4.1 Article

Two mononuclear octahedral complexes with benzimidazole-2-carboxylate: supramolecular networks constructed by hydrogen bonds

期刊

出版社

INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
DOI: 10.1107/S0108270111041837

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20771040, 21003053]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [10C26214412704]
  3. Guangdong Science and Technology Department [2010B0903-00031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The title compounds, trans-bis(1H-benzimidazole-2-carboxylato-kappa N-2(3),O)bis(ethanol-kappa O)cadmium(II), [Cd(C8H5N2O2)(2)(C2H6O)(2)], (I), and trans-bis(1H-benzimidazole-kappa N-3)bis(1H-benzimidazole-2-carboxylato-kappa N-2(3),O)nickel(II), [Ni(C8H5N2O2)(2)(C7H6N2)(2)], (II), are hydrogen-bonded supramolecular complexes. In (I), the Cd-II ion is six-coordinated by two O atoms from two ethanol molecules, and by two O and two N atoms from two bidentate benzimidazole-2-carboxylate (HBIC) ligands, giving a distorted octahedral geometry. The combination of O-H center dot center dot center dot O and N-H center dot center dot center dot O hydrogen bonds results in two-dimensional layers parallel to the ab plane. In (II), the six-coordinated Ni II atom, which lies on an inversion centre, shows a similar distorted octahedral geometry to the Cd-II ion in (I); two benzimidazole molecules occupy the axial sites and the equatorial plane contains two chelating HBIC ligands. Pairs of N-H center dot center dot center dot O hydrogen bonds between pairs of HBIC anions connect adjacent Ni II coordination units to form a one-dimensional chain parallel to the a axis. Moreover, these one-dimensional chains are further linked via N-H center dot center dot center dot O hydrogen bonds between HBIC anions and benzimidazole molecules to generate a three-dimensional supramolecular framework. The two compounds show quite different supramolecular networks, which may be explained by the fact that different co-ligands occupy the axial sites in the coordination units.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据