Abstract
A chelating benzimidazolylidene–carboxylate ligand (1) was transferred from [Ag(1)] to [RuCl2(dmso)4] to afford trans(C)-[Ru(1)2(bpy)] (2), but all attempts to incorporate 1 into cis(Cl)-[RuCl2(bpy)2] were unsuccessful. Alternatively, reaction of [RuCl(1)(η6-cymene)] (3) with bpy and AgOTf successfully produced [Ru(1)(bpy)2][OTf] (4). Methylation of 2 and 4 with MeOTf yielded trans(C)-[Ru(1-Me)2(bpy)][OTf]2 (5) and [Ru(1-Me)(bpy)2][OTf]2 (6), accompanied by a +2 and +1 increase in net charge, respectively. Cyclic voltammetry indicated that the increase in Ru(II)/Ru(III) oxidation potential from 2 to 5 was twice the increase from 4 to 6. UV–Vis spectroscopy also revealed that transitions in 5 occurred at higher energy than in 2 by double the difference between 6 and 4. Crystallographic analysis demonstrated that the coordination environment of Ru did not differ significantly between 2 and 5, suggesting that the observed shifts in oxidation potentials and absorption wavelengths are not due to changes in coordination chemistry or formal oxidation state. Collectively, these results show that 5 and 6 feature Ru centers more electron deficient than those in 2 and 4, respectively, by amounts linearly proportional to the difference in net charge.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
