D. Webster Keogh and Rinaldo Poli
The controlled sodium reduction of Nb(cp)Cl4L (cp = η-C5H5; L = PMe3, PMe2Ph or PMePh2) or Nb(η-C5Me5)Cl4 in the presence of PMe3 afforded the mononuclear 15-electron complexes Nb(cp)Cl3L and Nb(η-C5Me5)Cl3(PMe3), respectively. Reduction of Nb(cp)Cl4 in the presence of an excess of L for PMe2Ph and PMePh2 afforded solids that contain mainly the 17-electron Nb(cp)Cl3L2 species but are contaminated by the mono-L derivatives. A UV/VIS investigation of the solution equilibrium between Nb(cp)Cl3(PMe2Ph)2 and Nb(cp)Cl3(PMe2Ph) plus free PMe2Ph afforded an enthalpy of 19.0 ± 1.6 kcal mol-1 and an entropy of 45 ± 5 cal K-1 mol-1 for the ligand dissociation process. A comparative study of the equilibrium between Mo(cp)Cl3(PMe2Ph)2 and Mo(cp)Cl3(PMe2Ph) plus free PMe2Ph cannot be carried out because the equilibration is too slow at room temperature and because of thermal decomposition with ring loss at high temperature. Theoretical calculations at the second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation (MP2) level on the M(cp)Cl3(PH3)n (M = Nb or Mo, n = 1 or 2) model systems afforded geometries in good agreement with experimental examples. The calculated PH3 dissociation energy for M = Nb of 21.3 kcal mol-1 is in good agreement with experiment. For M = Mo, the more saturated complex is stabilized by 32.8 kcal mol-1 relative to the excited 1A′ state and by 23.5 kcal mol-1 relative to the ground 3A″ state. Therefore, the regain of pairing energy upon PH3 dissociation from Mo(cp)Cl3(PH3)2 provides a calculated stabilization for the 16-electron monophosphine complex of 9.3 kcal mol-1. The observed variations of bonding parameters upon metal change from Nb to Mo and a natural population analysis suggest that the main reason for a greater Mo–PH3 bonding interaction is the greater extent of both M–P σ bonding and π back bonding for the d2 metal relative to the d1 metal.