Jump to main content
Jump to site search

Issue 29, 2013
Previous Article Next Article

More surprising differences between two closely similar compartmental ligand families and another dinuclear synthon to stabilize dinuclear–mononuclear cocrystals

Author affiliations

Abstract

This paper presents syntheses, characterization, crystal structures and magnetic properties of two diphenoxo-bridged heterodinuclear CuIIMnII/CuIIFeII compounds [CuIIL1MnII(H2O)3](ClO4)2 (1) and [CuIIL1FeII(H2O)3](ClO4)2 (2) and two tetranuclear CuII3MnII/CuII3FeII compounds [{CuIIL2MnII(H2O)(MeOH)2}(CuIIL2)2](ClO4)2·MeOH (3) and [{CuIIL2FeII(H2O)(MeOH)2}(CuIIL2)2](ClO4)2·MeOH (4) derived from two 3-methoxysalicylaldehyde-diamine Schiff base compartmental ligands H2L1 and H2L2, in which the diamine counterpart comes from 1,3-diaminopropane and o-phenylenediamine, respectively. The two compounds 1 and 2 crystallize in the same space group (monoclinic P21/n) with practically identical unit cell parameters and are isomorphous. Similarly, the two compounds 3 and 4 crystallize in the same space group (monoclinic P21/c) with practically identical unit cell parameters and are isomorphous. The tetranuclear [{CuIIL2MII(H2O)(MeOH)2}(CuIIL2)2]2+ dication in 3 (M = Mn) and 4 (M = Fe) is a self-assembly of one diphenoxo-bridged dinuclear [CuIIL2MII(H2O)(MeOH)2]2+ dication and two mononuclear [CuIIL2] units. One mononuclear unit is self-assembled with the dinuclear unit by four bifurcated water⋯phenoxo/methoxy (O–H⋯O) hydrogen bonds and three π⋯π stacking interactions, while the second mononuclear unit is interlinked with the dinuclear unit by one methanol⋯phenoxo (O–H⋯O) hydrogen bond only. Clearly, compounds 3 and 4 are [2 × 1 + 1 × 2] cocrystals of one dinuclear and two mononuclear units. Variable-temperature magnetic susceptibility measurements of all the four compounds have been carried out, revealing moderate antiferromagnetic interaction between the copper(II) and manganese(II)/iron(II) in the dinuclear cores with J values (H = −2JS1S2) −29.1, −36.9, −15.9 and −20.2 cm−1, respectively. The magnetic properties are in line with those of previous related examples. Unique features in the structures of 1–4 have been discussed.

Graphical abstract: More surprising differences between two closely similar compartmental ligand families and another dinuclear synthon to stabilize dinuclear–mononuclear cocrystals

Back to tab navigation

Supplementary files

Publication details

The article was received on 31 Mar 2013, accepted on 18 May 2013 and first published on 20 Jun 2013


Article type: Paper
DOI: 10.1039/C3CE40569A
Citation: CrystEngComm, 2013,15, 5888-5897
  •   Request permissions

    More surprising differences between two closely similar compartmental ligand families and another dinuclear synthon to stabilize dinuclear–mononuclear cocrystals

    A. Biswas, L. Mandal, S. Mondal, C. R. Lucas and S. Mohanta, CrystEngComm, 2013, 15, 5888
    DOI: 10.1039/C3CE40569A

Search articles by author

Spotlight

Advertisements