Alphabetizing Ligands

Moderators: Chem_Mod, Chem_Admin

Rachel Caprini 1E
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:59 pm

Alphabetizing Ligands

Postby Rachel Caprini 1E » Wed Nov 16, 2016 3:39 am

The rule states that you should list your ligands in alphabetical order in the long name and write them in alphabetical order in the chemical formula, so why do some compounds ignore this rule (i.e., [Cr(F)3(I)(H2O)2], Li[Ni(CN)3(en)(NH3) and [FeCl3(H2O)3]-)?

Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Alphabetizing Ligands

Postby vsyacoubian2A » Wed Nov 16, 2016 9:01 am

I don't think there is a particular order for writing ligands in a chemical formula. Formulas don't follow the alphabetical rule.

Posts: 18400
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:53 pm
Has upvoted: 435 times

Re: Alphabetizing Ligands

Postby Chem_Mod » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:19 am

The IUPAC rule is to write the ligands in alphabetical order unless certain ligands are being emphasized. For example, anionic ligands are sometimes put before neutral ones.

Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:59 pm

Re: Alphabetizing Ligands

Postby Tara_Hekmati_3B » Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:13 pm

I understand this rule, but for ligands with names that don't match their formulas like ammine and ethylenediamine, do you put the coordination compound formula in alphabetical order based on the name of the ligand or it's formula?

Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:57 pm

Re: Alphabetizing Ligands

Postby Katherine_Zhuo_3B » Wed Nov 16, 2016 10:49 pm

For the formula, as long as you put the transition metal first, the ligands can be put in any order following the metal.

Return to “Naming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests