A comparison of the influences of alkoxide and thiolate ligands on the electronic structure and reactivity of molybdenum(3+) and tungsten(3+) complexes. preparation and structures of M(2)(O(T)Bu)(2)(S(t)Bu)(4), [Mo(S(t)Bu)(3)(NO)](2), and W(S(t)Bu)(3)(NO)(py).

Abstract

M(2)(O(t)Bu)(6) compounds (M = Mo, W) react in hydrocarbon solvents with an excess of (t)BuSH to give M(2)(O(t)Bu)(2)(S(t)Bu)(4), red, air- and temperature-sensitive compounds. (1)H NMR studies reveal the equilibrium M(2)(O(t)Bu)(6) + 4(t)BuSH <==> M(2)(O(t)Bu)(2)(S(t)Bu)(4) + 4(t)BuOH proceeds to the right slowly at 22 degrees C. The intermediates M(2)(O(t)Bu)(4)(S(t)Bu)(2), M(2)(O(t)Bu)(3)(S(t)Bu)(3), and M(2)(O(t)Bu)(5)(S(t)Bu) have been detected. The equilibrium constants show the M-O(t)Bu bonds to be enthalpically favored over the M-S(t)Bu bonds. In contrast to the M(2)(O(t)Bu)(6) compounds, M(2)(O(t)Bu)(2)(S(t)Bu)(4) compounds are inert with respect to the addition of CO, CO(2), ethyne, (t)BuC triple bond CH, MeC triple bond N, and PhC triple bond N. Addition of an excess of (t)BuSH to a hydrocarbon solution of W(2)(O(t)Bu)(6)(mu-CO) leads to the rapid expulsion of CO and subsequent formation of W(2)(O(t)Bu)(2)(S(t)Bu)(4). Addition of an excess of (t)BuSH to hydrocarbon solutions of [Mo(O(t)Bu)(3)(NO)](2) and W(O(t)Bu)(3)(NO)(py) gives the structurally related compounds [Mo(S(t)Bu)(3)(NO)](2) and W(S(t)Bu)(3)(NO)(py), with linear M-N-O moieties and five-coordinate metal atoms. The values of nu(NO) are higher in the related thiolate compounds than in their alkoxide counterparts. The bonding in the model compounds M(2)(EH)(6), M(2)(OH)(2)(EH)(4), (HE)(3)M triple bond CMe, and W(EH)(3)(NO)(NH(3)) and the fragments M(EH)(3), where M = Mo or W and E = O or S, has been examined by DFT B3LYP calculations employing various basis sets including polarization functions for O and S and two different core potentials, LANL2 and relativistic CEP. BLYP calculations were done with ZORA relativistic terms using ADF 2000. The calculations, irrespective of the method used, indicate that the M-O bonds are more ionic than the M-S bonds and that E ppi to M dpi bonding is more important for E = O. The latter raises the M-M pi orbital energies by ca. 1 eV for M(2)(OH)(6) relative to M(2)(SH)(6). For M(EH)(3) fragments, the metal d(xz)(),d(yz)() orbitals are destabilized by OH ppi bonding, and in W(EH)(3)(NO)(NH(3)) the O ppi to M dpi donation enhances W dpi to NO pi* back-bonding. Estimates of the bond strengths for the M triple bond M in M(2)(EH)(6) compounds and M triple bond C in (EH)(3)M triple bond CMe have been obtained. The stronger pi donation of the alkoxide ligands is proposed to enhance back-bonding to the pi* orbitals of alkynes and nitriles and facilitate their reductive cleavage, a reaction that is not observed for their thiolate counterpart.