1985
DOI: 10.1002/chin.198521281
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ChemInform Abstract: AN ORGANOTHORIUM‐NICKEL PHOSPHIDO COMPLEX WITH A SHORT THORIUM‐NICKEL DISTANCE. THE STRUCTURE OF TH(η5‐C5ME5)2(μ‐PPH2)2NI(CO)2

Abstract: Der Titelkomplex (III) ent‐′ steht durch die angegebene 1:1‐molare Reaktion und wird IR‐, UV/VIS‐ und 1H‐ sowie 31P‐NMR‐spektroskopisch charakterisiert.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Th–P bond distance in 2 is in good agreement with the sum of the single-bond covalent radii for thorium and phosphorus67, but is relatively long for a thorium(IV)–phosphanide bond545556575859. However, this can be rationalized on the sterically demanding Tren TIPS ligand whereas all other thorium(IV)–phosphanide complexes involve a bis (pentamethylcyclopentadienyl) ligand combination that presents a sterically more accessible wedge for phosphanide ligation545556575859. Interestingly, the Th–P bond is ∼0.05 Å longer than might be expected from the difference in covalent radii of thorium and uranium67 when compared with the parent uranium(IV)–phosphanide congener34, which may reflect a more ionic Th–P interaction compared with the U–P interaction as suggested by calculations (see below).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 60%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The Th–P bond distance in 2 is in good agreement with the sum of the single-bond covalent radii for thorium and phosphorus67, but is relatively long for a thorium(IV)–phosphanide bond545556575859. However, this can be rationalized on the sterically demanding Tren TIPS ligand whereas all other thorium(IV)–phosphanide complexes involve a bis (pentamethylcyclopentadienyl) ligand combination that presents a sterically more accessible wedge for phosphanide ligation545556575859. Interestingly, the Th–P bond is ∼0.05 Å longer than might be expected from the difference in covalent radii of thorium and uranium67 when compared with the parent uranium(IV)–phosphanide congener34, which may reflect a more ionic Th–P interaction compared with the U–P interaction as suggested by calculations (see below).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…2.866 Å), [Th(η 5 -C 5 Me 5 ) 2 {P(SiMe 3 ) 2 }(Me)] (2.888(4) Å) and [Th(η 5 -C 5 Me 5 ) 2 (HP-2,4,6-Pr i 3 C 6 H 2 ) 2 ] (av. 2.879 Å) (refs 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59). The Th–P distance in 2 can also be compared with the U-P distance in the uranium analogue (2.883(2) Å) (ref.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In order to ascertain whether this is a unique or more broadly applicable phenomenon would require comparison to closely related compounds and in that regard arsenic congeners are the logical next step. However, reflecting the cumulative instability of pairing a large, polar metal like thorium with increasingly large, soft p-block elements394041424344454647 presents an increasing synthetic challenge regarding their preparation and isolation. Indeed, examples of thorium complexes with bonds to pnictide (Pn) elements heavier than phosphorus are exceedingly rare, and under ambient conditions the only two structurally characterized thorium–arsenic complexes are the Zintl-polyarsenide [{Th(η 5 -1,3-Bu t 2 C 5 H 3 ) 2 } 2 (μ-η 3 :η 3 -As 6 )] (ref.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%