Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why Do Cationic Carbon Monoxide Complexes Have High C−O Stretching Force Constants and Short C−O Bonds? Electrostatic Effects, Not σ-Bonding

Goldman, Alan S., Krogh-Jespersen, Karsten·1996·Journal of the American Chemical Society

Abstract

A significant increase in the C−O stretching force constant ( F CO ) and a decrease in C−O bond length ( r CO ) result upon coordination of carbon monoxide to various cationic species. We report a study designed to elucidate the factors responsible for this effect. In particular, we distinguish between an explanation based on electrostatic effects and one based on withdrawal of electron density from the 5σ orbital of CO, an orbital generally considered to have some antibonding character. Ab initio electronic structure calculations on CO in the presence of a positive point charge (located on the carbon side of the bond axis) reveal that a simple Coulombic field increases the C−O stretching force constant and decreases the bond length. Coordination of CO to a simple cationic Lewis acid such as H + or CH 3 + is calculated to increase F CO (and decrease r CO ) to extents slightly less than those engendered by a point charge at the same distance from the carbonyl carbon. These results indicate that electron donation from the 5σ orbital has no intrinsic positive effect on the magnitude of F CO . Calculations were also conducted on several symmetrical, neutral, and cationic transition metal complexes, including some examples of the recently discovered homoleptic noble-metal carbonyls. It is found that F CO values can be quantitatively interpreted using a model which invokes only the effects of M−CO π-back-bonding and an electrostatic parameter. There is no correlation between the extent of σ-bonding (as measured by the depopulation of the CO σ orbitals) and F CO . Calculations on trigonal bipyramidal d 8 metal pentacarbonyls permit a comparison between inequivalent ligands (axial and equatorial) which, being coordinated to the same metal center, must experience approximately the same electrostatic field. In the case of Ru(CO) 5, π-back-bonding to the axial and equatorial carbonyls is of virtually equal magnitude, while σ-donation is much greater from the axial ligands than from the equatorial ligands. Nevertheless, the F CO and r CO values of the two ligand sets are essentially equal, confirming that the magnitude of σ-donation does not affect these parameters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ja960876z

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Goldman, A. S., & Krogh-Jespersen, K.
Venue
Journal of the American Chemical Society
Published
1996-01-01
Volume
118
Issue
48
Pages
12159-12166
ISSN
  • 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5126
OpenAlex
W1985548136
Cited by
293
References
1
FWCI
7.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Do Cationic Carbon Monoxide Complexes Have High C−O Stretching Force Constants and Short C−O Bonds? Electrostatic Effects, Not σ-Bonding. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ja960876z
The paper
Goldman, A. S., & Krogh-Jespersen, K. (1996). Why Do Cationic Carbon Monoxide Complexes Have High C−O Stretching Force Constants and Short C−O Bonds? Electrostatic Effects, Not σ-Bonding. Journal of the American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja960876z

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.