Redox condensation of
PPN[Mn2(CO)8(μ-PPh2)]
(1; (PPN = N(PPh3)2) with
Au2Cl2(μ-P−P)
(P−P =
(C5H4PPh2)2Fe
(dppf),
Ph2PC2H4PPh2
(dppe)) gives two hexanuclear Au−Mn clusters
[AuMn2(CO)8(μ-PPh2)]2(μ-P−P)
(P−P = dppf, (2), dppe (4)), both of which
contain a
diphosphine bridging two Mn2Au triangles. Complex
2 is formed via an intermediate, AuCl(μ-dppf)[AuMn2(CO)8(μ-PPh2)],
(3), which was isolated. Bridge cleavage of
2 occurs at thf
reflux with PPh3 and room temperature with
P(OEt)3 to give the triangular clusters
[(PR3)AuMn2(CO)8(μ-PPh2)] (R
= Ph (5), OEt (6)), respectively. The
latter exchange of dppf with
P(OEt)3 is reversible in solution. Condensation of
1 with AuCl(SMe2) gives an
anionic
pentanuclear cluster,
PPN[Au{Mn2(CO)8(μ-PPh2)}2]
(7). Complexes 2 and 7 were
structurally
characterized by single-crystal X-ray diffractometry. Complex
2, which is centrosymmetric
with Fe in dppf at a crystallographic inversion center, consists of a
ferrocenylphosphine
bridging two heterometallic triangles (Au−Mn = 2.660(1) and
2.776(1) Å; Mn−Mn =
3.049(2) Å). Complex 7 is made up of two planar
AuMn2P metallacycles fused at Au at an
angle of 85.50(4)°. With crystallographic
C
2
symmetry, a twisted-bowtie
skeleton resulted
with gold at its center. Both Au−Mn (mean 2.806(1) Å) and
(PPh2-bridged) Mn−Mn
(3.105(2) Å) lengths are significantly longer than those in
2. The Mn−Mn bond of 2 is
also
significantly longer than that of 1. Fenske−Hall MO
calculations on 1, 2, and 7
together
with
Mn2(CO)8(μ-H)(μ-PPh2)
(8) and
(PPhMe2)AuMn2(CO)8(PPh2)
(9) indicate that aside from
1, all the complexes, including 2 and
7, give a negative overlap population in the
Mn−Mn
interactions. The Mn−Mn distance appears to be determined by the
strength of the AuMn2
interaction and/or the size of H compared to Au. The weaker
Mn−Mn and Au−Mn
interactions in 7 (as compared to those in 2 and
9, respectively) are likely to be caused by
the absence of Au orbital reinforcement in the direction of the
Mn2 moiety as a consequence
of symmetry.