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.
2
-
$\begingroup$ Maybe the website that says chloro was created before 2006 and then wasnt updated. Thank you. $\endgroup$– SalmonCommented May 20, 2015 at 16:53
-
$\begingroup$ It was also cyano over here. but I couldn't add more links. $\endgroup$– SalmonCommented May 20, 2015 at 16:58
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
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.
answered May 20, 2015 at 17:08
-
$\begingroup$ Official answer. The "aMMine" part is one to keep in mind as I get confused between it and aMine. Thank you. $\endgroup$– SalmonCommented May 20, 2015 at 17:18