4
$\begingroup$

What is the correct nomenclature for $\ce{CN^-}$ and $\ce{Cl^-}$ ligands in coordination compounds?

Wikipedia says the coding name(?) as cyanido and chlorido while this suggests cyano and chloro.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe the website that says chloro was created before 2006 and then wasnt updated. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – Salmon May 20 '15 at 16:53
  • $\begingroup$ It was also cyano over here. but I couldn't add more links. $\endgroup$ – Salmon May 20 '15 at 16:58
4
$\begingroup$

The IUPAC Red Book is the official reference for recommended inorganic nomenclature. The full change to the additive nomenclature system was made in the 2005 update:

Some new recommendations represent breaks with tradition, in the interest of increased clarity and consistency. For example, the application of the ending ‘ido’ to all anionic ligands with ‘ide’ names in additive nomenclature (e.g. chlorido and cyanido instead of chloro and cyano, and hydrido throughout, i.e. no exception in boron nomenclature) is part of a general move to a more systematic approach.

This is discussed in more detail in section IR-7.1.3 on page 112. Basically, anionic ligand names used as prefixes get changed from '-ide', '-ate', and '-ite' to '-ido', '-ato', and 'ito', respectively. Neutral and cationic ligands are usually used unchanged except for things like aqua, ammine, carbonyl, etc.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Official answer. The "aMMine" part is one to keep in mind as I get confused between it and aMine. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – Salmon May 20 '15 at 17:18

Your Answer

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

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