
(
(
20) Al-Ajlouni, A. M.; Gould, E. S. Res. Chem. Intermed. 1998, 24, 653.
21) Swift, E. H. A System of Chemical Analysis; Prentice-Hall: Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, 1940; p 69.
(26) (a) Thompson, G. A. K.; Sykes, A. G. Inorg. Chem. 1976, 15, 638.
(b) Birk, J. P. Inorg. Chem. 1975, 14, 1724.
(27) Paquette, G.; Zador, M. Inorg. Chim. Acta, 1978, 26, I.23.
(28) Dash, A. C.; Nanda, Inorg. Chem. 1973, 12, 2024.
(22) Haight, G. P., Jr.; Johansson, L. Acta Chem. Scand. 1968, 22, 961.