Quantum Chemical Studies on Molecular Structures of Copper-Bipyridine Complexes
K.P. Srivastava*, S.K. Srivastaw and Gaurav Sinha
Ganga Singh College, Jai Prakash University, Chapra-841301, India
*Corresponding Author E-mail: jpukpsrichem@rediffmail.com
ABSTRACT:
The Cu-bipyridine complexes were studied through quantum chemical calculations using B3P86 and MP2 methodswith 6311+G(d,p) basis sets in the GAUSSIAN 2003 program package. The monodentate structures of neutral and ionic Cu-(4,4’-bipydine) complexes have C2 symmetry with about 40° rotation angles between the two pyridine rings, while the neutral and ionic Cu-2,2’-bipyridine complexes have planar conformations in C2v symmetry.
KEYWORDS: Copper, bipyridines, quantum chemical calculations, metal-ligand bonding
Bipyridine molecules have been extensively used as multidentate ligands in coordination, and supramolecular chemistry due to their strong binding affinities to metal ion[1]. Moreover, the metal complexes of these ligands and their derivatives play important roles in photochemical and photophysical processes, synthetic chemistry, biological and medicinal applications[2-3]. For example, the metal complexes of bipyridines are widely used for investigating fundamental photophysical processes and have been considered to be potentially valuable systems for solar energy conversion and nanotechnology[4-8]. In addition, some transition metal bipyridine complexes can serve as the active sites of many catalysts and are essential for the activities of several enzymes. 22BIPY (Figure-1a) is one of the most important representatives of the bipyridine ligands with the presence of two adjacent coordinating sites[9]. The stereochemistry of 22BIPY has been the subject of many experimental and theoretical investigations. 44BIPY (Figure-1b) has two nitrogen atoms at the opposite ends and, therefore, is considered as a bifunctional, non-chelating molecule used as a bridging ligand in coordination chemistry. Several previous experimental and theoretical investigations have been carried out on the rotational conformations of 44BIPY.
Copper plays an important role in organisms as one of the so-called “essential” metals. The ubiquitous Cu-organonitrogen complexes and their extensive applications have inspired much interest in the bonding, structures, and properties of Cu and nitrogen containing molecules. This research paper presents a systematic quantum chemical study of the metal-ligand binding interaction in Cu-bipyridine complexes.
The extensive applications of these metal-polypyridine complexes have inspired considerable interests in their reactions, bonding and structures. A large number of experimental and theoretical investigations about the complexes of transition metal cations with bipyridines and their derivatives have been reported previously[10-20] except copper.Therefore, it would be interesting to determine the bonding interactionbetween bipyridines and other transition metal atoms such as copper in this research paper.
Figure-1: Structures of 2,2’-bipyridine (a) and 4,4’-bipyridine (b)
Quantum chemical calculations
With a rapid growth in CPU speed, quantum chemical calculations using available program packages have become increasingly more sophisticated and valuable for predicting, modelling, and understanding experimental measurements. Quantum chemical calculations can provide quite reliable results about molecular geometries, energies, electronic states, vibrational frequencies, and reaction dynamics. In our work, theoretical calculations are employed to predict the molecular structures, electronic states, bond strengths, and vibrational frequencies of the neutral and ionic metal complexes as well as the AIEs of the neutral metal complexes.
In this work, the second order MP method (MP2) is used in the theoretical calculations, as it yields good predictions for the Cu complexes. In addition to the MP2 method, the MP3 and MP4 methods include higher order energy corrections. However, the MP3 method yields little improvement, and both MP3 and MP4 methods are much more expensive. Therefore, we mainly used the MP2 method for the theoretical calculations in this work. In our work, all the calculations are carried out with6-311+G (d,p) basis sets. The geometry optimization by the MP2 method is usually started from an optimized structure obtained from faster density functional theory (DFT) calculations. DFT methods are different from the wave function-based ab initio methods where the energy of an electronic system is expressed in terms of its electron density. DFT methods have a lower computational cost and a wider range of applications. Although there have been some concerns about the accuracy and reliability of DFT, these calculations have become very popular in modelling various types of molecular systems[14-16]and have yielded reasonable agreement with the experimental results.
Computational strategy and procedure
In this work, both MP2 and DFT calculations were performed with the GAUSSIAN2003 program package[21]. In the DFT calculations, Becke’s three parameter hybrid exchange functional (B3)was combined with the gradient-corrected correlation functional of Perdew (P86)or Lee, Yang and Parr (LYP). People’s triple zeta basis set with polarization and diffuse functions, 6-311+G(d,p), was used in most calculations. Electron density maps were generated and vibrational modes were identified with GaussView3.09[22]. AIEs were calculated to be the energy difference between the ionic and neutral complexes, where vibrational zero-point energy corrections were included. Metal-ligand bond dissociation energies were calculated to be the energy difference of the metal atoms and ligands from their complexes.
The theoretical calculations of metal complexes begin from geometry optimization of the free ligand. For ligands with several possible conformations, a systematic local minimum search needs to be performed starting from a number of initial guesses. The global minimum energy structure can be located by comparing the energies of all structures. During this search for the minimum energy structure, weak interactions, such as intramolecular hydrogen bonding, should be considered. Multidimensional FC factors were computed from the theoretical equilibrium geometries, harmonic frequencies, and normal modes of the neutral and ionic complexes.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
Cu-22BIPY Complex
To calculate the structures of Cu-(22BIPY), we first considered stable rotational conformers of the free ligand. Figure -2 illustrates two conformers of 22BIPY in cis- and trans- configurations, and Table -1 lists their symmetries, geometries and relative energies from the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) calculations. The trans- conformer has a planar structure in the C2h point group and is about 2000 cm-1 more stable than the cis-conformer. The cis-conformer is calculated to be in C2 symmetry with a rotation angle of 40.50 by the B3LYP method and a rotation angle of 47.0 0 by the MP2 method.
Table-1: Point groups, relative energies (Ee, cm-1),geometric structures(R, Ĺ;°)of 2,2’-bipyridine isomers from B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p)and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) calculations:
|
Methods |
B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) |
MP2/6-311+G(d,p) |
||
|
Point group |
C2h |
C2 |
C2h |
C2 |
|
Relative energies |
0 |
2253 |
0 |
1725 |
|
Geometric structures |
||||
|
R (C2 –C2’) |
1.491 |
1.494 |
1.488 |
1.486 |
|
R (C2 – N) |
1.342 |
1.340 |
1.350 |
1.348 |
|
R (N – C6) |
1.333 |
1.333 |
1.342 |
1.343 |
|
R (C6 – C5) |
1.394 |
1.394 |
1.399 |
1.400 |
|
R (C5 – C4) |
1.393 |
1.391 |
1.398 |
1.397 |
|
R (C4 – C3) |
1.389 |
1.391 |
1.395 |
1.396 |
|
R (C3 – C2) |
1.402 |
1.401 |
1.405 |
1.404 |
|
|
117.0 |
117.1 |
116.6 |
116.1 |
|
|
118.3 |
118.1 |
117.6 |
117.1 |
|
|
123.6 |
123.8 |
123.8 |
124.0 |
|
|
118.0 |
118.0 |
118.2 |
118.4 |
|
|
119.0 |
118.8 |
118.8 |
118.4 |
|
|
118.8 |
119.1 |
118.8 |
119.0 |
|
|
122.2 |
122.2 |
122.8 |
123.1 |
|
ϕa |
180.0 |
40.5 |
180.0 |
47.0 |
|
R (C2 –C2’) |
1.491 |
1.494 |
1.488 |
1.486 |
aфis the rotation angle between the two pyridine rings.
Considering both the trans- and cis-conformations of 22BIPY, Cu may bind with one nitrogen in the trans- conformer to form a monodentate structure [Figure -3 (a)] or with both nitrogen atoms in the cis conformer to form a bidentate structure [Figure -3 (b)]. Table -2 lists the low-lying electronic states, point groups, relative energies, metal-ligand BDEs, and equilibrium geometries of the optimized structures of Cu-22BIPY from the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) calculations. A twisted monodentate trans- structure and a planar bidentate cis- structure are predicted by the B3LYP method[23-24]. The trans- structure has no symmetry and is about 3000 cm-1 higher in electronic energy than the cis structure. In this trans- configuration, the two pyridine rings are twisted by about 220 compared to the free ligand, and the Cu atom bends off the pyridine plane to which it is attached by ~ 310. The AIE of this trans- isomer is calculated to be 42625 cm-1 and it is close to the measured ionization energy of the monodentate Cu-pyridine complex (43703 cm-1).
The bidentate cis isomer has C2v symmetry with the ground electronic states of 2B1 for the neutral species and 1A1 for the ion[25].
Table-2:Electronic states, point groups, relative energies (Ee andE0, cm-1), Bond dissociation energies (D0, kJmol-1) and geometric structures (R, Ĺ; °)of 2, 2’-bipyridine isomers from B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p)and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) calculations:
|
Methods |
B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) |
MP2/6-311+G(d,p) |
||||||
|
Point group |
cis, C2v |
trans, C2 |
cis, C2h |
trans, C2 |
||||
|
Relative energies |
||||||||
|
Ee |
0 |
37821 |
2979 |
45402 |
154 |
31000 |
0 |
38075 |
|
E0 |
0 |
38529 |
3239 |
45864 |
80 |
31229 |
0 |
38217 |
|
D0 |
91 |
406 |
27 |
292 |
63 |
390 |
42 |
285 |
|
Geometric structures |
||||||||
|
R(Cu-N) |
1.961 |
2.010 |
2.086 |
1.980 |
2.149 |
1.979 |
2.029 |
1.960 |
|
R(C2-C2’) |
1.443 |
1.500 |
1.483 |
1.489 |
1.483 |
1.491 |
1.480 |
1.483 |
|
R(C2-N) |
1.395 |
1.356 |
1.356 |
1.356 |
1.352 |
1.362 |
1.356 |
1.362 |
|
|
90.2 |
86.4 |
|
|
76.9 |
87.9 |
|
|
|
|
106.4 |
109.3 |
122.8 |
108.2 |
114.6 |
108.2 |
123.7 |
105.1 |
|
|
119.5 |
119.9 |
118.3 |
119.5 |
118.6 |
119.3 |
118.2 |
119.1 |
|
|
123.9 |
122.6 |
123.4 |
121.8 |
122.8 |
122.5 |
123.0 |
121.6 |
|
|
117.7 |
118.2 |
118.4 |
118.9 |
118.6 |
118.6 |
118.7 |
119.3 |
|
|
119.5 |
119.3 |
118.9 |
119.4 |
118.8 |
119.0 |
118.7 |
119.2 |
|
|
121.1 |
119.8 |
121.4 |
121.5 |
119.0 |
119.5 |
119.3 |
118.2 |
|
ϕb |
0.0 |
0.0 |
22.6 |
39.8 |
22.0 |
15.9 |
34.5 |
44.3 |
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
149.2 |
175.2 |
162.4 |
168.1 |
159.6 |
174.6 |
aEe is the electronic energy; E0 is the electronic energy including vibrational zero point energy correction.
b ф is the rotation angle between the two pyridine rings.
Table-3: Electronic states, adiabatic ionization energies (AIE, cm-1),Bond dissociation energies (D0, kJmol-1) and geometric structures (R, Ĺ; °)of 4, 4’-bipyridine isomers from B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p)and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) calculations:
|
Methods |
B3LYP |
MP2 |
||||
|
Species |
neutral |
ion |
ligand |
neutral |
ion |
Ligand |
|
Electronic states |
C1,2A |
C2,1A |
|
C2,2A |
C2,1A |
|
|
AIE |
44733 |
|
|
40900 |
-- |
|
|
D0 |
36.4 |
276.7 |
|
46.2 |
256.6 |
|
|
R(N-C2) |
1.344 |
1.354 |
1.336 |
1.350 |
1.360 |
1.345 |
|
R(C2- C3) |
1.387 |
1.381 |
1.392 |
1.395 |
1.390 |
1.395 |
|
R(C3- C4) |
1.401 |
1.404 |
1.400 |
1.404 |
1.406 |
1.404 |
|
R(C3’- C4’) |
1.400 |
1.400 |
1.400 |
1.403 |
1.404 |
1.404 |
|
R(C2’- C3’) |
1.392 |
1.393 |
1.392 |
1.398 |
1.399 |
1.395 |
|
R(N-C2’) |
1.336 |
1.335 |
1.336 |
1.345 |
1.344 |
1.345 |
|
R(C4- C4’) |
1.481 |
1.477 |
1.483 |
1.477 |
1.473 |
1.477 |
|
|
117.6 |
118.1 |
116.9 |
117.9 |
118.1 |
116.5 |
|
|
123.1 |
122.4 |
123.8 |
122.8 |
122.3 |
124.0 |
|
|
119.7 |
120.3 |
119.3 |
119.5 |
120.1 |
119.1 |
|
|
116.8 |
116.7 |
116.9 |
117.4 |
117.2 |
117.3 |
|
|
117.0 |
117.7 |
116.9 |
117.4 |
118.1 |
117.3 |
|
|
119.2 |
118.8 |
119.3 |
119.0 |
118.6 |
119.1 |
|
|
123.8 |
123.5 |
123.8 |
123.9 |
123.8 |
124.0 |
|
|
116.9 |
117.6 |
116.9 |
116.6 |
117.1 |
116.5 |
|
|
168.4 |
180.0 |
|
179.9 |
179.8 |
|
|
ϕa |
37.2 |
35.5 |
38.6 |
44.1 |
41.9 |
44.0 |
aфis the rotation angle between the two pyridine rings
Cu coordination leads to a rotation of the two pyridine rings and a reduction in the ring-ring distance. A Mulliken population analysis of the bidentate neutral isomer shows the Cu atom carries a positive charge of (+0.46) due to a large electron back donation from the Cu 3dπ to the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) of the ligand. This LUMO consists of a pπ orbital directed perpendicular to the ligand plane[26]. It explains the 2B1 ground state of the neutral complex. Mulliken population analysis shows only a partial positive charge (+0.64) on the Cu cation of the ionic species due to ligand for an electron donation to the HOMO of the Cu. This HOMO consists of a 3pσ orbital in the molecular plane, which should have a larger radius along the Cu+ -N bond and leads to a longer bond distance compare to the neutral species. The BDEs of both the neutral and ionic species in the bidentate form are much higher than the trans- isomers due to a stronger bidentate bonding interaction between the Cu and the ligand. Moreover, the difference between the ionic forms is much larger than the neutral forms, leading to a lower AIE of the bidentate isomer.
The MP2 method also predicts a twisted trans- structure for the monodentate neutral and ionic Cu-22BIPY complexes. However, the AIE of this monodentate complex from the MP2 calculations is about 8000 cm-1 lower than that predicted from the B3LYP calculations. Surprisingly, the MP2 method predicts a twisted bidentate cis isomer as a local minimum energy structure. This cis structure is calculated to be only 80 cm-1 higher in electronic energy than the trans- isomer. However, the twisted bidentate conformation is calculated to be the global minimum of the ionic species. Compared to the B3LYP predictions, the MP2 method predicts different structural changes induced by ionization. Upon ionization of the bidentate structure, for example, the rotation angle between the two rings is decreased from 22.0°in the neutral complex to 15.9° in the ion, the Cu-N bond distance shrinks from 2.149 to 1.979 Ĺ. In addition, the calculated AIE of this bidentate isomer is about 7000 cm-1 lower than that predicted by the B3LYP calculations. From these calculations alone, we cannot determine which of the Cu-22BIPY structures are more stable.
In our theoretical calculations, the AIEs of the cis isomer from the B3LYPcalculations and the trans- isomer from the MP2 calculations are close to the measured AIE. Thus, we cannot determine which of the structures is observed by comparing the calculated and measured AIEs alone.
Cu-44BIPY Complex
As 44BIPY has only one stable conformation with two equivalent nitrogen atoms positioned at opposite ends, the Cu complex should be formed by Cu atom σ binding to one nitrogen along the C2 axis of the ligand. Therefore, the geometry optimizations of Cu-44BIPY are performed on an initial structure in C2 symmetry by the B3LYP/6-311+G (d,p) and MP2/6-311+G(d,p) methods. The resultant electronic states, AIEs, BDEs, and geometries are listed in Table -3. The geometries of the free ligand are also calculated by these two methods and listed in Table -3 for comparison.
Unlike the B3LYP calculation, the MP2 calculations predicted a C2 configuration for both the neutral and ionic species. In this configuration, the Cu atom is in the plane of the ligand The ligand geometry remains virtually unchanged upon Cu coordination and ionization of the complex. The monodentate structures of neutral and ionic Cu-(4,4’-bipyridine) have C2 symmetry with about 40° rotation angles between the two pyridine rings.
Figure-2: Stable rotational isomers of the trans- (a) and cis- (b) 2, 2’-bipyridine
Figure-3: Isomers of Cu-(2,2’-bipyridine)
CONCLUSION:
The monodentate structures of neutral and ionic Cu-(4,4’-bipydine) have C2 symmetry with about 40° rotation angles between the two pyridine rings, while the neutral and ionic Cu-2,2’-bipyridine complexes have planar conformations in C2v symmetry. The MP2 method also predicts a twisted trans- structure for the monodentate neutral and ionic Cu-22BIPY complexes. However, the AIE of this monodentate complex from the MP2 calculations is about 8000 cm-1 lower than that predicted from the B3LYP calculations. Unlike the B3LYP calculation, the MP2 calculations predicted a C2 configuration for both the neutral and ionic Cu-(4,4’-bipydine) species.
REFERENCES:
1. Kaes, C.; Katz, A.; Hosseini, M. W. Chemical Reviews, 2000, 100, 3553.
2. Sammes, P. G.; Yahioglu, G. Chemical Society Reviews, 1994, 23, 327.
3. Luman, C. R.; Castellano, F. N. Comprehensive Coordination Chemistry II, 2004, 1, 25.
4. Hofmeier, H.; Schubert, U. S. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2004, 33, 373.
5. Kalyanasundaram, K. Coordination Chemistry Reviews,1982, 46, 159.
6. Meyer, T. J. Accounts of Chemical Research, 1978, 11, 94.
7. DeArmond, M. K.; Carlin, C. M. Coordination Chemistry Reviews, 1981, 36, 325.
8. Calabrese, J. C.; Tam, W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1987, 133, 244.
9. Andres, P. R.; Schubert, U. S. Advanced Materials (Weinheim, Germany) 2004, 16, 1043.
10. Benedix, R.; Birner, P.; Birnstock, F.; Hennig, H.; Hofmann, H. J. Journal of Molecular Structure, 1979, 51, 99.
11. Galasso, V.; De Alti, G.; Bigotto, A. Tetrahedron, 1971, 27, 991.
12. Barone, V.; Lelj, F.; Cauletti, C.; Piancastelli, M. N.; Russo, N. Molecular Physics 1983, 49, 599.
13. Jaime, C.; Font, J. Journal of Organic Chemistry1990, 55, 2637.
14. Goller, A.; Grummt, U. W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2000, 321, 399.
15. Ould-Moussa, L.; Castella-Ventura, M.; Kassab, E.; Poizat, O.; Strommen, D. P.; Kincaid, J. R. Journal of Raman Spectroscopy, 2000, 31, 377.
16. Goller, A. H.; Grummt, U.-W. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2002, 354, 233.
17. Perez-Jimenez, A. J.; Sancho-Garcia, J. C.; Perez-Jorda, J. M. Journal of Chemical Physics, 2005, 123, 134309/1.
18. Drew, M. G. B.; Hudson, M. J.; Iveson, P. B.; Russell, M. L.; Liljenzin, J.-O.; Sklberg, M.; Spjuth, L.; Madic, C. Journal of the Chemical Society, Dalton Transactions: Inorganic Chemistry, 1998, 2973
19. Wu, H.-F.; Brodbelt, J. S. Inorganic Chemistry, 1995, 34, 615.
20. Haeffner, F.; Brinck, T.; Haeberlein, M.; Moberg, C. THEOCHEM, 1997, 397, 39.
21. (a)M. W. Wong, C. Gonzalez, and J. A. Pople. GAUSSIAN 03, Revision C.02; Gaussian, Inc: Wallingford, CT, 2004.
(b) Li, S.; Rothschopf, G. K.; Fuller, J. F.; Yang, D.-S. J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 8636.
22. Roy Dennington II, T. K., John Millam, Ken Eppinnett, W. Lee Hovell, and Ray Gilliland. Gauss View, Version 3.09; Semichem, Inc.: Shawnee Mission, KS, 2003.
23. Nather, C.; Riedel, J.; Jess, I. Acta Crystallographica, Section C: Crystal Structure Communications, 2001, C57, 111.
24. Corongiu, G.; Nava, P. International Journal of Quantum Chemistry, 2003, 93, 395.
25. Xu, B.; Tao Nongjian, J. Science, 2003, 301, 1221.
26. Hazell, A. Polyhedron, 2004, 23, 2081.
Received on 05.01.2013 Modified on 24.01.2013
Accepted on 19.02.2013 © AJRC All right reserved
Asian J. Research Chem. 6(2): February 2013; Page 117-120