Loading…
Synthesis, characterization and magnetostructural correlation studies on three binuclear copper complexes of pyrimidine derived Schiff base ligands
Two Schiff base ligands (HL 1 and HL 2) which are closely related in their donor environment only differing at one donor center (O versus S) have been utilized to synthesize a bis(μ-thiolato) and a bis(μ-phenoxo) binuclear Cu(II,II) complex( 1 and 2) respectively. These two complexes are found to va...
Saved in:
Published in: | Polyhedron 2008-08, Vol.27 (12), p.2519-2528 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Two Schiff base ligands (HL
1 and HL
2) which are closely related in their donor environment only differing at one donor center (O versus S) have been utilized to synthesize a bis(μ-thiolato) and a bis(μ-phenoxo) binuclear Cu(II,II) complex(
1 and
2) respectively. These two complexes are found to vary appreciably in their magnetic properties despite their structural similarities. Ligand HL
2 has been found to adapt well enough to form the (μ-4,4′-bipyridyl) Cu(II,II) binuclear complex (
3).
Three binuclear Cu(II) complexes of two pyrimidine derived Schiff base ligands, 2-
S-methyl-6-methyl-4-formyl pyrimidine-
N(4)-ethyl thiosemicarbazone (HL
1) and salicyl hydrazone of 2-hydrazino-4,6-dimethylpyrimidine (HL
2), have been prepared. HL
1 produces a bis(μ-thiolato) Cu(II) complex co-crystallizing with its mononuclear analog, [Cu
2(L
1)
2(NO
3)
2][Cu(L
1)(NO
3)] (
1). On the other hand HL
2 shows versatility by producing two different classes of binuclear Cu(II) complexes, a bis(μ-phenoxo) complex [Cu
2(L
2)
2(NO
3)
2] (
2) and another a (μ-4,4′-bipyridyl) complex, [Cu
2(L
2)
2(μ-4,4′-bipyridyl)(NO
3)
2] (
3) under suitable conditions. All the three complexes show distorted square pyramidal geometry around each Cu atom but to a varied extent. Magnetic behavior of complex
1 shows that it is strongly ferromagnetic in nature whereas compounds
2 and
3 are weakly antiferromagnetic in nature. A magnetostructural correlation study combined with molecular modelling on complexes
1 and
2 has thrown light on the difference on magnetic interaction between the Cu atoms in these two complexes. Various factors that may be responsible for such differences are also explored. A novel and potentially useful pH dependant conversion of
3 to
2 has also been noticed. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0277-5387 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.poly.2008.05.009 |