research papers\(\def\hfill{\hskip 5em}\def\hfil{\hskip 3em}\def\eqno#1{\hfil {#1}}\)

Journal logoSTRUCTURAL
CHEMISTRY
ISSN: 2053-2296

Polymorphism in a secondary phosphine

crossmark logo

aSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Bedson Building, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
*Correspondence e-mail: paul.waddell@ncl.ac.uk

Edited by T. Ohhara, J-PARC Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Japan (Received 10 December 2024; accepted 21 January 2025; online 30 January 2025)

Two crystal structures of bis­(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine, C20H27P, are reported constituting the first recorded case of polymorphism in a secondary phosphine (R2PH). The two structures differ in their conformation and, as a result, the steric hindrance experienced at the phospho­rus centre is observed to be dependent on the packing environment. Each polymorph exhibits a distinct supra­molecular structure; in polymorph I the mol­ecules are arranged in columns in two directions, whereas polymorph II forms layers. There is a distinct lack of significant inter­molecular inter­actions in either form, with the exception of some weak Me⋯π inter­actions observed in polymorph II. These inter­actions are likely the cause of the variation in the C—P—C angles observed between the two structures.

1. Introduction

Phosphines have become ubiquitous ligands for transition-metal centres due to the ease with which their electronic and steric properties may be tailored and to the many and varied applications of transition-metal phosphine com­plexes in catal­y­sis. Secondary phosphines R2PH have the added advantage that the P—H proton may readily be removed to furnish anionic phosphanide R2P ligands (Izod, 2000[Izod, K. (2000). Adv. Inorg. Chem. 50, 33-108.]). We have a long-standing inter­est in the application of such phos­phanide ligands for the support of novel low-oxidation-state main group species; for example, the recently isolated fully phosphanyl-substituted ditetrelenes {(Mes)2P}2E=E{P(Mes)2}2 (E = Si or Ge; Mes = 2,4,6-Me3C6H2) (Izod et al., 2017a[Izod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017a). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56, 5593-5597.], 2022[Izod, K., Liu, M., Evans, P., Wills, C., Dixon, C. M., Waddell, P. G. & Probert, M. R. (2022). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202208851.]).

In the course of this work, we have striven to explore the impact of the steric profile and substitution pattern of the aromatic rings in di­aryl­phosphanide ligands on the structures and stabilities of both low-oxidation-state main group com­pounds and their alkali metal precursors R2PM (M = Li, Na or K) (Izod et al., 2017b[Izod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017b). Dalton Trans. 46, 13824-13834.]). While 2,6-disubstituted and 2,4,6-tri­sub­stituted aromatic rings are common phosphine substituents, alternative substitution patterns, such as in the 2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phenyl substituent described here, are rare.

Due to their reactivity, the structure determination of sec­ondary phosphines using single-crystal X-ray crystallography can be challenging, with the first such structure being reported in 1987 (Bartlett et al., 1987[Bartlett, R. A., Olmstead, M. M., Power, P. P. & Sigel, G. A. (1987). Inorg. Chem. 26, 1941-1946.]). As testament to this, at time of writing there are only 95 organic acyclic secondary phosphine structures in the Cambridge Structural Database (CSD, Ver­sion 5.45, update 2, June 2024; Groom et al., 2016[Groom, C. R., Bruno, I. J., Lightfoot, M. P. & Ward, S. C. (2016). Acta Cryst. B72, 171-179.]) and only one polymorph is reported for any one secondary phosphine com­pound, including cyclic phosphines and organometallic com­plexes.

In this work, we present the first known instance of polymorphism in a secondary phosphine. Bis(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine (Fig. 1[link]) crystallizes in two distinct forms: polymorph I, grown from tetra­hydro­furan, which crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P2/n, and polymorph II, grown from fluoro­benzene, which crystallizes in the monoclinic space group P21/c. As the first case of its kind, the structural analysis here should provide unique insights into the supra­molecular chemistry of secondary phosphines.

[Figure 1]
Figure 1
Bis(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine with the numbering scheme used in this article.

2. Experimental

2.1. Preparation of bis­(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine

All manipulations were performed under an inert atmosphere (argon gas) using standard Schlenk techniques unless otherwise stated. To a cold (−78 °C) solution of PCl3 (2.9 ml, 23 mmol) in diethyl ether (50 ml) was added (2,3,5,6-Me4C6H)MgBr (42 mmol) dissolved in tetra­hydro­furan (THF, 200 ml). This mixture was allowed to warm to room tem­per­a­ture and was stirred for 12 h. To this solution was carefully added an excess of solid LiAlH4 (1.0 g, 26.3 mmol) and the resulting mixture was stirred at room tem­per­a­ture for 2 h. Degassed water (50 ml) was carefully added and the organic phase was extracted into THF (3 × 30 ml). The combined organic extracts were dried over activated 4 Å mol­ecular sieves, the solution was filtered and solvent was removed in vacuo from the filtrate to give bis­(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine as a colourless solid in 65% yield. Crystals suitable for single-crystal X-ray diffraction were grown from cold (3 °C) THF (polymorph I) or from cold (−30 °C) fluoro­benzene (polymorph II).

2.2. Refinement

Crystal data, data collection and structure refinement details are summarized in Table 1[link]. H atoms bound to C atoms were positioned with idealized geometry. The displacement parameters of these H atoms were constrained using a riding model, with Uiso(H) values set to be an appropriate multiple of the Ueq value of the parent atom.

Table 1
Experimental details

For both structures: C20H27P, Mr = 298.38. Experiments were carried out at 150 K with Cu Kα radiation using a Rigaku Xcalibur Gemini ultra diffractometer with an Atlas detector. The absorption correction was analytical [CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2015[Rigaku OD (2015). CrysAlis PRO. Rigaku Oxford Diffraction Ltd, Yarnton, Oxfordshire, England.]), based on expressions derived by Clark & Reid (1995[Clark, R. C. & Reid, J. S. (1995). Acta Cryst. A51, 887-897.])]. H atoms were treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement.

  Polymorph I Polymorph II
Crystal data
Crystal system, space group Monoclinic, P2/n Monoclinic, P21/c
a, b, c (Å) 6.5476 (2), 5.9910 (2), 21.5676 (6) 12.8874 (6), 8.8455 (3), 15.4635 (7)
β (°) 96.020 (2) 104.108 (5)
V3) 841.36 (4) 1709.61 (13)
Z 2 4
μ (mm−1) 1.35 1.33
Crystal size (mm) 0.24 × 0.08 × 0.06 0.36 × 0.14 × 0.05
 
Data collection
Tmin, Tmax 0.696, 0.866 0.746, 0.939
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections 11409, 1500, 1299 12709, 3021, 2424
Rint 0.040 0.039
(sin θ/λ)max−1) 0.596 0.596
 
Refinement
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S 0.039, 0.118, 1.06 0.047, 0.135, 1.06
No. of reflections 1500 3021
No. of parameters 103 214
No. of restraints 0 182
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å−3) 0.27, −0.24 0.43, −0.35
Computer programs: CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2015[Rigaku OD (2015). CrysAlis PRO. Rigaku Oxford Diffraction Ltd, Yarnton, Oxfordshire, England.]), SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015a[Sheldrick, G. M. (2015a). Acta Cryst. A71, 3-8.]), SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2015b[Sheldrick, G. M. (2015b). Acta Cryst. C71, 3-8.]) and OLEX2 (Dolomanov et al., 2009[Dolomanov, O. V., Bourhis, L. J., Gildea, R. J., Howard, J. A. K. & Puschmann, H. (2009). J. Appl. Cryst. 42, 339-341.]).

The H atoms bound to phospho­rus were located using peaks in the Fourier difference map. In both structures, the most prominent residual peaks about phospho­rus after all other atoms were modelled were selected. In the case of polymorph I, the occupancy of this H atom was constrained to be 0.5 as it is disordered across a special position. For polymorph II, peaks corresponding to two proton positions with similar geometry were observed and hence the phosphine H atom was split across two positions with the occupancies refined to be approximately 63 and 37%. The displacement parameters of the phosphine H atoms in both structures were constrained using a riding model, with Uiso(H) values set to be 1.2Ueq relative to the parent atom.

It is likely that the unrestrained P—H distances are shorter than the true bond lengths, but the direction of the bond vectors are likely to be accurate. Though some residual density remains, most prominently in the structure of polymorph II, there are no peaks greater than 0.5 e Å−3 and they do not appear to be in positions that could correspond to atoms; the largest peak is altogether too close to the P atom (<1 Å) and/or in a position that would make little sense in terms of mol­ecular geometry. It is possible that these residual peaks are the result of series termination errors (Fourier ripples).

3. Results and discussion

The two structures of bis­(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine crystallize in different monoclinic space groups. Polymorph I crystallizes in the space group P2/n, with an asymmetric unit com­prising half of the mol­ecule (Z′ = 0.5). Here the P atom is located on the twofold rotation axis in the structure and the full mol­ecule is generated through this symmetry operation. Polymorph II crystallizes in the space group P21/c, with one whole mol­ecule in the asymmetric unit. In both structures, the proton on the P atom is disordered over two positions, as has been observed previously in similar bis­(ar­yl) secondary phosphine structures (Izod et al., 2017b[Izod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017b). Dalton Trans. 46, 13824-13834.]; Clegg, 2017[Clegg, W. (2017). CSD Communication (CCDC 1571091; refcode MEBCOO). CCDC, Cambridge, UK.]). Details of the refinements for both structures are presented in Table 1[link].

Though the bond distances do not differ significantly, the conformations of the mol­ecules in the two polymorphs are somewhat different, as demonstrated by overlaying them (Fig. 2[link]). The conformational variation can be attributed to differences in the geometry about the P atom and the angles between the planes of the aryl rings (Table 2[link]). As polymorph I exhibits a wider C—P—C angle than polymorph II, this would suggest that it experiences a greater degree of steric hindrance at the phospho­rus centre (Rivard et al., 2007[Rivard, E., Sutton, A. D., Fettinger, J. C. & Power, P. P. (2007). Inorg. Chim. Acta, 360, 1278-1286.]).

Table 2
Selected geometric parameters (Å, °) for polymorphs I and II

  Polymorph I Polymorph II
P1—C1 1.8471 (17) 1.852 (2)
P1—C11   1.856 (2)
C1—P1—C1/11 108.78 (11) 105.74 (9)
C1—P1—H1 100 (2) 109.1 (2)
C1—P1—H1i/C11—P1—H1 99 (2) 118.4 (2)
Ar­yl–aryl twist angle 84.39 (10) 94.12 (9)
Symmetry code: (i) −x + [{3\over 2}], y, −z + [{3\over 2}].
[Figure 2]
Figure 2
Overlay diagram of polymorphs I (yellow) and II (green).

The degree of steric pressure on the P atom in bis­(ar­yl)phosphines can also be assessed by the sum of the angles about phospho­rus, Σ°P (Boeré & Zhang, 2005[Boeré, R. T. & Zhang, Y. (2005). J. Organomet. Chem. 690, 2651-2657.]). The values measured exceed 300°, with polymorph I exhibiting a Σ°P of 318 (2)° and the same sum being 333.2 (2)° for polymorph II (measured for the H atom of highest occupancy). This would seem to contradict the inter­pretation of the C—P—C bond angles as, according to the Σ°P, the P atom in polymorph II is under greater steric pressure in spite of its narrower C—P—C angle. Regardless of the trend in these measurements, that there should be such variation within the same mol­ecule demonstrates the effect that polymorphism can potentially have on these com­pounds. These conformational perturbations are likely the result of the different packing environments and inter­molecular inter­actions in the two solid-state structures.

As is common in the structures of secondary bis­(ar­yl)phosphines, there are no significant contacts involving the H atom on the phospho­rus in either structure (Izod et al., 2017b[Izod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017b). Dalton Trans. 46, 13824-13834.]; Bartlett et al., 1987[Bartlett, R. A., Olmstead, M. M., Power, P. P. & Sigel, G. A. (1987). Inorg. Chem. 26, 1941-1946.]; Clegg, 2017[Clegg, W. (2017). CSD Communication (CCDC 1571091; refcode MEBCOO). CCDC, Cambridge, UK.]; Rivard et al., 2007[Rivard, E., Sutton, A. D., Fettinger, J. C. & Power, P. P. (2007). Inorg. Chim. Acta, 360, 1278-1286.]; Fleming et al., 2013[Fleming, C. G. E., Slawin, A. M. Z., Athukorala Arachchige, K. S., Randall, R., Bühl, M. & Kilian, P. (2013). Dalton Trans. 42, 1437-1450.]; Ritch et al., 2014[Ritch, J. S., Julienne, D., Rybchinski, S. R., Brockman, K. S., Johnson, K. R. D. & Hayes, P. G. (2014). Dalton Trans. 43, 267-276.]). The lack of structure-directing inter­actions involving this atom may well be the root of the disorder of the P—H proton manifest in both polymorphs.

The packing in both structures seems to prioritize the minimization of steric inter­actions as opposed to forming strong structure-directing inter­molecular bonds. As such, the packing is best described in terms of the alignment of the aryl rings. The mol­ecules in polymorph I stack forming continuous columns along both the crystallographic [100] direction, with P⋯P distances of ca 6.55 Å (Fig. 3[link]), and along the [010] direction, with an equivalent distance of ca 5.99 Å (the lengths of the respective axes). The rings exhibit similar angles to their respective directions, ca 57° in [100] and ca 52° in [010].

[Figure 3]
Figure 3
The structure of polymorph I, viewed along the [100] direction. Only one orientation of the H atoms bound to phospho­rus is shown and the rest have been omitted for clarity.

The distance between the mol­ecules along the columns appears to preclude direct ππ inter­actions (Avashti et al., 2014[Avasthi, K., Shukla, L., Kant, R. & Ravikumar, K. (2014). Acta Cryst. C70, 555-561.]; Brunner et al., 2014[Brunner, H., Tsuno, T., Balázs, G. & Bodensteiner, M. (2014). J. Org. Chem. 79, 11454-11462.]). In fact, there do not appear to be any salient inter­molecular inter­actions observed in polymorph I. This suggests that the mol­ecules are arranged in such a way as to minimize repulsive contacts rather than form attractive inter­actions. As a result, all the duryl rings in this structure are orientated coplanar to either the [110] or [[\overline{1}]10] directions. The orientation of the rings in these directions, with methyl groups directed towards each other in the same plane, further hinders the close approach of the mol­ecules in the structure (Fig. 4[link]).

[Figure 4]
Figure 4
The structure of polymorph I, viewed approximately along the [[\overline{1}]10] direction, showing the direct alignment of the methyl groups hindering close approach of the mol­ecules in this direction. H atoms have been omitted for clarity.

The packing in the structure of polymorph II is markedly different to that in polymorph I and much of this can be attributed to the fact that the two aryl rings are crystallographically independent in polymorph II. The mol­ecules align along the [010] direction, but the angles of the rings to this direction are shallower than in polymorph I; ca 28° for one and 0° for the other, where, once again, the methyl groups prevent the close approach of the π systems. Though the arrangement of the rings in the ([\overline{1}]02) plane, propagating along [010], is reminiscent of a similar arrangement in polymorph I, also in the [010] direction, in polymorph II the spacing between the mol­ecules in this direction is over 2 Å longer, with a P⋯P distance of ca 8.85 Å along [010], likely the result of the shallower P—C—P angle.

In contrast to the structure of polymorph I, there do appear to be some weak inter­molecular inter­actions in the structure of polymorph II in the form of C—H⋯C contacts between methyl groups and the aromatic rings. Two such contacts, with C⋯C distances < 3.7 Å, are observed (Table 3[link]), which can be classified as weak Me⋯π inter­actions (Brunner et al., 2014[Brunner, H., Tsuno, T., Balázs, G. & Bodensteiner, M. (2014). J. Org. Chem. 79, 11454-11462.]). The two contacts form a ring motif between two of the duryl rings and propagate along the [010] direction, forming a chain of inter­molecular inter­actions, with each mol­ecule related to the next by the symmetry of the 21 screw axis (Fig. 5[link]).

Table 3
Inter­molecular Me⋯π inter­actions (Å, °) in the structure of polymorph

D—H⋯A DA H⋯A D—H⋯A
C18—H18A⋯C15i 3.694 (4) 2.83 (2) 150 (1)
C19i—H19Bi⋯C15 3.637 (4) 2.88 (2) 136.6 (9)
Symmetry code: (i) −x + 1, −y + 2, −z + 1.
[Figure 5]
Figure 5
(a) A view of the ring motif formed in polymorph II of Me⋯π inter­actions between two mol­ecules and (b) the continuous chain motif formed of these inter­actions in the [010] direction. Close contacts are depicted as dashed lines and H atoms, with the exception of those bound to phospho­rus and the methyl groups involved in inter­molecular inter­actions, have been omitted for clarity.

By way of com­parison, a similar relationship between the mol­ecules is observed in both the [100] and [010] directions in polymorph I; however, in this case, the C⋯C distances are at least 0.1 Å too long to be considered Me⋯π inter­actions. Given this, it is possible that the weak but nonetheless attractive inter­actions observed in polymorph II are the root of the shallower C—P—C angle observed in this structure com­pared to that of polymorph I.

Although there are no discernible close contacts between the chains of mol­ecules in polymorph II, they appear to pack to form 2D layers coplanar to [100] (Fig. 6[link]). Again, there do not appear to be any significant structure-directing inter­actions between these layers and the closest centroid–centroid distances between pairs of duryl rings across the layer boundary are ca 4.2 Å. As a result, it can be inferred that these rings are orientated simply to minimize steric inter­actions.

[Figure 6]
Figure 6
A view of the packing in polymorph II, showing the layers coplanar with the crystallographic (100) plane. H atoms have been omitted for clarity.

4. Conclusion

Bis(2,3,5,6-tetra­methyl­phen­yl)phosphine is the first secondary phosphine known to exhibit polymorphism and is observed to form two different crystalline forms depending on the solvent of crystallization. As structures of these reactive com­pounds are somewhat rare in the literature, this study expands the sum of structural knowledge of secondary phosphines, as well as revealing aspects of their supra­molecular chemistry.

The mol­ecules in each crystal structure vary in terms of their conformation, with the degree of steric pressure on the P atom observed to vary depending on the packing environment. Though polymorph I crystallizes with columnar motifs in the [100] and [010] directions, and no significant structure-directing inter­molecular inter­actions, polymorph II forms a 2D layered structure with weak Me⋯π inter­actions, forming a chain motif along the [010] direction.

The study of polymorphism in a secondary phosphine raises some inter­esting points in terms of the solid-state structures of these mol­ecules. It should be noted that as the same mol­ecule exhibits drastically different values for Σ°P, a measure of the steric pressure on the P atom, that this is not an intrinsic mol­ecular property and can be affected by the packing environment. This demonstrates that caution should be exercised when drawing conclusions based on these values, especially in the context of solution-phase calculations.

Supporting information


Computing details top

Bis(2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenyl)phosphine (kji190001_fa) top
Crystal data top
C20H27PF(000) = 324
Mr = 298.38Dx = 1.178 Mg m3
Monoclinic, P2/nCu Kα radiation, λ = 1.54184 Å
a = 6.5476 (2) ÅCell parameters from 4245 reflections
b = 5.9910 (2) Åθ = 4.1–66.4°
c = 21.5676 (6) ŵ = 1.35 mm1
β = 96.020 (2)°T = 150 K
V = 841.36 (4) Å3Block, colourless
Z = 20.24 × 0.08 × 0.06 mm
Data collection top
Rigaku Xcalibur Gemini ultra
diffractometer with an Atlas detector
1500 independent reflections
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed X-ray tube, Enhance Ultra (Cu) X-ray Source1299 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Mirror monochromatorRint = 0.040
Detector resolution: 10.3968 pixels mm-1θmax = 66.9°, θmin = 4.1°
ω scansh = 77
Absorption correction: analytical
[CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2015), based on expressions derived by Clark & Reid (1995)]
k = 77
Tmin = 0.696, Tmax = 0.866l = 2524
11409 measured reflections
Refinement top
Refinement on F2Primary atom site location: dual
Least-squares matrix: fullHydrogen site location: mixed
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.039H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
wR(F2) = 0.118 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0665P)2 + 0.3189P]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
S = 1.06(Δ/σ)max = 0.001
1500 reflectionsΔρmax = 0.27 e Å3
103 parametersΔρmin = 0.24 e Å3
0 restraints
Special details top

Geometry. All esds (except the esd in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell esds are taken into account individually in the estimation of esds in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between esds in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell esds is used for estimating esds involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Single-crystal diffraction was carried out on a Rigaku Xcalibur Altlas Gemini ultra diffractometer using Cu Kα radiation (λ = 1.54184 Å). Data were collected at 150 K using an Oxford Cryosystems CryostreamPlus open-flow N2 cooling device. Intensities were corrected for absorption using a multifaceted crystal model created by indexing the faces of the crystal for which data were collected (Clark & Reid, 1995). Cell refinement, data collection and data reduction were undertaken via the software CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2024). Both structures were solved using SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015) and refined by SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2008) using the OLEX2 interface (Dolomanov et al., 2009).

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzUiso*/UeqOcc. (<1)
P10.75000.70011 (11)0.75000.0370 (2)
H10.930 (8)0.760 (8)0.736 (2)0.055*0.5
C10.6681 (2)0.5206 (3)0.68230 (8)0.0305 (4)
C20.4837 (3)0.5804 (3)0.64606 (8)0.0334 (4)
C30.4182 (3)0.4548 (3)0.59272 (8)0.0355 (4)
C40.5370 (3)0.2772 (3)0.57701 (8)0.0382 (4)
H40.49040.19100.54130.046*
C50.7214 (3)0.2184 (3)0.61090 (8)0.0345 (4)
C60.7905 (2)0.3439 (3)0.66413 (8)0.0311 (4)
C70.3561 (3)0.7772 (4)0.66223 (10)0.0461 (5)
H7A0.25390.72810.68940.069*
H7B0.28600.84130.62390.069*
H7C0.44530.89030.68380.069*
C80.2213 (3)0.5095 (4)0.55258 (9)0.0465 (5)
H8A0.10510.49650.57750.070*
H8B0.20280.40510.51750.070*
H8C0.22840.66230.53670.070*
C90.8429 (3)0.0249 (4)0.58956 (9)0.0461 (5)
H9A0.76490.04770.55390.069*
H9B0.86890.08280.62370.069*
H9C0.97400.07910.57730.069*
C100.9941 (3)0.2855 (3)0.70003 (8)0.0353 (4)
H10A1.05200.41840.72180.053*
H10B1.08880.23150.67110.053*
H10C0.97340.16860.73050.053*
Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) top
U11U22U33U12U13U23
P10.0399 (4)0.0324 (4)0.0362 (4)0.0000.0071 (3)0.000
C10.0282 (8)0.0338 (9)0.0288 (8)0.0022 (7)0.0002 (6)0.0041 (7)
C20.0288 (8)0.0381 (9)0.0324 (9)0.0010 (7)0.0003 (7)0.0066 (7)
C30.0276 (8)0.0485 (11)0.0294 (9)0.0006 (8)0.0014 (7)0.0091 (8)
C40.0366 (9)0.0509 (11)0.0259 (8)0.0027 (8)0.0024 (7)0.0018 (8)
C50.0335 (9)0.0401 (10)0.0295 (8)0.0007 (7)0.0011 (7)0.0017 (7)
C60.0282 (8)0.0355 (9)0.0290 (8)0.0011 (7)0.0004 (7)0.0056 (7)
C70.0369 (10)0.0486 (11)0.0506 (11)0.0103 (9)0.0063 (8)0.0003 (9)
C80.0337 (9)0.0683 (14)0.0351 (10)0.0034 (9)0.0070 (8)0.0075 (9)
C90.0490 (11)0.0484 (11)0.0397 (10)0.0083 (9)0.0010 (8)0.0068 (9)
C100.0298 (9)0.0410 (10)0.0340 (9)0.0030 (7)0.0024 (7)0.0025 (8)
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
P1—H11.29 (5)C6—C101.510 (2)
P1—C1i1.8472 (17)C7—H7A0.9800
P1—C11.8471 (17)C7—H7B0.9800
C1—C21.414 (2)C7—H7C0.9800
C1—C61.408 (2)C8—H8A0.9800
C2—C31.404 (3)C8—H8B0.9800
C2—C71.507 (3)C8—H8C0.9800
C3—C41.381 (3)C9—H9A0.9800
C3—C81.512 (2)C9—H9B0.9800
C4—H40.9500C9—H9C0.9800
C4—C51.390 (3)C10—H10A0.9800
C5—C61.407 (3)C10—H10B0.9800
C5—C91.505 (3)C10—H10C0.9800
C1i—P1—H198 (2)C2—C7—H7C109.5
C1—P1—H1100 (2)H7A—C7—H7B109.5
C1—P1—C1i108.78 (11)H7A—C7—H7C109.5
C2—C1—P1116.72 (13)H7B—C7—H7C109.5
C6—C1—P1122.08 (12)C3—C8—H8A109.5
C6—C1—C2120.98 (16)C3—C8—H8B109.5
C1—C2—C7122.17 (16)C3—C8—H8C109.5
C3—C2—C1119.14 (16)H8A—C8—H8B109.5
C3—C2—C7118.68 (15)H8A—C8—H8C109.5
C2—C3—C8121.47 (17)H8B—C8—H8C109.5
C4—C3—C2118.86 (15)C5—C9—H9A109.5
C4—C3—C8119.67 (17)C5—C9—H9B109.5
C3—C4—H4118.4C5—C9—H9C109.5
C3—C4—C5123.14 (17)H9A—C9—H9B109.5
C5—C4—H4118.4H9A—C9—H9C109.5
C4—C5—C6118.78 (17)H9B—C9—H9C109.5
C4—C5—C9119.49 (17)C6—C10—H10A109.5
C6—C5—C9121.73 (16)C6—C10—H10B109.5
C1—C6—C10121.94 (15)C6—C10—H10C109.5
C5—C6—C1119.01 (15)H10A—C10—H10B109.5
C5—C6—C10119.05 (15)H10A—C10—H10C109.5
C2—C7—H7A109.5H10B—C10—H10C109.5
C2—C7—H7B109.5
Symmetry code: (i) x+3/2, y, z+3/2.
Bis(2,3,5,6-tetramethylphenyl)phosphine (kji190003_fa) top
Crystal data top
C20H27PF(000) = 648
Mr = 298.38Dx = 1.159 Mg m3
Monoclinic, P21/cCu Kα radiation, λ = 1.54184 Å
a = 12.8874 (6) ÅCell parameters from 3351 reflections
b = 8.8455 (3) Åθ = 5.8–66.7°
c = 15.4635 (7) ŵ = 1.33 mm1
β = 104.108 (5)°T = 150 K
V = 1709.61 (13) Å3Block, colourless
Z = 40.36 × 0.14 × 0.05 mm
Data collection top
Rigaku Xcalibur Gemini ultra
diffractometer with an Atlas detector
3021 independent reflections
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed X-ray tube, Enhance Ultra (Cu) X-ray Source2424 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Mirror monochromatorRint = 0.039
Detector resolution: 10.3968 pixels mm-1θmax = 66.8°, θmin = 3.5°
ω scansh = 1515
Absorption correction: analytical
[CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2015), based on expressions derived by Clark & Reid (1995)]
k = 109
Tmin = 0.746, Tmax = 0.939l = 1818
12709 measured reflections
Refinement top
Refinement on F2Primary atom site location: dual
Least-squares matrix: fullHydrogen site location: mixed
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.047H atoms treated by a mixture of independent and constrained refinement
wR(F2) = 0.135 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0698P)2 + 0.7357P]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
S = 1.06(Δ/σ)max = 0.001
3021 reflectionsΔρmax = 0.43 e Å3
214 parametersΔρmin = 0.35 e Å3
182 restraints
Special details top

Geometry. All esds (except the esd in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell esds are taken into account individually in the estimation of esds in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between esds in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell esds is used for estimating esds involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. The hydrogen atom bound to phosphorous in this structure has been modelled over two positions. The P-H bond lengths were constrained to be similar using the SADI card. To prevent the close contact of one of these disordered hydrogens with an adjacent methyl group, this methyl group was also modelled as disordered over two positions.

Single-crystal diffraction was carried out on a Rigaku Xcalibur Altlas Gemini ultra diffractometer using Cu Kα radiation (λ = 1.54184 Å). Data were collected at 150 K using an Oxford Cryosystems CryostreamPlus open-flow N2 cooling device. Intensities were corrected for absorption using a multifaceted crystal model created by indexing the faces of the crystal for which data were collected (Clark & Reid, 1995). Cell refinement, data collection and data reduction were undertaken via the software CrysAlis PRO (Rigaku OD, 2024). Both structures were solved using SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015) and refined by SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2008) using the OLEX2 interface (Dolomanov et al., 2009).

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzUiso*/UeqOcc. (<1)
P10.75650 (5)0.71204 (7)0.50367 (4)0.0411 (2)
H1A0.822 (3)0.827 (4)0.527 (3)0.049*0.6323
H1B0.745 (6)0.639 (7)0.574 (3)0.049*0.3677
C10.81783 (16)0.5738 (2)0.44111 (15)0.0357 (5)
C20.82942 (16)0.6093 (2)0.35486 (15)0.0353 (5)
C30.87100 (17)0.4999 (3)0.30694 (16)0.0401 (5)
C40.90209 (18)0.3610 (3)0.34647 (17)0.0431 (5)
H40.92720.28760.31360.052*
C50.89728 (17)0.3273 (2)0.43253 (17)0.0407 (5)
C60.85536 (16)0.4348 (2)0.48175 (15)0.0381 (5)
C70.80033 (19)0.7628 (3)0.31418 (16)0.0422 (5)
H7A0.72520.78020.30720.063*
H7B0.81680.76720.25700.063*
H7C0.84040.83890.35250.063*
C80.8851 (2)0.5296 (3)0.21425 (18)0.0549 (6)
H8A0.91300.44070.19240.082*
H8B0.93400.61210.21610.082*
H8C0.81720.55490.17530.082*
C90.93877 (19)0.1764 (3)0.47214 (19)0.0504 (6)
H9A0.88500.12780.49580.076*
H9B1.00200.19170.51910.076*
H9C0.95570.11390.42670.076*
C110.62051 (16)0.7494 (2)0.43286 (14)0.0327 (4)
C120.55112 (17)0.6284 (2)0.39960 (14)0.0339 (5)
C130.44829 (17)0.6597 (2)0.34621 (14)0.0359 (5)
C140.41651 (17)0.8083 (3)0.32953 (14)0.0373 (5)
H140.34880.82790.29350.045*
C150.48205 (17)0.9295 (2)0.36467 (14)0.0346 (5)
C160.58531 (16)0.9002 (2)0.41712 (14)0.0326 (5)
C170.58273 (19)0.4660 (2)0.42098 (17)0.0423 (5)
H17A0.52140.40940.42710.063*
H17B0.63720.46150.47580.063*
H17C0.60980.42370.37370.063*
C180.37332 (19)0.5335 (3)0.30559 (17)0.0464 (6)
H18A0.40810.46860.27160.070*
H18B0.30990.57540.26720.070*
H18C0.35430.47610.35210.070*
C190.44052 (19)1.0886 (3)0.34468 (17)0.0435 (5)
H19A0.37281.08570.30170.065*
H19B0.49061.14610.32110.065*
H19C0.43181.13520.39850.065*
C200.65494 (19)1.0335 (2)0.45548 (16)0.0416 (5)
H20A0.69311.06800.41310.062*
H20B0.70511.00340.50940.062*
H20C0.61081.11380.46830.062*
C10A0.848 (2)0.404 (3)0.5765 (8)0.047 (3)0.6323
H10A0.83220.49600.60330.071*0.6323
H10B0.91500.36410.61030.071*0.6323
H10C0.79230.33140.57580.071*0.6323
C10B0.859 (4)0.384 (5)0.5759 (14)0.046 (5)0.3677
H10D0.86570.47010.61430.069*0.3677
H10E0.91920.31780.59650.069*0.3677
H10F0.79430.33020.57650.069*0.3677
Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) top
U11U22U33U12U13U23
P10.0397 (3)0.0397 (3)0.0411 (3)0.0051 (2)0.0046 (2)0.0048 (2)
C10.0302 (10)0.0325 (10)0.0424 (11)0.0001 (8)0.0050 (8)0.0008 (9)
C20.0294 (10)0.0320 (10)0.0429 (11)0.0008 (8)0.0059 (9)0.0022 (8)
C30.0346 (11)0.0386 (11)0.0479 (12)0.0009 (9)0.0116 (9)0.0002 (9)
C40.0384 (12)0.0362 (12)0.0566 (14)0.0044 (10)0.0152 (10)0.0037 (10)
C50.0288 (10)0.0310 (11)0.0616 (14)0.0008 (9)0.0094 (10)0.0045 (10)
C60.0282 (10)0.0361 (11)0.0482 (12)0.0017 (9)0.0058 (9)0.0075 (9)
C70.0409 (12)0.0355 (11)0.0496 (13)0.0039 (9)0.0097 (10)0.0071 (9)
C80.0587 (15)0.0579 (16)0.0528 (15)0.0046 (13)0.0225 (12)0.0012 (12)
C90.0368 (12)0.0352 (12)0.0777 (18)0.0062 (10)0.0114 (12)0.0112 (11)
C110.0342 (10)0.0293 (10)0.0372 (11)0.0006 (8)0.0135 (8)0.0039 (8)
C120.0363 (11)0.0301 (10)0.0394 (11)0.0027 (8)0.0168 (9)0.0030 (8)
C130.0376 (11)0.0352 (11)0.0386 (11)0.0067 (9)0.0162 (9)0.0068 (9)
C140.0314 (10)0.0428 (12)0.0391 (11)0.0008 (9)0.0115 (9)0.0032 (9)
C150.0360 (11)0.0326 (10)0.0384 (11)0.0015 (9)0.0151 (9)0.0006 (8)
C160.0342 (10)0.0296 (10)0.0365 (11)0.0017 (8)0.0132 (8)0.0024 (8)
C170.0445 (12)0.0283 (11)0.0571 (14)0.0024 (9)0.0180 (11)0.0011 (10)
C180.0428 (13)0.0443 (13)0.0549 (14)0.0128 (10)0.0172 (11)0.0139 (11)
C190.0429 (12)0.0362 (12)0.0532 (14)0.0063 (10)0.0152 (11)0.0031 (10)
C200.0411 (12)0.0293 (11)0.0536 (14)0.0030 (9)0.0102 (10)0.0043 (9)
C10A0.043 (6)0.042 (6)0.053 (3)0.013 (5)0.006 (3)0.017 (3)
C10B0.045 (9)0.045 (10)0.050 (5)0.019 (6)0.016 (5)0.009 (4)
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
P1—H1A1.32 (4)C12—C131.408 (3)
P1—H1B1.31 (4)C12—C171.508 (3)
P1—C11.852 (2)C13—C141.382 (3)
P1—C111.856 (2)C13—C181.510 (3)
C1—C21.413 (3)C14—H140.9300
C1—C61.411 (3)C14—C151.391 (3)
C2—C31.402 (3)C15—C161.404 (3)
C2—C71.505 (3)C15—C191.511 (3)
C3—C41.387 (3)C16—C201.513 (3)
C3—C81.511 (3)C17—H17A0.9600
C4—H40.9300C17—H17B0.9600
C4—C51.380 (3)C17—H17C0.9600
C5—C61.406 (3)C18—H18A0.9600
C5—C91.511 (3)C18—H18B0.9600
C6—C10A1.516 (8)C18—H18C0.9600
C6—C10B1.514 (13)C19—H19A0.9600
C7—H7A0.9600C19—H19B0.9600
C7—H7B0.9600C19—H19C0.9600
C7—H7C0.9600C20—H20A0.9600
C8—H8A0.9600C20—H20B0.9600
C8—H8B0.9600C20—H20C0.9600
C8—H8C0.9600C10A—H10A0.9600
C9—H9A0.9600C10A—H10B0.9600
C9—H9B0.9600C10A—H10C0.9600
C9—H9C0.9600C10B—H10D0.9600
C11—C121.409 (3)C10B—H10E0.9600
C11—C161.411 (3)C10B—H10F0.9600
C1—P1—H1A109.1 (18)C12—C13—C18120.9 (2)
C1—P1—H1B105 (3)C14—C13—C12119.39 (19)
C1—P1—C11105.74 (9)C14—C13—C18119.7 (2)
C11—P1—H1A118.4 (18)C13—C14—H14118.8
C11—P1—H1B108 (3)C13—C14—C15122.4 (2)
C2—C1—P1120.22 (16)C15—C14—H14118.8
C6—C1—P1119.09 (17)C14—C15—C16118.89 (19)
C6—C1—C2120.7 (2)C14—C15—C19119.2 (2)
C1—C2—C7121.5 (2)C16—C15—C19121.96 (19)
C3—C2—C1119.18 (19)C11—C16—C20122.31 (19)
C3—C2—C7119.3 (2)C15—C16—C11119.61 (19)
C2—C3—C8122.1 (2)C15—C16—C20118.08 (18)
C4—C3—C2119.0 (2)C12—C17—H17A109.5
C4—C3—C8118.9 (2)C12—C17—H17B109.5
C3—C4—H4118.6C12—C17—H17C109.5
C5—C4—C3122.7 (2)H17A—C17—H17B109.5
C5—C4—H4118.6H17A—C17—H17C109.5
C4—C5—C6119.3 (2)H17B—C17—H17C109.5
C4—C5—C9119.2 (2)C13—C18—H18A109.5
C6—C5—C9121.5 (2)C13—C18—H18B109.5
C1—C6—C10A119.5 (9)C13—C18—H18C109.5
C1—C6—C10B128.0 (15)H18A—C18—H18B109.5
C5—C6—C1118.9 (2)H18A—C18—H18C109.5
C5—C6—C10A121.5 (9)H18B—C18—H18C109.5
C5—C6—C10B113.1 (15)C15—C19—H19A109.5
C2—C7—H7A109.5C15—C19—H19B109.5
C2—C7—H7B109.5C15—C19—H19C109.5
C2—C7—H7C109.5H19A—C19—H19B109.5
H7A—C7—H7B109.5H19A—C19—H19C109.5
H7A—C7—H7C109.5H19B—C19—H19C109.5
H7B—C7—H7C109.5C16—C20—H20A109.5
C3—C8—H8A109.5C16—C20—H20B109.5
C3—C8—H8B109.5C16—C20—H20C109.5
C3—C8—H8C109.5H20A—C20—H20B109.5
H8A—C8—H8B109.5H20A—C20—H20C109.5
H8A—C8—H8C109.5H20B—C20—H20C109.5
H8B—C8—H8C109.5C6—C10A—H10A109.5
C5—C9—H9A109.5C6—C10A—H10B109.5
C5—C9—H9B109.5C6—C10A—H10C109.5
C5—C9—H9C109.5H10A—C10A—H10B109.5
H9A—C9—H9B109.5H10A—C10A—H10C109.5
H9A—C9—H9C109.5H10B—C10A—H10C109.5
H9B—C9—H9C109.5C6—C10B—H10D109.5
C12—C11—P1120.29 (16)C6—C10B—H10E109.5
C12—C11—C16120.43 (19)C6—C10B—H10F109.5
C16—C11—P1119.18 (15)H10D—C10B—H10E109.5
C11—C12—C17122.0 (2)H10D—C10B—H10F109.5
C13—C12—C11119.16 (19)H10E—C10B—H10F109.5
C13—C12—C17118.81 (19)
Selected geometric parameters (Å, °) for polymorphs I and II top
Polymorph IPolymorph II
P1—C11.8471 (17)1.852 (2)
P1—C111.856 (2)
C1—P1—C1/11108.78 (11)105.74 (9)
C1—P1—H1100 (2)109.1 (2)
C1—P1—H1i/C11—P1—H199 (2)118.4 (2)
Aryl–aryl twist angle84.39 (10)94.12 (9)
Symmetry code: (i) -x+3/2, y, -z+3/2.
Intermolecular Me···π interactions (Å, °) in the structure of polymorph II [Which interaction has the sym code?] top
D—H···AD···AH···AD—H···A
C18—H18A···C153.694 (4)2.83 (2)150 (1)
C19—H19B···C153.637 (4)2.88 (2)136.6 (9)
Symmetry code: (i) -x+1, -y+2, -z+1.
 

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council for the X-ray crystallography facilities.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no com­peting financial inter­ests.

Funding information

Funding for this research was provided by: Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (grant No. EP/F03637X/1).

References

First citationAvasthi, K., Shukla, L., Kant, R. & Ravikumar, K. (2014). Acta Cryst. C70, 555–561.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationBartlett, R. A., Olmstead, M. M., Power, P. P. & Sigel, G. A. (1987). Inorg. Chem. 26, 1941–1946.  CSD CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationBoeré, R. T. & Zhang, Y. (2005). J. Organomet. Chem. 690, 2651–2657.  Google Scholar
First citationBrunner, H., Tsuno, T., Balázs, G. & Bodensteiner, M. (2014). J. Org. Chem. 79, 11454–11462.  CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
First citationClark, R. C. & Reid, J. S. (1995). Acta Cryst. A51, 887–897.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationClegg, W. (2017). CSD Communication (CCDC 1571091; refcode MEBCOO). CCDC, Cambridge, UK.  Google Scholar
First citationDolomanov, O. V., Bourhis, L. J., Gildea, R. J., Howard, J. A. K. & Puschmann, H. (2009). J. Appl. Cryst. 42, 339–341.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationFleming, C. G. E., Slawin, A. M. Z., Athukorala Arachchige, K. S., Randall, R., Bühl, M. & Kilian, P. (2013). Dalton Trans. 42, 1437–1450.  CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
First citationGroom, C. R., Bruno, I. J., Lightfoot, M. P. & Ward, S. C. (2016). Acta Cryst. B72, 171–179.  Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationIzod, K. (2000). Adv. Inorg. Chem. 50, 33–108.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationIzod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017a). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56, 5593–5597.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationIzod, K., Evans, P. & Waddell, P. G. (2017b). Dalton Trans. 46, 13824–13834.  CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
First citationIzod, K., Liu, M., Evans, P., Wills, C., Dixon, C. M., Waddell, P. G. & Probert, M. R. (2022). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202208851.  CrossRef Google Scholar
First citationRigaku OD (2015). CrysAlis PRO. Rigaku Oxford Diffraction Ltd, Yarnton, Oxfordshire, England.  Google Scholar
First citationRitch, J. S., Julienne, D., Rybchinski, S. R., Brockman, K. S., Johnson, K. R. D. & Hayes, P. G. (2014). Dalton Trans. 43, 267–276.  CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
First citationRivard, E., Sutton, A. D., Fettinger, J. C. & Power, P. P. (2007). Inorg. Chim. Acta, 360, 1278–1286.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationSheldrick, G. M. (2015a). Acta Cryst. A71, 3–8.  Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationSheldrick, G. M. (2015b). Acta Cryst. C71, 3–8.  Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.

Journal logoSTRUCTURAL
CHEMISTRY
ISSN: 2053-2296
Follow Acta Cryst. C
Sign up for e-alerts
Follow Acta Cryst. on Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds