1. Introduction

ijms

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Int. J. Mol. Sci.

1422-0067

Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)

10.3390/ijms131115420

ijms-13-15420

Article

Errors in the Calculation of 27Al Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Chemical Shifts

Wang

Xianlong

12* Wang

Chengfei

1 Zhao

Hui

1Center of Bioinformatics, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, No. 4, 2nd Section, Jianshe Road, Chengdu 610054, China; E-Mails: chengfeiwang.aka.chance@gmail.com (C.W.); kathy517413@sohu.com (H.Z.) 2Department of Chemistry, Bryn Mawr College, 101 North Merion Avenue, Bryn Mawr, PA 19010, USA

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: WangXianlong@uestc.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-28-8320-8232; Fax: +86-28-8320-8238.

2012

21 11 2012

13 11 15420 15446 10 10 2012 02 11 2012 06 11 2012

2012

This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

Computational chemistry is an important tool for signal assignment of ²⁷Al nuclear magnetic resonance spectra in order to elucidate the species of aluminum(III) in aqueous solutions. The accuracy of the popular theoretical models for computing the ²⁷Al chemical shifts was evaluated by comparing the calculated and experimental chemical shifts in more than one hundred aluminum(III) complexes. In order to differentiate the error due to the chemical shielding tensor calculation from that due to the inadequacy of the molecular geometry prediction, single-crystal X-ray diffraction determined structures were used to build the isolated molecule models for calculating the chemical shifts. The results were compared with those obtained using the calculated geometries at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. The isotropic chemical shielding constants computed at different levels have strong linear correlations even though the absolute values differ in tens of ppm. The root-mean-square difference between the experimental chemical shifts and the calculated values is approximately 5 ppm for the calculations based on the X-ray structures, but more than 10 ppm for the calculations based on the computed geometries. The result indicates that the popular theoretical models are adequate in calculating the chemical shifts while an accurate molecular geometry is more critical.

aluminum-27 NMR aluminum(III) complexes computational chemistry density functional theory

1. Introduction

Studies with aluminum(III) (Al(III)) complexes are important in bioinorganic chemistry, geochemistry, environmental science, and material science due to the toxic effects of many aluminum compounds and their industrial usage as catalysts and coagulation agents. Because various kinds of species of Al(III) might differ significantly in their toxic effects, speciation of aqueous Al(III) complexes is of great value to study their biological and environmental roles [1,2]. Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) has been routinely used in studying the coordination chemistry and speciation of Al(III) in aqueous solutions due to its noninvasive character [3].

¹H, ¹³C, ¹⁷O and ²⁷Al are commonly used nuclei for observing NMR spectra of Al(III) complexes. Among them, ²⁷Al possesses advantages over the others, including 100% abundance, high signal sensitivity, a wide range of chemical shifts, and sensitivity to coordination environment. For example, the ²⁷Al chemical shift (δ_Al) of the tetrahedral [Al(OH)₄]⁻ species is 80 ppm relative to the octahedral [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ species. Therefore, solution-state ²⁷Al NMR spectroscopy has been a very powerful tool to characterize the structures of Al(III) complexes, to monitor the hydrolysis of Al(III), to identify Al(III) species in biological and environmental samples, and to quantify the concentrations of Al(III) species [3]. It is particularly useful for the characterization of those species which are difficult to isolate and/or to crystallize or inert for other spectroscopic methods.

²⁷Al nucleus has a spin of 5/2 and with a moderately large electric quadrupole moment. Both the chemical shift and line width of ²⁷Al signals are sensitive to aluminum coordination geometry. For a highly asymmetric coordination geometry, the resonance peaks of ²⁷Al may be too broad to observe. In aqueous solutions, the coordination number of Al³⁺ monomers fluctuates between 4 and 6. Many aqueous Al(III) complexes are octahedral-coordinated and some may be distorted. As a result, δ_Al of these complexes are not far away from 0 ppm relative to the aqueous [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ species and the chemical shift spectra peaks are not sharp. Furthermore, due to the tendency of Al(III) to hydroxylize, to oligomerize and to form mixed complexes, the solutions are often a complicated system with many coexisting species. Often, many ²⁷Al chemical shift signals are crowded together in the vicinity of 0 ppm. Although tentative structural information can be made by comparing the spectroscopic features of the unknown species with model complexes, it is usually difficult to make unique assignments. Therefore, computational modeling, along other experimental methods, is often used to complement ²⁷Al NMR experiments.

With the rapid development of computational chemistry, its application has become almost ubiquitous in all branches of chemistry. In the study of Al(III) complexes, computational methods have been used to predict NMR spectra. For example, Tossell [4] calculated the chemical shieldings of ²⁷Al, along with other nuclei, by applying the gauge-including atomic orbital (GIAO) method [5,6] with the Hartree-Fock (HF) theory and to elucidate the species formed during the hydrolysis and the oligomerization process of Al(III) in aqueous solution. Amini et al.[7,8] applied the HF theory and density functional theory (DFT) to calculate the solid-state ²⁷Al NMR spectra of aluminum acetylacetonate and other similar complexes for the clarification of the crystal structure of the compounds. Mirzaei et al.[9,10] used DFT calculations to calculate ²⁷Al and ³¹P chemical shieldings in the investigation of aluminum phosphide and nitride nanotubes. The gauge including projected augmented wave (GIPAW) method [11] developed by Mauri and Pickard in 2001 [12] which enabled the calculation of all-electron NMR parameters in solids was also used to predict the solid-state ²⁷Al NMR spectra [13,14].

Although the calculations of chemical shieldings have played an important role in the determination of structures, there have been a limited number of systematic studies concerned with the accuracy of computational models that predict the chemical shifts of ²⁷Al. Mulder et al.[15] reviewed several theoretical methods for the calculation of NMR chemical shifts and they evaluated the applications of these methods in protein structure determination. Jensen [16] evaluated the basis set convergence problem in calculating NMR shielding constants calculated by two DFT methods and proposed to use pcS-n basis sets for calculating shielding constants. In 1999, Kubicki et al.[17] performed a thorough computational study on Al(III) hydrolysis products and Al(III)-carboxylate complexes to determine how accurately the ²⁷Al chemical shifts can be calculated using ab initio methods. The study was based on the self-consistent isodensity polarized continuum model (SCIPCM) of the aqueous species using HF and second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation (MP2) theories. By comparing the calculated chemical shifts with the experimental values, they suggested that the ²⁷Al NMR spectra should be reinterpreted in some previous publications. Ten years later, Bi et al.[18] assessed the accuracy of ²⁷Al chemical shift calculations that used 29 DFT functionals, HF and MP2 models. They concluded that of all the models, the HF and MP2 models gave the most accurate results. Their conclusion was made on the basis of the calculations of only a few Al(III) hydrolysis products. It remains unanswered if the conclusion holds for more general Al(III) complexes.

Previous studies found that the error involved in the ab initio calculation of ²⁷Al chemical shifts is typically approximately 10 ppm and for some DFT models it could be as large as 30 ppm [18]. Errors of such magnitude pose serious limitations for the application in assigning experimental spectra, since the ²⁷Al chemical shifts of many octahedral-coordinated complexes are typically distributed in the small range from −10 to 30 ppm. To distinguish between the small differences found in similar complexation species, a computational method must be able to reproduce the chemical shifts with an error within a few ppm and at least be able to put the resonance peaks in the correct order.

There are two major parts to the errors in calculated ²⁷Al chemical shifts: the error in the prediction of the geometry and the error in the chemical shielding determination. Previous studies presenting the calculations of ²⁷Al chemical shifts did not differentiate between these two kinds of errors. There have been many publications concerning the accuracy of ab initio models including those that use DFT in predicting complex geometries [19]. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the performance of several commonly used theoretical models, including HF, MP2 and DFT, in predicting the chemical shifts of Al(III) complexes. Our approach is to use the X-ray crystallographic structures to calculate the chemical shifts and then to compare them with the experimentally measured values. It has been well established that X-ray diffraction structures represent well the molecular geometries in solutions except for the rotation-flexible functional groups.

2. Results and Discussion

More than 200 single-crystal X-ray diffraction determined geometries [20–145] of 114 Al(III) complex species were obtained from the Cambridge Crystal Database. (There is more than one crystal structure available for some complexes.) In most species, Al(III) is found in an octahedral-coordination environment binding with six ligands or functional groups. Some Al(III) are found in tetrahedral coordination environments and a limited number of species are in penta-coordination environments. Usually Al(III) binds with ligands via O atoms. Al–N ranks second in the binding modes. A few species of Al(III) coordinated with fluorides and phosphates were also examined. This covers most coordination forms commonly encountered in the study of solution aluminum chemistry. Other coordination forms, such as planar tri-coordination and complexation with other ligands, e.g., H and Cl, were not studied in this work.

(1) σ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 31 G ( d ) ) = 114.1 + 0.85 σ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 311 + G ( d , p ) ) , R 2 = 0.95

(2) σ A 1 ( GIAO - HF / 6 - 311 + G ( d , p ) ) = 59.4 + 0.96 σ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 311 + G ( d , p ) ) , R 2 = 0.98

2.1. Chemical Shielding Constants

The chemical shielding tensors of each structure were calculated with the GIAO formalism [5,6] at the following four popular model levels, B3LYP/6-31G(d), HF/6-31G(d), B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and HF/6-311+G(d,p). In addition, MP2/6-311+G(d,p) was also applied to species of [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺, [AlF₆]³⁻ and [AlF₅(OH₂)]²⁻.

Figure 1 shows how the calculated isotropic shielding constants at different levels are correlated. The x-axis represents the values calculated at the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level. On the y-axis direction, the shielding constants obtained at the B3LYP/6-31G(d), and HF/6-311+G(d,p) levels are represented as black squares and red circles, respectively. There is a strong linear correlation in a wide range from 350 to 600 ppm for both data sets, though the chemical shieldings calculated at different levels of theory could differ as large as 60 ppm. In general, the hybrid B3LYP functional gives consistently smaller shielding constants than the HF theory and so does the larger basis set (6-311+G(d,p)) than the smaller (6-31G(d)) basis set.

Comparing the two differently sized basis sets, 6-31G(d) versus 6-311+G(d,p), both using the B3LYP model, the coefficient of determination (R²) of the linear regression is 0.95. The best-fit straight line is Equation 1 (black dashed line in Figure 1). The majority of the absolute fitting residuals (74%) are less than 5 ppm. There is one outlier point with a fitting residual of 24 ppm, while all the rest are less than 13 ppm. The outlier point is an Al-phosphate species. The exact reason for the outlier is unclear.

The shielding constants obtained at the HF/6-311+G(d,p) level are slightly higher than those at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. They also have strong linear correlations with the values obtained at the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level (R² = 0.98). The best-fit straight line is Equation 2 (red dashed line in Figure 1). Most of the absolute fitting residuals (85%) are less than 5 ppm, while the rest are within 11 ppm except the Al-phosphate species which has a large residual of 24 ppm. For the calculations using the 6-31G(d) basis set, the correlation between the B3LYP and HF models is also strongly linear (R² = 0.99). Most of the fitting residuals are also within 5 ppm.

A more comprehensive study including the calculations with Dunning’s correlation consistent basis sets [146,147], aug-cc-pVXZ (X = D, T and Q), was carried out for a limit number of complexes. The calculated shielding constants were shown in Figure 2. It is clear that the values did not converge well even at the aug-cc-pVTZ or aug-cc-pVQZ level for many geometries. However, the shielding constants calculated with different basis sets are highly correlated, which is consistent with the above observation. Jensen [16] proposed to use pcS-n basis sets with DFT methods to obtain the converged shielding constants. Here, we showed that even though there are large errors involved in the absolute shielding constants calculated with the commonly used basis sets, such as 6-31G(d) and 6-311+G(d,p), the errors are not random and a linear relationship exists between the values obtained with these small size basis sets and basis set limits. Therefore, these basis sets are still valuable in predicting ²⁷Al chemical shifts.

The MP2 model has been considered a more accurate model in electronic structure calculations. We also calculated the chemical shielding constants using this model with the 6-311+G(d,p) basis set. Because the large memory cost required and CPU time needed for the model, the calculations were done only for three species, [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺, [AlF₆]³⁻ and [AlF₅(OH₂)]²⁻. The calculated chemical shielding constants are also strongly correlated with the values obtained at the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level, R² = 0.97. The slope of the best-fit equation is 0.98. The calculations indicate a trend, but more than three data sets (species) will have to be investigated before more firm quantitative relationships can be established.

2.2. Comparison between Experimental and Calculated Chemical Shifts

From the previous subsection, we see that the shielding constants have a strong linear correlation among five levels of theory, though the absolute numbers differ from each other significantly. In practice, the chemical shifts are our primary concern, since the absolute chemical shielding constants are difficult to measure experimentally. Chemical shifts are related to shielding constants through the approximate equation, δ_species = σ_ref – σ_species. ²⁷Al chemical shifts are usually referred to the aqueous [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ species in acidic solutions. We use the averaged chemical shielding constant of the [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ species at the corresponding level to calculate the chemical shifts of other species. The results are given in Table 1.

How do these models perform when compared with the experimental measurements? We searched the literature for experimental ²⁷Al NMR studies of Al(III) species and picked the species whose ²⁷Al chemical shifts were assigned. The measurements include both solution-state and solid-state magic-angle-spin (MAS) ²⁷Al NMR spectra. For the latter, the isotropic chemical shifts were calculated by fitting the simulated spectra with the experimental spectra. The solution-state NMR measurements were for the Al(III) species in both aqueous and organic solvents. Therefore, the experimental chemical shifts are measured at a wide range of different chemical environments. But the calculations were done for the isolated molecules. How strongly are the ²⁷Al chemical shifts dependent on the long-range chemical environment? The answer might be different for different species, but the environment effect might be small for most Al(III) species because the first coordination layer dominates the shielding effect to the ²⁷Al nucleus. For example, the chemical shifts of the tetrahedral-coordinated [Al(OC(CF₃)₃)₄]⁻ with various kinds of counter ions in different solvents, range from 38.8 to 33.8 ppm [140–143]. On the other hand, the chemical environment has a significant effect on the small [AlF₆]³⁻ species and fast ligand exchange occurs in aqueous solutions [148,149]. The solid-state MAS NMR studies found the isotropic chemical shifts of [AlF₆]³⁻ range from −0.1 to −17.9 ppm for which the counter ions include H⁺, K⁺, NH₄⁺ and Rb⁺[150]. The values for [AlF₅(OH₂)]²⁻ obtained from the solid-state MAS NMR spectra range from −6.3 to −14.4 ppm [150]. These results reflect the sensitivity of chemical shifts of small size species to chemical environment. The environment could affect the ²⁷Al chemical shifts through two aspects. The first is that the geometry parameters, such as bond lengths and bond angles, of the first coordination layer could be perturbed by the packing forces, by the electrical field and/or by solvation. The other factor is that the chemical environment other than the first coordination layer could contribute to the shielding or to the deshielding effect to the metal center. For the isolated molecule models used to compute the chemical shieldings, counter ions and solvents were not included. Therefore, only the first effect was accounted for in the calculations.

The calculated chemical shifts vs. the experimental chemical shifts are shown in Figure 3. Black squares are the calculated shifts at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level, and red circles and blue triangles are the calculated values at GIAO-B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and GIAO-HF/6-311+G(d,p), respectively.

Comparing the calculated chemical shifts at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level with the experimental values, the absolute errors for most species are less than 12 ppm except for three outliers. About one third (31%) of the absolute errors are less than 2 ppm, while more than 79% in total are less than 6 ppm. The overall root-mean-square difference (RMSD) is 6.5 ppm. If the three outliers whose absolute errors are larger than 12 ppm are removed, the RMSD decreases to 4.4 ppm. From this result, we see that the popular GIAO-B3LYP model with the 6-31G(d) basis set performs quite well for predicting the ²⁷Al chemical shifts using the X-ray measured geometries.

The three outliers are [AlF₆]³⁻, [Al(NCCH₃)₆]³⁺ and [Al₄(μ₂-OH)₂(μ₂-H₋₁malato)₄]²⁻. In calculating δ_Al for [AlF₆]³ the large error is probably due to its small size [150]. Calculations including the ion’s environment beyond the binding ligands would probably significantly improve the result. For the acetonitrile complex, the ligand is disordered in the crystals and not accounting for the distribution in geometries might lead to a significant error [118]. For the polymeric malate complex, the ²⁷Al NMR spectra are not well defined, so there might be a significant error associated with the experimental determination of δ_Al[73].

(3) δ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 31 G ( d ) ) = - 1.18 + 1.03 δ A 1 ( expt ) , R 2 = 0.94

(4) δ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 311 + G ( d , p ) ) = 1.67 + 0.95 δ A 1 ( expt ) , R 2 = 0.94

(5) δ A 1 ( GIAO - HF / 6 - 311 + G ( d , p ) ) = 2.63 + 0.96 δ A 1 ( expt ) , R 2 = 0.96

When the larger basis set, 6-311+G(d,p), is used, the accuracy improves slightly. The RMSD between the calculated chemical shifts at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level and the experimental values for all the species is 6.6 ppm and it decreases to 3.9 ppm after removing the three outliers whose absolute errors are larger than 12 ppm. About 40% of the absolute errors are less than 2 ppm, while 80% in total are less than 6 ppm.

The accuracy of the chemical shifts calculated at the GIAO-HF/6-311+G(d,p) level is slightly worse than that of the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. Although the RMSD for all the data points is 5.7 ppm which is less than the other two models, it decreases to 4.8 ppm after removing two outliers whose absolute errors are larger than 12 ppm. One third (33%) of the absolute errors are less than 2 ppm and 72% in total are less than 6 ppm.

By comparing the results of the three levels of theory, we see that they are similar in terms of the capability in predicting the ²⁷Al chemical shifts, though the GIAO-B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) model is slightly better than the other two.

As seen from Figure 3, the calculated chemical shifts at three levels were well correlated with the experimental results, except for a few outliers. The best-fit equations are given in Equations 3~5 for the correlation between the calculated chemical shifts at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d), GIAO-B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and GIAO-HF/6-311+G(d,p) levels, respectively, versus the experimental values (black solid line, red dashed line and blue dotted line, respectively in Figure 3).

2.3. Geometry Optimization

In a practical application scenario, the structure of the proposed complex is unknown. Geometry optimization is used to obtain the structure in the first place. Does the error of the calculated geometries contribute significantly to an error in predicting ²⁷Al chemical shifts? To investigate this question, the experimental geometries of 33 complexes were optimized at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level, followed by a shielding tensor calculation using the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) model.

The calculated δ_Al are plotted against the experimental values in Figure 4. On one hand, the calculated δ_Al are systematically larger than the experimental values; on the other hand, the slope of the best-fit equation which is given in Equation 6 and plotted as the black line in Figure 4 is 1.10. The 95% confidence interval for the slope is 1.04 to 1.17. The systematic larger calculated chemical shifts may be because the shielding constant of the reference [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ species is overestimated in the optimized geometry. The calculated σ_Al in the optimized geometry is 16.7 ppm larger than that in the X-ray geometry, which reflects the elongation of Al–O bonds by 0.06 Å in the optimized geometry compared with the mean value in the X-ray geometry. The latter deviation reflects that the single-molecule calculated geometry at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level causes significant errors in predicting δ_Al. Until such time as experimental techniques can unequivocally determine structures of molecules in liquid solvents, this issue cannot be unambiguously settled.

(6) δ A 1 ( GIAO - B 3 LYP / 6 - 31 G ( d ) / B 3 LYP / 6 - 31 G ( d ) ) = - 13.0 + 1.10 δ A 1 ( expt ) , R 2 = 0.97

The RMSD for all the data points is 10.9 ppm. Even after removing the points with errors larger than 12 ppm, the RMSD is about 8.4 ppm. If we offset all the calculated δ_Al by 15.4 ppm, i.e. to let the best-fit equation cross the origin point, the calculated RMSD is still as large as 7.7 ppm. Therefore, an accurate geometry is critical in calculating ²⁷Al chemical shifts.

2.4. Solvent Effect

Solvent effect plays an important role in solution-state ²⁷Al NMR. Without the constraint of the periodic boundary condition in the crystals, the geometries will be slightly different, the long-range interactions will be dramatically different and dynamical effect will be also different. In this study, we only examined how the commonly used implicit solvation model affects the prediction of ²⁷Al chemical shifts. The self-consistent reaction field (SCRF) method [151] with the polarizable continuum model (PCM) [152] of water and/or methanol was applied to the calculation of the shielding constants and the geometry optimization. In Figure 2, we have seen that the calculated shielding constants of [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ and [Al(OH)₄]⁻ in the PCM environment of water or methanol are nearly the same as those obtained in vacuum using the same geometry. However, the calculated shielding constants using the geometries optimized in the PCM environment of water or methanol differ by 5~10 ppm from those obtained with the optimized geometries in vacuum. The differences in [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ are larger than those in [Al(OH)₄]⁻, which reflects the former species is more sensitive to the solvation effect. At the B3LYP/aug-cc-pVQZ level, the calculated Al–O bond length of [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ in water or methanol is 0.036 Å shorter than that obtained in vacuum in average (1.896 Å vs. 1.932 Å), while the difference is only 0.008 Å in [Al(OH)₄]⁻ (1.770 Å vs. 1.778 Å).

Two more groups of calculations were carried out on 10 representative complexes. In the first group of calculations, the influence of the PCM model to the calculation of the shielding constants was examined using the X-ray geometries at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. In the second group of calculations, both the geometry optimization and the shielding constants calculation were carried out in the PCM environment of water at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. The calculated σ_Al values were compared with the values obtained in vacuum using the X-ray geometries. The differences are plotted in Figure 5, where the blue and red bars are for the first and second groups of calculations, respectively. Again, we see that the PCM model only causes a minor change to the calculated σ_Al if the same geometry was used. However, if the geometry optimization was applied, significant changes were observed. This result again says that the geometry parameters of the complexes have a big influence on the calculated σ_Al.

3. Computational Details

The crystal structures of 114 Al(III) complexes, determined by single-crystal X-ray diffraction, were obtained from the Cambridge Crystal Structural Database (Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, Cambridge, UK). They were used to build the molecular structures of the species. If there was more than one Al(III) species in the asymmetric unit, a molecular structure was built for each structure. For the disordered crystal structures, only the structure with major population was used to build the molecular model. In total, 213 molecular models were created from 206 crystal structures for 114 species. 33 complexes of small to intermediate sizes were optimized using the X-ray structures as the starting point.

Only a single molecule was included in each molecular model. Hydrogen positions were put in their ideal positions with the aid of GaussView 3.0 (Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford, CT, USA) if they were missing from the crystal structures. All the counter ions and solvent molecules were excluded from the models. Chemical shielding tensors were calculated for these X-ray geometry models and the models with further geometry optimization at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level.

All electronic structure calculations were done with the Gaussian03 program suite [153]. Chemical shielding tensors were calculated with the gauge-invariant atomic orbital (GIAO) formalism [5,6] of three theory models, Hartree-Fock, Becke-Lee-Yang three-parameter hybrid density functional theory (B3LYP) [154–157] and Møller-Plesset second-order perturbation theory (MP2) [158], with a series of basis sets, 6-31G(d) [159], 6-311+G(d,p) and 6-311++G(d,p) [160] and aug-cc-pVXZ (X = D, T and Q) [146,147]. The implicit solvent model of water and methanol was calculated using the self-consistent reaction field (SCRF) method [151] with the polarizable continuum model (PCM) [152]. ²⁷Al chemical shifts were obtained by subtracting the isotropic chemical shielding constants from the mean chemical shielding constant of the reference species, [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺, calculated at the same theory level.

4. Conclusions

The main purpose of this work is to give a quantitative evaluation of the errors involved in the calculation of ²⁷Al chemical shifts. We differentiated the source of the errors due to the limitations of the computational models in calculating the chemical shielding tensors and the inaccuracy in geometry prediction by using the X-ray measured geometries and the calculated geometries to compute chemical shifts. The RMSD between the calculated shifts and the experimental values is approximately 5 ppm if the X-ray crystallographic structures were used, while the RMSD is more than 10 ppm for the optimized geometries at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. Although we could not isolate the error due to the structural uncertainties in the X-ray crystallography, the popular GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) model produces quite accurate chemical shifts.

There are other error sources not considered in this study, such as the quality of DFT functionals and dynamical effects [161]. In addition, the structure of a complex in solution would be different from its crystal structure; the solvent effect is also more complicated than what has been studied here. However, the results presented in this study shows that the error associated with the shielding constants calculation is small compared with the error in the prediction of geometry. In particular, Jensen showed that the error in the shielding constants calculation can be controlled to less than 1 ppm. In the future, we should focus on predicting a more accurate geometry in solution or an ensemble of structural configurations generated using molecular dynamics.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21103016) and the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20100185120023). We thank four anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments of our manuscript. We thank Peter Beckmann for English editing and proofreading of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References 1

Lewis

Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology of Aluminium1st ed

CRC Press

Boca Raton, FL, USA

1989 2

Sposito

The Environmental Chemistry of Aluminum2nd ed

CRC Press

Boca Raton, FL, USA

1995 3

Wang

X.L.

Zou

Advances in determination of aluminum in environmental and biological materials by ²⁷Al nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy

Chin. J. Inorg. Chem200016548560 4

Tossell

J.A.

The effects of hydrolysis and oligomerization upon the NMR shieldings of Be⁺² and Al⁺³ species in aqueous solution

J. Magn. Reson1998135203207

10.1006/jmre.1998.1565

9799695

Ditchfield

Self-consistent perturbation theory of diamagnetism

Mol. Phys197427789807

10.1080/00268977400100711

Wolinski

Hinton

J.F.

Pulay

Efficient implementation of the gauge-independent atomic orbital method for NMR chemical shift calculations

J. Am. Chem. Soc199011282518260

10.1021/ja00179a005

Amini

S.K.

Tafazzoli

DFT calculations as a powerful technique to probe the crystal structure of Al(acac)₃

Magn. Reson. Chem20084610451050

10.1002/mrc.2324

18802968

Schurko

R.W.

Wasylishen

R.E.

Foerster

Characterization of anisotropic aluminum magnetic shielding tensors. Distorted octahedral complexes and linear molecules

J. Phys. Chem. A199810297509760

10.1021/jp982367k

Mirzaei

Aluminum phosphide nanotubes: Density functional calculations of aluminum-27 and phosphorus-31 chemical shielding parameters

J. Mol. Struct20109516971

10.1016/j.theochem.2010.04.009

Bodaghi

Mirzaei

Seif

Giahi

A computational NMR study on zigzag aluminum nitride nanotubes

Physica E200841209212

10.1016/j.physe.2008.06.023

Charpentier

The PAW/GIPAW approach for computing NMR parameters: A new dimension added to NMR study of solids

Solid State Nucl. Magn. Reson201140120

10.1016/j.ssnmr.2011.04.006

21612895

Pickard

C.J.

Mauri

All-electron magnetic response with pseudopotentials: NMR chemical shifts

Phys. Rev. B200163245101

10.1103/PhysRevB.63.245101

Pedone

Gambuzzi

Malavasi

Menziani

M.C.

First-principles simulations of the ²⁷Al and ¹⁷O solid-state NMR spectra of the CaAl₂Si₃O₁₀ glass

Theor. Chem. Acc20121311147

10.1007/s00214-012-1147-5

Choi

Matsunaga

Oba

Tanaka

²⁷Al NMR chemical shifts in oxide crystals: A first-principles study

J. Phys. Chem. C200911338693873

10.1021/jp810484j

Mulder

F.A.

Filatov

NMR chemical shift data and ab initio shielding calculations: Emerging tools for protein structure determination

Chem. Soc. Rev201039578590

10.1039/b811366c

20111782

Jensen

Basis set convergence of nuclear magnetic shielding constants calculated by density functional methods

J. Chem. Theory Comput20084719727

10.1021/ct800013z

Kubicki

J.D.

Sykes

Apitz

S.E.

Ab initio calculation of aqueous aluminum and aluminum-carboxylate complex energetics and ²⁷Al NMR chemical shifts

J. Phys. Chem. A1999103903915

10.1021/jp983462w

Qian

Feng

Yang

Assessment of the accuracy of theoretical methods for calculating ²⁷Al nuclear magnetic resonance shielding tensors of aquated aluminum species

J. Phys. Chem. A200911351385143

10.1021/jp810632f

19344113

Stack

A.G.

Rustad

J.R.

Casey

W.H.

Modeling water exchange on an aluminum polyoxocation

J. Phys. Chem. B20051092377123775

10.1021/jp0530505

16375358

Malone

S.A.

Cooper

Heath

S.L.

Synthesis and structure of a new aluminium citrate trimer from aqueous solution at very low pH

Dalton Trans.200345724573 21

Karlsson

Boström

Öhman

Equilibrium and structural studies of silicon(IV) and aluminium(III) in aqueous solution. 33. The Al(methylmalonate)₂(H₂O)²⁻ complex crystallised as a double salt with Al(H₂O)₆ ⁽³⁺⁾ and Cl⁻

Acta Chem. Scand199852995999

10.3891/acta.chem.scand.52-0995

Bataille

Hemi(piperazinediium) hexaaquaaluminium(III) bis(sulfate) tetrahydrate: A new double aluminium sulfate salt

Acta Cryst. C200359m459m461

10.1107/S0108270103021243

Dalrymple

S.A.

Parvez

Shimizu

G.K.

Intra- and intermolecular second-sphere coordination chemistry: Formation of capsules, half-capsules, and extended structures with hexaaquo- and hexaamminemetal ions

Inorg. Chem20024169866996

10.1021/ic025627s

12495336

Shen

Pan

Wang

Yao

Tang

Selective colorimetric and fluorescent detection of HSO₄⁻ with sodium(i), magnesium(ii) and aluminium(iii) xanthone-crown ether complexes

Dalton Trans.200835743581 25

Mainicheva

Gerasko

Sheludyakova

Naumov

Naumova

Fedin

Synthesis and crystal structures of supramolecular compounds of polynuclear aluminum(III) aqua hydroxo complexes with cucurbit[6]uril

Russ. Chem. Bull200655267275

10.1007/s11172-006-0247-6

Casey

W.H.

Olmstead

M.M.

Phillips

B.L.

A new aluminum hydroxide octamer, [Al₈(OH)₁₄(H₂O)₁₈](SO₄)₅·16H₂O

Inorg. Chem20054448884890

10.1021/ic050426k

15998009

Gatlin

J.T.

Mensinger

Z.L.

Zakharov

L.N.

MacInnes

Johnson

D.W.

Facile synthesis of the tridecameric Al₁₃ nanocluster Al₁₃(μ₃-OH)₆(μ₂-OH)₁₈(H₂O)₂₄(NO₃)₁₅

Inorg. Chem20084712671269

10.1021/ic7020808

18198827

Plutecka

Rychlewska

A three-dimensional Al^III/Na^I metal-organic framework resulting from dimethylformamide hydrolysis

Acta Cryst. C200965m75m77

10.1107/S0108270109000092

Bekaert

Barberan

Kaloun

E.B.

Rabhi

Danan

Brion

J.D.

Lemoine

Viossat

Crystal structure of hexakis (N,N-dimethylformamide-O) aluminium (III) tris (tribromide), Al [(CH₃)₂N(CH)O]₆(Br₃)₃

Z. Kristallogr2002217128130 30

Suzuki

Ishiguro

N,N-Dimethylformamide complex of aluminium(III) perchlorate

Acta Cryst. C199854586588

10.1107/S0108270197018817

Suzuki

Ishiguro

N,N-Dimethyl-acetamide complex of aluminium(III) perchlorate

Acta Cryst. E200662m576m578

10.1107/S1600536806005575

Riesen

Rae

A.D.

Revisiting the crystal structure and thermal properties of NaMgAl(oxalate)₃.9H₂O/Cr(iii): An extraordinary spectral hole-burning material

Dalton Trans.200847174722 33

Taylor

Crystal structures of potassium tris(oxalato) chromate(III) and potassium tris(oxalato) aluminate(III) trihydrate-reinvestigation

Aust. J. Chem19783114551462

10.1071/CH9781455

Bulc

Golic

Siftar

Structure of ammonium tris(oxalato)gallate(III) trihydrate, (I) (NH₄)₃[Ga(C₂O₄)₃].3H₂O, and ammonium tris(oxalato)aluminate(III) trihydrate, (II) (NH₄)₃[Al(C₂O₄)₃].3H₂O

Acta Cryst. C19844018291831

10.1107/S0108270184009720

Chohan

Pritchard

R.G.

Tripotassium tris(oxalato-κ²O,O′)-aluminate bis(hydrogen peroxide) hydrate, the first example of a cyclic hydrogen-bonded H₂O₂ dimer

Acta Cryst. C200359m187m189

10.1107/S0108270103006905

Pellaux

Decurtins

Schmalle

H.W.

Three anionic polymeric networks: Sodium(I)-ruthenium(III), sodium(I)-rhodium(III) and sodium(I)-aluminium(III) μ-oxalato complexes with tris(2,2′-bipyridine)ruthenium(II) cations

Acta Cryst. C19995510751079 37

Martin

Turner

S.S.

Day

Guionneau

Howard

J.A.

Hibbs

D.E.

Light

M.E.

Hursthouse

M.B.

Uruichi

Yakushi

Crystal chemistry and physical properties of superconducting and semiconducting charge transfer salts of the type (BEDT-TTF)₄[A^IM^III(C₂O₄)₃]·PhCN (A^I = H₃O, NH₄, K; M^III = Cr, Fe, Co, Al; BEDT-TTF = Bis(ethylenedithio)tetrathiafulvalene)

Inorg. Chem20014013631371

10.1021/ic001193u

11300843

Bulc

Golic

Siftar

Structure of sodium trisoxalatoaluminate(III) pentahydrate and sodium trisoxalatochromate(III) pentahydrate, Na₃[Al(C₂O₄)₃]·5H₂O and Na₃[Cr(C₂O₄)₃]·5H₂O

Vestn. Slov. Kem. Drus Bull. Slov. Chem. Soc198229211215 39

Golič

Leban

Bulc

The structure of sodium bis(tetraethylammonium) tris(oxalato)aluminate(III) monohydrate

Acta Cryst. C1989454446

10.1107/S0108270188010376

Tapparo

Heath

S.L.

Jordan

P.A.

Moore

G.R.

Powell

A.K.

Crystal structure and solution-state study of K[Al(mal)₂(H₂O)₂]·2H₂O (H₂mal = malonic acid)

J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans.199616011606 41

Diaz-Acosta

Baker

Cordes

Pulay

Calculated and experimental geometries and infrared spectra of metal tris-acetylacetonates: Vibrational spectroscopy as a probe of molecular structure for ionic complexes. Part I

J. Phys. Chem. A2001105238244

10.1021/jp0028599

Von Chrzanowski

L.S.

Lutz

Spek

A.L.

alpha-Tris(2,4-pentanedionato-κ²O,O′) aluminum(III) at 240, 210, 180, 150 and 110 K: A new delta phase at 110 K

Acta Cryst. Sect. C200763m129

10.1107/S0108270107005707

Thurston

J.H.

Trahan

Ould-Ely

Whitmire

K.H.

Toward a general strategy for the synthesis of heterobimetallic coordination complexes for use as precursors to metal oxide materials: synthesis, characterization, and thermal decomposition of Bi₂(Hsal)₆·M(Acac)₃ (M = Al, Co, V, Fe, Cr)

Inorg. Chem20044332993305

10.1021/ic035284d

15132640

Alekseev

Gromilov

Baidina

Stabnikov

Prokuda

Synthesis of bimetallic complexes based on acetylacetonates of aluminum and ferrum. Crystalline structure Al_0.9Fe_0.1(acac)₃

J. Struct. Chem200647318325

10.1007/s10947-006-0302-z

Q.T.H.

Umetani

Matsui

Ion-size recognition of Group 13 metals (Al³⁺, In³⁺) with modified-diketones

J. Chem. Soc, Dalton Trans.199738353840 46

Zhang

Yang

Huang

Yang

High-yield synthesis of 1,3-dimesityl-propane-1,3-dione: Isolation of its aluminum complex as a stable intermediate

Synth. Commun20083823492356

10.1080/00397910802138702

Hori

Shinohe

Takatani

Miyamoto

T.K.

Synthesis and crystal structures of fluorinated β-diketonate metal (Al³⁺, Co²⁺, Ni²⁺ and Cu²⁺) complexes

Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn2009829698

10.1246/bcsj.82.96

Neelgund

G.M.

Shivashankar

S.A.

Narasimhamurthy

S.W.

Tris(methyl 3-oxobutanoato-κ²O,O′)aluminium(III)

Acta Cryst. E200965m1681

10.1107/S1600536809049812

Dharmaprakash

M.S.

Thamotharan

Neelgundc

G.M.

Shivashankarc

S.A.

Tris(tert-butyl 3-oxobutanoato-κ²O¹,O³)-aluminium (III) at 153 K

Acta Cryst. E200662m434m436

10.1107/S1600536806003242

Vreshch

V.D.

Lysenko

A.B.

Chernega

A.N.

Howard

J.A.

Krautscheid

Sieler

Domasevitch

K.V.

Extended coordination frameworks incorporating heterobimetallic squares

Dalton Trans.200428992903 51

Lutz

T.G.

Clevette

D.J.

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Metal chelation with natural products: Isomaltol complexes of aluminum, gallium, and indium

Inorg. Chem198928715719

10.1021/ic00303a021

Phillips

B.L.

Olmstead

M.M.

Casey

W.H.

Rates of solvent exchange in aqueous aluminium(iii)-maltolate complexes

J. Chem. Soc, Dalton Trans.200221192125 53

Odoko

Yamamoto

Hosen

Okabe

fac-Tris(2-ethyl-4-oxo-4H-pyran-3-olato-κ²O³,O⁴) iron (III) and its aluminium (III) analog

Acta Cryst. C200359m121m123

10.1107/S0108270103004074

Karpishin

T.B.

Stack

T.D.

Raymond

K.N.

Octahedral versus trigonal prismatic geometry in a series of catechol macrobicyclic ligand-metal complexes

J. Am. Chem. Soc.1993115182192

10.1021/ja00054a025

Di Marco

V.B.

Bombi

Tapparo

Powell

A.K.

Anson

C.E.

Complexation of aluminium(III) with 3-hydroxy-2(1H)-pyridinone. Solution state study and crystal structure of tris(3-hdroxy-2(1H)-pyridinonato)aluminium(III)

J. Chem. Soc, Dalton Trans.199924272432 56

Nelson

W.O.

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Exoclathrate Al(C₇H₈NO₂)₃.12H₂O. A facial geometry imposed by extensive hydrogen bonding with the ice I structure

J. Am. Chem. Soc198710941214123 57

Nelson

W.O.

Karpishin

T.B.

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Aluminum and gallium compounds of 3-hydroxy-4-pyridinones: synthesis, characterization, and crystallography of biologically active complexes with unusual hydrogen bonding

Inorg. Chem19882710451051

10.1021/ic00279a022

Simpson

Rettig

S.J.

Trotter

Orvig

1-n-Propyl-and 1-n-butyl-3-hydroxy-2-methyl-4- pyridinone complexes of group 13 (IIIA) metal ions

Can. J. Chem199169893900

10.1139/v91-131

Zhang

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Lipophilic coordination compounds: aluminum, gallium, and indium complexes of 1-aryl-3-hydroxy-2-methyl-4-pyridinones

Inorg. Chem199130509515

10.1021/ic00003a031

Muetterties

E.L.

Guggenberger

L.J.

Stereochemically nonrigid six-coordinate molecules. Crystal structure of tris(tropolonato)aluminum(III)

J. Am. Chem. Soc19729480468055

10.1021/ja00778a019

Nomiya

Yoshizawa

Tsukagoshi

Kasuga

N.C.

Hirakawa

Watanabe

Synthesis and structural characterization of silver(I), aluminium(III) and cobalt(II) complexes with 4-isopropyltropolone (hinokitiol) showing noteworthy biological activities. Action of silver(I)-oxygen bonding complexes on the antimicrobial activities

J. Inorg. Biochem.2004984660

10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2003.07.002

14659632

Parac

T.N.

Raymond

K.N.

Meso myths: What drives assembly of helical versus meso-[M₂L₃] clusters?

Angew. Chem. Int. Ed19993828782882

10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(19991004)38:19<2878::AID-ANIE2878>3.0.CO;2-W

Wunderlich

C.H.

Bergerhoff

Crystal structure of di-μ-oxo-bis(bis(1,2- dihydroxyanthrachinonato)aluminium-(aquabis(dimethylformamide)calcium)), Al₂O₄(C₁₄H₆O₄)₄ Ca₂(HCON (CH₃)₂)₄(H₂O)₂,(alizarine complex)

Z. Kristallogr1993207185188

10.1524/zkri.1993.207.Part-1.185

Bergerhoff

Wunderlich

C.H.

Crystal structure of di-μ-oxo-bis(bis(1,2,4- trihydroxyanthrachinonato)aluminium-(aquabis(dimethylformamide)calcium)), Al₂O₄(C₁₄H₆O₅)₄ Ca₂(HCON(CH₃)₂)₄(H₂O)₂, (purpurine complex)

Z. Kristallogr2010207189192 65

Venema

F.R.

van Koningsveld

Peters

J.A.

van Bekkum

Co-operative hydrogen bonding with short O O distances in a binuclear Al-glycolate complex

J. Chem. Soc, Chem. Commun.1990699700 66

Van Koningsveld

Venema

F.R.

Structure of the hydrogen-bonded binuclear complex trisodium trihydrogen bis[tris(glycolato)aluminate(III)]

Acta Cryst. C199147289292

10.1107/S0108270190008678

Bombi

G.G.

Corain

Sheikh-Osman

A.A.

Valle

G.C.

The speciation of aluminum in aqueous solutions of aluminum carboxylates. Part I. X-ray molecular structure of Al[OC(O)CH(OH)CH₃]₃

Inorg. Chim. Acta19901717983

10.1016/S0020-1693(00)84668-X

Matzapetakis

Raptopoulou

C.P.

Terzis

Lakatos

Kiss

Salifoglou

Synthesis, structural characterization, and solution behavior of the first mononuclear, aqueous aluminum citrate complex

Inorg. Chem199938618619

10.1021/ic9806131

Matzapetakis

Kourgiantakis

Dakanali

Raptopoulou

C.P.

Terzis

Lakatos

Kiss

Banyai

Iordanidis

Mavromoustakos

Synthesis, pH-dependent structural characterization, and solution behavior of aqueous aluminum and gallium citrate complexes

Inorg. Chem20014017341744

10.1021/ic000461l

11312727

Dakanali

Raptopoulou

C.P.

Terzis

Lakatos

Banyai

Kiss

Salifoglou

A novel dinuclear species in the aqueous distribution of aluminum in the presence of citrate

Inorg. Chem200342252254

10.1021/ic0258025

12693200

Feng

T.L.

Gurian

P.L.

Healy

M.D.

Barron

A.R.

Aluminum citrate: Isolation and structural characterization of a stable trinuclear complex

Inorg. Chem199029408411

10.1021/ic00328a013

Keizer

T.S.

Scott

B.L.

Sauer

N.N.

McCleskey

T.M.

Stable, soluble beryllium aluminum citrate complexes inspired by the emerald mineral structure

Angew. Chem. Int. Ed20054424032406

10.1002/anie.200462531

Happel

Harms

Seubert

Synthesis and structural characterization of two aluminium malate complexes

Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem200763319521958

10.1002/zaac.200700241

Lakatos

Bertani

Kiss

Venzo

Casarin

Benetollo

Ganis

Favretto

Al^III ion complexes of saccharic acid and mucic acid: A solution and solid-state study

Chem. Eur. J20041012811290

10.1002/chem.200305328

15007818

Klüfers

Kramer

Piotrowski

Senker

Polyol-Metall-Komplexe, 43 [1]. Galactarato-Komplexe mit Aluminium und Kupfer (II)

Z. Naturforsch. B20025714461453 76

Lewiński

Zachara

Grabska

Synthesis and molecular structure of (^tBuOO)(^tBuO)Al (μ-O^tBu)₂Al(mesal)₂. The first structurally characterized (alkylperoxo)aluminum compound

J. Am. Chem. Soc199611867946795

10.1021/ja961083f

Lewinski

Zachara

Gos

Grabska

Kopec

Madura

Marciniak

Prowotorow

Reactivity of various four-coordinate aluminum alkyls towards dioxygen: Evidence for spatial requirements in insertion of an oxygen molecule into the Al–C bond

Chem. Eur. J2000632153227

10.1002/1521-3765(20000901)6:17<3215::AID-CHEM3215>3.0.CO;2-8

11002999

Kessler

V.G.

Gohil

Parola

Interaction of some divalent metal acetylacetonates with Al, Ti, Nb and Ta isopropoxides. Factors influencing the formation and stability of heterometallic alkoxide complexes

Dalton Trans.2003544550 79

Garbauskas

M.F.

Wengrovius

J.H.

Structure of the aluminium alkoxide complex [Al(O-iPr)(3,5-heptanedione)₂]₂

Acta Cryst. C19874324412442

10.1107/S0108270187087468

Cohen

S.M.

Raymond

K.N.

Catecholate/salicylate heteropodands: Demonstration of a catecholate to salicylate coordination change

Inorg. Chem20003936243631

10.1021/ic990608c

11196825

Cohen

S.M.

Meyer

Raymond

K.N.

Enterobactin protonation and iron Release: Hexadentate tris-salicylate ligands as models for triprotonated ferric enterobactin1

J. Am. Chem. Soc199812062776286

10.1021/ja973442s

Polynova

T.N.

Bel’skaya

N.P.

de Garciya Banus

D.T.

Porai-Koshits

M.A.

Martynenko

L.I.

Crystal structure of the dihydrated potassium salt of aluminum ethylenediaminetetraacetate

J. Struct. Chem197011158159

10.1007/BF00743933

Polynova

T.N.

Zasurskaya

L.A.

Ilyukhin

A.B.

Redetermination of the crystal structure of K[AlEdta].2H₂O

Crystallogr. Rep199742168 84

Jung

W.S.

Chung

Y.K.

Shin

D.M.

Kim

S.D.

Crystal and solution structure characteristics of ethylenediaminetetraacetatoaluminate(III) and gallate(III)

Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn20027512631267

10.1246/bcsj.75.1263

Petrosyants

S.P.

Ilyukhin

A.B.

Malyarik

M.A.

Hydrogen-bonded aggregates of scandium(III) complexes

Russ. J. Inorg. Chem1996411595 86

Schmitt

Jordan

P.A.

Henderson

R.K.

Moore

G.R.

Anson

C.E.

Powell

A.K.

Synthesis, structures and properties of hydrolytic Al(III) aggregates and Fe(III) analogues formed with iminodiacetate-based chelating ligands

Coord. Chem. Rev2002228115126

10.1016/S0010-8545(02)00110-8

Kilyen

Lakatos

Latajka

Labadi

Salifoglou

Raptopoulou

C.P.

Kozlowski

Kiss

Al(III)-binding properties of iminodiacetic acid, nitrilotriacetic acid and their mixed carboxylic-phosphonic derivatives

J. Chem. Soc, Dalton Trans.200235783586 88

Ilyukhin

A.B.

Petrosyants

S.P.

Millovanov

S.V.

Malyarik

M.A.

Aluminum(III) and gallium(III) complexes with methyliminodiacetic acid: Crystal structures of Cat[M(Mida)₂] (Cat⁺ = Na, K, NH₄; M³⁺ = Al, Ga) and M₄N[Ga(Mida)₂]H₂O

Crystallogr. Rep199742958965 89

Petrosyants

S.P.

Malyarik

M.A.

Ilyukhin

A.B.

Complexation of aluminium and gallium with iminodiacetic acid in aqueous solutions: Crystal structure of diaqua di-μ-hydroxobis (iminodiacetato)di aluminium(III) and potassium bis(iminodiacetato)gallate(III)

Russ. J. Inorg. Chem199540765 90

Jyo

Kohno

Terazono

Kawano

Crystal structure of the aluminum(III) complex of 1,4,7-Triazacyclononane-N,N′,N′-triacetate

Anal. Sci19906629630

10.2116/analsci.6.629

Bossek

Hanke

Wieghardt

B.K.

Pendent arm macrocyclic complexes: Crystal structures of Al(TCTA) and In (TS-TACN)

Polyhedron19931215

10.1016/S0277-5387(00)87045-X

Soleimannejad

Aghabozorg

Mohammadzadeh

Hooshmand

2-(2-Pyridyl) pyridinium bis(pyridine-2,6-dicarboxylato-κ³O,N,O′)aluminate(III) trihydrate

Acta Cryst2008E64m870m871 93

Valle

G.C.

Bombi

G.G.

Corain

Favarato

Zatta

Crystal and molecular structures of diaqua(nitrilotriacetato)aluminium(III) and di-μ-hydroxo-bis(nitrilotriacetato)dialuminate(III) dianion

J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans.198915131517 94

Heath

S.L.

Jordan

P.A.

Johnson

I.D.

Moore

G.R.

Powell

A.K.

Helliwell

Comparative X-ray and ²⁷Al NMR spectroscopic studies of the speciation of aluminum in aqueous systems: Al(III) complexes of N(CH₂CO₂H)₂(CH₂CH₂OH)

J. Inorg. Biochem199559785794

10.1016/0162-0134(94)00064-H

Joszai

Kerekes

Satoshi

Sawada

Zekany

Equilibrium and structure of the Al(III)-ethylenediamine-N,N′-bis(3-hydroxy-2-propionate) (EDBHP) complex. A multi-method study by potentiometry, NMR, ESI MS and X-ray diffraction

Dalton Trans.200632213227 96

Rajeswaran

Blanton

T.N.

Klubek

K.P.

Refinement of the crystal structure of the δ-modification of tris(8-hydroxy-quinoline)aluminum(III), δ-Al(C₉H₆NO)₃, the blue luminescent Alq₃

Z. Kristallogr2003218439440 97

Muccini

Loi

M.A.

Kenevey

Zamboni

Masciocchi

Sironi

Blue luminescence of facial tris(quinolin-8-olato)aluminum (III) in solution, crystals, and thin films

Adv. Mater200416861864

10.1002/adma.200305421

Rajeswaran

Blanton

T.N.

Structure determination of a new polymorph (ɛ-Alq₃) of the electroluminescence OLED (organic light-emitting diode) material, tris(8-hydroxyquinoline) aluminum(Alq₃)

J. Chem. Cryst2005357176

10.1007/s10870-005-1157-4

Kim

T.S.

Kim

D.H.

H.J.

Shimada

Kawajiri

Okubo

Murata

Mitani

Improved lifetime of an OLED using Aluminum(III) tris(8-hydroxyquinolate)

Sci. Tech. Adv. Mater20045331337

10.1016/j.stam.2003.11.009

100

Fujii

Hirayama

Ohtani

Kodama

Crystal structure of tris(8-quinolinolato) aluminum(III)-ethyl acetate (1/0.5)

Anal. Sci199612153154

10.2116/analsci.12.153

101

Yuchi

Hiramatsu

Ohara

Ohata

Performance of tris(2-methyl-8-quinolinolato) aluminum as fluorescent anionophore

Anal. Sci20031911771181

10.2116/analsci.19.1177

12945673

102

Iijima

Yamamoto

Synthesis of reactive [Al(Et)(q′)₂](q′ = 2-methyl-8-quinolinolato) serving as a precursor of light emitting aluminum complexes: Reactivity, optical properties, and fluxional behavior of the aluminum complexes

J. Organometal. Chem200669150165023

10.1016/j.jorganchem.2006.08.060

103

Amini

M.M.

Sharbatdaran

Mirzaeeand

Mirzaei

Synthesis, structure and luminescence study of a binuclear aluminium complex: A novel structure containing six coordinated aluminium atoms in two distinct coordination geometries

Polyhedron20062532313237

10.1016/j.poly.2006.05.031

104

Albrecht

Blau

Fröhlich

Supramolecular chemistry and self-assembly special feature: “Size-selectivity” in the template-directed assembly of dinuclear triple-stranded helicates

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA2002994867

10.1073/pnas.062600799

11959938

105

Dawson

Wang

J.F.

Carducci

M.D.

Mash

E.A.

Tris[2-(2-oxidophenyl)-5-phenyl-1,3,4- oxadiazole-κ²O²,N³]aluminium 0.167-hydrate

Acta Cryst2004E60m1644m1646 106

Steinhauser

Heinz

Bartholomä

Weyhermüller

Nick

Hegetschweiler

Complex formation of ICL670 and related ligands with Fe^III and Fe^II

Eur. J. Inorg. Chem.200441774192 107

Jegier

J.A.

Munoz-Hernandez

Atwood

D.A.

Six-coordinate aluminium cations: Synthesis, characterization and catalysis

J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans.199925832588 108

Ikeda

Ueda

Nabeshima

Aluminium complexes of N₂O₂-type dipyrrins: the first hetero-multinuclear complexes of metallo-dipyrrins with high fluorescence quantum yields

Chem. Commun.200925442546 109

Cissell

J.A.

Vaid

T.P.

Rheingold

A.L.

Aluminum tetraphenylporphyrin and aluminum phthalocyanine neutral radicals

Inorg. Chem20064523672369

10.1021/ic051794r

16529446

110

Camacho-Camacho

Merino

Martínez-Martínez

F.J.

Nöth

Contreras

Syntheses and characterization by NMR spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction of complexes derived from metals of groups 2 and 13 and the ligand bis (3,5-di-tert-butyl-1-hydroxy-2-phenyl) amine

Eur. J. Inorg. Chem.199910211027 111

Qiao

Wang

L.D.

Xie

J.F.

Lei

G.T.

G.S.

Qiu

Strongly luminescent binuclear aluminium chelate with polymer-like molecular packing and solution processibility

Chem. Commun.200545604562 112

Tong

Y.P.

Zheng

S.L.

Chen

X.M.

Syntheses, structures, and luminescent properties of isomorphous hydroxo-bridged aluminum(III) and indium(III) compounds with 2-(2-hydroxyphenyl) benzimidazole

Aust. J. Chem200659653656

10.1071/CH06199

113

Hoveyda

H.R.

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Coordination chemistry of 2-(2′-hydroxyphenyl)-2- benzoxazole with gallium(III) and aluminum(III): Two uncommon Group 13 metal environments stabilized by a biologically relevant binding group

Inorg. Chem19933249094913

10.1021/ic00074a041

114

Langemann

Heineke

Rupprecht

Raymond

K.N.

Nordesferriferrithiocin. Comparative coordination chemistry of a prospective therapeutic iron chelating agent

Inorg. Chem19963556635673

10.1021/ic9601854

11666760

115

Van Der Helm

Baker

J.R.

Loghry

R.A.

Ekstrand

J.D.

Structures of alumichrome A and ferrichrome A at low temperature

Acta Cryst1981B37323330 116

Liu

Rettig

S.J.

Orvig

Polydentate ligand chemistry of Group 13 metals: Effects of the size and donor selectivity of metal ions on the structures and properties of aluminum, gallium, and indium complexes with potentially heptadentate (N₄O₃) amine phenol ligands

Inorg. Chem19923154005407

10.1021/ic00052a015

117

Bekaert

Lemoine

Brion

J.D.

Viossat

Tris[(R)-lactamide-κ²O,O′]zinc(II) tetrabromozincate

Z. Kristallogr200622145 118

Babian-Kibala

Chen

Cotton

F.A.

Daniels

L.M.

Falvello

L.R.

Schmid

Yao

Synthesis and problematic crystal structures of [Al(CH₃CN)₆][MCl₆]₃(CH₃CN)₃ (M = Ta, Nb or Sb)

Inorg. Chim. Acta1996250359364

10.1016/S0020-1693(96)05405-9

119

Pfeiffer

Murso

Mahalakshmi

Moigno

Kiefer

Stalke

Experimental and computational study on a variety of structural motifs and coordination modes in aluminium complexes of di(2-pyridyl)amides and -phosphanides

Eur. J. Inorg. Chem2002200232223234

10.1002/1099-0682(200212)2002:12<3222::AID-EJIC3222>3.0.CO;2-U

120

Leman

J.T.

Braddock-Wilking

Coolong

A.J.

Barron

A.R.

1,3-Diaryltriazenido compounds of aluminum

Inorg. Chem19933243244336

10.1021/ic00072a028

121

Braddock-Wilking

Leman

J.T.

Farrar

C.T.

Cosgrove-Larsen

S.A.

Singel

D.J.

Barron

A.R.

Radical anion complexes of tris(1,3-diphenyltriazenido)aluminum

J. Am. Chem. Soc199511717361745

10.1021/ja00111a010

122

Chen

Duang

Deng

Synthesis, structure and NMR characterization of a new monomeric aluminophosphate [dl-Co(en)₃]₂ [Al(HPO₄)₂(H_1.5PO₄)₂(H₂PO₄)₂](H₃PO₄)₄ containing four different types of monophosphates

Solid Sate Sci.200911622627

10.1016/j.solidstatesciences.2008.11.009

123

Azais

Bonhomme

Bonhomme-Coury

Vaissermann

Millot

Man

P.P.

Bertani

Hirschinger

Livage

Cubane shaped clusters, precursors for aluminophosphate frameworks: A solid state multinuclear NMR study, in time and frequency domains

J. Chem. Soc. Dalton Trans.2002609618 124

Azaïs

Bonhomme-Coury

Vaissermann

Bertani

Hirschinger

Maquet

Bonhomme

Synthesis and characterization of a novel cyclic aluminophosphinate: Structure and solid-state NMR study

Inorg. Chem200241981988

10.1021/ic010700k

11849102

125

Azaïs

Bonhomme-Coury

Vaissermann

Maquet

Bonhomme

The first aluminophosphonate cluster analogue of the 4=1 SBU of zeolites: Structure and multinuclear solid-state NMR study, including ¹H NMR

Eur. J. Inorg. Chem.200228382843 126

Azais

Bonhomme

Bonhomme-Coury

Kickelbick

Aluminophosphonate clusters: A new architecture

Dalton Trans.200331583159 127

Grottel

Kozak

Maluszyriska

Pajak

An X-ray and nuclear magnetic resonance study of structure and ion motions in (C(NH₂)₃)₃AlF₆

J. Phys199241837 128

Adil

Goreshnik

Courant

Dujardin

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

Synthesis and structures of new hybrid fluorides templated by tetraprotonated pentaerythrityl tetramine

Solid State Sci.200412291235 129

Adil

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

Structural chemistry of organically-templated metal fluorides

J. Fluorine Chem200612713491354

10.1016/j.jfluchem.2006.04.015

130

Bourosh

P.N.

Koropchanu

E.B.

Simonov

Gdaniec

Bologa

O.A.

Gerbeleu

N.V.

Cobalt(III) α-dimethylglyoximates [Co(DH)₂(Py)₂]₂SiF₆·10H₂O and [Co(DH)₂(Thio)₂]₂SiF₆· 2H₂O·C₂H₅OH: Synthesis and structure

Russ. J. Inorg. Chem200271604 131

Touret

Bourdon

Leblanc

Retoux

Renaudin

Maisonneuve

Crystal structure of new hydroxide fluorides with isolated F-anions: [H₃N(CH₂)₆NH₃]₂M(F,OH)₆(F,OH)· H₂O (M = Al, In)

J. Fluorine Chem2001110133138

10.1016/S0022-1139(01)00420-1

132

Adil

Marrot

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

Diethylenetriaminium hexafluoroaluminate dehydrate

Acta Cryst2005E61m1178m1180 133

Fourquet

J.L.

Plet

Paper

R.D.

The structure of dimercury(I) alluminium(III) fluoride dehydrate

Rev. Chim. Miner198623183 134

Goreshnik

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

1,4,8,11-Tetraazacyclodecane-1,4,8,11-tetraium bis(aquapentafluoroaluminate) dehydrate

Acta Cryst2003E59m1059m1061 135

Cadiau

Hemon-Ribaud

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

2,4,6-Triamino-1,3,5-triazine- 1,3-diium aquapentafluoridoaluminate

Acta Cryst2008E64m523m524 136

Adil

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

Tris(2-ammonioethyl)aminium decafluorominium monohydrate, (H₄tren)[Al₂F₁₀]·H₂O

Acta Cryst2004E60m1379m1381 137

Tang

L.Q.

Dadachov

M.S.

Zou

X.D.

SU-12: A silicon-substituted ASU-16 with circular 24-rings and templated by a monoamine

Z. Kristallogr2001216385386 138

Goreshnik

Leblanc

Maisonneuve

From isolated polyanions to 1-D structure: Synthesis and crystal structure of hybrid fluorides {[(C₂H₄NH₃)₃NH]₄⁺}₂·(H₃O)⁺·[Al₇F₃₀]⁹⁻ and {[(C₂H₄NH₃)₃NH]₄ ⁺}₂·[Al₇F₂₉]⁸⁻ ′ (H₂O)₂

Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem2002628162166

10.1002/1521-3749(200201)628:1<162::AID-ZAAC162>3.0.CO;2-K

139

Dimitrov

Heidemann

Kemnitz

F/Cl-Exchange on AlCl₃-pyridine adducts: Synthesis and characterization of trans-difluoro-tetrakis-pyridine-aluminum-chloride, [AlF₂(Py)₄]⁺Cl⁻

Inorg. Chem2006451080710814

10.1021/ic061493x

17173440

140

Krossing

Raabe

Noncoordinating anions—Fact or fiction? A survey of likely candidates

Angew. Chem. Int. Ed20044320662090

10.1002/anie.200300620

141

Gonsior

Krossing

Müller

Raabe

Jansen

van Wüllen

PX₄ ⁺, P₂X₅ ⁺, and P₅X₂ ⁺ (X = Br, I) salts of the superweak Al(OR)₄ ⁻ anion [R = C(CF₃)₃]

Chem. Eur. J2002844754492

10.1002/1521-3765(20021004)8:19<4475::AID-CHEM4475>3.0.CO;2-M

12355536

142

Krossing

The facile preparation of weakly coordinating anions: Structure and characterisation of silverpolyfluoroalkoxyaluminates AgAl(OR_F)₄, calculation of the alkoxide ion affinity

Chem. Eur. J20017490502

10.1002/1521-3765(20010119)7:2<490::AID-CHEM490>3.0.CO;2-I

11271536

143

Santiso-Quiñones

Brückner

Knapp

Dionn

Passmore

Krossing

Cyclododecasulfur as a ligand: From gas-phase experiments to the crystal structures of [Cu(S₁₂)(S₈)]⁺ and [Cu(S₁₂)(CH₂Cl₂)]⁺

Angew. Chem. Int. Ed20094811331137

10.1002/anie.200804021

144

Santiso-Quiñones

Higelin

Schaefer

Brückner

Knapp

Krossing

Cu[Al(OR^F)₄] starting materials and their application in the preparation of [Cu(S_n)]⁺ (n = 12, 8) complexes

Chem. Eur. J20091566636677

10.1002/chem.200900244

19499560

145

Lewinski

Zachara

Kopec

Madura

Prowotorow

On the mechanism of four-coordinate aluminum alkyls interaction with dioxygen: Evidence for spatial demands in the autoxidation reaction

Inorg. Chem. Commun19992131134

10.1016/S1387-7003(99)00029-5

146

Kendall

R.A.

Dunning

T.H.

JrHarrison

R.J.

Electron affinities of the first-row atoms revisited. Systematic basis sets and wave functions

J. Chem. Phys.19929667966806

10.1063/1.462569

147

Woon

D.E.

Dunning

T.H.

Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations. III. The second row atoms, Al-Ar

J. Chem. Phys.19939813581371

10.1063/1.464303

148

Haraguchi

Fujiwara

Aluminum complexes in solution as studied by aluminum-27 nuclear magnetic resonance

J. Phys. Chem19697834673473 149

Kon’shin

V.V.

Chernyshov

B.N.

Ippolitov

E.G.

Composition and structure of aluminum fluorocomplexes in aqueous solutions of hydrogen peroxide and inorganic acids

Russ. Chem. Bull19873615771581

10.1007/BF00960107

150

Müller

Bentrup

²⁷Al-NMR-Untersuchungen an Alkalifluoroaluminaten

Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem19895751725

10.1002/zaac.19895750104

151

Chen

J.L.

Noodleman

Case

D.A.

Bashford

Incorporating solvation effects into density functional electronic structure calculations

J. Phys. Chem.1994981105911068

10.1021/j100094a013

152

Tomasi

Mennucci

Cammi

Quantum mechanical continuum solvation models

Chem. Rev200510529993093

10.1021/cr9904009

16092826

153

Frisch

M.J.

Trucks

G.W.

Schlegel

H.B.

Scuseria

G.E.

Robb

M.A.

Cheeseman

J.R.

Montgomery

J.A.

Jr.Vreven

Kudin

K.N.

Burant

J.C.

Gaussian 03 Revision B.05Gaussian Inc

Wallingford, CT, USA

2004 154

Vosko

S.H.

Wilk

Nusair

Accurate spin-dependent electron liquid correlation energies for local spin density calculations: a critical analysis

Can. J. Phys19805812001211

10.1139/p80-159

155

Stephens

P.J.

Devlin

F.J.

Chabalowski

C.F.

Frisch

M.J.

Ab initio calculation of vibrational absorption and circular dichroism spectra using density functional force fields

J. Phys. Chem1994981162311627

10.1021/j100096a001

156

Lee

Yang

Parr

R.G.

Development of the Colle-Salvetti correlation-energy formula into a functional of the electron density

Phys. Rev1988B37785789 157

Becke

A.D.

Density functional thermochemistry. III. The role of exact exchange

J. Chem. Phys19939856485652

10.1063/1.464913

158

Møller

Plesset

M.S.

Note on an approximation treatment for many-electron systems

Phys. Rev193446618622

10.1103/PhysRev.46.618

159

Francl

M.M.

Pietro

W.J.

Hehre

W.J.

Binkley

J.S.

Gordon

M.S.

DeFrees

D.J.

Pople

J.A.

Self-consistent molecular orbital methods. 23. A polarization basis set for second row elements

J. Chem. Phys19827736543665

10.1063/1.444267

160

McLean

A.D.

Chandler

G.S.

Contracted Gaussian basis sets for molecular calculations. I. Second row atoms, Z = 11–18

J. Chem. Phys19807256395648

10.1063/1.438980

161

Robinson

Haynes

P.D.

Dynamical effects in ab initio NMR calculations: Classical force fields fitted to quantum forces

J. Chem. Phys2010133084109

10.1063/1.3474573

20815562

Figures and Table Figure 1

Correlation between the calculated isotropic ²⁷Al chemical shielding constants using the X-ray crystallographic geometries at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) (black squares) and the HF/6-311+G(d,p) (red circles) levels versus those obtained at the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level. The black dashed line and the red dashed line are the best-fit linear regression of the two data sets, respectively, and the best-fit equations are given in Equations 1 and 2. The solid black line is the ideal diagonal line (y = x).

Figure 2

Calculated ²⁷Al shielding constants using the GIAO method with the B3LYP functional with different basis sets in optimized geometries of [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺ (A), [Al(OH)₄]⁻ (B) and other complexes (C). The basis sets were labeled on the graphs. In Panels A and B, there are three data points for each basis set which represent the values calculated in vacuum, in the PCM environment of water and methanol. Twelve geometries in A were obtained at the B3LYP/aug-cc-pVQZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVDZ and B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) levels in vacuum, in the PCM environment of methanol and water, and the data sets are colored in black, red, blue, green, cyan, magenta, yellow, brown, orange, pink, purple and gray, respectively. The last geometry in A, which is in light orange color, was obtained at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level in the PCM environment of water. Ten geometries in B were obtained at the B3LYP/aug-cc-pVQZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVDZ and B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) levels in vacuum, at the B3LYP/ aug-cc-pVQZ and B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ levels in the PCM environment of methanol, and at the B3LYP/aug-cc-pVQZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ, B3LYP/aug-cc-pVDZ and B3LYP/ 6-31G(d) levels in the PCM environment of water, and the data sets are colored in black, red, blue, green, cyan, magenta, yellow, brown, orange and pink, respectively. Six complexes in C are [Al(oxalate)₃]³⁻, [AlF₆]³⁻, [Al(EDTA)]⁻, Al(lactate)₃, [Al(malonate)₂(OH₂)₂]⁻ and [Al(N≡CCH₃)₆]³⁺, respectively. All the values obtained with a same geometry are connected with straight lines.

Figure 3

Correlation between the experimental ²⁷Al chemical shifts versus the calculated values using the X-ray crystallographic geometries at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) (black squares), the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) (red circles) and the HF/6-311+G(d,p) (blue triangles) levels. The black solid line, the red dashed line and the dotted blue lines are the best-fit linear regression of the three data sets, respectively, and the best-fit equations are given in Equations 3–5.

Figure 4

Correlation between the experimental ²⁷Al chemical shifts versus the calculated values at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level using the optimized geometries at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. The black solid line is the best-fit linear regression of the data and the best-fit equation is given in Equation 6, while the dashed red line is the ideal diagonal line (y = x).

Figure 5

Difference between the calculated σ_Al for 10 Al(III) complexes. The blue bars are the differences between the values in the PCM environment of water and in vacuum using the X-ray geometries. The red bars are the differences between the values calculated using the geometries optimized at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level in the PCM environment of water and those calculated using the X-ray geometries in vacuum. All the σ_Al are calculated at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. The complexes are [Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺, [Al(oxalate)₃]³⁻, [AlF₆]³⁻, Al(8-hydroxyquinoline)₃, [Al(EDTA)]⁻, Al(lactate)₃, [Al(malonate)₂(OH₂)₂]⁻, [Al(H₋₁citrate)₂]⁵⁻, [Al(N≡CCH₃)₆]³⁺ and Al(maltol)₃ for 1–10, respectively.

Table 1

Comparison between the calculated and experimental ²⁷Al chemical shifts.

Species a	Refs.	²⁷Al chemical shifts

		GIAOB3LYP/ 6-31G(d) b	GIAOB3LYP/ 6-311+G(d,p) b	GIAOHF/6-311+ G(d,p) b	GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d)//B3LYP/6-31G(d) c	Expt.d
Chemical shift reference

[Al(OH₂)₆]³⁺	[20–24]	0 ± 2.87	0 ± 3.44	0 ± 2.99	0	0

Al(III) hydrolysis products

[Al₂(μ₂-OH)₂(OH₂)₈]⁴⁺	[25]	0.74 ± 1.94	1.73 ± 0.11	−1.30 ± 2.35	3.23	4.2

[Al₈(μ₃-OH)₂(μ₂-OH)₁₂(OH₂)₁₆]¹⁰⁺	[26]	0.34 ± 0.39				4.8 (MAS)
		5.67 ± 0.11				8.4
		9.53 ± 0.10				11

[AlO₄Al₁₂(μ₂-OH)₂₄(OH₂)₁₂]⁷⁺ (Keggin-Al₁₃)	[25]	52.95 ± 0.02	61.50 ± 0.52	57.30		63.5
		7.05 ± 0.53	6.53 ± 0.67	4.52 ± 0.65		12

[Al₁₃(μ₃-OH)₆(μ₂-OH)₁₂(OH₂)₆]¹⁵⁺ (flat-Al₁₃)	[27]	15.74
		9.71 ± 0.79
		0.25 ± 0.32

[Al₃₀(μ₄-O)₈(μ₃-OH)₆(μ₂-OH)₅₀(OH₂)₂₄]¹⁵⁺ (Al₃₀)	[25]	4.08 ± 1.18				4
		8.57 ± 0.41				5~12
		64.38 ± 0.51				64.5

Al(III) complexation with carboxylate and carbonyl groups

[AlL₆]³⁻, L = formate	[28]	0.92	−4.12	−2.56

[AlL₆]³⁺, L = dimethylformamide	[29,30]	3.20 ± 0.46	−0.78 ± 0.60	0.42 ± 0.41

[AlL₆]³⁺, L = dimethylacetamide	[31]	−6.97	−16.13	−15.50

[AlL₃]³⁻, L = oxalate	[32–39]	13.35 ± 0.97	14.77 ± 0.97	15.43 ± 1.12	20.15	16.3

[AlL₂(OH₂)₂]⁻, L = malonate	[40]	4.81	4.32	3.65	19.77	2.5

[AlL₂(OH₂)₂]⁻, L = methylmalonate	[21]	8.29	2.93	4.14

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = acetylacetone	[41–44]	2.44 ± 0.84	−2.29 ± 0.50	−0.40 ± 0.87		0.88

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = 1,3-diphenylpropane-1,3-dione	[45]	7.39	−0.37	2.15

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = 1,3-dimesitylpropane-1,3-dione	[46]	5.26	−0.38	1.65

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = 1,3-bis(pentafluorophenyl)propane-1, 3-dione	[47]	2.39	−1.52	0.37

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = methylacetoacetate	[48]	6.54	2.60	2.60

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = t-butylacetoacetate	[49]	3.74	−0.91	−1.17

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = 3-(4-pyridyl)-2,4-pentanedione	[50]	2.17	−3.12	−0.40

[AlL₃]³⁺, L = 3-phenyl-2,4-pentanedione	[50]	2.53	−3	−0.51

AlL₃, L = iso-maltol	[51]	5.98	1.22	1.37	12.60	2.9

Al(III) complexation with catechol-like ligands

AlL₃, L = maltol	[52]	34.10 ± 0.17	39.04 ± 0.13	31.82 ± 0.12	43.36	37, 38

AlL₃, L = 2-ethylmaltol	[53]	33.86	38.80	31.48	43.74	38

[AlL]³⁻, L = tris(N,N′-diethyl-2,3-dihydroxoterephthalamide)diamine	[54]	30.30	32.66	26.75		26

AlL₃, L = 3-hydroxy-2-pyridone	[55]	24.09	33.43	27.05

AlL₃, L = 1,2-dimethyl-3-hydroxy-4-pyridone	[56,57]	32.32 ± 0.00	37.04 ± 0.00	28.75 ± 0.00		36, 39

AlL₃, L = 1-n-propyl-2-methyl-3-hydroxy-4-pyridone	[58]	31.80	35.76	28.37		37

AlL₃, L = 1-n-butyl-2-methyl-3-hydroxy-4-pyridone	[58]	31.21	35.51	27.77		37

AlL₃, L = 1-p-tolyl-2-methyl-3-hydroxy-4-pyridone	[59]	33.74	38.55	30.39		37

AlL₃, L = tropolone	[60]	32.68	36.11	29.72	42.72	36.6

AlL₃, L = 6-i-propyltropolone	[61]	33.42	36.50	29.84

Al₂L₃, L = 1,3-bis((3-oxy-1-methyl-2-oxo-1,2-dihydropyridin- 4-yl)carboxamido)-2,2-dimethylpropane	[62]	28.67 ± 0.00	34.18 ± 0.00

[Al₂(μ₂-O)₂ L₄]⁴⁻, L =1,2-dihydroxyanthraquinone	[63]	23.01 ± 0.00

[Al₂(μ₂-O)₂ L₄]⁴⁻, L =1,2,4-trihydroxyanthraquinone	[64]	23.67 ± 0.05				23.1

Al(III) complexation with carboxylate and hydroxyl groups

mer-[AlL₃]³⁻, L = glycolate	[65]	30.86	37.08	28.13

fac-[AlL₃]³⁻, L = glycolate	[66]	27.65	31.59	23.55	34.00	25.5

[AlL₃]³⁻, L = lacate	[67]	23.12 ± 0.13	26.32 ± 0.26	21.16 ± 0.16	33.44	24

[AlL₂]⁵⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[68,69]	19.07 ± 0.45	18.04 ± 0.68	17.33 ± 0.71	25.69	21.4

[Al₂L₃]⁶⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[70]	25.36	20.72	17.98
		20.28	14.44	11.40

[Al₃L₃(μ₂-OH)(OH₂)]⁴⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[71]	3.43	−0.44	0.05	20.74	0.6
		14.42	9.81	9.32	22.00	10.9
		15.90	9.81	8.41	23.00	12.9

[Al₃L₂(μ₂-OH)₂(OH₂)₄]⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[20]	5.43 ± 0.70
		25.75

[Be₂Al₂L₄]⁶⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[72]	17.79 ± 0.87				14.0

[Be₆Al₆L₆]¹⁸⁻, L = H₋₁citrate	[72]	3.07 ± 0.18				12.2

[Al₄L₆]⁶⁻, L = H₋₁malate	[73]	23.27 ± 0.00	20.20 ± 0.00	15.83 ± 0.00		17.2
		6.35 ± 0.00	1.14 ± 0.00	1.18 ± 0.00		1.6

[Al₄L₄(μ₂-OH)₂]²⁻, L = H₋₁malate	[73]	25.10 ± 0.79	28.46 ± 0.87	21.02 ± 1.06		2.2,1.6
		5.59 ± 1.02	1.83 ± 1.28	1.80 ± 1.11		1.1

[Al₂L₂(OH₂)₂]²⁻, L = H₋₁saccharate	[74]	28.61 ± 0.00	29.21 ± 0.00	24.36 ± 0.00	65.49

[Al₆L₄(μ₂-OH)₈]⁶⁻, L = H₋₄galactarate	[75]	16.43 ± 2.40	17.82 ± 1.13	11.64 ± 1.12		16.1, 16.8, 17.4, 17.7 (MAS)
		20.54 ± 1.74	21.27 ± 1.14	15.86 ± 1.75		22.6, 21.9 (MAS)

Al₂L₂(μ2-t-butoxo)2(t-butyoxy-t-butylperoxy), L = o-methoxycarbonyl phenoxy	[76,77]	11.91 ± 0.00	3.99 ± 0.00	3.94 ± 0.01
		62.46 ± 0.00	61.47 ± 0.01	64.46 ± 0.01

[AlL₂L′₂]⁻, L = acetylacetonate, L′ = iso-propoxo	[78]	9.25	2.89	4.44

Al₂L₄L′₂, L = 3,5-heptanedionato, L′ = iso-propoxo	[79]	9.69 ± 0.00	4.71 ± 0.00	2.40 ± 0.00

[AlL]⁺, L = (2-hydroxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)-bis (2,3-dihydroxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)ammonio	[80]	8.05	1.26	3.95

[AlL]⁺, L = tris((2-Hydroxybenzoyl)-2-aminoethyl)ammine	[81]	7.04	0.38	2.64

[AlL]⁺, L = tris((2-Hydroxy-3-methoxybenzoyl)-2- aminoethyl)ammine	[81]	6.05	0.27	2.24

Al(III) complexation with polyamino-polycarboxylates

[AlL]⁻, L = ethylenediaminetetraacetate	[82–84]	40.87 ± 2.57	42.22 ± 1.67	36.49 ± 1.27	47.88	41.2

[AlL₂]⁻, L = iminodiacetate	[85–87]	37.94 ± 0.66	41.68 ± 0.60	35.15 ± 0.42	41.69	36.5

[AlL₂]⁻, L = methyliminodiacetate	[88]	41.69 ± 0.62	43.18 ± 0.91	36.82 ± 0.63

Al₂L₂(μ₂-OH)₂(OH₂)₂, L = iminodiacetate	[86,89]	20.12 ± 0.67	22.07 ± 1.60	18.56 ± 1.03

AlL, L = 1,4,7-triazacyclononane-N,N′,N″-triacetate	[90,91]	52.17 ± 0.82	49.37 ± 1.44	44.68 ± 0.73

[AlL₂]⁻, L = dipicolinate	[92]	22.62	27.33	23.22

AlL(OH₂)₂, L = nitrilotriacetate	[93]	24.77	25.74	21.60

[Al₂L₂(μ₂-OH)₂]²⁻, L = nitrilotriacetate	[93]	27.42 ± 0.00	26.82 ± 0.00	22.16 ± 0.00	40.27	25.4

Al₂L₂(OH)₂, L = N-(2-oxyethyl)iminodiacetate	[94]	30.05 ± 0.00	28.59 ± 0.00	24.17 ± 0.00		32.8

Al₂L₂(μ₂-OH)₂, L = ethylene-N,N′-bis(3-hydroxy propionato)	[95]	29.00 ± 1.69	27.50 ± 1.33	24.23 ± 1.41	38.74	25~30

[Al₄L₂(μ₂-OH)₄]²⁻, L = 1,3-diamino-2-propanolato-N,N,N′,N′-tetraacetato	[86]	27.26 ± 1.69	25.83 ± 1.00	19.69 ± 0.56

[Al₄L₂L′₂(μ₂-OH)(μ₂-O)]⁻, L = N-(3-ammoniopropyl)carbamato, L′ = 1,3-diamino-2-propanolato- N,N,N′,N′-tetraacetato	[86]	30.00 ± 0.50	27.11 ± 1.36	22.54 ± 0.15

Al(III) complexation with mixed O and N ligands

AlL₃, L = 8-hydroxyquinoline	[96–100]	30.68 ± 1.84	31.27 ± 1.37	29.39 ± 1.68	40.41	31.1

AlL₃, L = 2-methyl-8-hydroxyquinoline	[101]	33.28	35.11	31.33

AlL₂L′, L = 2-methyl-8-hydroxyquinoline, L′ = picolinato	[102]	28.81	29.78	26.97

Al₂L₄(μ₂-2-(ethoxy)ethoxo))₂, L = 8-hydroxyquinoline	[103]	28.14 ± 0.44	24.82 ± 1.21	22.39 ± 1.29	37.52	26.9

Al₂L₃, L = 1,3-bis(8-hydroxyquinolin-7-yl)-2-methylenepropane	[104]	33.55 ± 0.00	34.88 ± 0.00	31.92 ± 0.00

AlL₃, L = 2-(2-hydroxyphenyl)-5-phenyl-1,3,4-oxadiazole	[105]	8.95	−0.96	3.41

[AlL₂]⁻, L = 1-phenyl-3,5-bis(2-oxyphenyl)-1,2,4-triazole	[106]	6.91	0.85	2.80

[AlL₂(OH₂)₂]⁺, L = N,N′-bis(3,5-di-tbutylsalicylidene) ethylenediamine	[107]	7.41	5.02	8.07

[AlL₂(CH₃OH)₂]⁺, L = N,N′-bis(3,5-di-tbutylsalicylidene) ethylenediamine	[107]	11.62 ± 1.47	8.59 ± 2.08	9.40 ± 1.21

[AlL₂(OH₂)₂]⁻, L = 1,9-bis(2-oxyphenyl)-5-phenyldipyrrine	[108]	6.67	3.16	5.88

AlLL′₂, L = 5,10,15,20-tetraphenylporphyrine, L′ = tetrahydrofuran	[109]	−5.41	−15.23	−10.73

AlL₂, L = 3,5-di-t-butyl-1,2-quinone-1-(2-hydroxy-3,5-di-tbutylphenyl) imine	[110]	50.61	50.41	41.14

AlL₂L′₂, L =2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane-3,5-dionato, L′ = 2-((2-hydroxy)benzylidene)amino)phenolato	[111]	12.17 ± 0.00	7.15 ± 0.00	6.82 ± 0.00

Al₂L₄(μ₂-OH)₂, L = 2-(2-oxyphenyl)benzimidazole	[112]	7.96 ± 0.00	1.56 ± 0.00	2.80 ± 0.00

Al₂L₄(μ₂-OH)₂, L = 2-(2′-hydroxyphenyl)-2-benzoxazolato	[113]	14.92 ± 0.21	± 0.00	8.12 ± 0.05		5

[AlL₂]⁻, L = nordesferriferrithiocin	[114]	19.95	17.46	16.86

[AlL₂]⁻, L = desferriferrithiocin	[114]	12.84	4.89	7.58

AlL, L = alumichrome A	[115]	26.96				31.54

[AlL]⁺, L =tris(5′-chloro-2′-hydroxybenzylaminoethyl)amine	[116]	19.87	11.25	13.95

[Al₃(μ₃-O)L₆L′₃]⁺, L = acetate, L′ = acetonitrile	[116]	2.66 ± 0.24	−1.08 ± 0.17	−0.16 ± 0.57

Al(III) complexation with N's

[AlL₆]³⁺, L = acetonitrile	[118]	−20.44 ± 2.21	−37.13 ± 1.12	−27.74 ± 1.59	−14.60	−33

AlL₃, L = bis(2-pyridyl)amido	[119]	28.36	20.50	23.19

AlL₃, L = 1,3-bis(2-methylphenyl)triazenido	[120]	28.62	16.35	21.86	41.93	28

AlL₃, L = 1,3-bis(4-chlorophenyl)triazenido	[120]	28.62	23.05	23.15		26

AlL₃, L = 1,3-bis(4-methoxyphenyl)triazenido	[120]	26.60	20.75	21.82	41.48	27

AlL₃, L = 1,3-diphenyltriazenido	[121]	26.72	21.26	21.82		25

Al(III) complexation with P and other ligands

[Al(H₂L)₃(HL)₃]⁶⁻, L = phosphate	[122]	−9.22	10.78	−14.88		−15.2

[Al₄(HL)₄L′₁₂]⁴⁺, L = phosphate, L′ = ethanol	[123]	1.32 ± 0.00				−8.7, −8.8 (MAS)
		1.77 ± 0.00				−8.2

[Al₂L₂L′₈]⁴⁺, L = phenylphosphinato, L′ = n-butanol	[124]	4.91 ± 0.00	2.04 ± 0.00	0.09 ± 0.00		−2.5

[Al₃L₂L′₁₀(μ₂-OH)]⁴⁺, L = phenylphosphinato, L′ = ethanol	[125]	−0.02				−2.2
		3.42 ± 0.69				1.5

[Al₅L₄L′₁₀(μ₂-OH)₂]⁵⁺, L = phenylphosphinato, L′ = sec-butanol	[126]	−0.32 ± 0.07				0
		40.99				48.7

Al(III)-fluoride complexes

[AlF₆]³⁻	[127–132]	17.60 ± 0.84	−1.05 ± 0.88	−4.77 ± 1.22		−5, −0.1, −0.6, −2.4, −2.7, −2.8, −17.9,

[AlF₅(OH₂)]²⁻	[129, 133–135]	17.46 ± 1.26	5.18 ± 1.46	−0.05 ± 2.33		−6.3, −12.0, −13.8, −14.4

[Al₂F₁₀]⁴⁻	[136,137]	18.35 ± 0.97

[Al₄F₁₈]⁶⁻	[129]	12.62 ± 0.06

[Al₇F₃₀]⁹⁻	[138]	−3.59
		12.16 ± 0.29

[AlF₂L₄]⁺, L = pyridine	[139]	6.74 ± 0.47	2.10 ± 1.75	4.19 ± 0.04	13.53	3.6 (MAS)

Tetrahedral-coordinated Al(III) with O's

[Al(OR)₄]⁻, R = C(CF₃)₃	[140–143]	40.55	33.09	38.36	51.71	38.8
		41.41	33.35	38.80		36.2
		39.71	32.22	36.79		37.5
		36.58
		35.84	26.16	32.88		36
		41.08	29.83	38.56		33.8
		31.80	21.82	27.67		34.1
		39.66	31.83	36.86		34.1
		41.91		39.54

[Al(OR)₄]⁻, R = CH(CF₃)₂	[142,144]	58.23 ± 0.33	56.30 ± 0.11	58.42 ± 0.64	69.97	58
		61.18	60.69	61.91		58
		55.61	52.74	54.95		56.9

[Al(OR)₄]⁻, R = C(CH₃)(CF₃)₂	[142,144]	50.29	45.58	49.88		45.2
		50.71	44.95	49.34		45.6

[(OR)₃Al FAl(OR)₃]⁻, R = C(CF₃)₃	[141]	32.62 ± 1.47	27.89 ± 1.89	33.22 ± 2.21	46.30	36

Tetrahedral-coordinated Al(III) with C's and N's

Al₂L₂L′₄, L = pyrazolyl, L′ = t-butyl	[145]	143.64 ± 0.00	146.56 ± 0.00	148.74 ± 0.00	143.42	150

Al₂L₂L′₄, L = 3,5-dimethylpyrazolyl, L′ = methyl	[77]	140.62 ± 0.00	164.46 ± 0.00	158.22 ± 0.00	139.69	150

AlLL′₂, L = 1,3-diphenyltriazenido, L′ = iso-butyl	[120]	170.36	189.01	178.95

AlLL′₂, L = 1,3-diphenyltriazenido, L′ = 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylphenoxy	[120]	41.52	44.09	50.88	45.65	31

Penta-coordinated Al(III) complexes

[AlL]²⁻, L = (2-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)-bis(2,3-dihydroxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)amine	[79]	51.30	53.08

[AlL]²⁻, L = (2-hydroxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)-bis(2,3-dihydroxybenzoyl-2-aminoethyl)amine	[79]	56.30

AlLL′, L = N,N′-ethylene-bis(salicylideneamino-), L′ = methyl	[119]	61.12	66.86	64.69

B₂Al₂(μ₂-ethoxo)L₄L′₆, L = pyrazolyl, L′ = ethyl	[77]	67.85 ± 0.00	68.09 ± 0.00	66.20 ± 0.00	72.01	62

“H₋₁” in the complexation species refers that the hydroxyl group or one of the hydroxyl groups in the ligand is deprotonated;

The chemical shifts were obtained by subtracting the calculated isotropic chemical shielding constants from the averaged isotropic shielding tensor of the reference species computed at the same theoretical level. The calculated ²⁷Al chemical tensors were obtained with the GIAO method at three theoretical levels: B3LYP/6-31G(d), B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) and HF/6-311+G(d,p) and the X-ray crystallographic structures were used for the molecular geometries. The values following “±” are the standard deviations of the calculated values of either several models or multiple chemically equivalent sites;

The molecular geometries were optimized at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level, followed by a chemical shielding tensor calculation at the GIAO-B3LYP/6-31G(d) level;

The values followed by “(MAS)” refer that the measurements were done using the solid-state MAS ²⁷Al NMR spectroscopy and the isotropic chemical shifts were obtained by a fitting procedure from the spectra. Otherwise, the measurements were done in the solution state.