The recently synthesized
rhodium–aluminum bimetallic complex
Rh(PAlP) 1 (PAlP = pincer-type diphosphino-aluminyl ligand
Al{[N(C6H4)]2NMe}[CH2P(
i
Pr)2]2) containing a unique
Rh–Al direct bond exhibits coordination flexibility because
Rh and Al can play the role of coordination site for the substrate.
DFT calculations of NH3, CO, and C2H4 adducts with 1 show that the Rh atom is favorable for
all these substrate but the Al atom is as favorable as the Rh atom
for NH3 and unfavorable for CO and C2H4. NH3 and CO prefer the coordination at the Rh-axial (Ax)
site to the Rh-equatorial (Eq) site, but C2H4 prefers coordination at the Rh-Eq site to the Rh-Ax site. Consequently,
two CO and C2H4 molecules coordinate with 1 at the Rh-Ax and Rh-Eq sites to afford trigonal bipyramidal
complexes Rh(PAlP)(CO)2 and Rh(PAlP)(C2H4)2, which is consistent with the experimental observation
of Rh(PAlP)(CO)2. Energy decomposition analysis reveals
that an electrostatic term plays an important role for NH3 coordination with the Al atom of 1, because Al has
a significantly large positive charge and NH3 has a much
negatively charged N atom and exhibits a considerably negative electrostatic
potential at the Al position. In B and Ga analogues Rh(PBP) 2 and Rh(PGaP) 3, B and Ga atoms are not good
for CO and C2H4 like the Al atom in 1. NH3 adducts with 2 and 3 at
the B and Ga sites are less stable than those adducts at the Rh-Ax
site unlike the NH3 adduct with 1 at the Al
site. This difference in the NH3 adduct between Rh(PAlP)
and others (Rh(PBP) and Rh(PGaP)) arises from much less positive charges
of B and Ga and a smaller atomic size of B than that of Al. These
results indicate that the significantly large electropositive nature
and appropriate atomic size of Al are responsible for the characteristic
coordination flexibility of Rh(PAlP).