Next Article in Journal
Sex Difference in Cardioprotection against Acute Myocardial Infarction in MAO-B Knockout Mice In Vivo
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Curcumin on Oxidative Stress and Ferroptosis in Acute Ammonia Stress-Induced Liver Injury in Gibel Carp (Carassius gibelio)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 7
10.3390/ijms24076442
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Edit a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Heteroligand Iron(V) Complexes Containing Porphyrazine, trans-Di[benzo]porphyrazine or Tetra[benzo]porphyrazine, Oxo and Fluoro Ligands: DFT Quantum-Chemical Study

by
Denis V. Chachkov
1 and
Oleg V. Mikhailov
2,*
1
Kazan Department of Joint Supercomputer Center of Russian Academy of Sciences—Branch of Federal Scientific Center “Scientific Research Institute for System Analysis of the RAS”, Lobachevskii Street 2/31, 420111 Kazan, Russia
2
Department of Analytical Chemistry, Certification and Quality Management, Kazan National Research Technological University, K. Marx Street 68, 420015 Kazan, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(7), 6442; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076442
Received: 26 February 2023 / Revised: 25 March 2023 / Accepted: 27 March 2023 / Published: 29 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Quantum-Chemical Modeling and Design of Chelate and Macrocyclic Metal Complexes 2.0)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
By using quantum chemical calculation data obtained by the DFT method with the B3PW91/TZVP and OPBE/TZVP levels, the possibility of the existence of three Fe(V) complexes, each of which contains in the inner coordination sphere porphyrazine/trans-di[benzo]porphyrazine/tetra[benzo]porphyrazine (phthalocyanine), oxygen (O2−) and fluorine (F−) ions, was shown. Key geometric parameters of the molecular structure of these heteroligand complexes are given; it is noted that FeN4 chelate nodes, and all metal-chelate and non-chelate cycles in each of these compounds, are practically planar with the deviation from coplanarity, as a rule, by no more than 0.5°. Furthermore, the bond angles between two nitrogen atoms and an Fe atom are equal to 90°, or less than this by no more than 0.1°, while the bond angles between donor atoms N, Fe, and O or F, in most cases, albeit insignificantly, differ from this value. Nevertheless, the bond angles formed by Fe, O and F atoms are exactly 180°. It is shown that good agreement occurs between the structural data obtained using the above two versions of the DFT method. NBO analysis data for these complexes are presented; it is noted that, according to both DFT methods used, the ground state of the each of three complexes under consideration may be a spin quartet or spin doublet. Additionally, standard thermodynamic parameters of formation (standard enthalpy ∆fH0, entropy S0 and Gibbs’s energy ∆fG0) for the macrocyclic compounds under consideration are calculated.

1. Introduction

In our previous articles [1,2], we carried out a quantum-chemical calculation of the molecular structures of coordination compounds having [ML1(O)F] (I), [ML2(O)F] (II) and [ML3(O)F] (III) formulas (M is Ni or Co, L12−, L22− and L32− are double deprotonated forms of porphyrazine H2L1, trans-di[benzo]porphyrazine H2L2 and tetra[benzo]porphyrazine (phthalocyanine) H2L3, respectively) (see Scheme 1).
According to the data presented in these works, obtained using two variants of the DFT method, namely B3PW91/TZVP and OPBE/TZVP, the possibility of the existence of all three types of complexes I–III in the case of M = Ni, but only one type, namely III, in the case of M = Co, was shown. Additionally, for both Ni and Co, the oxidation state in each of these compounds is equal to V (at least formally), which in both cases is the maximum among the reliably established values of this parameter for these chemical elements. The oxidation state of V is also very high for Fe, and to stabilize it with the participation of each of the above macrocyclic ligands, it is necessary that, in addition to these ligands, the inner coordination sphere of the complex contains ligands formed by the atoms with the highest electronegativity, specifically O2− and F− ligands. In this connection, it seems interesting to consider whether such complexes can be formed in the case of M = Fe, where the oxidation state V is intermediate between the minimum (–II) and maximum (VII) reliably established for this 3d element. It should be especially noticed that any information on iron compounds with I, II and III formulas, in the special literature devoted to macrocyclic ligands such as porphyrins, porphyrazines and their derivatives [3,4,5,6,7,8,9], or anywhere else, was not found by us. Nevertheless, complexes having these formulas are of rather considerable interest for the preparative chemistry of macrocyclic and coordination compounds. In addition, such substances may be helpful from a purely practical point of view, since, in principle, they can be used at least as catalysts for various organic synthesis processes and as components of specific redox systems. In this connection, the present paper was devoted to the consideration of the possibility of the existence of the complexes I, II and III using quantum-chemical calculation by density functional theory (DFT), which is now one of most popular methods of quantum chemistry and, in the case of a positive answer to this question, the calculation of the parameters of their molecular and electronic structures.

2. Results and Discussion

It should be immediately noticed that, according to the data obtained with each of the DFT quantum chemical methods used here, for the 3d element under consideration, the formation of all three types of complexes I–III indicated above takes place. The lengths of chemical bonds between various atoms and bond angles for [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] coordination compounds under study calculated using each of the DFT versions indicated above are given in Table 1. The images of molecular structures of these compounds obtained by the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method are shown in Figure 1, obtained by the DFT OPBE/TZVP method, in Figure S1 (see Supplementary Materials). As can be seen from Table 1, both variants of the DFT method, B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP, not only predict a stable molecular structure for all three compounds I, II and III in the case M = Fe, but also give quantitative characteristics of their molecular structures that differ only slightly from each other. Regarding the lengths of bonds between iron and nitrogen atoms, oxygen and fluorine, to which a given metal atom is bonded in these macrocyclic complexes, it may be concluded that the iron–oxygen bonds are the shortest, the iron–nitrogen bonds are the longest, and the iron–fluorine bonds occupy an intermediate position. By taking into account the radii of Fe, O, N and F atoms, it can be argued that the values of the above-mentioned bond lengths given in Table 1 correspond to the lengths of the double bond Fe=O and the single bonds Fe–F and Fe–N. It is characteristic that the Fe–N bonds in each of compounds I–III are equal only in pairs (Table 1). This difference is quite understandable, because in their molecular structures, the N1 and N3 atoms, strictly speaking, are not equivalent to the N2 and N4 atoms. The lengths of Fe–N bonds in the [FeL1(O)F]-[FeL2(O)F]-[FeL3(O)F] series generally increase, while the lengths of the Fe=O and Fe–F bonds decrease. Such a circumstance may be associated, on the one hand, with an increase in the size of the “chelate cell” in the macrocyclic compounds under study, and, on the other hand, with the magnification of the positive charge on the iron atom upon passing from the L12− ligand to the L32− ligand. In this regard, it should be noted that exactly the same situation with respect to the lengths of the above bonds also takes place in nickel complexes similar in composition, as described in [1]. FeN4 chelate nodes and all four six-membered metal chelate rings as well as all four five-membered non-chelate ones that contain one nitrogen and four carbon atoms and adjacent to six-membered metal chelate rings in the metal macrocyclic compounds I, II and III are strong or practically strong planar, since the sums of the bond angles in each of these structural fragments (BAS, NBAS, BAS6 and BAS5) are 360.0°, 360°, 720.0° and 540.0°, respectively, or values close to these, differing from the indicated values, as a rule, by no more than 0.5°. The BAS values in the MN4 chelate nodes of all these coordination compounds are practically the same, and all bond angles (NFeN) are the same in them, which, although quite a bit, still differ from 90° (Table 1). As for the non-bond angles (NNN) in the N4 group, these angles according to the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method data, are equal only in pairs in each of the compounds I–III; according the DFT OPBE/TZVP method data, such pairwise equality takes place only in the case of complex II, in complexes I and III, all angles (NNN) are equal to 90° (Table 1). The six-membered chelate rings in each of these complexes are the same, both in terms of the sum of bond angles and their sets. For five-membered rings, this similarity takes place only in complexes I and III, and only within the framework of the DFT OPBE/TZVP method; according to the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method, they differ from each other in all three of these complexes. For the [FeL2(O)F] complex, this difference is quite understandable, given that two of these four rings are linked to six-membered “phenylene” groups, while the other two are not linked. However, why all five-membered rings within the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method are different not only in the [FeL2(O)F] complex, but also in the [FeL1(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] complexes, remains unclear. The atoms of oxygen, iron, and fluorine in all the complexes under discussion form bond angles equal to or almost equal to 180°. It is noteworthy that a similar situation is also observed in the Co(V) and Ni(V) complexes of the same type considered in [1,2]. What is also noteworthy is that none of the bond angles (OFeN) and (FFeN) formed by Fe atom, donor N, O and F atoms is equal to 90°, despite the fact that the FeN4 chelate node in each of these metal macrocyclic complexes is almost coplanar. In addition, these bond angles are equal to each other only in pairs (Table 1); this also takes place in all analogous nickel complexes [1]. In cobalt complex of the type III, these angles are the same, although none of them is equal to 90° [2]. These data, as well as the fact that the above bond lengths are different from each other, make it possible to attribute the iron complexes under examination to the number of pseudo-octahedral complexes having tetragonal distortion, whereby the carbon–nitrogen and carbon–carbon bond lengths in both chelate and non-chelate cycles in each of complexes I–III, calculated by the above two DFT methods, are very close to each other. In this way, it can be argued that the molecular structures of each of the complexes [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F], found by both DFT methods used, show a very significant similarity to each other, not only qualitatively, but also quantitatively.
The values of the dipole electric moments (μ) for the given complexes obtained using DFT B3PW91/TZVP are 0.85, 0.42 and 0.42 Debye units; using DFT OPBE/TZVP, they are 0.78 ([FeL1(O)F]), 0.35 ([FeL2(O)F]) and 0.67 ([FeL3(O)F]) Debye units, respectively. As can be seen, they differ noticeably from zero, which is quite understandable, since there is no center of symmetry in these complexes. However, they are not too significant and, on the whole, they are quite consistent with the concept of an almost planar structure of macrocyclic fragments L12−, L22− and L32− which are part of the complexes under study. The numerical values of this parameter calculated by these two DFT methods, as well as the parameters of molecular structures, do not generally differ too much from each other. The exceptions, however, are the values (μ) for the [FeL3(O)F] complex, which differ from each other by more than one and a half times. We believe that the results found by the DFT B3PW91/TZVP are more reliable, since the DFT method variants that use the B3PW91 functional describe the parameters of molecular structures better than the DFT versions that use the OPBE functional.
Key NBO analysis data, and, namely, the values of effective charges on the central iron atom and the nitrogen, oxygen and fluorine ones bonded with the central atom for the macrocyclic iron compounds I–III obtained by both DFT versions indicated above are presented in Table 2. Complete NBO data for all these complexes are given in the Supplementary Materials. As can be seen from these data, the values of the charges on individual atoms are very different from those that they would have if all the chemical bonds in these compounds were of a purely ionic nature; this fact, in our opinion, directly indicates a very high degree of electron density delocalization in the metal complexes considered here.
According to DFT B3PW91/TZVP calculation data, the ground state of the complexes II and III is spin quartet (MS = 4); additionally, the nearest excited state having MS value different from spin multiplicity of the ground state, namely spin doublet, is higher than the ground state on 49.9 kJ/mol for [FeL2(O)F] and on and 59.0 kJ/mol for [FeL3(O)F]. The calculation by the DFT OPBE/TZVP method indicates that the ground state of complexes I and II is a spin quartet, too; the nearest excited triplet is higher on 5.5 and 2.7 kJ/mol, respectively. This conclusion is also supported by the <S**2> (operator of the square of the intrinsic angular momentum of the total spin of the system) values, which are in the range of (3.75–3.85), and corresponds to the presence of three unpaired electrons in each of these complexes and configurations 3d3. However, in the case of complex I, according to DFT B3PW91/TZVP, and of complex III, according to the DFT OPBE/TZVP method, another situation takes place—the ground state is a spin doublet, and the nearest excited quartet state is higher, on 9.4 and 1.1 kJ/mol, respectively. In both cases, the <S**2> values (1.6043 in the case of complex I and 1.1656 in the case of complex III) are intermediate between the values of this parameter, which correspond to the presence of one and three unpaired electrons in the system, namely 0.7500 and 3.7500, where testing the wave functions of the ground and excited states for stability within each of these methods by using the standard STABLE = OPT procedure showed that the wave function of each states indicated above was stable under the considered perturbations for the each of complexes I, II and III under examination. In this connection, an unambiguous conclusion about the spin multiplicity of the ground state can be drawn from the data of these calculations only for complex II; in the case of complexes I and III, additional studies on this problem are needed. However, for complex II, the NBO analysis results calculated by the DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods differ quite noticeably from each other (Table 2; see also the full NBO analysis data presented in Supplementary Materials). On the other hand, noteworthy is the very small difference between the energies of the ground and nearest excited states (<10 kJ/mol), which is observed in four out of six cases (in complex I, in the framework of both methods; in complex II, in the framework of the DFT OPBE/TZVP method; in complex III, within the framework of the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method). In this regard, there are certain grounds for believing that, at least in the case of the [FeL2(O)F] complex, such a specific phenomenon as spin crossover is possible.
Images of the highest occupied (HOMO) and lowest vacant (LUMO) molecular orbitals of the considered complexes FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F], obtained using DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods are shown in Figure 2 and Figure S2 (see Supplementary Materials), respectively. As can be seen from these, both the shapes of HOMO and LUMO and the values of their energies calculated by these versions of the DFT method differ quite significantly from each other. In this case, which is characteristic, in the series [FeL1(O)F]-[FeL2(O)F]-[FeL3(O)F] the energies of both HOMO and LUMO increase; as a rule, the lowest among them is HOMO (beta), the highest—LUMO (alpha).
The standard thermodynamic parameters of formation (∆fH0, S0 and ∆fG0) for the iron compounds I, II and III are presented in Table 3. As can be easily noted, the values of both ∆fH0 and ∆fG0 are positive for the each of [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] complexes. Hence, none of these complexes can be obtained from simple substances formed by chemical elements in their compositions (and namely carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine and iron). Nonetheless, according to the data obtained as a result of the quantum-chemical calculations carried out by two independent methods of density functional theory, OPBE/TZVP and B3PW91/TZVP, all three iron complexes—types I–III—considered in this given article would be able to act as individual chemical compounds, at least in the gas phase, whereby it is typical, in the series [FeL1(O)F]-[FeL2(O)F]-[FeL3(O)F], that the values of ∆fH0 and ∆fG0 decrease; this fact at least indirectly indicates an increase in their resistance to break down into simpler components.

3. Methods and Materials

As in our articles [1,2] cited above, as well as in previous ones, e.g., [10,11,12], the version of the DFT method with B3PW91/TZVP level combining the TZVP extended triple zeta split-valence basis set and B3PW91 functional [13,14] was used. According to data [15], this functional had a minimal value of so-called “normal error” in comparison with other DFT versions. Such an output is confirmed by comparing the data of calculating the structural parameters of 3d-element macrocyclic coordination compounds with phthalocyanine, obtained using different versions of the DFT method, with the experimental values of these parameters. Additionally, for comparison as in our articles [16,17,18,19,20,21,22], quantum-chemical calculations were carried out using the DFT method with OPBE/TZVP level combining TZVP basis set [23,24] and the OPBE functional [25,26]. As shown in [26,27,28,29,30], for the 3d elements, this variant of the DFT method more adequately predicts the relative energy stabilities of high-spin and low-spin states, and also reliably describes the most important geometric parameters of corresponding molecular structures. Calculations are performed with the Gaussian09 program package [31]. The correspondence of the discovered stationary points to energy minima was proved in all cases by the calculation of energy second derivatives with respect to atom coordinates; all equilibrium structures corresponding to minima of the potential energy surfaces had only real positive frequency values. Theoretically, Fe(V), which is in the complexes I–III, must have 3d3 electronic configuration, and that is why spin multiplicities 2 and 4 were considered for the given central ion in the course of calculation. Among the structures optimized at these multiplicities, the lowest-lying structure was selected. Parameters of molecular structures with the given multiplicities were calculated using the unrestricted (UB3PW91, UOPBE) method. The energetically most favorable structure has always been checked using the STABLE = OPT procedure, whereby the wave function corresponding to this structure was stable in all cases. Natural Bond Orbital (NBO) analysis was carried out using NBO version 3.1, integrated into the Gaussian09 program [31] according to the methodology described in [32]. NBO methods are well known for their excellent numerical stability and convergence with respect to basis set expansion, and for being sensibly proportionate to convergence of energy and other calculated wavefunction properties (unlike Mulliken analysis and related overlap-dependent methods in this case). The standard thermodynamic parameters of a formation (∆fH0, S0 and ∆fG0) for the metal macrocyclic compounds under consideration were calculated using the method described in [33].

4. Conclusions

Therefore, the data obtained using the DFT methods with OPBE/TZVP and B3PW91/TZVP levels and presented in this article are sufficiently reliable to confirm the principal possibility of the existence, as a minimum, of three novel Fe(V) macrocyclic compounds having [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] compositions, where L12−, L22− and L32− are, respectively, a double deprotonated form of porphyrazine H2L1, trans-di[benzo]porphyrazine H2L2 and tetra[benzo]porphyrazine H2L3. In the each of these complexes, there are five chemical bonds formed by Fe atoms with atoms having greater electronegativity than Fe, according to the exchange mechanism—two bonds with N atoms, two bonds with O atom and one with an F atom. According to the definition of the term “oxidation degree” presented in [20], we may assume (of course, with a certain degree of caution) that the oxidation degree of iron atoms in the [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] macrocyclic compounds under study might be equal to +5, and hence, the oxidation state of iron in them is V. It should be noted in this connection that such an oxidation state is uncharacteristic for iron and was noted only in a small number of works (see, in particular, [34,35,36,37]). However, there is still no information on iron complexes containing any porphyrin and porphyrazine derivatives in the inner coordination sphere [8,9]. Of course, the real charge on the iron atoms in any of these compounds differs significantly from the value of +5.00 ē; however, the given parameter has not been connected directly with the definition of oxidation degree and, if so, then it, in principle, cannot be used for the definition of oxidation state [38], whereby the results of our quantum-chemical calculations using both of the above variants of the DFT method, namely B3PW91/TZVP and OPBE/TZVP, are quite consistent with the concept of a rather high stability of those complexes with a high degree of oxidation of the central atom of the 3d element in the inner coordination sphere of which are acido ligands such as F− and O2− containing atoms of chemical elements with the highest electronegativity [38,39,40].
Nevertheless, at the present, it is expedient to confirm the possibility of the existence of compounds I, II and III experimentally, because their synthesis might be important for further chemistry development of both the highest oxidation states of d-elements, and, of course, of the chemistry of iron. Judging by the voluminous data presented in the review article [36], as well as in original articles [35,37], iron complexes containing close to L1, L2, and L3 (NNNN) donor-atomic polydentate ligands with high oxidation states for this element (namely, Fe(IV), Fe(V) and Fe(VI)) can be used as potential catalysts; taking these data into account, it seems very likely that the macrocyclic metal chelates [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] in this regard will also be quite promising. Perhaps (and even very likely) these compounds can be catalysts in other practically important reactions of organic synthesis (carbonylation, dehydrogenation, oxidation, etc.). It can be assumed that these compounds, in addition to their use in catalysis, are capable of finding their application as components of sensory and redox systems, specific agents in biochemical processes, and drugs in the treatment of various diseases. The latter is all the more likely if we take into account the important circumstance that the each of complexes I–III must be very strong oxidizing agents and, therefore, must also be potent antibacterial and antiviral agents. In addition, predicting the existence possibility of the exotic coordination compounds and modeling their molecular structures using modern quantum chemical calculations (and, in particular, the DFT methods of various levels) is a very useful tool in solving problems associated with such a synthesis. Now it is up to us to confirm the possibility of the existence of these exotic macrocyclic metal complexes in a real chemical experiment.

Supplementary Materials

The supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms24076442/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, O.V.M.; Methodology, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Software, D.V.C.; Validation, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Formal Analysis, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Investigation, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Resources, D.V.C.; Data Curation, D.V.C.; Writing—original Draft Preparation, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Writing—review and Editing, O.V.M.; Visualization, O.V.M. and D.V.C.; Supervision, O.V.M.; Project Administration, O.V.M.; Funding Acquisition, D.V.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study did not require institutional approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No unpublished data was created or analyzed in this article.

Acknowledgments

All quantum-chemical calculations were performed at the Joint Supercomputer Center of Russian Academy of Sciences—Branch of Federal Scientific Center “Scientific Research Institute for System Analysis of the RAS” that is acknowledgement for technical support. Contribution of author Denis V. Chachkov was funded by the state assignment to the Federal Scientific Center “Scientific Research Institute for System Analysis of the RAS” for scientific research. Additionally, this study was carried out using the equipment of the Center for Collective Use “Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology” of the Kazan National Research Technological University with the financial support of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation under agreement No. 075-15-2021-699.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

References

  1. Chachkov, D.V.; Mikhailov, O.V. Nickel macrocyclic complexes with porphyrazine and some [benzo]substituted, oxo and fluoro ligands: DFT analysis. J. Porphyr. Phthalocyan. 2022, 26, 222–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. New heteroligand complex of cobalt with phthalocyanine, oxo and fluoro ligands: DFT consideration. J. Porphyr. Phthalocyan. 2022, 26, 316–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kasuda, K.; Tsutsui, M. Some new developments in the chemistry of metallophthalocyanines. Coord. Chem. Rev. 1980, 32, 67–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  4. Thomas, A.L. Phthalocyanines Research & Applications; CRC Press: London, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  5. Sliva, W.; Mianovska, B. Metalloporphyrin arrays. Transit. Met. Chem. 2000, 25, 491–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mamardashvili, G.M.; Mamardashvili, N.Z.; Koifman, O.I. Self-assembling systems based on porphyrins. Russ. Chem. Rev. 2008, 77, 59–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Donzello, M.P.; Ercolani, C.; Novakova, V.; Zimcik, P.; Stuzhin, P.A. Tetrapyrazinoporphyrazines and their metal derivatives. Part I: Synthesis and basic structural information. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2016, 309, 107–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lomova, T.N. Axial Coordinated Metal Porphyrins in Science and Practice; URSS: Moscow, Russia, 2018; 700p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  9. Khelevina, O.G.; Malyasova, A.S. 40 years with porphyrazines. J. Porphyr. Phthalocyan. 2019, 23, 1251–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  10. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. DFT Quantum-Chemical Modeling Molecular Structures of Cobalt Macrocyclic Complexes with Porphyrazine or Its Benzo-Derivatives and Two Oxygen Acido Ligands. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 9085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. Twelve-Nitrogen-Atom Cyclic Structure Stabilized by 3d-Element Atoms: Quantum Chemical Modeling. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 6560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chachkov, D.V.; Mikhailov, O.V. Heteroligand complexes of chromium, manganese, and iron with trans-dibenzoporphyrazine and two oxo ligands: DFT calculations. Russ. Chem. Bull. 2022, 71, 656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Becke, A.D. Density-functional exchange-energy approximation with correct asymptotic behavior. Phys. Rev. A 1988, 38, 3098–3100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Perdew, J.P.; Burke, K.; Wang, Y. Generalized gradient approximation for the exchange-correlation hole of a many-electron system. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 16533–16539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  15. Medvedev, M.G.; Bushmarinov, I.S.; Sun, J.; Perdew, J.P.; Lyssenko, K.A. Density functional theory is straying from the path toward the exact functional. Science 2017, 355, 49–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. DFT Quantum-Chemical Calculations of Molecular Structures for Heteroligand M(III) Complexes of 3d Elements with Porphyrazine and Fluoride Ion. Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2020, 65, 887–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. About possibility of stabilization of unusual copper(IV) oxidation state in complexes with porphyrazine and two fluorine ligands: Quantum-chemical design. Inorg. Chem. Commun. 2019, 106, 224–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. Density Functional Theory Modeling of Molecular Structures of Heteroligand 3d M(IV) Complexes with Porphyrazine and Oxo Anion. Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2020, 65, 1019–1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. Copper(IV) Stabilization in Macrocyclic Complexes with 3,7,11,15-Tetraazaporphine, Its Di[benzo]- or Tetra[benzo] Derivatives and Oxide Anion: Quantum-Chemical Research. Materials 2020, 13, 3162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mikhailov, O.V.; Chachkov, D.V. M(VI) Oxidation State Stabilization in Iron, Cobalt and Nickel Heteroligand Metal Chelates Containing 3,7,11,15-Tetraazaporphine and Two Axial Oxo Ligands: Quantum-Chemical Simulation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  21. Chachkov, D.V.; Mikhailov, O.V. Quantum-chemical calculation of molecular structures of (5656)macrotetracyclic 3d-metal complexes “self-assembled” in quaternary systems M(II) ion-ethanedithioamide- formaldehyde- ammonia by the density functional theory method. Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2014, 59, 218–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chachkov, D.V.; Mikhailov, O.V. Structure of (5656)macrotetracyclic chelates in the ternary systems M(II)-ethanedithioamide-acetone (M = Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn) according to DFT calculations. Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2013, 58, 1073–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Schaefer, A.; Horn, H.; Ahlrichs, R. Fully optimized contracted Gaussian basis sets for atoms Li to Kr. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 97, 2571–2577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  24. Schaefer, A.; Huber, C.; Ahlrichs, R. Fully optimized contracted Gaussian basis sets of triple zeta valence quality for atoms Li to Kr. J. Chem. Phys. 1994, 100, 5829–5835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hoe, W.M.; Cohen, A.; Handy, N.C. Assessment of a new local exchange functional OPTX. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2001, 341, 319–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Perdew, J.P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1997, 78, 1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  27. Paulsen, H.; Duelund, L.; Winkler, H.; Toftlund, H.; Trautwein, A.X. Free Energy of Spin-Crossover Complexes Calculated with Density Functional Methods. Inorg. Chem. 2001, 40, 2201–2203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Swart, M.; Groenhof, A.R.; Ehlers, A.W.; Lammertsma, K. Validation of Exchange−Correlation Functionals for Spin States of Iron Complexes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 5479–5483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Swart, M.; Ehlers, A.W.; Lammertsma, K. Performance of the OPBE exchange-correlation functional. Mol. Phys. 2004, 102, 2467–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Swart, M. Metal–ligand bonding in metallocenes: Differentiation between spin state, electrostatic and covalent bonding. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2007, 360, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Frisch, M.J.; Trucks, G.W.; Schlegel, H.B.; Scuseria, G.E.; Robb, M.A.; Cheeseman, J.R.; Scalmani, G.; Barone, V.; Mennucci, B.; Petersson, G.A.; et al. Gaussian 09, Revision A.01; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  32. Weinhold, F.; Landis, C.R.; Glendening, E.D. What is NBO analysis and how is it useful? Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 2016, 35, 399–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ochterski, J.W. Thermochemistry in Gaussian; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  34. Demazeau, G.; Buffat, B.; Pouchard, M.; Hagenmuller, P. Recent developments in the field of high oxidation states of transition elements in oxides stabilization of six-coordinated iron(V). Z. Anorg. Allgem. Chem. 1982, 491, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Noorhasan, N.N.; Sharma, V.K.; Cabelli, D. Reactivity of ferrate(V) with aminopolycarboxylates in alkaline medium: A premix pulse radiolysis. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2008, 361, 1041–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Sharma, V.K. Ferrate(VI) and ferrate(V) oxidation of organic compounds: Kinetics and mechanism. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2013, 257, 495–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Li, X.X.; Xue, S.S.; Lu, X.Y.; Seo, M.S.; Lee, Y.M.; Kim, W.S.; Cho, K.B.; Wonwoo Nam, W.W. Ligand Architecture Perturbation Influences the Reactivity of Nonheme Iron(V)-Oxo Tetraamido Macrocyclic Ligand Complexes: A Combined Experimental and Theoretical Study. Inorg. Chem. 2021, 60, 4058–4067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Kiselev, Y.M.; Tretiyakov, Y.D. The problem of oxidation state stabilisation and some regularities of a Periodic system of the elements. Russ. Chem. Rev. 1999, 68, 365–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Riedel, S.; Kaupp, M. The highest oxidation states of the transition metal elements. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2009, 253, 606–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Jiang, X.L.; Xu, C.Q.; Lu, J.B.; Cao, C.S.; Schmidbaur, H.; Schwarz, W.H.E.; Li, J. Electronic Structure and Spectroscopic Properties of Group-7 Tri-Oxo-Halides MO3X (M = Mn–Bh, X = F–Ts). Inorg. Chem. 2021, 60, 9504–9515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 24 06442 sch001 550
Scheme 1. Structural formulas of complexes I, II and III.
Scheme 1. Structural formulas of complexes I, II and III.
Ijms 24 06442 sch001
Ijms 24 06442 g001 550
Figure 1. The images of molecular structures of the iron complexes I–III obtained as a result of quantum-chemical calculation by DFT B3PW91/TZVP: (a): [FeL1(O)F], (b): [FeL2(O)F], (c): [FeL3(O)F].
Figure 1. The images of molecular structures of the iron complexes I–III obtained as a result of quantum-chemical calculation by DFT B3PW91/TZVP: (a): [FeL1(O)F], (b): [FeL2(O)F], (c): [FeL3(O)F].
Ijms 24 06442 g001
Ijms 24 06442 g002a 550Ijms 24 06442 g002b 550
Figure 2. The images of HOMO and LUMO in the FeL1(O)F] (ground state–spin doublet, MS = 2), FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] (ground state–spin quartet, MS = 4) according to the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method. The energies values of the indicated MOs (in brackets) are given in eV. The symbol “alpha” belongs to electron with spin (+1/2), symbol “beta”, to electron with spin (−l/2). The abbreviations “HOMO (−1) (alpha)” and “HOMO (−2) (alpha)” are used to designate MOs located slightly below HOMO (alpha) and closest to it in order of decreasing energy values.
Figure 2. The images of HOMO and LUMO in the FeL1(O)F] (ground state–spin doublet, MS = 2), FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] (ground state–spin quartet, MS = 4) according to the DFT B3PW91/TZVP method. The energies values of the indicated MOs (in brackets) are given in eV. The symbol “alpha” belongs to electron with spin (+1/2), symbol “beta”, to electron with spin (−l/2). The abbreviations “HOMO (−1) (alpha)” and “HOMO (−2) (alpha)” are used to designate MOs located slightly below HOMO (alpha) and closest to it in order of decreasing energy values.
Ijms 24 06442 g002aIjms 24 06442 g002b
Table
Table 1. Bond lengths and bond angles in the iron macrocyclic compounds [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] calculated by DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods.
Table 1. Bond lengths and bond angles in the iron macrocyclic compounds [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] calculated by DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods.
Macrocyclic Compound[FeL1(O)F][FeL2(O)F][FeL3(O)F]
Parameter of molecular structureCalculated by DFTCalculated by DFTCalculated by DFT
B3PW91/TZVPOPBE/TZVPB3PW91/TZVPOPBE/TZVPB3PW91/TZVPOPBE/TZVP
The lengths of Fe–N bonds in MN4 chelate node, pm
Fe1N1192.7193.0194.6194.5195.3195.3
Fe1N2193.7193.0193.8193.6195.3195.3
Fe1N3192.7193.0194.6194.5195.3195.3
Fe1N4193.7193.0193.8193.6195.3195.3
The lengths of Fe–O and Fe–F bonds, pm
Fe1O1172.2167.0165.4166.9165.4163.7
Fe1F1178.8187.4188.4187.8188.1186.2
The lengths of C–N bonds in 6-numbered chelate rings, pm
N1C3136.5136.6135.7136.7135.6136.4
N1C4136.5136.6135.7136.7135.6136.4
N2C1136.0136.5135.1136.2135.6136.5
N2C2136.0136.5135.1136.2135.6136.5
N3C7136.5136.6135.7136.7135.6136.4
N3C8136.5136.6135.7136.7135.6136.3
N4C5136.0136.5135.1136.2135.6136.3
N4C6136.0136.5135.1136.2135.6136.5
N5C2131.9132.1132.0132.2131.8132.2
N5C3131.9132.1132.1131.9131.8132.1
N6C6131.9132.1132.0132.2131.8132.1
N6C7131.9132.1132.1131.9131.8132.2
N7C4131.9132.1132.1131.9131.8132.1
N7C5131.9132.1132.0132.2131.8132.2
N8C1131.9132.1132.0132.2131.8132.1
N8C8131.9132.1132.1131.9131.8132.2
The lengths of C–C bonds in 5-numbered chelate ring (N1C4C9C10C3), pm
C4C9144.6145.4146.4146.0146.4146.1
C9C10135.3135.5139.6140.2139.6140.2
C10C3144.6145.4146.4146.0146.4146.1
Bond angles in chelate node FeN4, deg
(N1Fe1N2)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
(N2Fe1N3)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
(N3Fe1N4)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
(N4Fe1N1)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
Bond angles sum (BAS), deg360.0359.6359.6359.6359.6359.6
Non-bond angles between N atoms in N4 grouping, deg
(N1N2N3)89.790.090.290.390.090.0
(N2N3N4)90.390.089.889.790.090.0
(N3N4N1)89.790.090.290.390.090.0
(N4N1N2)90.390.089.889.790.090.0
Non-bond angles sum (NBAS), deg360.0360.0360.0360.0360.0360.0
Bond angles in 6-numbered chelate ring (Fe1N1C4N7C5N4), deg
(Fe1N1C4)126.0126.0125.5125.3125.5125.6
(N1C4N7)128.0127.3128.2127.7128.2128.3
(C4N7C5)122.1122.3122.2122.2122.6122.2
(N7C5N4)127.8127.4127.9127.3128.2128.3
(C5N4Fe1)126.1126.2126.2125.8125.5125.6
(N4Fe1N1)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
Bond angles sum (BAS61), deg720.0719.1719.9718.2719.9719.9
Bond angles in 6-numbered chelate ring (Fe1N4C6N6C7N3), deg
(Fe1N4C6)126.1126.2126.2125.8125.5125.6
(N4C6N6)127.8127.4127.9127.3128.2128.3
(C6N6C7)122.1122.3122.2122.2122.6122.2
(N6C7N3)128.0127.3128.2127.7128.2128.3
(C7N3Fe1)126.0126.0125.5125.3125.5125.6
(N3Fe1N4)90.089.989.989.989.989.9
Bond angles sum (BAS62), deg720.0719.1719.9718.2719.9719.9
Bond angles in 5-numbered ring (C3N1C4C9C10), deg
(C3N1C4)107.9107.2109.2108.8109.0108.8
(N1C4C9)108.9109.5109.3109.3109.4109.4
(C4C9C10)107.2106.9106.1106.3106.1106.2
(C9C10C3)107.1106.9106.1106.3106.1106.2
(C10C3N1)108.9109.5109.3109.3109.4109.4
Bond angles sum (BAS51), deg540.0540.0540.0540.0540.0540.0
Bond angles in 5-numbered ring (C1N2C2C12C11), deg
(C1N2C2)107.8107.2107.6107.2109.0108.8
(N2C2C12)109.1109.5109.6109.7109.4109.4
(C2C12C11)107.0106.9106.6106.7106.1106.2
(C12C11C1)107.0106.9106.6106.7106.1106.2
(C11C1N2)109.1109.5109.6109.7109.4109.4
Bond angles sum (BAS51), deg540.0540.0540.0540.0540.0540.0
Bond angles between O, Fe and N atoms, deg
O1Fe1N189.492.792.691.892.692.3
O1Fe1N291.291.892.792.692.692.6
O1Fe1N389.492.792.691.892.692.2
O1Fe1N491.291.892.792.692.692.6
Bond angles between F, Fe and N atoms, deg
F1Fe1N190.687.387.488.287.487.8
F1Fe1N288.888.287.387.487.487.4
F1Fe1N390.687.387.488.287.487.7
F1Fe1N488.888.287.387.487.487.4
Bond angles between O, Fe and F atoms, deg
O1Fe1F1180.0180.0180.0180.0180.0179.9
Table
Table 2. NBO analysis data for the iron compounds [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] calculated by the DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods.
Table 2. NBO analysis data for the iron compounds [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] calculated by the DFT B3PW91/TZVP and DFT OPBE/TZVP methods.
Macrocyclic CompoundDFT
Level		Effective Charge on Atom, in Electron Charge Units (ē)<S**2>
Fe1N1 (N3)N2 (N4)O1F1
[FeL1(O)F]OPBE/TZVP+0.253−0.304
(−0.304)		−0.305
(−0.305)		−0.172−0.4453.7919
B3PW91/TZVP+0.342−0.357
(−0.357)		−0.360
(−0.360)		−0.103−0.3841.6043
[FeL2(O)F]OPBE/TZVP+0.212−0.283
(−0.283)		−0.310
(−0.310)		−0.196−0.4583.7877
B3PW91/TZVP+0.433−0.335
(−0.335)		−0.360
(−0.360)		−0.123−0.4893.7999
[FeL3(O)F]OPBE/TZVP+0.103−0.285
(−0.288)		−0.286
(−0.286)		−0.090−0.3861.1656
B3PW91/TZVP+0.212−0.331
(−0.331)		−0.331
(−0.331)		−0.291−0.5453.8007
Table
Table 3. Standard thermodynamic parameters of formation (enthalpy ∆fH0, entropy S0 and Gibbs’s energy ∆fG0) for the complexes having [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] compositions calculated using DFT OPBE/TZVP method.
Table 3. Standard thermodynamic parameters of formation (enthalpy ∆fH0, entropy S0 and Gibbs’s energy ∆fG0) for the complexes having [FeL1(O)F], [FeL2(O)F] and [FeL3(O)F] compositions calculated using DFT OPBE/TZVP method.
Complex∆H0f, 298, kJ/moleS0f, 298, J/mole K∆G0f, 298, kJ/mole
[FeL1(O)F]200.1772.2421.0
[FeL2(O)F]143.7955.6387.7
[FeL3(O)F]85.31149.0349.3
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chachkov, D.V.; Mikhailov, O.V. Heteroligand Iron(V) Complexes Containing Porphyrazine, trans-Di[benzo]porphyrazine or Tetra[benzo]porphyrazine, Oxo and Fluoro Ligands: DFT Quantum-Chemical Study. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 6442. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076442

AMA Style

Chachkov DV, Mikhailov OV. Heteroligand Iron(V) Complexes Containing Porphyrazine, trans-Di[benzo]porphyrazine or Tetra[benzo]porphyrazine, Oxo and Fluoro Ligands: DFT Quantum-Chemical Study. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(7):6442. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076442

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chachkov, Denis V., and Oleg V. Mikhailov. 2023. "Heteroligand Iron(V) Complexes Containing Porphyrazine, trans-Di[benzo]porphyrazine or Tetra[benzo]porphyrazine, Oxo and Fluoro Ligands: DFT Quantum-Chemical Study" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 7: 6442. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076442

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop