Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 2055
12 of 18
3
. Experimental
3
.1. Materials and Instruments
All solvents used were of reagent grade, (Aldrich, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and they were
−
1
used with no further purification. Infrared spectra in the region of 4000–370 cm were obtained in
1
KBr pellets with a Jasco FT-IR-6200 spectrometer. The H-NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker
AC 250, 400 MHFT-NMR instrument in DMSO-d . Chemical shifts are given in ppm using H-TMS as
1
6
internal reference. Elemental analysis for C, H, N, and S were carried out with a Carlo Erba EA MODEL
19
1
8
108 (Waltham, MA, USA). The 1 Sn M o˝ ssbauer spectra were collected at sample temperature of
0 K using a constant acceleration spectrometer equipped with a Ca119mSnO source kept at room
3
temperature. The isomer shift values of the components used to fit the spectra are given relative to
119
SnO at room temperature. The Sn M o˝ ssbauer spectra were recorded with Constant acceleration
2
WissEl-Wissenschaftliche Elektronik GmbH spectrometer (Starnberg, Germany).
3
.2. Synthesis and Crystallization of {[(n-Bu) Sn(CH COO)]n} (1) and {[Ph Sn(CH COO)]n} (2)
3
3
3
3
Although the synthesis of these compounds is already known [33
,
34] we briefly described the
procedure follows here. 0.5 mmol of tri-n-butyltin oxide (C H OSn , 0.298 g) for
1, or triphenyltin(IV)
24
54
2
hydrooxide (C H OSn, 0.183 g) for
2, were diluted with 0.5 mmol acetic acid, in 20 mL benzene
24
16
in a 100-mL spherical flask. The flask was fitted with a Dean–Stark moisture trap and the reaction
mixture was refluxed for 3 h. The solution was filtered and the clear filtrate was concentrated to
dryness. Crystals of
ether solution.
1
and
2
, suitable for X-ray analysis, were formed by slow evaporation of a diethyl
◦
1: Yield: 40%; m.p: 75–76 C; (C H O Sn)n·(MW = 349.04); elemental analysis: found C = 48.23,
14
30
2
−
1
H = 6.65%; calcd: C = 48.18, H = 8.66%. MID-IR (cm ) (KBr): 3045 w, 2330 w, 2295 s, 1959 w, 1821
w, 1659 s, 1643 w, 1573 w, 1555 s, 1428 s, 1334 vs, 1261 vs, 1077 vs, 1025 w, 997 w, 729 w, 696 w, 665 w,
1
6
09 w, 499 w, 455 w. H NMR (ppm) in DMSO-d : 1.776 (s), 1.578–1.501 (q), 1.327–1.236 (q), 1.043–1.001
6
(
t), 0.880–0.843 (t).
◦
2: Yield: 40%; m.p: 110–115 C; (C H O Sn) (MW = 409.02); elemental analysis: found
n
20
18
2
−
1
C = 58.91, H = 4.40%; calcd: C = 58.73, H = 4.43%. MID-IR (cm ) (KBr): 2400 w, 1574 w, 1556 s, 1415 w,
1
1
384 s, 1015 s, 867 w, 671 w, 612 s. H NMR (ppm) in DMSO-d : 7.850–7.707 (q), 7.452–7.390 (q), 1.758
6
(single), 1.114–1.079 (t).
3
.3. X-Ray Structure Determination
Single crystal X-ray diffraction data for
diffractometer, equipped with a CCD area detector utilizing Cu Kα (λ
1
and
2
were collected on an Oxford-Diffraction Supernova
= (1.5418 Å)) radiation. A suitable
crystal was mounted on a Hampton cryoloop with Paratone-N oil and transferred to a goniostat
where it was cooled for data collection. Empirical absorption corrections (multiscan based on
symmetry-related measurements) were applied using CrysAlis RED software [46]. The structures were
2
solved by direct methods using SIR2004 [47] and refined on F using full-matrix least-squares with
SHELXL-2014/7 [48]. Software packages used were as follows: CrysAlis CCD for data collection [46],
CrysAlis RED for cell refinement and data reduction [46], WINGX for geometric calculations [49]. The
non-H atoms were treated anisotropically, whereas the aromatic H atoms were placed in calculated,
ideal positions and refined as riding on their respective carbon atoms. The single crystals of compound
2
exhibited a fairly poor diffraction pattern. As a result moderate quality X-ray data were collected
which did not lead to a publishable crystal structure. For this reason the X-ray data of
here and have not been deposited in Cambridge Structural Database.
2 are not quoted
Supplementary data (1_bu3sn2o_asp_checkcif_new.pdf and 1_bu3sn2o_asp_FINAL.cif) are
available from CCDC, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB2 1EZ, UK, (e-mail:deposit@ccdc.cam.ac.uk), on
request, quoting the deposition numbers CCDC-1846946 (1).