The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
1959
DOI: 10.1021/ja01532a013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stability Orders in Transition Metal-1,10-Phenanthroline Complexes1

Abstract: Stability constants are measured for complexes of Fe(II), Co(II), Ni(II), Cu(II) and Zn(II) with some 5-substituted-1,10-phenanthrolines, and are tabulated with other constants reported in the literature. It is found that the order of stabilities for the 1:1 complexes follows the expected series: Fe(II) < Co(II) < Ni(II) < Cu(II) > Zn(II). The 1:3 complexes follow an anomalous order which is attributed to non-uniformity in the metal ions with respect to the symmetry of the octahedral configuration. An importan… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

4
32
0

Year Published

1963
1963
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A similar representation of log K1 plotted against pK, shows the same trend except that the relative positions of iron (11) and copper are different. As has been noted elsewhere (1,12) the large 03 of the iron (11) complexes resides mainly in the abnormally large K3. Copper (11), on the other hand, shows a large K 1 (see the Irving-Williams order of stability) but this is not carried over into the P3 owing to the reluctance on the part of copper to accept ligands beyond a coordination number of four.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A similar representation of log K1 plotted against pK, shows the same trend except that the relative positions of iron (11) and copper are different. As has been noted elsewhere (1,12) the large 03 of the iron (11) complexes resides mainly in the abnormally large K3. Copper (11), on the other hand, shows a large K 1 (see the Irving-Williams order of stability) but this is not carried over into the P3 owing to the reluctance on the part of copper to accept ligands beyond a coordination number of four.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…A number of studies t o determine the stability of metal complexes of the phenanthrolines have been published (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8), among the most complete of which are those of Irving and co-workers (2,4). In an extension of these studies the present investigation has sought formation curves, and hence formation constants, for the complexes formed by 5,6-and 4,7-dimethyl-1,lO-phenanthroline with a selected group of ions of the first transition series.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phenanthroline was employed in preference to the commonly employed Fe(II) colorimetric agent ferrozine since, at low pH, ferrozine can induce the reduction of Fe(III) and therefore interfere with the reliable measurement of Fe(II) (Anastacio et al, 2008). Furthermore, phenanthroline can be used to quantify the concentration of Fe(II) in the presence of EDTA and citrate, with no interference due to complex formation (Wang et al, 2013) and forms an extremely stable Fe(II) complex with a stability constant of 10 21.3 (Banks & Bystroff, 1959); stronger than that of Fe(II)-EDTA (Morel & Hering, 1993). In the presence of SRFA, multiple background measurements were performed in the presence of phenanthroline and averaged to account for the absorbance of SRFA alone.…”
Section: Analysis Of Fe(ii)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the basis of a pK a of 1.12, at pH 5, g99.99% of the complex is present as Ru(bpy) 2 (dpp) 2+ , and the emission spectrum consists of only the 705 nm emission from the unprotonated complex. Taking the quantum efficiency of emission from room temperature, 22 ( 1°C, N 2 saturated, aqueous solutions of Ru(bpy) 3 2+ in water (6) to be 0.0429 (averaged from several references 18 ), the gradient method using a series of concentrations e0.10M 11 yields 1.98 ( 0.20 × 10 -3 as the quantum efficiency of the 705 nm emission from the unprotonated complex Ru(bpy) 2 (dpp) 2+ , designated Φ em u . The 735 nm emission from the protonated complex was then measured from a deaerated, aqueous solution containing the same concentration of Ru(bpy) 2 (dpp) 2+ but 1.0 M in HNO 3 .…”
Section: Nm Emissionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taking the quantum efficiency of emission from room temperature, 22 ( 1°C, N 2 saturated, aqueous solutions of Ru(bpy) 3 2+ in water (6) to be 0.0429 (averaged from several references 18 ), the gradient method using a series of concentrations e0.10M 11 yields 1.98 ( 0.20 × 10 -3 as the quantum efficiency of the 705 nm emission from the unprotonated complex Ru(bpy) 2 (dpp) 2+ , designated Φ em u . The 735 nm emission from the protonated complex was then measured from a deaerated, aqueous solution containing the same concentration of Ru(bpy) 2 (dpp) 2+ but 1.0 M in HNO 3 . With 1 M HNO 3 , g93% of the complex is present as the protonated complex, Ru(bpy) 2 (dppH) 3+ , and the emission spectrum consists of the 620 and 735 nm emissions from the protonated complex.…”
Section: Nm Emissionmentioning
confidence: 99%