Metallophilicity versus π–π Interactions: Ligand‐Unsupported Argentophilicity/Cuprophilicity in Oligomers‐of‐Dimers [M2L2]n (M=CuI or AgI, L=tridentate ligand)

To verify whether attractive metallophilic interactions exist in the dimer-of-dimers [Cu(2)(ophen)(2)](2) (Hophen=1H-[1,10]phenanthrolin-2-one) (1), we designed and synthesized a series of such [M(2)L(2)](2) structures by varying the d(10) metal and/or the ligand (M=Cu(I) or Ag(I), L=ophen or obpy; Hobpy=1H-[2,2']bipyridinyl-6-one), and have successfully obtained three dimers-of-dimers: [Ag(2)(ophen)(2)](2).6 H(2)O (2), [Cu(2)(obpy)(2)](2) (3), and [Ag(2)(obpy)(2)](2).4.5 H(2)O.0.5 DMF (4). X-ray analyses of these structures show that interdimer M-M separations in [Ag(2)-(ophen)(2)](2) (3.199 A) are remarkably shorter than those in [Cu(2)(ophen)(2)](2) (3.595 A). Shorter interdimer M-M separations are found in the structures of [M(2)(obpy)(2)](2) (2.986 and 2.993 A in [Cu(2)(obpy)(2)](2), 3.037 to 3.093 A in [Ag(2)(obpy)(2)](2)), in which the pi systems are smaller than in the complexes with the ophen ligand. Detailed structural comparison of these dimers-of-dimers indicates that the interdimer, face-to-face pi-pi interactions repulse rather than support the interdimer metal-metal attractive interactions. This study also yields qualitative comparison of the strengths between argentophilic, cuprophilic, and face-to-face pi-pi interactions. DFT calculations on the four dimers-of-dimers further support the above deduction. The structure of a trimer-of-dimers [Ag(2)(obpy)(2)](3) (Ag-Ag 3.171 to 3.274 A) is further evidence that the oligomerization of the [M(2)L(2)] molecules is favored by stronger metallophilic and weaker face-to-face pi-pi interactions.