PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11592184

"Non-VSEPR" Structures and Bonding in d(0) Systems.

Abstract

Under certain circumstances, metal complexes with a formal d(0) electronic configuration may exhibit structures that violate the traditional structure models, such as the VSEPR concept or simple ionic pictures. Some examples of such behavior, such as the bent gas-phase structures of some alkaline earth dihalides, or the trigonal prismatic coordination of some early transition metal chalcogenides or pnictides, have been known for a long time. However, the number of molecular examples for "non-VSEPR" structures has increased dramatically during the past decade, in particular in the realm of organometallic chemistry. At the same time, various theoretical models have been discussed, sometimes controversially, to explain the observed, unusual structures. Many d(0) systems are important in homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysis, biocatalysis (e.g. molybdenum or tungsten enzymes), or materials science (e.g. ferroelectric perovskites or zirconia). Moreover, their electronic structure without formally nonbonding d orbitals makes them unique starting points for a general understanding of structure, bonding, and reactivity of transition metal compounds. Here we attempt to provide a comprehensive view, both of the types of deviations of d(0) and related complexes from regular coordination arrangements, and of the theoretical framework that allows their rationalization. Many computational and experimental examples are provided, with an emphasis on homoleptic mononuclear complexes. Then the factors that control the structures are discussed in detail. They are a) metal d orbital participation in sigma bonding, b) polarization of the outermost core shells, c) ligand repulsion, and d) pi bonding. Suggestions are made as to which of the factors are the dominant ones in certain situations. In heteroleptic complexes, the competition of sigma and pi bonding of the various ligands controls the structures in a complicated fashion. Some guidelines are provided that should help to better understand the interrelations. Bent's rule is of only very limited use in these types of systems, because of the paramount influence of pi bonding. Finally, computed and measured structures of multinuclear complexes are discussed, including possible consequences for the properties of bulk solids.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Martin Kaupp. 2001-10-01. "Non-VSEPR" Structures and Bonding in d(0) Systems.. https://doi.org/10.1002/1521-3773(20011001)40%3A19%3C3534%3A%3Aaid-anie3534%3E3.0.co%3B2-%23

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗