I'm currently working on a project using Iron(III) acetylacetonate, which in the wikipedia page it's written Tris(acetylacetonato)iron(III), and it says it's the IUPAC name, maybe it's obvious but I'm a little confused about the nomenclature, why acetylacetonato instead of acetylacetonate, couldn't it be Tris(acetylacetonate)iron(III)? Is one name better than the other?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In IUPAC nomenclature, anionic ligands generally end in -o (-ido, -ito or -ato). See this for reference. $\endgroup$ – Aniruddha Deb Jan 3 '20 at 2:50
  • $\begingroup$ Both can be used. See: chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/5039/… $\endgroup$ – Nilay Ghosh Jan 3 '20 at 5:35
  • $\begingroup$ It should be used interchangeably otherwise in Italian and probably Spanish we would miss a class. - ate already sounds - ato and I don't know what - ato ENG change into IT $\endgroup$ – Alchimista Jan 3 '20 at 7:51
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I knew it was simple, I guess it's a problem of having studied chemistry in a different language, it wasn't obvious for me. I understand then that both are correct, being the latter the normative IUPAC name, and the first one the easy, common name. $\endgroup$ – jogan Jan 3 '20 at 18:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.