C–H Activation of Pyrazolyl Ligands by Ru(II)
Previously, hydridotris(pyrazolyl)borate (Tp) Ru(II) alkyl and aryl complexes of the type TpRu(L)(NCMe)R (R = methyl or aryl; L = charge-neutral two-electron donating ligand) were demonstrated to activate aromatic C–H bonds. To confirm the impact of replacing the anionic Tp ligand with charge-neutral poly(pyrazolyl)alkane ligands, [(C(pz) 4 )Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe)Me][BAr' 4 ] (pz = pyrazolyl, BAr' 4 = tetrakis[3,5-bis(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]borate) was prepared. Heating a C 6 D 6 solution of [(C(pz) 4 )Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe)Me][BAr' 4 ] with 1 equiv of NCMe resulted in C–H activation of the 5-position of a pyrazolyl ring to yield [(κ 3 -( N , C 5 , N )C(pz) 4 )Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe) 2 ][BAr' 4 ] and CH 4 . Intramolecular C–H activation of the 5-position of a pyrazolyl ring also occurred when (η 6 - p -cymene)Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(Br)Ph was heated in the presence of C(pz) 4 to yield [(κ 3 - N , C 5 , N )C(pz) 4 ]Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe)Br and C 6 H 6 . Density functional theory calculations showed that the different reactivities of TpRu(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe)R and [(C(pz) 4 )Ru(P(OCH 2 ) 3 CEt)(NCMe)Me][BAr' 4 ] result from the stronger binding of the Tp pyrazolyl rings to Ru(II) compared to that of C(pz) 4