What’s in an Atom? a Comparison of Carbon and Silicon-Centered Amidinium···carboxylate Frameworks
Preprints are manuscripts made publicly available before they have been submitted for formal peer review and publication. They might contain new research findings or data. Preprints can be a draft or final version of an author's research but must not have been accepted for publication at the time of submission.
Despite their apparent similarity, framework materials based on tetraphenylmethane and tetraphenylsilane building blocks often have quite different structures and topologies. Herein, we describe a new silicon tetraamidinium compound and use it to prepare crystalline hydrogen bonded frameworks with carboxylate anions in water. The silicon-containing frameworks are compared with those prepared from the analogous carbon tetraamidinium: when biphenyldicarboxylate or tetrakis(4-carboxyphenyl)methane anions were used similar channel-containing networks are observed for both the silicon and carbon tetraamidinium. When terephthalate or bicarbonate anions were used, different products form. Insights into possible reasons for the different products are provided by a survey of the Cambridge Structural Database and quantum chemical calculations, both of which indicate that, contrary to expectations, tetraphenylsilane derivatives have less geometrical flexibility than tetraphenylmethane derivatives, i.e. they are less able to distort away from ideal tetrahedral bond angles.