Synthesis and structure of tetra­aqua­bis­(dimethyl ether)magnesium(II) dibromide dimethyl ether disolvate

Moritz, B.; Mairath, T.; Strohmann, C.

doi:10.1107/S205698902600366X

research communications

CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC
COMMUNICATIONS

ISSN: 2056-9890

Volume 82| Part 5| May 2026| Pages 463-466

https://doi.org/10.1107/S205698902600366X

Open

access

Synthesis and structure of tetraaquabis(dimethyl ether)magnesium(II) dibromide dimethyl ether disolvate

Beata Moritz,^a Tristan Mairath ^a and Carsten Strohmann ^a ^*

^aTU Dortmund University, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Inorganic Chemistry, Otto-Hahn-Strasse 6, 44227 Dortmund, Germany
^*Correspondence e-mail: [email protected]

Edited by W. T. A. Harrison, University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom (Received 3 April 2026; accepted 8 April 2026; online 14 April 2026)

Unlike typical hexahydrates, the title compound, [Mg(C₂H₆O)₂(H₂O)₄]Br₂·2C₂H₆O or [Mg(H₂O)₄(DME)₂]Br₂·DME₂ (DME = dimethyl ether, C₂H₆O), is a water-poor magnesium(II) complex. The central magnesium cation (site symmetry 1) is coordinated by four water molecules and two molecules of dimethyl ether and adopts a slightly elongated trans-octahedral coordination geometry. The water molecules are linked to outer-sphere bromide anions and additional dimethyl ether molecules via O—H⋯Br and O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds. Due to the volatility of dimethyl ether, the presence of coordinating and non-coordinating molecules of this ether makes this solid state structure presented here particularly interesting. To investigate the intermolecular interactions leading to this special coordination, a Hirshfeld surface analysis was performed. It showed that the H⋯H interactions (70.4%) make the largest contribution to the crystal packing, followed by H⋯Br interactions (19.4%), H⋯O interactions (10.1%) and Br⋯O interactions (0.1%).

Keywords: crystal structure; magnesium(II) bromide; dimethyl ether; Hirshfeld surface analysis; hydrogen bonds.

CCDC reference: 2544504

1. Chemical context

Magnesium(II) bromide is a well-known chemical with a wide range of applications. For example, it can be used to catalyze nucleophilic addition reactions as a Lewis acid in organic synthesis (Annunziata et al., 1992 ). It is also reported to catalyze cycloadditions (Danishefsky et al., 1985 ) and rearrangement reactions (Black et al., 1988 , 1990 ). Furthermore, magnesium(II) bromide is known for its use in polymerization reactions (Daito et al., 2021 ) or possible catalytic effect on the formation of Grignard reagents (Garst et al., 1994 ).

While magnesium(II) bromide is a commonly used salt, and many complexations of MgBr₂-containing compounds with etheric solvents like THF are known (Seyferth, 2009 ; Toney & Stucky, 1971 ), the solvent considered here, dimethyl ether (C₂H₆O; DME), exhibits challenging properties. DME, with a boiling point of 248 K (Bauer & Kruse, 2019 ), is the smallest ether available. Nevertheless, it can be used, for example, as an extraction solvent (Bauer & Kruse, 2019; Zheng & Watanabe, 2022 ) or as an alternative to conventional fuels (Semelsberger et al., 2006 ; Catizzone et al., 2021 ). However, with regard to chemical synthesis and structural studies, it has been less investigated.

This is consistent with the absence of solid-state structures involving dimethyl ether, and is particularly evident from the fact that only one other solid-state structure of a magnesium(II) complex with dimethyl ether as a ligand (2) is known to date. In this work, the title compound (1), which represents the second structure of a magnesium(II) complex containing dimethyl ether is reported. In complex 2, the magnesium cation is coordinated by two dimethyl ether molecules and two bidentate B₃H₈⁻ ligands (CSD refcode KIRWAK; Kim et al., 2007 ), resulting in a distorted MgO₂H₄ cis-octahedral geometry. The magnesium center in complex 1 adopts a trans-octahedral geometry. Compared to the magnesium complexes with dimethyl ether as ligands, which have been less studied to date, the structural motif of magnesium(II) hexahydrates like 3 is well known (e.g., YIKLAH; Hennings et al., 2013 ). Such structures can be described as water-rich, whereas compound 1 represents a relatively water-poor compound. Complex 1 is described in more detail below, providing an overview of its structure and crystal packing.

2. Structural commentary

Complex 1, [Mg(H₂O)₄(DME)₂]Br₂·DME₂, crystallizes at 193 K in the monoclinic space group P2₁/n (Fig. 1). The asymmetric unit consists of one half of the complex with the magnesium cation lying on the inversion center at 1/2, 1/2, 1/2 for the asymmetric atoms and the second half is generated by inversion symmetry. The metal ion in 1 exhibits a slightly distorted MgO₆ octahedral coordination geometry with two bromide anions and two dimethyl ether molecules located in the outer sphere. This geometry can be identified by the angles around the magnesium center, which are close to 90° (Table 1). In this arrangement, the water molecules are in the equatorial plane. The distances between the water oxygen atoms (O2 and O3) and the metal center are very similar to each other. In contrast, the distances between the magnesium atom and the directly coordinating (via O1), axially positioned dimethyl ether molecules are slightly elongated and suggest a stretching of the octahedral geometry. This distortion could be attributed, on the one hand, to steric effects caused by the methyl substituents. On the other hand, the elongation of the Mg1—O1 bond could be explained in terms of electronic factors due to the higher electronegativity of carbon compared to hydrogen. The higher electron density in the C—O bond in comparison to the H—O bond leads to a weaker coordination of the dimethyl ether oxygen atom to the magnesium center. These elongated axial coordinations are in contrast to the structure of the magnesium(II) bromide hexahydrate, where all coordinations from the water molecules are equal (YIKLAH; Hennings et al., 2013). The directly coordinating dimethyl ether molecules in 1 show longer C—O bond lengths [C1—O1 = 1.441 (5) Å, C2—O1 = 1.433 (6) Å] than those in the outer sphere [C3—O4 = 1.416 (6) Å, C4—O4 = 1.422 (6) Å]. Due to the coordination, the electron density could be shifted from the oxygen atom O1 to the O1—Mg1 coordination, causing a weakening of the C—O1 bonds. The bond lengths of the dimethyl ether molecules in the outer sphere are consistent with data from the literature (Allen et al., 1987 ).

Table 1
Selected geometric parameters (Å, °)

Mg1—O1	2.140 (3)	Mg1—O2	2.060 (3)
Mg1—O3	2.026 (3)

O3—Mg1—O1ⁱ	89.88 (12)	O3—Mg1—O2ⁱ	89.94 (13)
O3—Mg1—O1	90.11 (12)	O2—Mg1—O1	89.20 (12)
O3—Mg1—O2	90.06 (13)	O2ⁱ—Mg1—O1	90.80 (12)
Symmetry code: (i) .

Figure 1
The molecular structure of 1, showing the atom labeling and 50% probability displacement ellipsoids. Symmetry code: (i) −x + 1, 1−z + 1, −z + 1.

3. Supramolecular features

The crystal packing of complex 1 is shown in Fig. 2. When observing the non-directly coordinating DME molecules, a relatively short distance H3A⋯O4 of 1.83 (6) Å can be seen, which indicates a hydrogen bond (Table 2). Regarding the high volatility of dimethyl ether, the presence of these weakly co-coordinating molecules in this aggregate is quite unusual. Similar interactions can be seen between H2B⋯Br1 [2.41 (8) Å] and H3B⋯Br1 [2.40 (7) Å]. The bromide anions are slightly displaced from the equatorial plane formed by the water molecules, as can be seen from the angle of 85.44 (8)° for O1—Mg1⋯Br1. This could be explained by intermolecular interactions, for example, hydrogen bonds.

Table 2
Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, °)

D—H⋯A	D—H	H⋯A	D⋯A	D—H⋯A
O2—H2A⋯Br1ⁱⁱ	0.79 (6)	2.48 (5)	3.268 (3)	173 (4)
O2—H2B⋯Br1	0.89 (7)	2.41 (8)	3.258 (3)	159 (7)
O3—H3A⋯O4	0.85 (6)	1.83 (6)	2.664 (5)	170 (6)
O3—H3B⋯Br1	0.89 (7)	2.40 (7)	3.255 (3)	163 (5)
Symmetry code: (ii) $[-x+{\script{1\over 2}}, y+{\script{1\over 2}}, -z+{\script{1\over 2}}]$ .

Figure 2
The molecular packing of 1 viewed along the a axis with the unit cell shown as a black outline. Hydrogen bonds are shown as dashed blue lines.

To better understand the intermolecular interactions and to investigate, which intermolecular interaction is dominating the packing of 1, a Hirshfeld surface analysis (Spackman & Jayatilaka, 2009 ) was carried out. The surface and the corresponding fingerprint plots (McKinnon et al., 2007 ) were calculated using CrystalExplorer21 (Spackman et al., 2021 ). Fig. 3 illustrates the Hirshfeld surface mapped over d_norm in the range from −0.71 to 1.31 arbitrary units. The red areas represent the closest contacts, which correspond to hydrogen bonds. The contributions of the respective intermolecular interactions are visualized by the two-dimensional fingerprint plots shown in Fig. 4. The H⋯H interactions can be identified as the most significant interactions for the packing in the crystal structure of 1 (70.4%), followed by the H⋯Br interactions, contributing 19.4% and the H⋯O interactions with a contribution of 10.1%. The Br⋯O interactions, with a contribution of 0.1%, are less impactful. Based on this analysis, the H⋯H interactions could be identified as the most significant interactions of the crystal packing, whereas the hydrogen bonds represent the closest contacts between the molecules.

Figure 3
Hirshfeld surface analysis of 1 showing close contacts in the crystal.

Figure 4
Two-dimensional fingerprint plots for compound 1, showing (a) all contributions and (b)–(e) contributions between specific interacting atom pairs (blue areas).

4. Database survey

A search of the Cambridge Structural Database (Groom et al., 2016 ; WebCSD February 2026) revealed several structures of magnesium(II) complexes, for example, a complex, where the magnesium ion is coordinated by two bromide anions in the axial position and four tetrahydrofuran (THF) ligands in the equatorial position (ZZZVBQ04; Stern et al., 2010 ). Instead of the THF ligands, another complex contains the more sterically demanding tetrahydropyran (THP) ligands (OCARAO; Schüler et al., 2021 ).

Further research reveals a more similar structure to complex 1 containing two water molecules, four THF molecules and two bromide anions (THFMGB; Sarma et al., 1977 ). Another crystal structure with uncoordinated ether molecules in the outer sphere consists of two different cationic magnesium moieties with two [MnCl₄]^2– counter-ions. While one of the magnesium centers is coordinated by four THF molecules and two water molecules, the other is coordinated by two THF ligands and four water molecules (NUSREY; Sobota et al., 1998 ). The latter is a coordinated cationic domain that is very similar to the one found in complex 1, which contains dimethyl ether ligands instead of THF. As already mentioned, a search for magnesium(II) complexes with dimethyl ether as a ligand revealed only one structure, complex 2 (KIRWAK; Kim et al., 2007). In addition, two lithium halide complexes with DME ligands are known, for example (AQIKUK, AQIKOE; Hättasch et al., 2025 ). The absence of further structures with dimethyl ether as a ligand highlights the untapped potential of investigating such compounds.

5. Synthesis and crystallization

To ensure safe handling of dimethyl ether in liquid form, the reaction was performed at low temperatures due to its low boiling point.

MgBr₂ (16.0 mg, 0.090 mmol, 1.00 eq.), dissolved in THF, was used as a starting material for the synthesis of complex 1. The solvent was removed from this reagent under reduced pressure. Dimethyl ether (1 ml) was added to the remaining salt MgBr₂ at 223 K. After complete solvation of the salt, the reaction vessel was stored at 193 K. Compound 1 crystallized after four days in the form of colorless blocks, which were suitable for X-ray diffraction. The crystals are temperature sensitive, and were picked at 193 K. Since the complex 1 contains water, residual moisture must have been present for the compound to crystallize, although the source of water is unknown.

6. Refinement

Crystal data, data collection and structure refinement details are summarized in Table 3. The hydrogen atoms were located in difference maps and refined freely with isotropic displacement parameters.

Table 3
Experimental details

Crystal data
Chemical formula	[Mg(C₂H₆O)₂(H₂O)₄]Br₂·2C₂H₆O
M_r	440.46
Crystal system, space group	Monoclinic, P2₁/n
Temperature (K)	100
a, b, c (Å)	8.089 (3), 9.494 (3), 13.351 (5)
β (°)	102.606 (16)
V (Å³)	1000.6 (6)
Z	2
Radiation type	Mo Kα
μ (mm⁻¹)	4.11
Crystal size (mm)	0.24 × 0.18 × 0.15

Data collection
Diffractometer	Bruker D8 VENTURE area detector
Absorption correction	Multi-scan (SADABS; Krause et al., 2015 )
T_min, T_max	0.329, 0.491
No. of measured, independent and observed [I > 2σ(I)] reflections	18018, 2223, 1612
R_int	0.060
(sin θ/λ)_max (Å⁻¹)	0.644

Refinement
R[F² > 2σ(F²)], wR(F²), S	0.043, 0.116, 1.05
No. of reflections	2223
No. of parameters	152
H-atom treatment	All H-atom parameters refined
Δρ_max, Δρ_min (e Å⁻³)	0.86, −0.88
Computer programs: APEX6 and SAINT (Bruker, 2016 ), SHELXT (Sheldrick, 2015a ), SHELXL (Sheldrick, 2015b ) and OLEX2 (Dolomanov et al., 2009 ).

Supporting information

CCDC reference: 2544504

Crystal structure: contains datablock I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S205698902600366X/hb8210sup1.cif

Structure factors: contains datablock I. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S205698902600366X/hb8210Isup2.hkl

checkCIF report

Computing details top

Tetraaquabis(dimethyl ether)magnesium(II) dibromide dimethyl ether disolvate top

Crystal data top

[Mg(C₂H₆O)₂(H₂O)₄]Br₂·2C₂H₆O	F(000) = 452
M_r = 440.46	D_x = 1.462 Mg m⁻³
Monoclinic, P2₁/n	Mo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
a = 8.089 (3) Å	Cell parameters from 3601 reflections
b = 9.494 (3) Å	θ = 2.7–27.0°
c = 13.351 (5) Å	µ = 4.11 mm⁻¹
β = 102.606 (16)°	T = 100 K
V = 1000.6 (6) Å³	Block, clear colourless
Z = 2	0.24 × 0.18 × 0.15 mm

Data collection top

Bruker D8 VENTURE area detector diffractometer	2223 independent reflections
Radiation source: microfocus sealed X-ray tube, INCOATEC microfocus sealed tube, Iys 3.0	1612 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Multilayer optics monochromator	R_int = 0.060
Detector resolution: 10.4167 pixels mm^-1	θ_max = 27.2°, θ_min = 2.7°
ω and φ scans	h = −10→10
Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Krause et al., 2015)	k = −12→12
T_min = 0.329, T_max = 0.491	l = −17→17
18018 measured reflections

Refinement top

Refinement on F²	Primary atom site location: dual
Least-squares matrix: full	Hydrogen site location: difference Fourier map
R[F² > 2σ(F²)] = 0.043	All H-atom parameters refined
wR(F²) = 0.116	w = 1/[σ²(F_o²) + (0.0542P)² + 1.9217P] where P = (F_o² + 2F_c²)/3
S = 1.05	(Δ/σ)_max < 0.001
2223 reflections	Δρ_max = 0.86 e Å⁻³
152 parameters	Δρ_min = −0.88 e Å⁻³
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.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å²) top

	x	y	z	U_iso*/U_eq
Br1	0.10246 (5)	0.25568 (4)	0.30234 (3)	0.03415 (16)
Mg1	0.500000	0.500000	0.500000	0.0284 (4)
O1	0.3210 (4)	0.5284 (3)	0.5950 (2)	0.0341 (7)
O3	0.4396 (4)	0.2929 (3)	0.4848 (2)	0.0326 (7)
O2	0.3116 (4)	0.5452 (3)	0.3732 (2)	0.0323 (7)
O4	0.6731 (4)	0.0916 (4)	0.4994 (2)	0.0452 (8)
C1	0.3682 (6)	0.5991 (5)	0.6925 (3)	0.0362 (10)
C2	0.1863 (6)	0.4306 (6)	0.5957 (4)	0.0416 (11)
C4	0.6744 (7)	0.0189 (6)	0.4065 (4)	0.0462 (12)
C3	0.8387 (7)	0.1249 (7)	0.5545 (5)	0.0547 (14)
H3C	0.891 (6)	0.188 (6)	0.515 (4)	0.035 (13)*
H2C	0.225 (6)	0.361 (5)	0.642 (3)	0.028 (12)*
H1A	0.261 (5)	0.648 (5)	0.707 (3)	0.029 (11)*
H1B	0.398 (6)	0.535 (5)	0.742 (3)	0.029 (12)*
H4A	0.736 (7)	0.073 (6)	0.356 (4)	0.060 (17)*
H2D	0.096 (7)	0.477 (5)	0.616 (4)	0.043 (14)*
H1C	0.461 (6)	0.672 (5)	0.690 (4)	0.040 (13)*
H2A	0.328 (7)	0.591 (6)	0.327 (4)	0.045 (16)*
H3A	0.522 (8)	0.236 (6)	0.493 (5)	0.053 (17)*
H3B	0.353 (9)	0.263 (6)	0.437 (5)	0.064 (19)*
H2E	0.139 (6)	0.393 (5)	0.528 (4)	0.031 (11)*
H3D	0.887 (7)	0.041 (6)	0.570 (4)	0.043 (14)*
H4B	0.556 (7)	−0.001 (6)	0.362 (4)	0.052 (15)*
H4C	0.740 (8)	−0.076 (7)	0.428 (5)	0.073 (19)*
H2B	0.247 (10)	0.478 (8)	0.338 (6)	0.10 (3)*
H3E	0.833 (9)	0.191 (8)	0.613 (5)	0.08 (2)*

Atomic displacement parameters (Å²) top

	U¹¹	U²²	U³³	U¹²	U¹³	U²³
Br1	0.0322 (2)	0.0351 (2)	0.0323 (2)	0.00003 (18)	0.00085 (16)	−0.00621 (18)
Mg1	0.0288 (9)	0.0306 (10)	0.0249 (9)	0.0005 (8)	0.0037 (7)	0.0004 (8)
O1	0.0320 (15)	0.0421 (17)	0.0287 (15)	−0.0023 (13)	0.0078 (12)	−0.0026 (13)
O3	0.0282 (14)	0.0334 (15)	0.0333 (16)	0.0026 (13)	0.0004 (12)	0.0007 (13)
O2	0.0363 (16)	0.0327 (16)	0.0259 (15)	−0.0007 (13)	0.0020 (12)	0.0020 (13)
O4	0.0383 (17)	0.055 (2)	0.0397 (18)	0.0101 (15)	0.0029 (14)	−0.0117 (16)
C1	0.046 (3)	0.038 (2)	0.027 (2)	0.004 (2)	0.0117 (19)	−0.0024 (19)
C2	0.034 (2)	0.053 (3)	0.039 (3)	−0.004 (2)	0.011 (2)	−0.004 (2)
C4	0.056 (3)	0.045 (3)	0.037 (3)	0.007 (2)	0.009 (2)	−0.004 (2)
C3	0.042 (3)	0.050 (3)	0.066 (4)	0.005 (3)	−0.001 (3)	−0.005 (3)

Geometric parameters (Å, º) top

Mg1—O1	2.140 (3)	O4—C3	1.416 (6)
Mg1—O1ⁱ	2.140 (3)	C1—H1A	1.04 (4)
Mg1—O3ⁱ	2.026 (3)	C1—H1B	0.89 (5)
Mg1—O3	2.026 (3)	C1—H1C	1.02 (5)
Mg1—O2	2.060 (3)	C2—H2C	0.91 (5)
Mg1—O2ⁱ	2.060 (3)	C2—H2D	0.94 (5)
O1—C1	1.441 (5)	C2—H2E	0.97 (5)
O1—C2	1.433 (6)	C4—H4A	1.05 (6)
O3—H3A	0.85 (6)	C4—H4B	1.03 (5)
O3—H3B	0.88 (7)	C4—H4C	1.05 (7)
O2—H2A	0.79 (6)	C3—H3C	0.96 (5)
O2—H2B	0.89 (8)	C3—H3D	0.89 (5)
O4—C4	1.422 (6)	C3—H3E	1.01 (7)

O1ⁱ—Mg1—O1	180.0	O1—C1—H1A	108 (2)
O3—Mg1—O1ⁱ	89.88 (12)	O1—C1—H1B	109 (3)
O3ⁱ—Mg1—O1ⁱ	90.12 (12)	O1—C1—H1C	109 (3)
O3—Mg1—O1	90.11 (12)	H1A—C1—H1B	106 (4)
O3ⁱ—Mg1—O1	89.88 (12)	H1A—C1—H1C	111 (4)
O3—Mg1—O3ⁱ	180.0	H1B—C1—H1C	114 (4)
O3—Mg1—O2	90.06 (13)	O1—C2—H2C	109 (3)
O3—Mg1—O2ⁱ	89.94 (13)	O1—C2—H2D	110 (3)
O3ⁱ—Mg1—O2ⁱ	90.06 (13)	O1—C2—H2E	112 (3)
O3ⁱ—Mg1—O2	89.94 (13)	H2C—C2—H2D	108 (4)
O2—Mg1—O1	89.20 (12)	H2C—C2—H2E	112 (4)
O2ⁱ—Mg1—O1	90.80 (12)	H2D—C2—H2E	105 (4)
O2—Mg1—O1ⁱ	90.80 (12)	O4—C4—H4A	114 (3)
O2ⁱ—Mg1—O1ⁱ	89.20 (12)	O4—C4—H4B	114 (3)
O2—Mg1—O2ⁱ	180.0	O4—C4—H4C	106 (3)
C1—O1—Mg1	120.9 (3)	H4A—C4—H4B	104 (4)
C2—O1—Mg1	122.4 (3)	H4A—C4—H4C	109 (5)
C2—O1—C1	110.4 (3)	H4B—C4—H4C	111 (4)
Mg1—O3—H3A	116 (4)	O4—C3—H3C	110 (3)
Mg1—O3—H3B	121 (4)	O4—C3—H3D	104 (3)
H3A—O3—H3B	112 (5)	O4—C3—H3E	110 (4)
Mg1—O2—H2A	122 (4)	H3C—C3—H3D	117 (5)
Mg1—O2—H2B	122 (5)	H3C—C3—H3E	98 (5)
H2A—O2—H2B	100 (6)	H3D—C3—H3E	118 (5)
C3—O4—C4	112.1 (4)

Symmetry code: (i) −x+1, −y+1, −z+1.

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º) top

D—H···A	D—H	H···A	D···A	D—H···A
O2—H2A···Br1ⁱⁱ	0.79 (6)	2.48 (5)	3.268 (3)	173 (4)
O2—H2B···Br1	0.89 (7)	2.41 (8)	3.258 (3)	159 (7)
O3—H3A···O4	0.85 (6)	1.83 (6)	2.664 (5)	170 (6)
O3—H3B···Br1	0.89 (7)	2.40 (7)	3.255 (3)	163 (5)

Symmetry code: (ii) −x+1/2, y+1/2, −z+1/2.

References

Allen, F. H., Kennard, O., Watson, D. G., Brammer, L., Orpen, A. G. & Taylor, R. (1987). J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 pp. S1–S19. Google Scholar
Annunziata, R., Cinquini, M., Cozzi, F., Cozzi, P. G. & Consolandi, E. (1992). J. Org. Chem. 57, 456–461. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Bauer, M. C. & Kruse, A. (2019). Fuel 254, 115703. Web of Science CrossRef Google Scholar
Black, T. H., Hall, J. A. & Sheu, R. G. (1988). J. Org. Chem. 53, 2371–2374. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Bruker (2016). APEX6 and SAINT. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Google Scholar
Catizzone, E., Freda, C., Braccio, G., Frusteri, F. & Bonura, G. (2021). J. Energy Chem. 58, 55–77. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Daito, Y., Kojima, R., Kusuyama, N., Kohsaka, Y. & Ouchi, M. (2021). Polym. Chem. 12, 702–710. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Danishefsky, S. J., Pearson, W. H., Harvey, D. F., Maring, C. J. & Springer, J. P. (1985). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 107, 1256–1268. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Dolomanov, 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
Garst, J. F., Easton Lawrence, K., Batlaw, R., Boone, J. & Ungváry, F. (1994). Inorg. Chim. Acta 222, 365–375. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Groom, 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
Hättasch, J., Schmidt, A. & Strohmann, C. (2025). Acta Cryst. E81, 1086–1093. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Hennings, E., Schmidt, H. & Voigt, W. (2013). Acta Cryst. C69, 1292–1300. Web of Science CSD CrossRef ICSD CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Howard Black, T., Eisenbeis, S. A., McDermott, T. S. & Maluleka, S. L. (1990). Tetrahedron 46, 2307–2316. CrossRef Google Scholar
Kim, D. Y., Yang, Y., Abelson, J. R. & Girolami, G. S. (2007). Inorg. Chem. 46, 9060–9066. Web of Science CSD CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Krause, L., Herbst-Irmer, R., Sheldrick, G. M. & Stalke, D. (2015). J. Appl. Cryst. 48, 3–10. Web of Science CSD CrossRef ICSD CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
McKinnon, J. J., Jayatilaka, D. & Spackman, M. A. (2007). Chem. Commun. 3814–3816. Google Scholar
Sarma, R., Ramirez, F., McKeever, B., Chaw, Y. F., Marecek, J. F., Nierman, D. & McCaffrey, T. M. (1977). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 99, 5289–5295. CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Schüler, P., Görls, H., Krieck, S. & Westerhausen, M. (2021). Chem. A Eur. J. 27, 15508–15515. Google Scholar
Semelsberger, T. A., Borup, R. L. & Greene, H. L. (2006). J. Power Sources 156, 497–511. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Seyferth, D. (2009). Organometallics 28, 1598–1605. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2015a). Acta Cryst. A71, 3–8. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Sheldrick, G. M. (2015b). Acta Cryst. A71, 3–8. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Sobota, P., Utko, J. & Jerzykiewicz, L. B. (1998). Inorg. Chem. 37, 3428–3431. Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Spackman, M. A. & Jayatilaka, D. (2009). CrystEngComm 11, 19–32. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Spackman, P. R., Turner, M. J., McKinnon, J. J., Wolff, S. K., Grimwood, D. J., Jayatilaka, D. & Spackman, M. A. (2021). J. Appl. Cryst. 54, 1006–1011. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Stern, D., Granitzka, M., Schulz, T. & Stalke, D. (2010). Z. Naturforsch. B 65, 719–724. Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
Toney, J. & Stucky, G. D. (1971). J. Organomet. Chem. 28, 5–20. CSD CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
Zheng, Q. & Watanabe, M. (2022). Resour. Chem. Mater. 1, 16–26. 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.