- Email: [email protected]
Half-sandwich ruthenium-arene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization
Accepted Manuscript Half-sandwich ruthenium-arene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization Pelin Köse Yaman, Betül Şen, Cansu Sonay Karagöz, Elif Subaşı PII:
S0022-328X(17)30033-5
DOI:
10.1016/j.jorganchem.2017.01.013
Reference:
JOM 19770
To appear in:
Journal of Organometallic Chemistry
Received Date: 30 May 2016 Revised Date:
27 July 2016
Accepted Date: 18 January 2017
Please cite this article as: P.K. Yaman, B. Şen, C.S. Karagöz, E. Subaşı, Half-sandwich rutheniumarene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization, Journal of Organometallic Chemistry (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jorganchem.2017.01.013. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Graphical Abstract
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Half-sandwich ruthenium-arene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization Pelin Köse Yaman a, Betül Şen b, Cansu Sonay Karagöz c, Elif Subaşı a, * a
RI PT
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey b Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey c The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 232 301 8692; fax: +90 232 453 4188. E-mail address: [email protected]
SC
ABSTRACT
Novel conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes ([(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2],
(1);
[(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2],
(2)
and
[(η6-p-
M AN U
cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl]Cl, (3) have been synthesized from the reaction of [{(η6-pcymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazones TSC1 (2-acetyl-5-chlorothiophene thiosemicarbazone), TSC2 (2-acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone) and TSC3 (3-thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone) in a 1: 2 M ratio in methanol and all of the complexes have been characterized by elemental analysis, UV–Vis, FT-IR and 1H NMR
(2)
TE D
spectroscopy. The crystal structures of TSC1, TSC2 and [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], have been determined by X-ray crystallography revealing that TSC1 and TSC2,
crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c and complex (2) show a distorted octahedral geometry around the ruthenium centre. The mononuclear complex adopts a typical three
EP
legged piano-stool geometry (a description commonly used for half–sandwich compounds) with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination
AC C
geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p-cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms. The spectroscopic studies showed that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) and sulfur atom in complex (3).
Keywords: Ruthenium(II); arene complexes; Thiophen containing Thiosemicarbazones
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1. Introduction Thiosemicarbazones (TSCs) are of considerable pharmacological interest since a number of derivatives have shown a broad spectrum of biological properties. The wide range of biological activities possessed by substituted TSCs and their metal complexes include cytotoxic, antitumor, antibacterial and antiviral properties [1]. TSCs are versatile ligands as
RI PT
they have a number of donor atoms which may coordinate in various ways [2]. Incorporation of metals onto these ligands can result in alteration or enhancement of their biological activity [3]. Many examples of pharmacological applications with TSCs and their metal complexes have been evaluated for their antibacterial [4, 5], antifungal [6, 7], antiviral [8], antiamoebic
SC
[9], antimalarial [10] and antitumor [11,12] activities. It is considered to be a reason for biological activity that the TSC molecules to chelate with trace metals in biological system.
M AN U
There has been much interest in the chemistry of half-sandwich arene ruthenium(II) complexes since the development of useful synthetic precursors with the general formula [RuCl2(η6-arene)]n [13-16]. Organometallic ruthenium compounds, which are particularly the half of sandwich complexes, are emerging as a very promising class of anti-tumor and antimicrobial agents. The geometry of these complexes provides a good scaffold for generating new molecules by changing the coordinated arene, the chelated ligand and the chloride group
TE D
[17, 18]. As ligands, TSCs have more than one potential donor. Therefore, we tried to observe the sites of substitution of these ligands to the metal center. We have already described, halfsandwich (η6-p-cymene) ruthenium(II) complex [(η6-p-cymene)RuClTSCN-S]Cl and carbonyl complexes
[Ru(CO)Cl(PPh3)2TSCN-S],
[Ru(CO)(PPh3)2(η3-O,N3,S-TSC1)],
EP
[Ru(Cl)(CO)(PPh3)2(η2-N3,S-TSC2)] and [Ru(Cl)(CO)(PPh3)2(η2-N3,S-TSC3)] [19-20]. As part of our continued interest in the synthesis and structural aspects of ruthenium(II)
AC C
complexes, new conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes ([(η6p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], (1); [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) and [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl2], (3)
have been synthesized from the reaction of [{(η6-p-
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazones TSC1 (2-acetyl-5-chlorothiophene thiosemicarbazone), TSC2 (2-acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone) and TSC3 (3-thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone) in a 1: 2 M ratio in methanol and all of the complexes have been characterized by elemental analysis, UV–vis, FT-IR and 1H NMR spectroscopy. The crystal structures of the novel ligands TSC1, TSC2 and the complex [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) have been determined by X-ray crystallography.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2. Experimental 2.1. Materials Acetonitrile (ACN), benzene, petroleum ether, dichloromethane, methanol, ethanol, hexane and silica gel were purchased from Merck and RuCl3.3H2O, α-Phellandrene were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. All chemicals used for the syntheses of TSCs were purchased from
RI PT
Sigma-Aldrich as well. The precursor complex [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] was synthesized following the literature method [21]. TSCn (n= 1-3) ligands were prepared by reducing the Schiff bases [22].
SC
2.2. Methods
Reactions were carried out under an oxygen-free argon atmosphere using Schlenk techniques. All glassware was oven-dried at 120˚C. All solvents were dried and degassed using standard
M AN U
techniques and stored under nitrogen until used [23]. Elemental analyses were carried out using a LECOCHNS-O-9320 by Technical and Scientific Research Council of Turkey, TUBITAK. IR spectra on a Varian 1000 FT spectrophotometer (KBr pellets) and UV–vis Spectra Shimadzu Model 1800 spectrophotometer were recorded on samples at the Dokuz Eylül University. 1H NMR spectra were recorded in CDCl3 on 500 MHz High Performance (TMS).
2.3. Synthesis
TE D
Digital FT NMR at Ege University and chemical shifts were referenced to tetramethylsilane
EP
2.3.1 Synthesis of TSC ligands (general procedure). The preparative methods for TSCs were well described by Klayman et al. [24] and Scovill
AC C
[25]. The TSC1 and TSC2 were obtained from 2-acetyl-5-methylthiophene/2-acetyl-5chlorothiophene and thiosemicarbazide (1:1 M ratio) in absolute ethanol with addition of two drops of sulfuric acid. The mixture was refluxed for 4 hour and then cooled. The solid was precipitated, filtered and recrystallized from ethanol. TSC3 was synthesized according to the literature [26].
2.3.1.1 2-Acetyl-5-chloro-thiophene thiosemicarbazone, (TSC1) Yield : 1.2 g, 92%. mp : 175-180 °C. C7H8N3S2Cl: Calcd. C 35.9; H 3.5; N 17.9; S 27.4%; found: C 35.6; H 3.6; N 17.9; S 27.5%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3223 (s) (NH2), 3151 (s) (N–H), 1575 (s) (C=N), 1065 (m) (N-N), 839 (s) (C=S), 1108 (s) (CN,NCN). 1H NMR (400
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 8.59 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.10 (br, 2H, NH2), 2.22 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N). UVVis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 250 (0.79), 343 (1.87). 2.3.1.2 2-Acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone, (TSC2) Yield : 1.6 mg, 94%. mp : 165-170 °C. C8H11N3S2: Calcd. C 45.0; H 5.2; N 19.7; S 30.0%;
RI PT
found: C 45.2; H 5.0; N 19.3; S 30.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3232 (s) (NH2), 3140 (m) (N–H),1547 (s) (C=N), 1034 (m) (N-N), 840 (m) (C=S), 1102 (m) (CN, NCN). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 8.62 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.16 (br, 2H, NH2), 2.24 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N). UV-
2.3.1.3 3-Thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone, (TSC3)
SC
Vis (THF) (nm) (A) : λ: 248 (0.82), 338 (2.14).
Yield : 980 mg, 89%. mp : 158-165 °C. C6H7N3S2: Calcd. C 38.9; H 3.8; N 22.7; S 34.6%;
M AN U
found: C 38.5; H 3.9; N 22.9; S 34.7%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3255 (w) (NH2), 3147 (m) (N–H), 1530 (s) (C=N), 1038 (m) (N-N), 1055 (m) (N-N), 817 (s) (C=S), 1090 (m) (CN, NCN). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 9.30 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.58 (br, 2H, NH2), 7.87 (s, 1H, HC=N). UV-Vis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 315 (1.38).
2.3.2. Synthesis of the Ruthenium complexes (general procedure).
1.8-2.0g
(78-87%)
TE D
[{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] was synthesized as described in the literature and the yield is [21].
Complexes
(1–3)
were
prepared
by
reacting
[{(η6-p-
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazone ligands TSC1, TSC2 and TSC3
EP
were obtained in 78–83% yields. The methods employed are very similar and given in detail as a representative example.
Thiosemicarbazone ligand (TSC1) (260 mg, 1.12 mmol) was dissolved in methanole (20 ml)
AC C
and was added to a stirred suspension of [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] (340 mg, 0.56 mmol) in hot methanole (20 ml). Then, the resulting solution was refluxed under nitrogen atmosphere for 4 hours. The reaction mixture was then cooled to room temperature, which results in the formation of precipitate. The compound was filtered and the purity of the complexes was checked by TLC. The products were recrystallized from CH2Cl2/hexane mixture. Then it was dried in vacuum. 2.3.2.1 [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], 1 Yield : 500 mg, 83%. mp : 138-140 °C. C17H19N3S2Cl2Ru: calcd. C 40.8; H 3.8; N 8.4; S 12.8%; found: C 40.9; H 3.6; N 8.8; S 12.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3249 (m) (NH2),
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 3130 (w) (N-H), 1572 (s) (C=N), 1088 (m) (N-N), 801 (s) (C=S), 871, 754, 695 (m) (thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 10.91 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.07 (br, 2H, NH2), 6.08-7.59 (m, 2H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.96 (m, 1H, CH(CH3)2), 2.26 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N), 2.08 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.34 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2), 1.12 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2). UVvis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 352(1.14).
RI PT
2.3.2.2 [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], 2 (TSC2) (852 mg, 4 mmol) and [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCI}2(µ-Cl)2] (1224 mg, 2 mmol) gave 1600 mg, 77% of compound 2 as orange powder.
Yield : 1600 mg, 77%. mp : 135-140 °C. C18H22N3S2ClRu: calcd. C 44.9; H 4.6; N 8.7; S
SC
13.3%; found: C 44.7; H 4.9; N 8.3; S 13.7%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3253 (m) (NH2), 3147 (m) (N-H), 1546 (w) (C=N), 1051 (m) (N-N), 803 (s) (C=S), 870, 701, 662 (m)
M AN U
(thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 10.81 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.17 (br, 2H, NH2), 6.10-7.45 (m, 2H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.64 (1H, m, CH(CH3)2), 2.26 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N), 2.12 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.32 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2), 1.21 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2). UVvis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 348 (0.64).
2.3.2.3 [(η6-p-cymene)RuCl(TSC3)]Cl, 3
TE D
(TSC3) (207 mg, 1.12 mmol) and [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCI}2(µ-Cl)2] (340 mg, 0.56 mmol) gave 400 mg, 73% of compound 3 as orange powder. Yield : 400 mg, 73%. mp: 145-150°C. C16H18N3S2CIRu: calcd. C 42.4; H 4.0; N 9.3; S 14.2%; found: C 42.2; H 4.2; N 9.1; S 14.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3265 (w) (NH2),
EP
3124 (w) (N-H), 1545 (s) (C=N), 1055 (m) (N-N), 798 (s) (C=S), 840, 798, 656 (m) (thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 11.37 (s, H, N-H), 8.58 (br, 2H,
AC C
NH2), 8.35 (s, 1H, HC=N), 6.00-7.00 (m, 3H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.85 (1H, m, CH(CH3)2), 2.06 (3H, s, CH3), 1.11 (d, 6H, CH(CH3)2). UV-vis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 296 (0.62); 326 (0,63).
2.4 Crystal structures determination and refinement The suitable single crystals of the compounds were chosen for the crystallographic study. The molecular structure of the compounds is determined by single crystal X-ray diffraction. Single-crystal data were collected at 293(2) K by ω-scan technique, on an Agilent Diffraction Xcalibur X-ray diffractometer with an Eos CCD area detector using graphitemonochromated radiation MoKα (λ = 0.71073 Å) from a enhance X-ray source. The data
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT collection, cell refinement and data reduction were performed using the CrysAlisPro program [27]. Solution, refinement and analysis of the structures were done using the OLEX2 system [28]. The crystal structures were solved by the direct method using the SHELXS [29] and refined by full-matrix least squares method based on F2 against all reflections using the SHELXL [30]. All non-hydrogen atoms were refined anisotropically. The crystal structure
RI PT
positions of hydrogen atoms were treated as riding atoms. Geometrical calculations were performed using PLATON [31]. The figures were made using ORTEP [32] and OLEX2 [28]. Details of the data collection conditions and the parameters of the refinement process are
SC
given in Table 1.
M AN U
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Synthesis
Novel conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes of the general formula ([(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], (1); [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) and [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl]Cl, (3) have been prepared by reacting [{(η6-p-
TE D
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective TSC ligands TSCn (n=1-3) in a 1:2 molar ratio in methanol. For the structural characterization FT-IR spectra, UV–Vis spectra and
1
H NMR
spectra were used and the corresponding data are given in experimental section.
EP
All of the complexes were isolated in medium yields and are well enough stable in air and light. The analytical data given in experimental section for the complexes are in a good fit with the formula recommended. The complexes are soluble in general organic solvents such
AC C
as dichloro methane and chloroform. Several attempts have been made to get the single crystals of all the complexes but it has been ineffective except complex (2). The spectroscopic data and the single crystal X-ray studies of TSC1, TSC2 and the complex (2) reasonably support the formulas of the compounds.
3.2 Analytical Data The analytical data for the ligands and complexes (1–3) are summarized in the experimental section. The stoichiometry of the ligands and their complexes has been confirmed by elemental analyses. The analytical data for the complexes are in good
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT agreement with the formula proposed and the spectroscopic data are given in the experimental section. The spectroscopic data fairly supports the formula of the compounds.
3.3 Infrared Spectra
RI PT
The FT-IR spectra of the free ligands were compared with those of the metal complexes in order to study the binding modes of the TSC ligand to the ruthenium metal. The main stretching frequencies of TSCn (n=1-3) and Ru(II) complexes (1-3) are given in the experimental section.
SC
TSCs are shown with general formula, [R1R2C2N3N2(H)C1(S)N1R3R4], can coordinate in a number of different manners. Most commonly they bind as either of two tautomeric forms, a neutral thione form or the anion from the thiol form. Infrared spectroscopy was used to
M AN U
confirm coordination as the thione form in (1-3). FT-IR spectra of the free ligands were
TE D
compared with the complexes to confirm the coordination of the ligand to ruthenium.
The highest frequency bands at 3223-3255 cm−1 region in spectra of the ligands are assigned to υasym and υsym of terminal NH2. These bands are present in the spectra of the complexes (1-
EP
3) at 3249-3265 cm-1 region, indicating non-involvement of this group in coordination. A strong band at 3151 cm−1, (TSC1); 3140 cm−1, (TSC2) and 3147 cm−1, (TSC3) attributed to υ(N–H) of –NH–N=C in spectra of free ligands are present with altered frequencies in the
AC C
spectra of metal complexes at 3130 cm−1, (1); 3147 cm−1, (2); and 3124 cm−1, (3) as shown in the literature [33].
The absorptions due to C=N of the free ligands at 1575 cm−1 (TSC1), 1547 cm−1 (TSC2), and 1530 cm−1 (TSC3) were observed in the FT-IR spectra. Coordination of the thiosemicarbazone ligands to ruthenium ion through azomethine nitrogen is expected to change the electron density in the azomethine and thus alters υ(C=N) band frequency after complexation, indicating coordination of azomethine nitrogen to ruthenium ion [34]. However, the υ(C=N) bands observed at 1572 cm−1 and 1546 cm−1, in complex (1) and (2), respectively remained unchanged. Co-ordination of the TSC3 to the ruthenium ion through
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT azomethine nitrogen atom is changed the electron density in the azomethine link and thus alters the υ (C=N) absorption frequency about 15 cm-1 at 1545 cm−1, in complex (3). Coordination via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom is inferred by the following observations. The free ligands display υ(C=S) absorption at 839 cm−1 (TSC1), 840 cm−1 (TSC2) and 817 cm−1 (TSC3). This band is also present in the low frequency region in the spectra of the
RI PT
complexes at 801 cm−1 (1), 803 cm−1 (2) and 798 cm−1 (3). The downward (C=S) band shift (19-38 cm-1) in the complexes provides evidence for coordination of thiocarbonyl sulfur atom for all of the complexes [35, 36]. No bands near 2570 cm-1 due to υ(C-SH) suggesting that these ligands remain in the thione form in the solid-state in complexes (1-3). FT-IR spectra of the
SC
complexes show that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas
and sulfur atom in complex (3).
M AN U
TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) The υ(N–N) bands of TSCs are at 1065 cm-1 (TSC1), 1034 cm-1 (TSC2) and 1038 cm-1 (TSC3). The increase in frequency of these bands 1088 cm-1 (1), 1051 cm-1 (2), 1055 cm-1 (3) in the spectra of all the complexes respectively provides evidence for either the coordination via the azomethine nitrogen [37] as in complex (3) or H-bonding between NH
TE D
and Cl atoms as seen from the X-ray crystallographic structure of complex (2). These two reasons may change the stretching frequency of N-N bond. The bands observed at 871, 754, 695 cm-1
for complex (1); 870, 701, 662 cm-1 for complex (2) and 840, 798, 656 cm-1 for
complex (3) are attributed to the thiophene ring deformation modes in the ligands. These
EP
thiophene ring deformation vibrations are not affected in the complexes [38]. 3.4 1H NMR spectra
AC C
The ligand-to-metal bonding is further supported by 1H NMR spectra. The TSC ligands and the complexes are very soluble in CHCl3 and so their NMR spectra were obtained in CDCl3. The 1H NMR spectral results obtained for TSCn and n=1–3 in CDCl3 with their assignments are given in the experimental section. In the spectrum of complex (3), sharp singlets at 8.35 ppm has been assigned to azomethine proton (–HC=N). The positions of azomethine signal in the complexes are shifted to a lower field compared to free ligands at 7.87 ppm (TSC3), indicating coordination through the azomethine nitrogen. A downfield shift is observed for these signals compared to the free ligands upon coordination to ruthenium, suggesting coordination of the metal to the
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT azomethine nitrogen atom as the signal becomes more deshielded in each case. This is also observed for similar arene ruthenium (II) thiosemicarbazone complexes [39, 40]. The absence of the signal at 4.00 ppm that can be ascribed to –SH is consistent with the idea that in solution, as in the solid state, TSCs exist as the thione tautomer in the complexes (1-3) [41]. The singlet signal due to the methyl (CH3-C=N) on the ligands (TSC1-TSC2) are
RI PT
observed at 2.22 ppm and 2.24 ppm respectively, these signals shifts slightly towards lower field in complexes (1) and (2) at 2.26 ppm.
The isopropyl methines are found as multiplets at 2.96 ppm, in (1); 2,64 ppm, in (2) and 2.85 ppm, in (3). The isopropyl methyls are occured as two doublets at 1.34 and 1.12 ppm, in
SC
(1) and 1.32 and 1.21 ppm, in (2), whereas only as a doublet at 1.11 ppm, in (3). The singlet signal due to the methyl on the rings are observed at 2.08 ppm, in (1); 2.12 ppm, in (2) and 2.06 ppm, in (3). In the 1H NMR spectra of complex (1) and (2) the loss of symmetry is
M AN U
evidenced by the appearance of sets of doublets in the region of 5.50- 7.50 ppm accounting for the protons of the p-cymene rings. The methyl substituents of the isopropyl group are observed as two distinct doublets in the aliphatic region of the spectra, which further confirms the loss of symmetry as the two methyl groups are non-equivalent. These doublets belong to the methyl protons are observed at 1.34 and 1.12 ppm for complex (1) and 1.32 and 1.21 ppm
TE D
for complex (2). The loss of symmetry of the arene rings in complex (1) and (2) suggests that these complexes have similar modes of coordination.
The p-cymene protons resonate at
frequencies typically seen for this group [42].
The NH2 signals in the complexes attributed to the ligand are practically unchanged from
EP
the free ligands. The NH2 group generates broad signal at 8.07 ppm, in (1); 8.17 ppm, in (2) and 8.58 ppm (3). Resonances of terminal NH2 in (1-3) are seen in the same positions as in ligand spectra confirming the non-involvement of this group in coordination. A signal for the
AC C
hydrazinic NH protons at 8.59 ppm (TSC1), 8.62 ppm (TSC2), and 9.30 ppm (TSC3) in 1H NMR spectra of the ligands are present in NMR spectra of the complexes; 10.91 ppm (1), 10.81 ppm (2), and 11.37 ppm (3) with gradual downfield shifts. All the other protons resonate in regions commonly expected. The 1H NMR spectra of the complexes (1-3) are essentially direct combination of the signals from the ligands plus those from the p-cymene moiety. In the 1H NMR spectra of complexes (1-3) all indications are that the ligands remain neutral form (as evidenced by the presence of the NH protons). Multiplets are observed at around 6.60–7.93 ppm in all the complexes and have been assigned to the aromatic protons of p-cymene ring and thiophen of the thiosemicarbazone ligands. Furthermore, in all the complexes largest ∆δ are observed for the protons that are located
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT close to the coordinating atoms. So, the deshielding effect of the metal is apparent to such protons [43].
3.5 Electronic spectra
RI PT
The electronic spectra of the ligands and its copmlexes were recorded in THF. The spectra of free ligands showed two types of bands at 314-343 and 248-250 nm. The probable assigment for these bands are due to the n-π* (thiosemicarbazones) and π-π* (thiophene) transitions. The ground state of Ru (II) is 1A1g, arising from the t62g configuration in an octahedral
environment. Excited state corresponding to the t52ge1g configuration are 3T1g, 3T2g, 1T1g and T2g. Hence four bands, corresponding to the transitions 1A1g
1
T1g and 1A1g
1
3
T1g, 1A1g
SC
1
3
T2g, 1A1g
T2g are possible, in order of increasing energy. The electronic spectra of
M AN U
Ru(II) complexes show several absorptions in the ultraviolet region. Bands at 296-351 nm in all Ru(II) complexes may be assigned to Ru (4dπ)
π* (imine) transitions. The pattern of
the electronic spectra of all the complexes indicate the presence of an octahedral geometry around ruthenium (II) ion [44].
3.6. Description of the crystal structures
TE D
3.6.1 Crystal structure of TSC1and TSC2
The compounds, TSC1 and TSC2, crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c; their molecular structures are illustrated in Fig. 3 and 4, respectively. TSC2 comprises two
EP
crystallographically independent molecules (A and B) in the asymmetric unit. The corresponding bond lengths and bond angles of molecules A and B of TSC2 agree well with each other and are within normal ranges.
AC C
The thiophene rings (S4/C10–C13 in molecule A of TSC2, S6/C18–C21 in molecule B of TSC2 and S2/C3–C6 in TSC1) are reasonably planar, the maximum deviation from planarity being 0.006 (5), 0.018 (5) and 0.004 (1) Å for atoms C12, C20 and C3, respectively. The two endocyclic C–S bonds lengths, C10–S4 and C13–S4 in A; C18–S6 and C21–S6 in B and C3– S2 and C6–S2 in (I), are 1.723 (7) and 1.708(8) Å; 1.707(7) and 1.698(8) Å and 1.721(2) and 1.710(2) Å, respectively. These distances are in good agreement with a related compound [4547]. The TSC fragment in molecule A and B is almost planar with the maximum deviation 0.0386 and 0.0577 Å, respectively, and in TSC1 maximum deviation is 0.0547 Å. The TSC group adopts an extended conformation, which can be seen from the torsion angle value of
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT S3/C8/N5/N6=172.9(4)o in molecule A, S5/C16/N8/N9=–169.4(5)° in molecule B and S1/C1/N2/N3= –169.7(2)° in TSC1. This conformation enables the formation of an intramolecular N–H···N hydrogen bond. The exocyclic C–S distances, C8–S3 and C16–S5 in both A and B are 1.690(6) Å, respectively, and in TSC1 distance C1–S1 is 1674(2) Å, confirm their significant double-bond character [48]. The N–N bond lengths are 1.364 (7) and 1.370
RI PT
(7) Å in molecules A and B, respectively, of compound TSC1, and 1.377(3) Å in compound TSC2. These bond lengths are very close to that reported for a similar TSC compound [49-51]. Likewise, in compound TSC1, the C6–Cl1 bond length is comparable with those in related structures [52, 53]. In all three compounds, the molecular structure is stabilized by a cyclic intramolecular N–H···N hydrogen bonds which generate S(5) ring motifs (Table 2) [54].
SC
In the crystal of compound TSC1, molecules are linked by pairs of N–H···S hydrogen bonds, forming inversion dimmers with an R22(8) ring motif (Table 2 and Fig. 5). The dimers
M AN U
are linked by π···π interaction [Cg1···Cg1i= 3.8330(3) Å, inter-planar distance=3.6174 Å, slippage 1.267 Å, where Cg1 is the centroid of the S2/C3–C6 ring; symmetry code: (i) x, 3/2 y, 1/2+z], forming ribbons lying parallel to plane
.
In the compound TSC2, the molecules labeled as A are linked via bifurcated N–H···S and
TE D
C–H···S hydrogen bonds, forming A–A dimers with two R12(7) ring motifs, and R22(8) and R22(14) ring motifs. The molecules labeled as B is also involved in intermolecular N8– H8···S5i2 hydrogen bonds, resulting in R22(8) centrosymmetric dimers. In addition to these, the dimers are packed by pairs of N–H···S hydrogen bonds interactions forming
EP
centrosymmetric rings with set-graph motif R22(8) and resulting in the formation of a twodimensional network extending along [100], (Fig. 6). The crystal packing is further stabilized
AC C
by intermolecular C15–H15B···Cg1 and C23–H23A···Cg2 interactions into supramolecular chains running along the c axis. Cg1 and Cg2 are the centres of gravity of thiophene rings S4/C10–C13 and S6/C18–C21, respectively. Details of these interactions are given Table 2.
3.6.2 Crystal structure of the Complex (2) The title compound adopts a typical three legged piano-stool geometry (a description commonly used for half–sandwich compounds) with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p–cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms (Fig. 7). The distorted octahedral geometry is evident from the bond angles given in Table 3.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The six-membered ring of the p-cymene is almost planar, with a maximum deviation of 0.020 (4) Å (C20) and an overall r.m.s. deviation of 0.0126 Å. The dihedral angle between the p-cymene ring (C17–C22) and the isopropenyl group (C23–C25) planes is 75.90 (0.27)o. The Ru–C(ring) distances are in the range 2.1364 (1)–2.2414 (1) Å and agree well with those reported for similar structures [55,56]. The distance between the RuII ion and the least-
RI PT
squares plane of the p-cymene aromatic ring is 1.6703 (1) Å, which is very close to that reported in other (p-cymene)ruthenium(II) complexes [57, 58]. Defining X as the centroid of the aromatic ring, the Cl1—Ru1—X, Cl2—Ru1—X and S3—Ru1—X angles are 126.85, 125.73 and 129.00o, respectively.
SC
The two Ru–Cl bond distances are slightly different [2.4215(2) and 2.4324 (2) Å], longer than those of previously reported structures [59-61]. The bond lengths in the coordinated TSC ligand are nearly similar in free TSC ligand. Besides, the bond angles in the TSC moiety
M AN U
shows significant changes on coordination.
The molecular structure is stabilized by N4–H4A···N6 and N5–H5···Cl1 intramolecular interactions, which generate S(5) and S(6) ring motifs, respectively. In the crystal packing, both chloro ligands are involved in H-bonded interaction with the NH2 moieties of a neighbouring molecule, thus forming a symmetry-related dimeric structure (Table 4). These
b axis (Fig. 8).
EP
4. Conclusion
TE D
interactions combine to link the molecules into zigzag chains of rings which run parallel to the
This paper describes the synthesis, structural and spectral characterization of thiophene containing TSC1-3 ligands and their half-sandwich ruthenium (II) arene complexes ([(η6-p-
AC C
cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2],
(1);
[(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2],
(2)
and
[(η6-p-
cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3) Cl]Cl, (3). The crystal structures of TSC1, TSC2 and [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) have been determined by X-ray crystallography revealing that TSC1 and TSC2, crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c and complex 2 show a distorted octahedral geometry around the ruthenium centre. The mononuclear complex adopts a typical three legged piano-stool geometry with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p-cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms. The spectroscopic studies showed that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) and sulfur atom in complex (3). Althoug N,S-coordination mode is the most common for thiosemicarbazone ligands, unusual monodentate coordination mode of TSC1and TSC2 in complex (1) and (2) are shown in this paper. In the spectral data of the complexes all
RI PT
indications are that the TSC ligands remain neutral form.
Acknowledgments
SC
The authors also acknowledge Dokuz Eylul University for the use of the Agilent Xcalibur Eos difractometer (purchased under University Research Grant No: 2010.KB.FEN.13). Thanks to Assist. Prof. Dr. Muhittin Aygün for single crystal X-Ray analysis at Physics Department, in
M AN U
Dokuz Eylul University. This study was supported by project number 2015.KB.FEN.018 from Dokuz Eylul University Rectorship, Scientific Research Project Coordination Center. We gratefully thank the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, EBILTEM, Ege University for NMR analysis, and TUBITAK, for elemental
Supplementary material
TE D
analysis.
CCDC 1478649, 1478648 and 1478647 contains the supplementary crystallographic data for the ligand (TSC1) and ligand (TSC2) and complex (1), respectively. These data can be
EP
obtained free of charge via http://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk/conts/retrieving.html, or from the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB2 1EZ, UK; fax:
AC C
(+44) 1223-336-033; or e-mail: [email protected].
References
[1] D.L. Klayman, J.P. Scovill, J.F. Bartosevich, J. Bruce, J. Med. Chem. 26 (1983) 35-39. [2] H. Beraldo, D. Gambino, MiniRev. Med. Chem. 4 (2004) 31-39. [3] J. Garcia-Tojal, A. Garcia-Orad, J.L. Serra, J.L. Pizarro, L. Lezamma, M.I. Arriortua, T. Rojo, J. Inorg. Biochem. 75 (1999) 45-54. [4] A.S. Dobek, D.L. Klayman, E.T. Dickson, J.P. Scovill, E.C. Tramont, Antimicrob.Agents Ch. 18 (1980) 27-36. [5] R. Ramachandran, M. Rani, S. Kabilan, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 19 (2009) 2819-2823.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [6] D. Kovala-Demertzi, J.R. Miller, N. Kourkoumelis, S.K. Hadjikakou, M.A. Demertzis, Polyhedron 18 (1999) 1005-1013. [7] R.A. Finch, M.C. Liu, S.P. Grill, W.C. Rose, R. Loomis, K.M. Vasquez, Y.C. Cheng, A.C. Sartorelli, Biochem. Pharmacol. 59 (2000) 983-991. [8] S. Sharma, F. Athar, M.R. Maurya, A. Azam, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 40 (2005) 1414-1419.
RI PT
[9] G.L. Parrilha, J.G. Da Silva, L.F. Gouveia, A.K. Gasparoto, R.P. Dias, W.R. Rocha, D.A. Santos, N.L. Speziali, H. Beraldo, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 46 (2011) 1473-1482.
[10] K. Alomar, V. Gaumet, M. Allain, G. Bouet, A. Landreau, J. Inorg. Biochem. 115 (2012) 36-43.
SC
[11] C. Shipman Jr., S.H. Smith, J.C. Drach, D.L. Klayman, Antiviral Res. 6 (1986) 197-222. [12] A. Usman, I.A. Razak, S. Chantrapromma, H.-K. Fun, A. Sreekanth, S. Sivakumar, M.R.P. Kurup, Acta Crystallogr. C 58 (2002) M461-M463
M AN U
[13] a) G. Winkhaus, H. Singer, J. Organomet. Chem. 7 (1967) 487-491.
b) M. Auzias, B. Therrien, G. Süss-Fink, P. Štěpnika, W.H. Ang, P.J. Dyson, Inorg. Chem. 47 (2008) 578-583.
c) B. Therrien, Coord. Chem. Rev. 253 (2009) 493-519.
d) G. Pampaloni, Coord. Chem. Rev. 254 (2010) 402-419.
TE D
[14] a) M.A. Bennett, A.K. Smith, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. (1974) 233-241. b) R. Castarlenas, C. Vovard, C. Fischmeister, P.H. Dixneuf, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128 (2006) 4079-4089.
c) P. Govindaswamy, G. Süss-Fink, B. Therrien, Organometallics 26 (2007) 915-924.
EP
d) A.M. Pizarro, M. Melchart, A. Habtemariam, L. Salassa, F.P.A. Fabbiani, S. Parsons, P.J. Sadler, Inorg. Chem. 49 (2010) 3310-3319. [15] a) M.J. Clarke, F. Zhu, D.R. Frasca, Chem. Rev. 99 (1999) 2511-2534.
AC C
b) F. Wang, J. Xu, A. Habtemariam, J. Bella, P.J. Sadler, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127 (2005) 17734-17743.
c) P.J. Dyson, G. Sava, Dalton Trans. (2006) 1929-1933. d) B. Therrien,W.H. Ang, F. Che´ rioux, L. Vieille-Petit, L. Juillerat-Jeanneret, G. S ¨ uss-Fink, P.J. Dyson, J. Clust. Sci. 18 (2007) 741-752. e) B. Therrien, , G. Süss‐Fink, P. Govindaswamy, A.K. Renfrew, P.J. Dyson, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47 (20) (2008) 3773-3776. [16] I.W. McNae, K. Fishburne, A. Habtemariam, T.M. Hunter, M. Melchart, F. Wang, M.D. Walkinshaw, P.J. Sadler, Chem. Commun. (2004) 1786-1787.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [17] F. Beckford, D. Dourth, M. Shaloski Jr., J. Didion, J. Thessing, J. Woods, V. Crowell, N. Gerasimchuk, A. Gonzalez-Sarrías, N.P. Seeram, J. Inorg. Biochem. 105 (2011) 10191029. [18] C.S. Allardyce, A. Dorcier, C. Scolaro, P.J. Dyson. Appl. Organomet. Chem. 19 (2005) 1-10.
RI PT
[19] H. Yildirim, E. Guler, M. Yavuz, N. Ozturk, P. K. Yaman, E. Subasi, E. Şahin, S. Timur. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 44 (2014) 1-8.
[20] N.Öztürk, P.K. Yaman, M.Yavuz, Ö.Öter, S.Timur, E.Subaşi. .J. Coord. Chem. 67 (16) (2014) 2688-2700.
SC
[21] M.A. Bennett, T.N. Huang, T.W. Matheson, A.K. Smith, Inorg. Synth. 21 (1985) 75-78. [22] S.K. Mandal, A.R. Chakravarty, Polyhedron 11 (1992) 823-827.
Ed. Oxford: Pergamon (1980).
M AN U
[23] D.D. Perrin, W.L.F. Armarego, D.R. Perrin, Purification of Laboratory Chemicals, 2nd
[24] D.L. Klayman, A.J. Lin, N. Acton, J.P. Scovill, J.M. Hoch, W.K. Milhous. J. Nat. Prod. 47 (1984) 715-717.
[25] J.P. Scovill. Phosphorus, Sulfur Silicon Relat. Elem. 60 (1991) 15-19. [26] K. Alomar, M.A. Khan, M. Allain, G. Bouet, Polyhedron 28 (2009) 1273-1280.
TE D
[27] CrysAlisProSoftware system, Version 1.171.35.11, Agilent Technologies UK Ltd. (2011). [28] O.V. Dolomanov, L.J. Bourhis, R.J. Gildea, et al., J. Appl. Cryst. 42 (2009) 339-341. [29] G.M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallogr. Sect. A64 (2008) 112–122. [30] G.M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallogr. Sect. C71 (2015) 3-8.
EP
[31] A.L. Spek, J. Appl. Cryst. 36 (2003) 7–13. [32] L.J. Farrugia, ORTEP-3 for Windows, J. Appl. Cryst. 45 (2012) 849-854. [33] K. Sampath, S. Sathiyaraj, G. Raja, C. Jayabalakrishnan. J. Mol. Struct. 1046 (2013) 82-
AC C
91.
[34] A. Manimaran, C. Jayabalakrishnan. J. Adv. Res. 3 (2012) 233-236. [35] K. Natarajan, R.K. Poddar, U. Agarwala. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 39 (1977) 431-435. [36] S. Manivannan, R. Prabhakaran, K.P. Balasubramanian, V. Dhanabal, R. Karvembu, V. Chinnusamy. Appl. Organomet. Chem. 21 (2007) 952-957. [37] C. Jayabalakrishnan, R. Karvembu, K. Natarajan, Transition Metal Chemistry, 27 (7) (2002) 790-794. [38] S. Singh, F. Athar, M. R. Maurya, A. Azam, Eur. J. Med. Chem, 41 (5) (2006) 592-598. [39] M.U. Raja, E. Sindhuja, R. Ramesh, Inorg. Chem. Commun, 13 (2010) 1321-1324. [40] F.A. Beckford, Inorg. Chem. Commun 12 (2009) 2839-2846.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [41] S. Das, S. Sinha, R. Britto, K. Somasundaram, A. G. Samuelson, J. Inorg. Biochem. 104 (2) (2010) 93-104. [42] F.A. Beckford, G. Leblanc, J. Thessing, M. Shaloski, B. J. Frost, L. Li, & N. P. Seeram, Inorg. Chem. Commun. 12(11) (2009) 1094-1098. [43] A. Manimaran, C. Jayabalakrishnan, J. Adv. Res. 3 3 (2012) 233-243.
[45] Z.-L. Jing, M. Yu, X. Chen, Acta Cryst. E63 (2007) o3714.
RI PT
[44] M. Sivagamasundari, R. Ramesh. Spectrochim. Acta, Part A 66 (2007) 427-433.
[46] P.A. Gaye, A. Sy, A.D. Sarr, M. Gaye, C. Besnard, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) o1168.
[47] C. Kazak, M. Aygün, G. Turgut, M. Odabasoglu, S. Özbey, O. Büyükgüngör, Acta
SC
Cryst. C56 (2000) 1044-1045.
[48] A. Kumbhar, P. Sonawane, S. Padhye, D. X. West, R. J. Butcher, J. Chem. Crystallogr. 27 (1997) 533–539.
76–83.
M AN U
[49] K. Alomar, A. Landreau, M. Allain, G. Bouet, G. Larcher, J. Inorg. Biochem. 126 (2013)
[50] M.-X. Li, D. Zhang, L.-Z. Zhang, J.–Y. Niu, Inorg. Chem. Commun. 13 (2010) 12681271.
[51] B.J. Anderson, M.B. Freedman, S. P. Millikan, V.A. Smolenski, J.P. Jasinski, Acta
TE D
Cryst. E71 (2015) o796–o797.
[52] S. Sultan, M. Taha, S. A.A. Shah, B. M. Yamin, H.M. Zaki, Acta Cryst. E70 (2014) o751.
[53] R. Prasath, P. Bhavana, S.W. Ng, E.R.T. Tiekink, Acta Cryst. E66 (2010) E66 o2883.
EP
[54] J. Bernstein, R.E. Davis,L. Shimoni, N.-L. Chang, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 34 (1995) 1555–1573.
[55] W.-R. Yao, Z.-H. Liu, Q.-F. Zhang, Acta Cryst. C59 (2003) m156–m158.
AC C
[56] S.H. Dale, M.R.J. Elsegood, Acta Cryst. C62 (2006) m166–m170 [57] N.M.S. Ballester, M.R.J. Elsegood, M.B. Smith, Acta Cryst. E64 (2008) m309–m310. [58] M. Aitali, L. El Firdoussi, A. Karim, A.F. Barrero, M. Quirós, Acta Cryst. C56 (2000) 1088–1089.
[59] R.E. Sykora, A.G. Harris, J.W. Clements, N.W. Hoffman, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) m99m100. [60] B. Oelkers, L.H. Finger, J. Sundermeyer, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) m319. [61] M. Chandra, D.S. Pandey, M.C. Puerta, P. Valerga, Acta Cryst. E58 (2002) m28–m29.
AC C
EP
TE D
Fig. 1. Thiosemicarbazones (TSC1-3)
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
Fig. 2. Ru(II) complexes (1-3
Fig. 3. The molecular structure and atom-numbering scheme for the title compound TSC1. Displacement ellipsoids are shown at the 50% probability level.
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Fig. 4. The molecular structure of the two independent molecules (A and B) of compound
SC
TSC2, showing the atom labelling. Displacement ellipsoids are drawn at the 50%
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
probability level.
Fig. 5. A partial view along the c axis of the crystal packing of compound TSC1, showing the N–H ··S hydrogen bonds (dashed lines), which result in the formation of inversion dimers with an R22(8) ring motif. Symmetry code as in Table 2.
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Fig. 6. A partial view along the b axis of the crystal packing of compound (II), showing
SC
the N–H···S and C–H···S hydrogen bonds (dashed lines), which result in the formation of two R12(7)motifs, and three R22(8) motifs and R22(14) ring motif. H atoms not involved in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
hydrogen bonding have been omitted for clarity. Symmetry code as in Table 2.
Fig. 7. The molecular structure and atom-numbering scheme for the complex (2). Displacement ellipsoids are drawn at the 40% probability level. The 6-binding mode of the p-cymene ligand is represented by a heavy dashed line between the Ru atom and the centroid of the aromatic ring.
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
M AN U
Fig. 8. Part of the crystal structure of complex (2) showing the formation of hydrogenbonded dimers running parallel to the [010] direction. H atoms not involved in hydrogen
TE D
bonding have been omitted for clarity. Symmetry code as in Table 4.
Table 1
Crystal data and structure refinement parameters for the Compound TSC1, Compound TSC2 and Complex (2). TSC1
TSC2
2
C7H8ClN3S2
C8H11N3S2
C18H25Cl2N3RuS2
233.73
213.32
519.50
293(2)
293(2)
293(2)
P21/c
P21/c
Pbca
monoclinic
monoclinic
orthorhombic
5.5637(4), 25.2322(16)
14.9578(12), 28.511(2),
15.3842(9),
7.4806(6)
5.6542(4)
22.7967(15)
90, 104.221(8), 90
90, 93.956(7), 90
90, 90, 90
Cell volume (Å )
1017.97(13)
2405.5(3)
4405.9(4)
Formula unit cell Z
4
8
8
1.525
1.178
1.566
480.0
896.0
2112.0
Formula weight Temperature (K)
AC C
Space group
EP
Chemical formula
Crystal system a, b, c (Å) o
α, β, γ ( )
3
3
ρcalc (g/cm ) F(000) -
Absorption coefficient µ (mm 1
)
0.741
0.406
1.151
12.5628(6),
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 0.5805×0.3742×0.221
0.695×0.271×0.111
0.35×0.283×0.134
Diffractometer
Xcalibur, Eos
Xcalibur, Eos
Xcalibur, Eos
Radiation/Wavelength (Å)
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
Reflections measured
3994
4900
13189
-6 ≤ h ≤ 3, -31 ≤ k ≤ 22,
-18 ≤ h ≤ 18, 0 ≤ k ≤ 35,
-16 ≤ h ≤ 18, -14 ≤ k ≤ 14,
-9 ≤ l ≤ 9
0≤l≤7
-26 ≤ l ≤ 25
2067/0/119
4900/0/239
3758/0/240
R1=0.0393, wR2=0.0950
R1 =0.1108,
Range of h, k, l Data/Restraints/Parameters Final R indexes [I>=2σ (I)]
wR2=0.3541 R1=0.0542, wR2=0.1024
Final R indexes [all data]
R1 =0.1566, wR2=0.3774
2
1.063
1.278
Largest diff. peak/hole (e Å-3)
0.34/ -0.27
1.51/ -0.53
R1=0.0478,
wR2=0.0568 R1=0.0950,
wR2=0.0655 0.922
0.55/ -0.52
TE D
M AN U
SC
Goodness-of-fit on F
RI PT
Crystal size (mm3)
Table 2:
Hydrogen-bond geometry for TSC1 and TSC2 (Å, o) D–H
H ··· A
N1 – H1A ··· N3
0.86
2.28
2.6338(2)
105
N1 – H1B ··· S1ii
0.86
2.59
3.4443(3)
176
N4 – H4A ··· N6
0.86
2.20
2.5558(2)
105
N4 – H4B ··· S5
0.86
2.45
3.2904(3)
167
N5 – H5 ··· S3i1
0.86
2.61
3.4668(3)
173
C15 – H15A···S3i1
0.96
2.81
3.4643(3)
126
N7 – H7A ··· N9
0.86
2.27
2.6166(2)
104
N7 – H7B ··· S3
0.86
2.67
3.4899(3)
161
N8 – H8 ··· S5i2
0.86
2,79
3.6136(3)
161
AC C
EP
D – H ··· A
D ··· A
D – H ··· A
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT C15–H15C···Cgi3
0.96
2.80
3.6962(3)
156
C15–H15B···Cgi4
0.96
2.83
3.6962(3)
140
Symmetry codes: (ii) -1-x, 1-y, 1-z; (i1) -x, 1-y, 1-z; (i2) 1-x, 1-y, -z; (i3) x, y, 1+z,
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
(i4) x, y, -1+z.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 3 :
Selected geometric parameters for complex 2 (Å, o). 2.422(1)
Cl1 – Ru1 – Cl2
88.38(5)
S3 – C8
1.700(5)
Cl1 – Ru1 – S3
89.17(5)
S4 – C10
1.719(5)
S3 – Ru1 – Cl2
83.97(5)
S4 – C13
1.713(5)
N4 – C8 – S3
120.8(4)
N4 – C8
1.309(5)
N5 – C8 – S3
121.6(4)
N5 – N6
1.379(5)
C13 – S4 – C10
N5 – C8
1.343(8)
Hydrogen-bond geometry for Complex 2. D–H
– C9 N4 –N6 H4A ··· N6
1.277(6)
H ··· A
D ··· A
0.86
D – H ··· A
N6 –2.28 N5– C8– 2.6307(2) S3 178.0(3)
M AN U
D – H ··· A
92.0(3)
SC
Table 4:
RI PT
Ru1 – S3
105
N5 – H5 ··· Cl1
0.86
2.42
3.1472(2)
143
N4 – H4A ··· Cl1*
0.86
2.60
3.2276(2)
131
N4 – H4B ··· Cl2*
0.86
2.49
3.2729(2)
152
AC C
EP
TE D
Symmetry codes: (*) 3/2-x, -1/2+y, z
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights
•
Preparation of thiosemicarbazones TSCn (1-3).
•
Synthesis of organoruthenium(II) complexes (1-3) with TSCs.
•
Characterization by elemental analysis, UV–Vis, FT-IR, 1H NMR, single crystal X-ray
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
diffraction spectroscopy.
S0022-328X(17)30033-5
DOI:
10.1016/j.jorganchem.2017.01.013
Reference:
JOM 19770
To appear in:
Journal of Organometallic Chemistry
Received Date: 30 May 2016 Revised Date:
27 July 2016
Accepted Date: 18 January 2017
Please cite this article as: P.K. Yaman, B. Şen, C.S. Karagöz, E. Subaşı, Half-sandwich rutheniumarene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization, Journal of Organometallic Chemistry (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jorganchem.2017.01.013. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Graphical Abstract
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Half-sandwich ruthenium-arene complexes with thiophen containing thiosemicarbazones: Synthesis and structural characterization Pelin Köse Yaman a, Betül Şen b, Cansu Sonay Karagöz c, Elif Subaşı a, * a
RI PT
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey b Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey c The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Dokuz Eylül University, 35160 İzmir, Turkey
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 232 301 8692; fax: +90 232 453 4188. E-mail address: [email protected]
SC
ABSTRACT
Novel conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes ([(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2],
(1);
[(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2],
(2)
and
[(η6-p-
M AN U
cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl]Cl, (3) have been synthesized from the reaction of [{(η6-pcymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazones TSC1 (2-acetyl-5-chlorothiophene thiosemicarbazone), TSC2 (2-acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone) and TSC3 (3-thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone) in a 1: 2 M ratio in methanol and all of the complexes have been characterized by elemental analysis, UV–Vis, FT-IR and 1H NMR
(2)
TE D
spectroscopy. The crystal structures of TSC1, TSC2 and [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], have been determined by X-ray crystallography revealing that TSC1 and TSC2,
crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c and complex (2) show a distorted octahedral geometry around the ruthenium centre. The mononuclear complex adopts a typical three
EP
legged piano-stool geometry (a description commonly used for half–sandwich compounds) with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination
AC C
geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p-cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms. The spectroscopic studies showed that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) and sulfur atom in complex (3).
Keywords: Ruthenium(II); arene complexes; Thiophen containing Thiosemicarbazones
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1. Introduction Thiosemicarbazones (TSCs) are of considerable pharmacological interest since a number of derivatives have shown a broad spectrum of biological properties. The wide range of biological activities possessed by substituted TSCs and their metal complexes include cytotoxic, antitumor, antibacterial and antiviral properties [1]. TSCs are versatile ligands as
RI PT
they have a number of donor atoms which may coordinate in various ways [2]. Incorporation of metals onto these ligands can result in alteration or enhancement of their biological activity [3]. Many examples of pharmacological applications with TSCs and their metal complexes have been evaluated for their antibacterial [4, 5], antifungal [6, 7], antiviral [8], antiamoebic
SC
[9], antimalarial [10] and antitumor [11,12] activities. It is considered to be a reason for biological activity that the TSC molecules to chelate with trace metals in biological system.
M AN U
There has been much interest in the chemistry of half-sandwich arene ruthenium(II) complexes since the development of useful synthetic precursors with the general formula [RuCl2(η6-arene)]n [13-16]. Organometallic ruthenium compounds, which are particularly the half of sandwich complexes, are emerging as a very promising class of anti-tumor and antimicrobial agents. The geometry of these complexes provides a good scaffold for generating new molecules by changing the coordinated arene, the chelated ligand and the chloride group
TE D
[17, 18]. As ligands, TSCs have more than one potential donor. Therefore, we tried to observe the sites of substitution of these ligands to the metal center. We have already described, halfsandwich (η6-p-cymene) ruthenium(II) complex [(η6-p-cymene)RuClTSCN-S]Cl and carbonyl complexes
[Ru(CO)Cl(PPh3)2TSCN-S],
[Ru(CO)(PPh3)2(η3-O,N3,S-TSC1)],
EP
[Ru(Cl)(CO)(PPh3)2(η2-N3,S-TSC2)] and [Ru(Cl)(CO)(PPh3)2(η2-N3,S-TSC3)] [19-20]. As part of our continued interest in the synthesis and structural aspects of ruthenium(II)
AC C
complexes, new conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes ([(η6p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], (1); [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) and [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl2], (3)
have been synthesized from the reaction of [{(η6-p-
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazones TSC1 (2-acetyl-5-chlorothiophene thiosemicarbazone), TSC2 (2-acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone) and TSC3 (3-thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone) in a 1: 2 M ratio in methanol and all of the complexes have been characterized by elemental analysis, UV–vis, FT-IR and 1H NMR spectroscopy. The crystal structures of the novel ligands TSC1, TSC2 and the complex [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) have been determined by X-ray crystallography.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2. Experimental 2.1. Materials Acetonitrile (ACN), benzene, petroleum ether, dichloromethane, methanol, ethanol, hexane and silica gel were purchased from Merck and RuCl3.3H2O, α-Phellandrene were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. All chemicals used for the syntheses of TSCs were purchased from
RI PT
Sigma-Aldrich as well. The precursor complex [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] was synthesized following the literature method [21]. TSCn (n= 1-3) ligands were prepared by reducing the Schiff bases [22].
SC
2.2. Methods
Reactions were carried out under an oxygen-free argon atmosphere using Schlenk techniques. All glassware was oven-dried at 120˚C. All solvents were dried and degassed using standard
M AN U
techniques and stored under nitrogen until used [23]. Elemental analyses were carried out using a LECOCHNS-O-9320 by Technical and Scientific Research Council of Turkey, TUBITAK. IR spectra on a Varian 1000 FT spectrophotometer (KBr pellets) and UV–vis Spectra Shimadzu Model 1800 spectrophotometer were recorded on samples at the Dokuz Eylül University. 1H NMR spectra were recorded in CDCl3 on 500 MHz High Performance (TMS).
2.3. Synthesis
TE D
Digital FT NMR at Ege University and chemical shifts were referenced to tetramethylsilane
EP
2.3.1 Synthesis of TSC ligands (general procedure). The preparative methods for TSCs were well described by Klayman et al. [24] and Scovill
AC C
[25]. The TSC1 and TSC2 were obtained from 2-acetyl-5-methylthiophene/2-acetyl-5chlorothiophene and thiosemicarbazide (1:1 M ratio) in absolute ethanol with addition of two drops of sulfuric acid. The mixture was refluxed for 4 hour and then cooled. The solid was precipitated, filtered and recrystallized from ethanol. TSC3 was synthesized according to the literature [26].
2.3.1.1 2-Acetyl-5-chloro-thiophene thiosemicarbazone, (TSC1) Yield : 1.2 g, 92%. mp : 175-180 °C. C7H8N3S2Cl: Calcd. C 35.9; H 3.5; N 17.9; S 27.4%; found: C 35.6; H 3.6; N 17.9; S 27.5%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3223 (s) (NH2), 3151 (s) (N–H), 1575 (s) (C=N), 1065 (m) (N-N), 839 (s) (C=S), 1108 (s) (CN,NCN). 1H NMR (400
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 8.59 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.10 (br, 2H, NH2), 2.22 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N). UVVis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 250 (0.79), 343 (1.87). 2.3.1.2 2-Acetyl-5-methyl-thiophene thiosemicarbazone, (TSC2) Yield : 1.6 mg, 94%. mp : 165-170 °C. C8H11N3S2: Calcd. C 45.0; H 5.2; N 19.7; S 30.0%;
RI PT
found: C 45.2; H 5.0; N 19.3; S 30.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3232 (s) (NH2), 3140 (m) (N–H),1547 (s) (C=N), 1034 (m) (N-N), 840 (m) (C=S), 1102 (m) (CN, NCN). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 8.62 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.16 (br, 2H, NH2), 2.24 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N). UV-
2.3.1.3 3-Thiophene aldehyde thiosemicarbazone, (TSC3)
SC
Vis (THF) (nm) (A) : λ: 248 (0.82), 338 (2.14).
Yield : 980 mg, 89%. mp : 158-165 °C. C6H7N3S2: Calcd. C 38.9; H 3.8; N 22.7; S 34.6%;
M AN U
found: C 38.5; H 3.9; N 22.9; S 34.7%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3255 (w) (NH2), 3147 (m) (N–H), 1530 (s) (C=N), 1038 (m) (N-N), 1055 (m) (N-N), 817 (s) (C=S), 1090 (m) (CN, NCN). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 9.30 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.58 (br, 2H, NH2), 7.87 (s, 1H, HC=N). UV-Vis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 315 (1.38).
2.3.2. Synthesis of the Ruthenium complexes (general procedure).
1.8-2.0g
(78-87%)
TE D
[{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] was synthesized as described in the literature and the yield is [21].
Complexes
(1–3)
were
prepared
by
reacting
[{(η6-p-
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective thiosemicarbazone ligands TSC1, TSC2 and TSC3
EP
were obtained in 78–83% yields. The methods employed are very similar and given in detail as a representative example.
Thiosemicarbazone ligand (TSC1) (260 mg, 1.12 mmol) was dissolved in methanole (20 ml)
AC C
and was added to a stirred suspension of [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] (340 mg, 0.56 mmol) in hot methanole (20 ml). Then, the resulting solution was refluxed under nitrogen atmosphere for 4 hours. The reaction mixture was then cooled to room temperature, which results in the formation of precipitate. The compound was filtered and the purity of the complexes was checked by TLC. The products were recrystallized from CH2Cl2/hexane mixture. Then it was dried in vacuum. 2.3.2.1 [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], 1 Yield : 500 mg, 83%. mp : 138-140 °C. C17H19N3S2Cl2Ru: calcd. C 40.8; H 3.8; N 8.4; S 12.8%; found: C 40.9; H 3.6; N 8.8; S 12.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3249 (m) (NH2),
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 3130 (w) (N-H), 1572 (s) (C=N), 1088 (m) (N-N), 801 (s) (C=S), 871, 754, 695 (m) (thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 10.91 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.07 (br, 2H, NH2), 6.08-7.59 (m, 2H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.96 (m, 1H, CH(CH3)2), 2.26 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N), 2.08 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.34 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2), 1.12 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2). UVvis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 352(1.14).
RI PT
2.3.2.2 [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], 2 (TSC2) (852 mg, 4 mmol) and [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCI}2(µ-Cl)2] (1224 mg, 2 mmol) gave 1600 mg, 77% of compound 2 as orange powder.
Yield : 1600 mg, 77%. mp : 135-140 °C. C18H22N3S2ClRu: calcd. C 44.9; H 4.6; N 8.7; S
SC
13.3%; found: C 44.7; H 4.9; N 8.3; S 13.7%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3253 (m) (NH2), 3147 (m) (N-H), 1546 (w) (C=N), 1051 (m) (N-N), 803 (s) (C=S), 870, 701, 662 (m)
M AN U
(thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 10.81 (s, 1H, N–H), 8.17 (br, 2H, NH2), 6.10-7.45 (m, 2H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.64 (1H, m, CH(CH3)2), 2.26 (s, 3H, CH3-C=N), 2.12 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.32 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2), 1.21 (d, 3H, CH(CH3)2). UVvis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 348 (0.64).
2.3.2.3 [(η6-p-cymene)RuCl(TSC3)]Cl, 3
TE D
(TSC3) (207 mg, 1.12 mmol) and [{(η6-p-cymene)RuCI}2(µ-Cl)2] (340 mg, 0.56 mmol) gave 400 mg, 73% of compound 3 as orange powder. Yield : 400 mg, 73%. mp: 145-150°C. C16H18N3S2CIRu: calcd. C 42.4; H 4.0; N 9.3; S 14.2%; found: C 42.2; H 4.2; N 9.1; S 14.4%. IR (KBr pellet), ʋmax/cm-1: 3265 (w) (NH2),
EP
3124 (w) (N-H), 1545 (s) (C=N), 1055 (m) (N-N), 798 (s) (C=S), 840, 798, 656 (m) (thiophene ring). 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3), (δ:ppm): 11.37 (s, H, N-H), 8.58 (br, 2H,
AC C
NH2), 8.35 (s, 1H, HC=N), 6.00-7.00 (m, 3H, thiophen ring; ds, 4H, p-cymene ring), 2.85 (1H, m, CH(CH3)2), 2.06 (3H, s, CH3), 1.11 (d, 6H, CH(CH3)2). UV-vis (THF) (nm) (A): λ: 296 (0.62); 326 (0,63).
2.4 Crystal structures determination and refinement The suitable single crystals of the compounds were chosen for the crystallographic study. The molecular structure of the compounds is determined by single crystal X-ray diffraction. Single-crystal data were collected at 293(2) K by ω-scan technique, on an Agilent Diffraction Xcalibur X-ray diffractometer with an Eos CCD area detector using graphitemonochromated radiation MoKα (λ = 0.71073 Å) from a enhance X-ray source. The data
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT collection, cell refinement and data reduction were performed using the CrysAlisPro program [27]. Solution, refinement and analysis of the structures were done using the OLEX2 system [28]. The crystal structures were solved by the direct method using the SHELXS [29] and refined by full-matrix least squares method based on F2 against all reflections using the SHELXL [30]. All non-hydrogen atoms were refined anisotropically. The crystal structure
RI PT
positions of hydrogen atoms were treated as riding atoms. Geometrical calculations were performed using PLATON [31]. The figures were made using ORTEP [32] and OLEX2 [28]. Details of the data collection conditions and the parameters of the refinement process are
SC
given in Table 1.
M AN U
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Synthesis
Novel conformationally rigid half-sandwich organoruthenium(II) complexes of the general formula ([(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2], (1); [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) and [(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3)Cl]Cl, (3) have been prepared by reacting [{(η6-p-
TE D
cymene)RuCl}2(µ-Cl)2] with the respective TSC ligands TSCn (n=1-3) in a 1:2 molar ratio in methanol. For the structural characterization FT-IR spectra, UV–Vis spectra and
1
H NMR
spectra were used and the corresponding data are given in experimental section.
EP
All of the complexes were isolated in medium yields and are well enough stable in air and light. The analytical data given in experimental section for the complexes are in a good fit with the formula recommended. The complexes are soluble in general organic solvents such
AC C
as dichloro methane and chloroform. Several attempts have been made to get the single crystals of all the complexes but it has been ineffective except complex (2). The spectroscopic data and the single crystal X-ray studies of TSC1, TSC2 and the complex (2) reasonably support the formulas of the compounds.
3.2 Analytical Data The analytical data for the ligands and complexes (1–3) are summarized in the experimental section. The stoichiometry of the ligands and their complexes has been confirmed by elemental analyses. The analytical data for the complexes are in good
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT agreement with the formula proposed and the spectroscopic data are given in the experimental section. The spectroscopic data fairly supports the formula of the compounds.
3.3 Infrared Spectra
RI PT
The FT-IR spectra of the free ligands were compared with those of the metal complexes in order to study the binding modes of the TSC ligand to the ruthenium metal. The main stretching frequencies of TSCn (n=1-3) and Ru(II) complexes (1-3) are given in the experimental section.
SC
TSCs are shown with general formula, [R1R2C2N3N2(H)C1(S)N1R3R4], can coordinate in a number of different manners. Most commonly they bind as either of two tautomeric forms, a neutral thione form or the anion from the thiol form. Infrared spectroscopy was used to
M AN U
confirm coordination as the thione form in (1-3). FT-IR spectra of the free ligands were
TE D
compared with the complexes to confirm the coordination of the ligand to ruthenium.
The highest frequency bands at 3223-3255 cm−1 region in spectra of the ligands are assigned to υasym and υsym of terminal NH2. These bands are present in the spectra of the complexes (1-
EP
3) at 3249-3265 cm-1 region, indicating non-involvement of this group in coordination. A strong band at 3151 cm−1, (TSC1); 3140 cm−1, (TSC2) and 3147 cm−1, (TSC3) attributed to υ(N–H) of –NH–N=C in spectra of free ligands are present with altered frequencies in the
AC C
spectra of metal complexes at 3130 cm−1, (1); 3147 cm−1, (2); and 3124 cm−1, (3) as shown in the literature [33].
The absorptions due to C=N of the free ligands at 1575 cm−1 (TSC1), 1547 cm−1 (TSC2), and 1530 cm−1 (TSC3) were observed in the FT-IR spectra. Coordination of the thiosemicarbazone ligands to ruthenium ion through azomethine nitrogen is expected to change the electron density in the azomethine and thus alters υ(C=N) band frequency after complexation, indicating coordination of azomethine nitrogen to ruthenium ion [34]. However, the υ(C=N) bands observed at 1572 cm−1 and 1546 cm−1, in complex (1) and (2), respectively remained unchanged. Co-ordination of the TSC3 to the ruthenium ion through
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT azomethine nitrogen atom is changed the electron density in the azomethine link and thus alters the υ (C=N) absorption frequency about 15 cm-1 at 1545 cm−1, in complex (3). Coordination via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom is inferred by the following observations. The free ligands display υ(C=S) absorption at 839 cm−1 (TSC1), 840 cm−1 (TSC2) and 817 cm−1 (TSC3). This band is also present in the low frequency region in the spectra of the
RI PT
complexes at 801 cm−1 (1), 803 cm−1 (2) and 798 cm−1 (3). The downward (C=S) band shift (19-38 cm-1) in the complexes provides evidence for coordination of thiocarbonyl sulfur atom for all of the complexes [35, 36]. No bands near 2570 cm-1 due to υ(C-SH) suggesting that these ligands remain in the thione form in the solid-state in complexes (1-3). FT-IR spectra of the
SC
complexes show that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas
and sulfur atom in complex (3).
M AN U
TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) The υ(N–N) bands of TSCs are at 1065 cm-1 (TSC1), 1034 cm-1 (TSC2) and 1038 cm-1 (TSC3). The increase in frequency of these bands 1088 cm-1 (1), 1051 cm-1 (2), 1055 cm-1 (3) in the spectra of all the complexes respectively provides evidence for either the coordination via the azomethine nitrogen [37] as in complex (3) or H-bonding between NH
TE D
and Cl atoms as seen from the X-ray crystallographic structure of complex (2). These two reasons may change the stretching frequency of N-N bond. The bands observed at 871, 754, 695 cm-1
for complex (1); 870, 701, 662 cm-1 for complex (2) and 840, 798, 656 cm-1 for
complex (3) are attributed to the thiophene ring deformation modes in the ligands. These
EP
thiophene ring deformation vibrations are not affected in the complexes [38]. 3.4 1H NMR spectra
AC C
The ligand-to-metal bonding is further supported by 1H NMR spectra. The TSC ligands and the complexes are very soluble in CHCl3 and so their NMR spectra were obtained in CDCl3. The 1H NMR spectral results obtained for TSCn and n=1–3 in CDCl3 with their assignments are given in the experimental section. In the spectrum of complex (3), sharp singlets at 8.35 ppm has been assigned to azomethine proton (–HC=N). The positions of azomethine signal in the complexes are shifted to a lower field compared to free ligands at 7.87 ppm (TSC3), indicating coordination through the azomethine nitrogen. A downfield shift is observed for these signals compared to the free ligands upon coordination to ruthenium, suggesting coordination of the metal to the
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT azomethine nitrogen atom as the signal becomes more deshielded in each case. This is also observed for similar arene ruthenium (II) thiosemicarbazone complexes [39, 40]. The absence of the signal at 4.00 ppm that can be ascribed to –SH is consistent with the idea that in solution, as in the solid state, TSCs exist as the thione tautomer in the complexes (1-3) [41]. The singlet signal due to the methyl (CH3-C=N) on the ligands (TSC1-TSC2) are
RI PT
observed at 2.22 ppm and 2.24 ppm respectively, these signals shifts slightly towards lower field in complexes (1) and (2) at 2.26 ppm.
The isopropyl methines are found as multiplets at 2.96 ppm, in (1); 2,64 ppm, in (2) and 2.85 ppm, in (3). The isopropyl methyls are occured as two doublets at 1.34 and 1.12 ppm, in
SC
(1) and 1.32 and 1.21 ppm, in (2), whereas only as a doublet at 1.11 ppm, in (3). The singlet signal due to the methyl on the rings are observed at 2.08 ppm, in (1); 2.12 ppm, in (2) and 2.06 ppm, in (3). In the 1H NMR spectra of complex (1) and (2) the loss of symmetry is
M AN U
evidenced by the appearance of sets of doublets in the region of 5.50- 7.50 ppm accounting for the protons of the p-cymene rings. The methyl substituents of the isopropyl group are observed as two distinct doublets in the aliphatic region of the spectra, which further confirms the loss of symmetry as the two methyl groups are non-equivalent. These doublets belong to the methyl protons are observed at 1.34 and 1.12 ppm for complex (1) and 1.32 and 1.21 ppm
TE D
for complex (2). The loss of symmetry of the arene rings in complex (1) and (2) suggests that these complexes have similar modes of coordination.
The p-cymene protons resonate at
frequencies typically seen for this group [42].
The NH2 signals in the complexes attributed to the ligand are practically unchanged from
EP
the free ligands. The NH2 group generates broad signal at 8.07 ppm, in (1); 8.17 ppm, in (2) and 8.58 ppm (3). Resonances of terminal NH2 in (1-3) are seen in the same positions as in ligand spectra confirming the non-involvement of this group in coordination. A signal for the
AC C
hydrazinic NH protons at 8.59 ppm (TSC1), 8.62 ppm (TSC2), and 9.30 ppm (TSC3) in 1H NMR spectra of the ligands are present in NMR spectra of the complexes; 10.91 ppm (1), 10.81 ppm (2), and 11.37 ppm (3) with gradual downfield shifts. All the other protons resonate in regions commonly expected. The 1H NMR spectra of the complexes (1-3) are essentially direct combination of the signals from the ligands plus those from the p-cymene moiety. In the 1H NMR spectra of complexes (1-3) all indications are that the ligands remain neutral form (as evidenced by the presence of the NH protons). Multiplets are observed at around 6.60–7.93 ppm in all the complexes and have been assigned to the aromatic protons of p-cymene ring and thiophen of the thiosemicarbazone ligands. Furthermore, in all the complexes largest ∆δ are observed for the protons that are located
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT close to the coordinating atoms. So, the deshielding effect of the metal is apparent to such protons [43].
3.5 Electronic spectra
RI PT
The electronic spectra of the ligands and its copmlexes were recorded in THF. The spectra of free ligands showed two types of bands at 314-343 and 248-250 nm. The probable assigment for these bands are due to the n-π* (thiosemicarbazones) and π-π* (thiophene) transitions. The ground state of Ru (II) is 1A1g, arising from the t62g configuration in an octahedral
environment. Excited state corresponding to the t52ge1g configuration are 3T1g, 3T2g, 1T1g and T2g. Hence four bands, corresponding to the transitions 1A1g
1
T1g and 1A1g
1
3
T1g, 1A1g
SC
1
3
T2g, 1A1g
T2g are possible, in order of increasing energy. The electronic spectra of
M AN U
Ru(II) complexes show several absorptions in the ultraviolet region. Bands at 296-351 nm in all Ru(II) complexes may be assigned to Ru (4dπ)
π* (imine) transitions. The pattern of
the electronic spectra of all the complexes indicate the presence of an octahedral geometry around ruthenium (II) ion [44].
3.6. Description of the crystal structures
TE D
3.6.1 Crystal structure of TSC1and TSC2
The compounds, TSC1 and TSC2, crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c; their molecular structures are illustrated in Fig. 3 and 4, respectively. TSC2 comprises two
EP
crystallographically independent molecules (A and B) in the asymmetric unit. The corresponding bond lengths and bond angles of molecules A and B of TSC2 agree well with each other and are within normal ranges.
AC C
The thiophene rings (S4/C10–C13 in molecule A of TSC2, S6/C18–C21 in molecule B of TSC2 and S2/C3–C6 in TSC1) are reasonably planar, the maximum deviation from planarity being 0.006 (5), 0.018 (5) and 0.004 (1) Å for atoms C12, C20 and C3, respectively. The two endocyclic C–S bonds lengths, C10–S4 and C13–S4 in A; C18–S6 and C21–S6 in B and C3– S2 and C6–S2 in (I), are 1.723 (7) and 1.708(8) Å; 1.707(7) and 1.698(8) Å and 1.721(2) and 1.710(2) Å, respectively. These distances are in good agreement with a related compound [4547]. The TSC fragment in molecule A and B is almost planar with the maximum deviation 0.0386 and 0.0577 Å, respectively, and in TSC1 maximum deviation is 0.0547 Å. The TSC group adopts an extended conformation, which can be seen from the torsion angle value of
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT S3/C8/N5/N6=172.9(4)o in molecule A, S5/C16/N8/N9=–169.4(5)° in molecule B and S1/C1/N2/N3= –169.7(2)° in TSC1. This conformation enables the formation of an intramolecular N–H···N hydrogen bond. The exocyclic C–S distances, C8–S3 and C16–S5 in both A and B are 1.690(6) Å, respectively, and in TSC1 distance C1–S1 is 1674(2) Å, confirm their significant double-bond character [48]. The N–N bond lengths are 1.364 (7) and 1.370
RI PT
(7) Å in molecules A and B, respectively, of compound TSC1, and 1.377(3) Å in compound TSC2. These bond lengths are very close to that reported for a similar TSC compound [49-51]. Likewise, in compound TSC1, the C6–Cl1 bond length is comparable with those in related structures [52, 53]. In all three compounds, the molecular structure is stabilized by a cyclic intramolecular N–H···N hydrogen bonds which generate S(5) ring motifs (Table 2) [54].
SC
In the crystal of compound TSC1, molecules are linked by pairs of N–H···S hydrogen bonds, forming inversion dimmers with an R22(8) ring motif (Table 2 and Fig. 5). The dimers
M AN U
are linked by π···π interaction [Cg1···Cg1i= 3.8330(3) Å, inter-planar distance=3.6174 Å, slippage 1.267 Å, where Cg1 is the centroid of the S2/C3–C6 ring; symmetry code: (i) x, 3/2 y, 1/2+z], forming ribbons lying parallel to plane
.
In the compound TSC2, the molecules labeled as A are linked via bifurcated N–H···S and
TE D
C–H···S hydrogen bonds, forming A–A dimers with two R12(7) ring motifs, and R22(8) and R22(14) ring motifs. The molecules labeled as B is also involved in intermolecular N8– H8···S5i2 hydrogen bonds, resulting in R22(8) centrosymmetric dimers. In addition to these, the dimers are packed by pairs of N–H···S hydrogen bonds interactions forming
EP
centrosymmetric rings with set-graph motif R22(8) and resulting in the formation of a twodimensional network extending along [100], (Fig. 6). The crystal packing is further stabilized
AC C
by intermolecular C15–H15B···Cg1 and C23–H23A···Cg2 interactions into supramolecular chains running along the c axis. Cg1 and Cg2 are the centres of gravity of thiophene rings S4/C10–C13 and S6/C18–C21, respectively. Details of these interactions are given Table 2.
3.6.2 Crystal structure of the Complex (2) The title compound adopts a typical three legged piano-stool geometry (a description commonly used for half–sandwich compounds) with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p–cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms (Fig. 7). The distorted octahedral geometry is evident from the bond angles given in Table 3.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The six-membered ring of the p-cymene is almost planar, with a maximum deviation of 0.020 (4) Å (C20) and an overall r.m.s. deviation of 0.0126 Å. The dihedral angle between the p-cymene ring (C17–C22) and the isopropenyl group (C23–C25) planes is 75.90 (0.27)o. The Ru–C(ring) distances are in the range 2.1364 (1)–2.2414 (1) Å and agree well with those reported for similar structures [55,56]. The distance between the RuII ion and the least-
RI PT
squares plane of the p-cymene aromatic ring is 1.6703 (1) Å, which is very close to that reported in other (p-cymene)ruthenium(II) complexes [57, 58]. Defining X as the centroid of the aromatic ring, the Cl1—Ru1—X, Cl2—Ru1—X and S3—Ru1—X angles are 126.85, 125.73 and 129.00o, respectively.
SC
The two Ru–Cl bond distances are slightly different [2.4215(2) and 2.4324 (2) Å], longer than those of previously reported structures [59-61]. The bond lengths in the coordinated TSC ligand are nearly similar in free TSC ligand. Besides, the bond angles in the TSC moiety
M AN U
shows significant changes on coordination.
The molecular structure is stabilized by N4–H4A···N6 and N5–H5···Cl1 intramolecular interactions, which generate S(5) and S(6) ring motifs, respectively. In the crystal packing, both chloro ligands are involved in H-bonded interaction with the NH2 moieties of a neighbouring molecule, thus forming a symmetry-related dimeric structure (Table 4). These
b axis (Fig. 8).
EP
4. Conclusion
TE D
interactions combine to link the molecules into zigzag chains of rings which run parallel to the
This paper describes the synthesis, structural and spectral characterization of thiophene containing TSC1-3 ligands and their half-sandwich ruthenium (II) arene complexes ([(η6-p-
AC C
cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC1)Cl2],
(1);
[(η6-p-cymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2],
(2)
and
[(η6-p-
cymene)Ru(η2-N,S-TSC3) Cl]Cl, (3). The crystal structures of TSC1, TSC2 and [(η6-pcymene)Ru(η1-S-TSC2)Cl2], (2) have been determined by X-ray crystallography revealing that TSC1 and TSC2, crystallized in the monoclinic space group P21/c and complex 2 show a distorted octahedral geometry around the ruthenium centre. The mononuclear complex adopts a typical three legged piano-stool geometry with the metal centre coordinated by two chlorides and a TSC ligand. The coordination geometry around RuII atom is distorted octahedron with three sites occupied by the p-cymene ligand (with an ƞ6 coordination mode) while the remaining three sites occupied by the S atom of the TSC ligand and two Cl atoms. The spectroscopic studies showed that TSC1and TSC2 are coordinated to the central metal as a
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT monodentate ligand coordinating via the thiocarbonyl sulfur atom (C=S) in complexes (1) and (2), whereas TSC3 is coordinated to ruthenium as a bidentate ligand through azomethine nitrogen (C=N) and sulfur atom in complex (3). Althoug N,S-coordination mode is the most common for thiosemicarbazone ligands, unusual monodentate coordination mode of TSC1and TSC2 in complex (1) and (2) are shown in this paper. In the spectral data of the complexes all
RI PT
indications are that the TSC ligands remain neutral form.
Acknowledgments
SC
The authors also acknowledge Dokuz Eylul University for the use of the Agilent Xcalibur Eos difractometer (purchased under University Research Grant No: 2010.KB.FEN.13). Thanks to Assist. Prof. Dr. Muhittin Aygün for single crystal X-Ray analysis at Physics Department, in
M AN U
Dokuz Eylul University. This study was supported by project number 2015.KB.FEN.018 from Dokuz Eylul University Rectorship, Scientific Research Project Coordination Center. We gratefully thank the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, EBILTEM, Ege University for NMR analysis, and TUBITAK, for elemental
Supplementary material
TE D
analysis.
CCDC 1478649, 1478648 and 1478647 contains the supplementary crystallographic data for the ligand (TSC1) and ligand (TSC2) and complex (1), respectively. These data can be
EP
obtained free of charge via http://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk/conts/retrieving.html, or from the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB2 1EZ, UK; fax:
AC C
(+44) 1223-336-033; or e-mail: [email protected].
References
[1] D.L. Klayman, J.P. Scovill, J.F. Bartosevich, J. Bruce, J. Med. Chem. 26 (1983) 35-39. [2] H. Beraldo, D. Gambino, MiniRev. Med. Chem. 4 (2004) 31-39. [3] J. Garcia-Tojal, A. Garcia-Orad, J.L. Serra, J.L. Pizarro, L. Lezamma, M.I. Arriortua, T. Rojo, J. Inorg. Biochem. 75 (1999) 45-54. [4] A.S. Dobek, D.L. Klayman, E.T. Dickson, J.P. Scovill, E.C. Tramont, Antimicrob.Agents Ch. 18 (1980) 27-36. [5] R. Ramachandran, M. Rani, S. Kabilan, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 19 (2009) 2819-2823.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [6] D. Kovala-Demertzi, J.R. Miller, N. Kourkoumelis, S.K. Hadjikakou, M.A. Demertzis, Polyhedron 18 (1999) 1005-1013. [7] R.A. Finch, M.C. Liu, S.P. Grill, W.C. Rose, R. Loomis, K.M. Vasquez, Y.C. Cheng, A.C. Sartorelli, Biochem. Pharmacol. 59 (2000) 983-991. [8] S. Sharma, F. Athar, M.R. Maurya, A. Azam, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 40 (2005) 1414-1419.
RI PT
[9] G.L. Parrilha, J.G. Da Silva, L.F. Gouveia, A.K. Gasparoto, R.P. Dias, W.R. Rocha, D.A. Santos, N.L. Speziali, H. Beraldo, Eur. J. Med. Chem. 46 (2011) 1473-1482.
[10] K. Alomar, V. Gaumet, M. Allain, G. Bouet, A. Landreau, J. Inorg. Biochem. 115 (2012) 36-43.
SC
[11] C. Shipman Jr., S.H. Smith, J.C. Drach, D.L. Klayman, Antiviral Res. 6 (1986) 197-222. [12] A. Usman, I.A. Razak, S. Chantrapromma, H.-K. Fun, A. Sreekanth, S. Sivakumar, M.R.P. Kurup, Acta Crystallogr. C 58 (2002) M461-M463
M AN U
[13] a) G. Winkhaus, H. Singer, J. Organomet. Chem. 7 (1967) 487-491.
b) M. Auzias, B. Therrien, G. Süss-Fink, P. Štěpnika, W.H. Ang, P.J. Dyson, Inorg. Chem. 47 (2008) 578-583.
c) B. Therrien, Coord. Chem. Rev. 253 (2009) 493-519.
d) G. Pampaloni, Coord. Chem. Rev. 254 (2010) 402-419.
TE D
[14] a) M.A. Bennett, A.K. Smith, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. (1974) 233-241. b) R. Castarlenas, C. Vovard, C. Fischmeister, P.H. Dixneuf, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128 (2006) 4079-4089.
c) P. Govindaswamy, G. Süss-Fink, B. Therrien, Organometallics 26 (2007) 915-924.
EP
d) A.M. Pizarro, M. Melchart, A. Habtemariam, L. Salassa, F.P.A. Fabbiani, S. Parsons, P.J. Sadler, Inorg. Chem. 49 (2010) 3310-3319. [15] a) M.J. Clarke, F. Zhu, D.R. Frasca, Chem. Rev. 99 (1999) 2511-2534.
AC C
b) F. Wang, J. Xu, A. Habtemariam, J. Bella, P.J. Sadler, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127 (2005) 17734-17743.
c) P.J. Dyson, G. Sava, Dalton Trans. (2006) 1929-1933. d) B. Therrien,W.H. Ang, F. Che´ rioux, L. Vieille-Petit, L. Juillerat-Jeanneret, G. S ¨ uss-Fink, P.J. Dyson, J. Clust. Sci. 18 (2007) 741-752. e) B. Therrien, , G. Süss‐Fink, P. Govindaswamy, A.K. Renfrew, P.J. Dyson, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47 (20) (2008) 3773-3776. [16] I.W. McNae, K. Fishburne, A. Habtemariam, T.M. Hunter, M. Melchart, F. Wang, M.D. Walkinshaw, P.J. Sadler, Chem. Commun. (2004) 1786-1787.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [17] F. Beckford, D. Dourth, M. Shaloski Jr., J. Didion, J. Thessing, J. Woods, V. Crowell, N. Gerasimchuk, A. Gonzalez-Sarrías, N.P. Seeram, J. Inorg. Biochem. 105 (2011) 10191029. [18] C.S. Allardyce, A. Dorcier, C. Scolaro, P.J. Dyson. Appl. Organomet. Chem. 19 (2005) 1-10.
RI PT
[19] H. Yildirim, E. Guler, M. Yavuz, N. Ozturk, P. K. Yaman, E. Subasi, E. Şahin, S. Timur. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 44 (2014) 1-8.
[20] N.Öztürk, P.K. Yaman, M.Yavuz, Ö.Öter, S.Timur, E.Subaşi. .J. Coord. Chem. 67 (16) (2014) 2688-2700.
SC
[21] M.A. Bennett, T.N. Huang, T.W. Matheson, A.K. Smith, Inorg. Synth. 21 (1985) 75-78. [22] S.K. Mandal, A.R. Chakravarty, Polyhedron 11 (1992) 823-827.
Ed. Oxford: Pergamon (1980).
M AN U
[23] D.D. Perrin, W.L.F. Armarego, D.R. Perrin, Purification of Laboratory Chemicals, 2nd
[24] D.L. Klayman, A.J. Lin, N. Acton, J.P. Scovill, J.M. Hoch, W.K. Milhous. J. Nat. Prod. 47 (1984) 715-717.
[25] J.P. Scovill. Phosphorus, Sulfur Silicon Relat. Elem. 60 (1991) 15-19. [26] K. Alomar, M.A. Khan, M. Allain, G. Bouet, Polyhedron 28 (2009) 1273-1280.
TE D
[27] CrysAlisProSoftware system, Version 1.171.35.11, Agilent Technologies UK Ltd. (2011). [28] O.V. Dolomanov, L.J. Bourhis, R.J. Gildea, et al., J. Appl. Cryst. 42 (2009) 339-341. [29] G.M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallogr. Sect. A64 (2008) 112–122. [30] G.M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallogr. Sect. C71 (2015) 3-8.
EP
[31] A.L. Spek, J. Appl. Cryst. 36 (2003) 7–13. [32] L.J. Farrugia, ORTEP-3 for Windows, J. Appl. Cryst. 45 (2012) 849-854. [33] K. Sampath, S. Sathiyaraj, G. Raja, C. Jayabalakrishnan. J. Mol. Struct. 1046 (2013) 82-
AC C
91.
[34] A. Manimaran, C. Jayabalakrishnan. J. Adv. Res. 3 (2012) 233-236. [35] K. Natarajan, R.K. Poddar, U. Agarwala. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 39 (1977) 431-435. [36] S. Manivannan, R. Prabhakaran, K.P. Balasubramanian, V. Dhanabal, R. Karvembu, V. Chinnusamy. Appl. Organomet. Chem. 21 (2007) 952-957. [37] C. Jayabalakrishnan, R. Karvembu, K. Natarajan, Transition Metal Chemistry, 27 (7) (2002) 790-794. [38] S. Singh, F. Athar, M. R. Maurya, A. Azam, Eur. J. Med. Chem, 41 (5) (2006) 592-598. [39] M.U. Raja, E. Sindhuja, R. Ramesh, Inorg. Chem. Commun, 13 (2010) 1321-1324. [40] F.A. Beckford, Inorg. Chem. Commun 12 (2009) 2839-2846.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [41] S. Das, S. Sinha, R. Britto, K. Somasundaram, A. G. Samuelson, J. Inorg. Biochem. 104 (2) (2010) 93-104. [42] F.A. Beckford, G. Leblanc, J. Thessing, M. Shaloski, B. J. Frost, L. Li, & N. P. Seeram, Inorg. Chem. Commun. 12(11) (2009) 1094-1098. [43] A. Manimaran, C. Jayabalakrishnan, J. Adv. Res. 3 3 (2012) 233-243.
[45] Z.-L. Jing, M. Yu, X. Chen, Acta Cryst. E63 (2007) o3714.
RI PT
[44] M. Sivagamasundari, R. Ramesh. Spectrochim. Acta, Part A 66 (2007) 427-433.
[46] P.A. Gaye, A. Sy, A.D. Sarr, M. Gaye, C. Besnard, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) o1168.
[47] C. Kazak, M. Aygün, G. Turgut, M. Odabasoglu, S. Özbey, O. Büyükgüngör, Acta
SC
Cryst. C56 (2000) 1044-1045.
[48] A. Kumbhar, P. Sonawane, S. Padhye, D. X. West, R. J. Butcher, J. Chem. Crystallogr. 27 (1997) 533–539.
76–83.
M AN U
[49] K. Alomar, A. Landreau, M. Allain, G. Bouet, G. Larcher, J. Inorg. Biochem. 126 (2013)
[50] M.-X. Li, D. Zhang, L.-Z. Zhang, J.–Y. Niu, Inorg. Chem. Commun. 13 (2010) 12681271.
[51] B.J. Anderson, M.B. Freedman, S. P. Millikan, V.A. Smolenski, J.P. Jasinski, Acta
TE D
Cryst. E71 (2015) o796–o797.
[52] S. Sultan, M. Taha, S. A.A. Shah, B. M. Yamin, H.M. Zaki, Acta Cryst. E70 (2014) o751.
[53] R. Prasath, P. Bhavana, S.W. Ng, E.R.T. Tiekink, Acta Cryst. E66 (2010) E66 o2883.
EP
[54] J. Bernstein, R.E. Davis,L. Shimoni, N.-L. Chang, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 34 (1995) 1555–1573.
[55] W.-R. Yao, Z.-H. Liu, Q.-F. Zhang, Acta Cryst. C59 (2003) m156–m158.
AC C
[56] S.H. Dale, M.R.J. Elsegood, Acta Cryst. C62 (2006) m166–m170 [57] N.M.S. Ballester, M.R.J. Elsegood, M.B. Smith, Acta Cryst. E64 (2008) m309–m310. [58] M. Aitali, L. El Firdoussi, A. Karim, A.F. Barrero, M. Quirós, Acta Cryst. C56 (2000) 1088–1089.
[59] R.E. Sykora, A.G. Harris, J.W. Clements, N.W. Hoffman, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) m99m100. [60] B. Oelkers, L.H. Finger, J. Sundermeyer, Acta Cryst. E67 (2011) m319. [61] M. Chandra, D.S. Pandey, M.C. Puerta, P. Valerga, Acta Cryst. E58 (2002) m28–m29.
AC C
EP
TE D
Fig. 1. Thiosemicarbazones (TSC1-3)
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
Fig. 2. Ru(II) complexes (1-3
Fig. 3. The molecular structure and atom-numbering scheme for the title compound TSC1. Displacement ellipsoids are shown at the 50% probability level.
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Fig. 4. The molecular structure of the two independent molecules (A and B) of compound
SC
TSC2, showing the atom labelling. Displacement ellipsoids are drawn at the 50%
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
probability level.
Fig. 5. A partial view along the c axis of the crystal packing of compound TSC1, showing the N–H ··S hydrogen bonds (dashed lines), which result in the formation of inversion dimers with an R22(8) ring motif. Symmetry code as in Table 2.
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Fig. 6. A partial view along the b axis of the crystal packing of compound (II), showing
SC
the N–H···S and C–H···S hydrogen bonds (dashed lines), which result in the formation of two R12(7)motifs, and three R22(8) motifs and R22(14) ring motif. H atoms not involved in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
hydrogen bonding have been omitted for clarity. Symmetry code as in Table 2.
Fig. 7. The molecular structure and atom-numbering scheme for the complex (2). Displacement ellipsoids are drawn at the 40% probability level. The 6-binding mode of the p-cymene ligand is represented by a heavy dashed line between the Ru atom and the centroid of the aromatic ring.
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
M AN U
Fig. 8. Part of the crystal structure of complex (2) showing the formation of hydrogenbonded dimers running parallel to the [010] direction. H atoms not involved in hydrogen
TE D
bonding have been omitted for clarity. Symmetry code as in Table 4.
Table 1
Crystal data and structure refinement parameters for the Compound TSC1, Compound TSC2 and Complex (2). TSC1
TSC2
2
C7H8ClN3S2
C8H11N3S2
C18H25Cl2N3RuS2
233.73
213.32
519.50
293(2)
293(2)
293(2)
P21/c
P21/c
Pbca
monoclinic
monoclinic
orthorhombic
5.5637(4), 25.2322(16)
14.9578(12), 28.511(2),
15.3842(9),
7.4806(6)
5.6542(4)
22.7967(15)
90, 104.221(8), 90
90, 93.956(7), 90
90, 90, 90
Cell volume (Å )
1017.97(13)
2405.5(3)
4405.9(4)
Formula unit cell Z
4
8
8
1.525
1.178
1.566
480.0
896.0
2112.0
Formula weight Temperature (K)
AC C
Space group
EP
Chemical formula
Crystal system a, b, c (Å) o
α, β, γ ( )
3
3
ρcalc (g/cm ) F(000) -
Absorption coefficient µ (mm 1
)
0.741
0.406
1.151
12.5628(6),
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 0.5805×0.3742×0.221
0.695×0.271×0.111
0.35×0.283×0.134
Diffractometer
Xcalibur, Eos
Xcalibur, Eos
Xcalibur, Eos
Radiation/Wavelength (Å)
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
MoKα / λ = 0.71073
Reflections measured
3994
4900
13189
-6 ≤ h ≤ 3, -31 ≤ k ≤ 22,
-18 ≤ h ≤ 18, 0 ≤ k ≤ 35,
-16 ≤ h ≤ 18, -14 ≤ k ≤ 14,
-9 ≤ l ≤ 9
0≤l≤7
-26 ≤ l ≤ 25
2067/0/119
4900/0/239
3758/0/240
R1=0.0393, wR2=0.0950
R1 =0.1108,
Range of h, k, l Data/Restraints/Parameters Final R indexes [I>=2σ (I)]
wR2=0.3541 R1=0.0542, wR2=0.1024
Final R indexes [all data]
R1 =0.1566, wR2=0.3774
2
1.063
1.278
Largest diff. peak/hole (e Å-3)
0.34/ -0.27
1.51/ -0.53
R1=0.0478,
wR2=0.0568 R1=0.0950,
wR2=0.0655 0.922
0.55/ -0.52
TE D
M AN U
SC
Goodness-of-fit on F
RI PT
Crystal size (mm3)
Table 2:
Hydrogen-bond geometry for TSC1 and TSC2 (Å, o) D–H
H ··· A
N1 – H1A ··· N3
0.86
2.28
2.6338(2)
105
N1 – H1B ··· S1ii
0.86
2.59
3.4443(3)
176
N4 – H4A ··· N6
0.86
2.20
2.5558(2)
105
N4 – H4B ··· S5
0.86
2.45
3.2904(3)
167
N5 – H5 ··· S3i1
0.86
2.61
3.4668(3)
173
C15 – H15A···S3i1
0.96
2.81
3.4643(3)
126
N7 – H7A ··· N9
0.86
2.27
2.6166(2)
104
N7 – H7B ··· S3
0.86
2.67
3.4899(3)
161
N8 – H8 ··· S5i2
0.86
2,79
3.6136(3)
161
AC C
EP
D – H ··· A
D ··· A
D – H ··· A
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT C15–H15C···Cgi3
0.96
2.80
3.6962(3)
156
C15–H15B···Cgi4
0.96
2.83
3.6962(3)
140
Symmetry codes: (ii) -1-x, 1-y, 1-z; (i1) -x, 1-y, 1-z; (i2) 1-x, 1-y, -z; (i3) x, y, 1+z,
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
(i4) x, y, -1+z.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 3 :
Selected geometric parameters for complex 2 (Å, o). 2.422(1)
Cl1 – Ru1 – Cl2
88.38(5)
S3 – C8
1.700(5)
Cl1 – Ru1 – S3
89.17(5)
S4 – C10
1.719(5)
S3 – Ru1 – Cl2
83.97(5)
S4 – C13
1.713(5)
N4 – C8 – S3
120.8(4)
N4 – C8
1.309(5)
N5 – C8 – S3
121.6(4)
N5 – N6
1.379(5)
C13 – S4 – C10
N5 – C8
1.343(8)
Hydrogen-bond geometry for Complex 2. D–H
– C9 N4 –N6 H4A ··· N6
1.277(6)
H ··· A
D ··· A
0.86
D – H ··· A
N6 –2.28 N5– C8– 2.6307(2) S3 178.0(3)
M AN U
D – H ··· A
92.0(3)
SC
Table 4:
RI PT
Ru1 – S3
105
N5 – H5 ··· Cl1
0.86
2.42
3.1472(2)
143
N4 – H4A ··· Cl1*
0.86
2.60
3.2276(2)
131
N4 – H4B ··· Cl2*
0.86
2.49
3.2729(2)
152
AC C
EP
TE D
Symmetry codes: (*) 3/2-x, -1/2+y, z
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights
•
Preparation of thiosemicarbazones TSCn (1-3).
•
Synthesis of organoruthenium(II) complexes (1-3) with TSCs.
•
Characterization by elemental analysis, UV–Vis, FT-IR, 1H NMR, single crystal X-ray
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
diffraction spectroscopy.