Ruthenium-Locked Helical Chirality: A Barrier of Inversion and Formation of an Asymmetric Macrocycle.

Abstract

Upon coordination to metal centers, tetradentate ligands based on the 6,6′-bis(2″-aminopyridyl)-2,2′-bipyridine (bapbpy) structure form helical chiral complexes due to the steric clash between the terminal pyridines of the ligand. For octahedral ruthenium(II) complexes, the two additional axial ligands bound to the metal center, when different, generate diastereotopic aromatic protons that can be distinguished by NMR. Based on these geometrical features, the inversion barrier of helical [RuII(L)(RR′SO)Cl]+ complexes, where L is a sterically hindered bapbpy derivative and RR′SO is a chiral or achiral sulfoxide ligand, was studied by variable-temperature 1H NMR. The coalescence energies for the inversion of the helical chirality of [Ru(bapbpy)(DMSO)(Cl)]Cl and [Ru(bapbpy)(MTSO)(Cl)]Cl (where MTSO is (R)-methyl p-tolylsulfoxide) were found to be 43 and 44 kJ/mol, respectively. By contrast, in [Ru(biqbpy)(DMSO)(Cl)]Cl (biqbpy = 6,6′-bis(aminoquinolyl)-2,2′-bipyridine), increased strain caused by the larger terminal quinoline groups resulted in a coalescence temperature higher than 376 K, which pointed to an absence of helical chirality inversion at room temperature. Further increasing the steric strain by introducing methoxy groups ortho to the nitrogen atoms of the terminal pyridyl groups in bapbpy resulted in the serendipitous discovery of a ring-closing reaction that took place upon trying to make [Ru(OMe-bapbpy)(DMSO)Cl]+ (OMe-bapbpy = 6,6′-bis(6-methoxy-aminopyridyl)-2,2′-bipyridine). This reaction generated, in excellent yields, a chiral complex [Ru(L″)(DMSO)Cl]Cl, where L″ is an asymmetric tetrapyridyl macrocycle. This unexpected transformation appears to be specific to ruthenium(II) as macrocyclization did not occur upon coordination of the same ligand to palladium(II) or rhodium(III).