Effect of anionic co-ligands on structure and magnetic coupling of bis(μ-phenoxo-bridged dinuclear copper(II) complexes

Two phenoxo bridged dinuclear Cu(II) complexes, [Cu2L2(NO2)(2)] (1) and [Cu2L2(NO3)(2)] (2) have been synthesized using the tridentate reduced Schiff-base ligand 2-[(2-dimethylamino-ethylamino)-methyl]-phenol (HL). The complexes have been characterized by X-ray structural analyses and variable-temperature magnetic susceptibility measurements. The structures of the two compounds are very similar having the same tridentate chelating ligand (L) and mono-dentate anionic ligand nitrite for 1 and nitrate for 2. In both complexes Cu(II) is penta-coordinated but the square pyramidal geometry of the copper ions is severely distorted (Addison parameter (tau) = 0.33) in 1 while the distortion is quite small (average tau = 0.11) in 2. These differences have marked effect on the magnetic properties of two compounds. Although both are antiferromagnetically coupled, the coupling constants (J = -140.8 and -614.7 cm (1) for 1 and 2, respectively) show that the coupling is much stronger in 2.

When do export subsidies have a redistributional role?

If an export subsidy is efficient, that is, has a surplus-transfer role, then there exists an implicit function relating the optimal level of the subsidy to the income target in the agricultural sector. If an export subsidy is inefficient no such function exists. We show that dependence exists in large-export equilibrium, not in small-export equilibrium and show that these results remain robust to concerns about domestic tax distortions. The failure of previous work to produce this result stems from its neglect of the income constraint on producer surplus in the programming problem transferring surplusfrom consumersand taxpayers to farmers.

When do export subsidies have a redistributional role? Reply

Our differences are three. The first arises from the belief that "... a nonzero value for the optimally chosen policy instrument implies that the instrument is efficient for redistribution" (Alston, Smith, and Vercammen, p. 543, paragraph 3). Consider the two equations: (1) o* = f(P3) and (2) = -f(3) ++r h* (a, P3) representing the solution to the problem of maximizing weighted, Marshallian surplus using, simultaneously, a per-unit border intervention, 9, and a per-unit domestic intervention, wr. In the solution, parameter ot denotes the weight applied to producer surplus; parameter p denotes the weight applied to government revenues; consumer surplus is implicitly weighted one; and the country in question is small in the sense that it is unable to affect world price by any of its domestic adjustments (see the Appendix). Details of the forms of the functions f((P) and h(ot, p) are easily derived, but what matters in the context of Alston, Smith, and Vercammen's Comment is: Redistributivep referencest hatf avorp roducers are consistent with higher values "alpha," and whereas the optimal domestic intervention, 7r*, has both "alpha and beta effects," the optimal border intervention, r*, has only a "beta effect,"-it does not have a redistributional role. Garth Holloway is reader in agricultural economics and statistics, Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, School of Agriculture, Policy, and Development, University of Reading. The author is very grateful to Xavier Irz, Bhavani Shankar, Chittur Srinivasan, Colin Thirtle, and Richard Tiffin for their comments and their wisdom; and to Mario Mazzochi, Marinos Tsigas, and Cal Turvey for their scholarship, including help in tracking down a fairly complete collection of the papers that cite Alston and Hurd. They are not responsible for any errors or omissions. Note, in equation (1), that the border intervention is positive whenever a distortion exists because 8 > 0 implies 3 - 1 + 8 > 1 and, thus, f((P) > 0 (see Appendix). Using Alston, Smith, and Vercammen's definition, the instrument is now "efficient," and therefore has a redistributive role. But now, suppose that the distortion is removed so that 3 - 1 + 8 = 1, 8 = 0, and consequently the border intervention is zero. According to Alston, Smith, and Vercammen, the instrument is now "inefficient" and has no redistributive role. The reader will note that this thought experiment has said nothing about supporting farm incomes, and so has nothing whatsoever to do with efficient redistribution. Of course, the definition is false. It follows that a domestic distortion arising from the "excess-burden argument" 3 = 1 + 8, 8 > 0 does not make an export subsidy "efficient." The export subsidy, having only a "beta effect," does not have a redistributional role. The second disagreement emerges from the comment that Holloway "... uses an idiosyncratic definition of the relevant objective function of the government (Alston, Smith, and Vercammen, p. 543, paragraph 2)." The objective function that generates equations (1) and (2) (see the Appendix) is the same as the objective function used by Gardner (1995) when he first questioned Alston, Carter, and Smith's claim that a "domestic distortion can make a border intervention efficient in transferring surplus from consumers and taxpayers to farmers." The objective function used by Gardner (1995) is the same objective function used in the contributions that precede it and thus defines the literature on the debate about borderversus- domestic intervention (Streeten; Yeh; Paarlberg 1984, 1985; Orden; Gardner 1985). The objective function in the latter literature is the same as the one implied in another literature that originates from Wallace and includes most notably Gardner (1983), but also Alston and Hurd. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 86(2) (May 2004): 549-552 Copyright 2004 American Agricultural Economics Association This content downloaded on Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:58:41 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 550 May 2004 Amer. J. Agr. Econ. The objective function in Holloway is this same objective function-it is, of course, Marshallian surplus.1 The third disagreement concerns scholarship. The Comment does not seem to be cognizant of several important papers, especially Bhagwati and Ramaswami, and Bhagwati, both of which precede Corden (1974, 1997); but also Lipsey and Lancaster, and Moschini and Sckokai; one important aspect of Alston and Hurd; and one extremely important result in Holloway. This oversight has some unfortunate repercussions. First, it misdirects to the wrong origins of intellectual property. Second, it misleads about the appropriateness of some welfare calculations. Third, it prevents Alston, Smith, and Vercammen from linking a finding in Holloway (pp. 242-43) with an old theorem (Lipsey and Lancaster) that settles the controversy (Alston, Carter, and Smith 1993, 1995; Gardner 1995; and, presently, Alston, Smith, and Vercammen) about the efficiency of border intervention in the presence of domestic distortions.

Two macrocyclic pentaaza compounds containing pyridine evaluated as novel chelating agents in copper(II) and nickel(II) overload

Two pentaaza macrocycles containing pyridine in the backbone, namely 3,6,9,12,18-pentaazabicyclo[12.3.1] octadeca-1(18),14,16-triene ([15]pyN(5)), and 3,6,10,13,19-pentaazabicyclo[13.3.1]nonadeca-1(19),15,17-triene ([16]pyN(5)), were synthesized in good yields. The acid-base behaviour of these compounds was studied by potentiometry at 298.2 K in aqueous solution and ionic strength 0.10 M in KNO3. The protonation sequence of [15]pyN(5) was investigated by H-1 NMR titration that also allowed the determination of protonation constants in D2O. Binding studies of the two ligands with Ca2+, Ni2+, Cu2+, Zn2+, Cd2+, and Pb2+ metal ions were performed under the same experimental conditions. The results showed that all the complexes formed with the 15-membered ligand, particularly those of Cu2+ and especially Ni2+, are thermodynamically more stable than with the larger macrocycle. Cyclic voltammetric data showed that the copper(II) complexes of the two macrocycles exhibited analogous behaviour, with a single quasi-reversible one-electron transfer reduction process assigned to the Cu(II)/Cu(I) couple. The UV-visible-near IR spectroscopic and magnetic moment data of the nickel(II) complexes in solution indicated a tetragonal distorted coordination geometry for the metal centre. X-band EPR spectra of the copper(II) complexes are consistent with distorted square pyramidal geometries. The crystal structure of [Cu([15]pyN(5))](2+) determined by X-ray diffraction showed the copper(II) centre coordinated to all five macrocyclic nitrogen donors in a distorted square pyramidal environment.

Effect of an ancillary ligand on single helix-double helix interconversion in copper complexes. Copper(I)-water bond

Reaction of Cu(ClO(4))(2)center dot 6H(2)O with the 1:2 condensate of benzildihydrazone and 2-acetylpyridine, in methanol in equimolar ratio yields a green compound which upon recrystallisation from 1:1 CH(2)Cl(2)-C(6)H(6) mixture affords [CuL(H(2)O)](ClO(4))(2)center dot 1/2C(6)H(6). The complex crystallises in the space group P-1 with a = 8.028(11) angstrom, b = 12.316(17) angstrom, c = 18.14(3) angstrom, alpha = 97.191(10)degrees, beta = 94.657(10)degrees and gamma = 108.039(10)degrees. It is single helical with the metal having a distorted trigonal bipyramidal N(4)O coordination sphere. The acid dissociation constant of the Cu(I) complex in CH(3)CN is 3.34 +/- 0.19. The X band EPR spectrum of the compound is rhombic with g(1) = 2.43, g(2) = 2.10 g(3) = 2.02 and A(1) = 79.3 x 10(-4) cm(-1). The Cu(II/I) potential of the complex in CH(2)Cl(2) at a glassy carbon electrode is 0.43 V vs SCE. It is argued that the copper-water bond persists in the corresponding copper(I) species. Its implications on the single helix-double helix interconversion in copper helicates are discussed. DFT calculations at the B3LYP/6-311G** level shows that the binding energy of water in the single helicol live-coordinate copper(I) species [CuL(H(2)O)](+) is similar to 40 kJ mol(-1).

Synthesis and characterization of nickel(II) and copper(II) complexes with tetradentate Schiff base ligands

The 1:1 condensation of 1,2-diaminopropane and 1-phenylbutane-1,3-dione at high dilution gives a mixture of two positional isomers of terdentate mono-condensed Schiff bases 6-amino-3-methyl-1-phenyl-4-aza-2-hepten-1-one (HAMPAH) and 6-amino-3,5-dimethyl-1-phenyl-4-aza-2-hexen-1-one (HADPAH). The mixture of the terdentate ligands has been used for further condensation with pyridine-2-carboxaldehyde or 2-acetylpyridine to obtain the unsymmetrical tetradentate Schiff base ligands. The tetradentate Schiff bases are then allowed to react with the methanol solution of copper(II) and nickel(II) perchlorate separately. The X-ray diffraction confirms the structures of two of the complexes and shows that the condensation site of the diamine with 1-phenylbutane-1,3-dione is the same.

Homoleptic copper(II) and copper(I) complexes of 5,6-dihydro-5,6-epoxy-1,10-phenanthroline. Six-coordinate copper(I) in solution

Reaction of 5,6-dihydro-5,6-epoxy-1,10-phenanthroline (L) with Cu(ClO(4))(2)center dot 6H(2)O in methanol in 3:1 M ratio at room temperature yields light green [CuL(3)](ClO(4))(2)center dot H(2)O (1). The X-ray crystal structure of the hemi acetonitrile solvate [CuL(3)](ClO(4))(2)center dot 0.5CH(3)CN has been determined which shows Jahn-Teller distortion in the CuN(6) core present in the cation [CuL(3)](2+). Complex 1 gives an axial EPR spectrum in acetonitrile-toluene glass with g(parallel to) = 2.262 (A(parallel to) = 169 x 10 (4) cm (1)) and g(perpendicular to) = 2.069. The Cu(II/I) potential in 1 in CH(2)Cl(2) at a glassy carbon electrode is 0.32 V versus NHE. This potential does not change with the addition of extra L in the medium implicating generation of a six-coordinate copper(I) species [CuL(3)](+) in solution. B3LYP/LanL2DZ calculations show that the six Cu-N bond distances in [CuL(3)](+) are 2.33, 2.25, 2.32, 2.25, 2.28 and 2.25 angstrom while the ideal Cu(I)-N bond length in a symmetric Cu(I)N(6) moiety is estimated as 2.25 angstrom. Reaction of L with Cu(CH(3)CN)(4)ClO(4) in dehydrated methanol at room temperature even in 4:1 M proportion yields [CuL(2)]ClO(4) (2). Its (1)H NMR spectrum indicates that the metal in [CuL(2)](+) is tetrahedral. The Cu(II/I) potential in 2 is found to be 0.68 V versus NHE in CH(2)Cl(2) at a glassy carbon electrode. In presence of excess L, 2 yields the cyclic voltammogram of 1. From (1)H NMR titration, the free energy of binding of L to [CuL(2)](+) to produce [CuL(3)](+) in CD(2)Cl(2) at 298 K is estimated as -11.7 (+/-0.2) kJ mol (1).

Trinuclear and tetranuclear adduct formation between sodium perchlorate and copper(II) complexes of salicylaldimine type ligands: structural characterization and theoretical investigation

The synthesis of two new sodium perchlorate adducts (1:2 and 1:3) with copper(II) "ligand-complexes'' is reported. One adduct is trinuclear [(CuL(1))(2)NaClO(4)] (1) and the other is tetranuclear [(CuL(2))(3)Na]ClO(4)center dot EtOH (2). The ligands are the tetradentate di-Schiff base of 1,3-propanediamines and salicylaldehyde (H(2)L(1)) or 2-hydroxyacetophenone (H(2)L(2)). Both complexes have been characterized by X-ray single crystal structure analyses. In both structures, the sodium cation has a six-coordinate distorted octahedral environment being bonded to four oxygen atoms from two Schiff-base complexes in addition to a chelated perchlorate anion in 1 and to six oxygen atoms from three Schiff-base complexes in 2. We have carried out a DFT theoretical study (RI-B97-D/def2-SVP level of theory) to compute and compare the formation energies of 1:2 and 1:3 adducts. The DFT study reveals that the latter is more stabilized than the former. The X-ray crystal structure of 1 shows that the packing of the trinuclear unit is controlled by unconventional C-H center dot center dot center dot O H-bonds and Cu(2+)-pi non-covalent interactions. These interactions explain the formation of 1 which is a priori disfavored with respect to 2.