Our teacher told us that for coordination number 4 and tetrahedral shape $\ce{[M(AB)2]}$ doesn't have a plane of symmetry, so it shows optical isomerism.

What if we take a plane passing through the two $\ce{A}$'s so the $\ce{B's}$ will be the mirror image of each other? Am I wrong?

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ AB is implied to mean a bidentate ligand with a bridge between A and B. See where the bridge will go in the mirror. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 30, 2021 at 10:31
  • $\begingroup$ Do we see the bonds as well while considering the mirror image? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 30, 2021 at 10:37
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ In all likeness, the bridges consist of quite a few atoms, not just bonds. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 30, 2021 at 10:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, you are right, I understood. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 30, 2021 at 10:45

1 Answer 1


Just to record the question as answered:

  • If you had separate A and B ligands with no ligand-ligand bonds, then the complex would have a plane (actually two planes) of symmetry and would not be chiral.

  • But when you have a bridge between each A ligand and a separate B ligand, the bridges do not conform with the above plane(s) of symmetry and so those symmetry planes are lost. Thereby the complex becomes chiral.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.