2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.crci.2004.09.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lead(II): misleading or merely hermaphroditic?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

6
30
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
6
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An explanation of the difference in these alkali metal arrays may be that only Rb is involved in coordinative interaction with uranyl-O [Rb-O 3.035(6) Å]. As seems to be commonly the case with heavy and apparently weakly coordinating metals, [6,21,[27][28][29][30][31] it is difficult to define a precise cutoff distance for interactions considered to be bonding but the coordination numbers of both Rb and Cs here appear to be high, involving O-donors only, with rather irregular geometry about the metals. Interestingly, the extreme M···O separations approach those of M···U, which, if they are correctly considered as contacts of closed-shell species of similar charge, would be regarded as involving negligible interactions, thus indicating that the extreme M···O contacts must also be of little significance.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…An explanation of the difference in these alkali metal arrays may be that only Rb is involved in coordinative interaction with uranyl-O [Rb-O 3.035(6) Å]. As seems to be commonly the case with heavy and apparently weakly coordinating metals, [6,21,[27][28][29][30][31] it is difficult to define a precise cutoff distance for interactions considered to be bonding but the coordination numbers of both Rb and Cs here appear to be high, involving O-donors only, with rather irregular geometry about the metals. Interestingly, the extreme M···O separations approach those of M···U, which, if they are correctly considered as contacts of closed-shell species of similar charge, would be regarded as involving negligible interactions, thus indicating that the extreme M···O contacts must also be of little significance.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Pb(II) complexes with 2,2 0 -bipyridine and 4,4 0 -bipyridine ligands [18][19][20] were subject to frequent studies. Since 4,4 0 -bipyridine can potentially act as a spacer ligand, a vast number of coordination polymers of its metal ions (e.g., with Pb(II), [20,21]) have been previously reported.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pb(II) complexes with 2,2 0 -bipyridine and 4,4 0 -bipyridine ligands [18][19][20] were subject to frequent studies. Since 4,4 0 -bipyridine can potentially act as a spacer ligand, a vast number of coordination polymers of its metal ions (e.g., with Pb(II), [20,21]) have been previously reported. Although, 2,2 0 -bipyridine ligand can also act as a bridging ligand [22] (by free rotation along the central C-C bond), but the most common mode of binding for this ligand and its derivatives are the chelating fashion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is little unusual in such a range of distances for Na I [7], but it is even more true of Pb II that Pb (donor atom) separations associated with coordination can vary over a wide range [3 ± 5]. Justification has been advanced for consideration of PbÀO separations at least as great as 3.1 ä, as indicative of (single) bonding [8], and there are many instances of significantly longer contacts, where a similar conclusion appears plausible [5] 1 ). Thus, it must be noted that in [NaPb(en)(ClO 4 )(NO 2 ) 2 ] n , the two nitrite ligands described as unidentate on Pb (PbÀO 2.604(5) and 2.629(5) ä, resp.)…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%