metal-organic compounds
Redetermination of (η4-s-cis-1,3-butadiene)tricarbonyliron(0)
aInstitut für Anorganische Chemie und Strukturchemie, Lehrstuhl II: Material- und Strukturforschung, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Universitätsstrasse 1, D-40225 Düsseldorf, Germany
*Correspondence e-mail: reissg@uni-duesseldorf.de
The 4H6)(CO)3], was previously reported by Mills & Robinson [Acta Cryst. (1963), 16, 758–761]. The compound crystallizes in the centrosymmetric space goup Pnma with the complex located on a mirror plane. The redetermination of this structure at 100 K yielded almost equilibrated C—C bond lengths within the butadiene ligand according to a metal-to-ligand bonding–back-bonding mechanism. The C—C bond lengths presented herein are significantly shorter than those reported earlier. The H-atom positions that have not been reported so far were located by difference Fourier maps. The positional parameters of all H atoms and individual Uiso values were refined freely.
of the title compound, [Fe(CRelated literature
For {Fe(CO)3} compounds and applications, see: Knölker (2000); Pearson (1983); Sawyer et al. (2008 and references therein). For theoretical and experimental data for η4-s-cis-1,3-butadienetricarbonyliron(0), see: Bühl & Thiel (1997); Reihlen et al. (1930); Mills & Robinson (1963); Kukolich et al. (1993); Kruczynski & Takats (1976). For related complexes, see: Reiss & Konietzny (2002); Davidson (1969); Immirzi & Allegra (1969); Porri et al. (1965); Reiss (2002). For librational corrected values for C—C bond lengths, see: Schomaker & Trueblood (1968).
Experimental
Crystal data
|
Data collection
Data collection: CrysAlis PRO (Oxford Diffraction, 2009); cell CrysAlis PRO; data reduction: CrysAlis PRO; program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: DIAMOND (Brandenburg, 2010); software used to prepare material for publication: publCIF (Westrip, 2010).
Supporting information
https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810039218/nc2198sup1.cif
contains datablocks I, global. DOI:Structure factors: contains datablock I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536810039218/nc2198Isup2.hkl
The title compound was synthesizes according to procedures reported in the literature (Reihlen et al., 1930). The low melting Fe(0) complex crystallizes readily as block shaped crystals on slow cooling.
All hydrogen atoms were located from difference Fourier synthesis. In the final
the positional parameters of all atoms, the anisotropic displacement parameters of all non-hydrogen atoms and the Uiso values of all hydrogen atoms were refined freely.Olefine complexes containing the {Fe(CO)3} fragment are intensively studied and are used as catalysts in a wide range of applications (Knöker, 2000; Sawyer et al., 2008). Diene and dienyl complexes of iron are common intermediates in iron catalyzed organic reactions (Pearson, 1981). Butadiene complexes have been structurally characterized since the 60 s of the last century (Porri, Lionelli, Allegra & Immirzi, 1965; Immirzi & Allegra, 1969). The first synthesis of the title compound dates back to the 30 s of the last century (Reihlen et al. 1930). Vibrational spectroscopic (Davidson, 1969) and 13C-NMR spectroscopic studies (Kruczynski & Takats, 1976) were undertaken on the title compound. The structures of the title compound were derived from microwave spectroscopy (Kukolich et al., 1993) and quantum chemical calculations (Bühl und Thiel, 1997). The first η4-coordinated butadiene ligand (Mills & Robinson, 1963). This early based on equi-inclination photographic data, did not report any information on the hydrogen atom positions. The standard uncertainties of the reported C—C bond lengths that range from 0.05 to 0.06 do not allow a detailed discussion of the bonding properties of the butadiene ligand.
verified the constitution of the title complex consisting of three coordinated CO ligands and oneThe redetermination of η4-s-cis-1,3-butadienetricarbonyliron(0) at 100 K yielded significantly improved geometric parameters that enables a detailed discussion of the structure. The Fe(0) center of the title complex is coordinated by three carbonyl ligands and one s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand. The different C—Fe(carbonyl) and C≡O bond lengths are equal within their standard uncertainties. The angles between the C≡O ligands are 93.11 (6) and 101.50 (4)°. The coordinated 1,3-butadiene ligand shows the well known s-cis-conformation with the C—C bond lengths equilibrated according to the s.u.'s derived from the X-ray diffraction experiment. The C—C bond lengths are significant shorter (C1—C2 1.423 (1); C1—C1i 1.418 (2) (librational corrected values; Schomaker and Trueblood, 1968)) than those reported for the of this compound but they are in very good agreement to values derived from microwave spectra (Kukolich et al., 1993) and theoretical calculations (Bühl & Thiel, 1997). The values are in good agreement to values derived for the analogous bis(1,3-cyclohexadiene)monocarbonyliron(0) complex (Reiß, 2002). This equilibration is a consequence of a bonding-back bonding mechanism between the diene ligand and the metal center (Reiß & Konietzny, 2002).
The coordination figure at Fe(0) is best described as a square pyramid with the sterically more demanding s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand occupying two coordination sites of the basis. The hydrogen atom of the coordinated s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand are diplaced of the plane defined by its four carbon atoms. H1 and H2a are only slightly displaced by 11.8 (5)° and 11.1 (6)°, respectively, whereas H2b shows a dihedral angle of 43.4 (7)°. The refined hydrogen atom positions are in very good agreement to results from microwave spectroscopy (Kukolich et al., 1993).
This redetermination at low temperature yielded improved and significant shorter C—C bond lengths and locates the not yet reported hydrogen atom positions for the s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand by crystallographic methods. All geometric parameters derived are in very good agreement with other experimental and theoretical results reported in the last decades.
For {Fe(CO)3} compounds and applications, see: Knölker (2000); Pearson (1983); Sawyer et al. (2008 and references therein). For theoretical and experimental data for η4-s-cis-1,3-butadienetricarbonyliron(0), see: Bühl & Thiel (1997); Reihlen et al. (1930); Mills & Robinson (1963); Kukolich et al. (1993); Kruczynski & Takats (1976). For related literature, see: Reiss & Konietzny (2002); Davidson (1969); Immirzi & Allegra (1969); Porri et al. (1965); Reiss (2002); Schomaker & Trueblood (1968).
Data collection: CrysAlis PRO (Oxford Diffraction, 2009); cell
CrysAlis PRO (Oxford Diffraction, 2009); data reduction: CrysAlis ro (Oxford Diffraction, 2009); program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: DIAMOND (Brandenburg, 2010); software used to prepare material for publication: publCIF (Westrip, 2010).Fig. 1. Hydrogen atoms are drawn with an arbitrary radius and the displacement ellipsoids are shown at the 50% probability level. Symmetrie codes: i = x, -y+1/2, z. |
[Fe(C4H6)(CO)3] | F(000) = 392 |
Mr = 193.97 | Dx = 1.674 Mg m−3 |
Orthorhombic, Pnma | Mo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å |
Hall symbol: -P 2ac 2n | Cell parameters from 10152 reflections |
a = 11.4323 (6) Å | θ = 3.3–31.1° |
b = 10.9146 (6) Å | µ = 1.91 mm−1 |
c = 6.1664 (4) Å | T = 100 K |
V = 769.44 (8) Å3 | Prism, yellow |
Z = 4 | 0.40 × 0.38 × 0.36 mm |
Oxford Diffraction Xcalibur Eos diffractometer | 1131 reflections with I > 2σ(I) |
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tube | Rint = 0.019 |
Graphite monochromator | θmax = 30.0°, θmin = 3.6° |
ω scans | h = −16→16 |
Absorption correction: multi-scan (CrysAlis PRO; Oxford Diffraction, 2009) | k = −15→15 |
Tmin = 0.850, Tmax = 1.000 | l = −8→8 |
13021 measured reflections | 3 standard reflections every 30 min |
1177 independent reflections | intensity decay: none |
Refinement on F2 | Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods |
Least-squares matrix: full | Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.015 | Hydrogen site location: difference Fourier map |
wR(F2) = 0.040 | All H-atom parameters refined |
S = 1.04 | w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.02P)2 + 0.3P] where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3 |
1177 reflections | (Δ/σ)max = 0.001 |
67 parameters | Δρmax = 0.35 e Å−3 |
0 restraints | Δρmin = −0.22 e Å−3 |
[Fe(C4H6)(CO)3] | V = 769.44 (8) Å3 |
Mr = 193.97 | Z = 4 |
Orthorhombic, Pnma | Mo Kα radiation |
a = 11.4323 (6) Å | µ = 1.91 mm−1 |
b = 10.9146 (6) Å | T = 100 K |
c = 6.1664 (4) Å | 0.40 × 0.38 × 0.36 mm |
Oxford Diffraction Xcalibur Eos diffractometer | 1131 reflections with I > 2σ(I) |
Absorption correction: multi-scan (CrysAlis PRO; Oxford Diffraction, 2009) | Rint = 0.019 |
Tmin = 0.850, Tmax = 1.000 | 3 standard reflections every 30 min |
13021 measured reflections | intensity decay: none |
1177 independent reflections |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.015 | 0 restraints |
wR(F2) = 0.040 | All H-atom parameters refined |
S = 1.04 | Δρmax = 0.35 e Å−3 |
1177 reflections | Δρmin = −0.22 e Å−3 |
67 parameters |
Experimental. Absorption correction details: CrysAlisPro, Oxford Diffraction Ltd., Version 1.171.33.52 Empirical absorption correction using spherical harmonics, implemented in SCALE3 ABSPACK scaling algorithm. |
Geometry. All e.s.d.'s (except the e.s.d. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell e.s.d.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of e.s.d.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between e.s.d.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell e.s.d.'s is used for estimating e.s.d.'s involving l.s. planes. |
Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2, conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > σ(F2) is used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger. |
x | y | z | Uiso*/Ueq | ||
Fe | 0.422257 (14) | 0.2500 | 0.10001 (3) | 0.01195 (6) | |
C1 | 0.40416 (9) | 0.31478 (9) | 0.41329 (14) | 0.02025 (18) | |
H1 | 0.3372 (11) | 0.3551 (12) | 0.451 (2) | 0.025 (3)* | |
C2 | 0.50116 (10) | 0.37495 (11) | 0.31685 (16) | 0.0293 (2) | |
H2A | 0.4931 (13) | 0.4628 (14) | 0.294 (2) | 0.039 (4)* | |
H2B | 0.5783 (12) | 0.3456 (14) | 0.346 (2) | 0.033 (4)* | |
C3 | 0.54866 (12) | 0.2500 | −0.0711 (2) | 0.0220 (2) | |
O3 | 0.63206 (10) | 0.2500 | −0.1730 (2) | 0.0381 (3) | |
C4 | 0.33599 (8) | 0.36948 (8) | −0.02057 (14) | 0.01764 (16) | |
O4 | 0.28356 (7) | 0.44729 (7) | −0.09743 (12) | 0.02909 (17) |
U11 | U22 | U33 | U12 | U13 | U23 | |
Fe | 0.01180 (8) | 0.01336 (9) | 0.01068 (9) | 0.000 | 0.00004 (5) | 0.000 |
C1 | 0.0273 (4) | 0.0212 (4) | 0.0123 (4) | −0.0003 (3) | −0.0005 (3) | −0.0032 (3) |
C2 | 0.0371 (5) | 0.0323 (5) | 0.0185 (4) | −0.0166 (4) | −0.0030 (4) | −0.0046 (4) |
C3 | 0.0174 (5) | 0.0313 (7) | 0.0174 (5) | 0.000 | −0.0004 (4) | 0.000 |
O3 | 0.0198 (5) | 0.0651 (8) | 0.0294 (6) | 0.000 | 0.0089 (4) | 0.000 |
C4 | 0.0198 (4) | 0.0180 (4) | 0.0151 (4) | 0.0000 (3) | 0.0025 (3) | 0.0001 (3) |
O4 | 0.0338 (4) | 0.0254 (4) | 0.0280 (4) | 0.0108 (3) | 0.0010 (3) | 0.0072 (3) |
Fe—C4i | 1.7961 (9) | C1—C2 | 1.4194 (14) |
Fe—C4 | 1.7961 (9) | C1—C1i | 1.4142 (19) |
Fe—C3 | 1.7893 (14) | C1—H1 | 0.912 (13) |
Fe—C1 | 2.0675 (9) | C2—H2A | 0.974 (15) |
Fe—C1i | 2.0675 (9) | C2—H2B | 0.955 (14) |
Fe—C2 | 2.1123 (10) | C3—O3 | 1.1418 (18) |
Fe—C2i | 2.1123 (10) | C4—O4 | 1.1425 (11) |
C4i—Fe—C4 | 93.11 (6) | C1—Fe—C2i | 70.86 (4) |
C4i—Fe—C3 | 101.50 (4) | C1i—Fe—C2i | 39.69 (4) |
C4—Fe—C3 | 101.50 (4) | C2—Fe—C2i | 80.43 (7) |
C4i—Fe—C1 | 125.46 (4) | C2—C1—C1i | 117.56 (6) |
C4—Fe—C1 | 94.79 (4) | C2—C1—Fe | 71.86 (5) |
C3—Fe—C1 | 129.18 (5) | C1i—C1—Fe | 70.00 (3) |
C4i—Fe—C1i | 94.79 (4) | C2—C1—H1 | 122.6 (8) |
C4—Fe—C1i | 125.46 (4) | C1i—C1—H1 | 118.8 (8) |
C3—Fe—C1i | 129.18 (5) | Fe—C1—H1 | 119.0 (8) |
C1—Fe—C1i | 40.00 (5) | C1—C2—Fe | 68.46 (5) |
C4i—Fe—C2 | 164.87 (4) | C1—C2—H2A | 116.3 (9) |
C4—Fe—C2 | 91.59 (4) | Fe—C2—H2A | 120.3 (9) |
C3—Fe—C2 | 91.63 (4) | C1—C2—H2B | 119.2 (9) |
C1—Fe—C2 | 39.69 (4) | Fe—C2—H2B | 107.2 (9) |
C1i—Fe—C2 | 70.86 (4) | H2A—C2—H2B | 116.4 (13) |
C4i—Fe—C2i | 91.59 (4) | O3—C3—Fe | 177.25 (13) |
C4—Fe—C2i | 164.87 (4) | O4—C4—Fe | 178.28 (8) |
C3—Fe—C2i | 91.63 (4) |
Symmetry code: (i) x, −y+1/2, z. |
Experimental details
Crystal data | |
Chemical formula | [Fe(C4H6)(CO)3] |
Mr | 193.97 |
Crystal system, space group | Orthorhombic, Pnma |
Temperature (K) | 100 |
a, b, c (Å) | 11.4323 (6), 10.9146 (6), 6.1664 (4) |
V (Å3) | 769.44 (8) |
Z | 4 |
Radiation type | Mo Kα |
µ (mm−1) | 1.91 |
Crystal size (mm) | 0.40 × 0.38 × 0.36 |
Data collection | |
Diffractometer | Oxford Diffraction Xcalibur Eos |
Absorption correction | Multi-scan (CrysAlis PRO; Oxford Diffraction, 2009) |
Tmin, Tmax | 0.850, 1.000 |
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections | 13021, 1177, 1131 |
Rint | 0.019 |
(sin θ/λ)max (Å−1) | 0.703 |
Refinement | |
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S | 0.015, 0.040, 1.04 |
No. of reflections | 1177 |
No. of parameters | 67 |
H-atom treatment | All H-atom parameters refined |
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å−3) | 0.35, −0.22 |
Computer programs: CrysAlis PRO (Oxford Diffraction, 2009), CrysAlis ro (Oxford Diffraction, 2009), SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 2008), SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008), DIAMOND (Brandenburg, 2010), publCIF (Westrip, 2010).
References
Brandenburg, K. (2010). DIAMOND. Crystal Impact GbR, Bonn, Germany. Google Scholar
Bühl, M. & Thiel, W. (1997). Inorg. Chem. 36, 2922–2924. PubMed Google Scholar
Davidson, G. (1969). Inorg. Chim. Acta, pp. 596–600. Google Scholar
Immirzi, A. & Allegra, G. (1969). Acta Cryst. B25, 120–124. CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Knölker, H.-J. (2000). Chem. Rev. 100, 2941–2961. PubMed Google Scholar
Kruczynski, L. & Takats, J. (1976). Inorg. Chem. 15, 3140–3147. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Kukolich, S. G., Roebrig, M. A., Wallace, D. W. & Henderson, G. L. (1993). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115, 2021–2027. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Mills, O. S. & Robinson, G. (1963). Acta Cryst. 16, 758–761. CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Oxford Diffraction (2009). CrysAlis PRO. Oxford Diffraction Ltd, Yarnton, Oxfordshire, England. Google Scholar
Pearson, A. J. (1983). Transition Met. Chem. 6, 67–78. CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
Porri, L., Lionelli, A., Allegra, G. & Immirzi, A. (1965). Chem. Commun. pp. 336–337. Google Scholar
Reihlen, H., Gruhl, A., v. Hessling, G. & Pfrengle, O. (1930). Liebigs Ann. Chem. 483, 161–182. Google Scholar
Reiss, G. J. (2002). Z. Naturforsch. Teil B, 57, 479–482. CAS Google Scholar
Reiss, G. J. & Konietzny, S. (2002). J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans. pp. 862–864. Web of Science CSD CrossRef Google Scholar
Sawyer, K. R., Glascoe, E. A., Cahoon, J. F., Schlegel, J. P. & Harris, C. B. (2008). Organometallics, 27, 4370–4379. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Schomaker, V. & Trueblood, K. N. (1968). Acta Cryst. B24, 63–76. CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Web of Science Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2008). Acta Cryst. A64, 112–122. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Westrip, S. P. (2010). J. Appl. Cryst. 43, 920–925. Web of Science CrossRef CAS 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.
Olefine complexes containing the {Fe(CO)3} fragment are intensively studied and are used as catalysts in a wide range of applications (Knöker, 2000; Sawyer et al., 2008). Diene and dienyl complexes of iron are common intermediates in iron catalyzed organic reactions (Pearson, 1981). Butadiene complexes have been structurally characterized since the 60 s of the last century (Porri, Lionelli, Allegra & Immirzi, 1965; Immirzi & Allegra, 1969). The first synthesis of the title compound dates back to the 30 s of the last century (Reihlen et al. 1930). Vibrational spectroscopic (Davidson, 1969) and 13C-NMR spectroscopic studies (Kruczynski & Takats, 1976) were undertaken on the title compound. The structures of the title compound were derived from microwave spectroscopy (Kukolich et al., 1993) and quantum chemical calculations (Bühl und Thiel, 1997). The first crystal structure verified the constitution of the title complex consisting of three coordinated CO ligands and one η4-coordinated butadiene ligand (Mills & Robinson, 1963). This early structure determination, based on equi-inclination photographic data, did not report any information on the hydrogen atom positions. The standard uncertainties of the reported C—C bond lengths that range from 0.05 to 0.06 do not allow a detailed discussion of the bonding properties of the butadiene ligand.
The redetermination of η4-s-cis-1,3-butadienetricarbonyliron(0) at 100 K yielded significantly improved geometric parameters that enables a detailed discussion of the structure. The Fe(0) center of the title complex is coordinated by three carbonyl ligands and one s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand. The different C—Fe(carbonyl) and C≡O bond lengths are equal within their standard uncertainties. The angles between the C≡O ligands are 93.11 (6) and 101.50 (4)°. The coordinated 1,3-butadiene ligand shows the well known s-cis-conformation with the C—C bond lengths equilibrated according to the s.u.'s derived from the X-ray diffraction experiment. The C—C bond lengths are significant shorter (C1—C2 1.423 (1); C1—C1i 1.418 (2) (librational corrected values; Schomaker and Trueblood, 1968)) than those reported for the crystal structure of this compound but they are in very good agreement to values derived from microwave spectra (Kukolich et al., 1993) and theoretical calculations (Bühl & Thiel, 1997). The values are in good agreement to values derived for the analogous bis(1,3-cyclohexadiene)monocarbonyliron(0) complex (Reiß, 2002). This equilibration is a consequence of a bonding-back bonding mechanism between the diene ligand and the metal center (Reiß & Konietzny, 2002).
The coordination figure at Fe(0) is best described as a square pyramid with the sterically more demanding s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand occupying two coordination sites of the basis. The hydrogen atom of the coordinated s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand are diplaced of the plane defined by its four carbon atoms. H1 and H2a are only slightly displaced by 11.8 (5)° and 11.1 (6)°, respectively, whereas H2b shows a dihedral angle of 43.4 (7)°. The refined hydrogen atom positions are in very good agreement to results from microwave spectroscopy (Kukolich et al., 1993).
This redetermination at low temperature yielded improved and significant shorter C—C bond lengths and locates the not yet reported hydrogen atom positions for the s-cis-1,3-butadiene ligand by crystallographic methods. All geometric parameters derived are in very good agreement with other experimental and theoretical results reported in the last decades.