Gas-phase behaviour of Ru(II) cyclopentadienyl-derived complexes with N-coordinated ligands by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: fragmentation pathways and energetics

Rationale: The gas-phase behaviour of six Ru(II) cyclopentadienyl-derived complexes with N-coordinated ligands, compounds with antitumor activities against several cancer lines, was studied. This was performed with the intent of establishing fragmentation pathways and to determine the Ru-L(N) and Ru-L(P) ligand bond dissociation energies. Such knowledge can be an important tool for the postulation of the mechanisms of action of these anticancer drugs.

Methods: Two types of instruments equipped with electrospray ionisation were used (ion trap and a Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) mass spectrometer). The dissociation energies were determined using energy-variable collision-induced dissociation measurements in the ion trap. The FTICR instrument was used to perform MS(n) experiments on one of the compounds and to obtain accurate mass measurements. Theoretical calculations were performed at the density functional theory (DFT) level using two different functionals (B3LYP and M06L) to estimate the dissociation energies of the complexes under study.

Results: The influence of the L(N) on the bond dissociation energy (D) of RuCp compounds with different nitrogen ligands was studied. The lability order of L(N) was: imidazole<1-butylimidazole<5-phenyl-1H-tetrazole<1-benzylimidazole. Both the functionals used gave the following ligand lability order: imidazole<1-benzylimidazole<5-phenyl-1H-tetrazole<1-butylimidazole. It is clear that there is an inversion between 1-benzylimidazole and 1-butylimidazole for the experimental and theoretical lability orders. The M06L functional afforded values of D closer to the experimental values. The type of phosphane (L(P) ) influenced the dissociation energies, with values of D being higher for Ru-L(N) with 1-butylimidazole when the phosphane was 1,2-bis(diphenylphosphino)ethane. The Ru-L(P) bond dissociation energy for triphenylphosphane was independent of the type of complex.

Conclusions: The D values of Ru-L(N) and Ru-L(P) were determined for all six compounds and compared with the values calculated by the DFT method. For the imidazole-derived ligands the energy trend was rationalized in terms of the increasing extension of the σ-donation/π-backdonation effect. The bond dissociation energy of Ru-PPh(3) was independent of the fragmentations.