Chemistry Stack Exchange is a question and Anybody can ask a question

answer site for scientists, academics, teachers,

and students in the field of chemistry. It only
takes a minute to sign up. Anybody can answer

Sign up to join this community The best answers are voted up and
rise to the top

Why don't ligands affect the oxidation state of the central metal ion?
Asked
4 years, 10 months ago Modified
2 years, 8 months ago Viewed
2k times

If Fe3+
were complexed with 6 H 2
O ligands, the resulting complex ion would be [Fe(H 2
3+
O)6 ] , and the central
metal ion would still have the same oxidation state of +3 as it did before complexation. However, didn't the Fe 3+

6 ion receive 12 electrons (2 from each water molecule) in forming the complex? Is this not a kind of reduction?

Also, is the positive charge of the complex ion still localized on the metal ion, or is it spread over the entirety of the
complex?
2
redox coordination-compounds transition-metals oxidation-state

Share Improve this question Follow edited Sep 28, 2017 at 13:55 asked Sep 28, 2017 at 12:50
Jan lightweaver
64.5k 11 175 362 1,473 2 22 36

2 The oxidation state of the metal is a formal count not a real charge.
– Zhe
Sep 28, 2017 at 13:08

@Zhe I acknowledge that, and I had asked a separate subquestion regarding the real charge of the complex. But whenever
something is reduced, their oxidation state goes down, no? So my main question is essentially why Fe isn't reduced by being
3+

coordinated by ligands.
–  lightweaver
Sep 28, 2017 at 13:16

1 Even if the end result is a reduction, it doesn't matter because the oxidation state is just computed from a formula that doesn't
account for that. The difference is that water is approximated as a neutral ligand whereas something like a chloride is
approximated as an anionic ligand. The former does not affect the oxidation state of the metal ion whereas the latter does.
There's nothing to be confused about here because we just created a definition, and then, we applied it. Definitions aren't reality.
– Zhe
Sep 28, 2017 at 14:44

1 You don't become any richer when the banks lend you money. Same thing here, with metal ion instead of you and electrons
instead of money.
– Ivan Neretin
Sep 28, 2017 at 15:28

1 Answer Sorted by: Highest score (default)

If you take a glimpse at the molecular orbital scheme, you will notice that the electrons donated by the water
 molecules still reside in orbitals that are largely ligand-centred (and have a relatively low energy). On the other
5 hand, iron(III) also has five d electron itself; these reside in the t and e orbitals, which are largely metal-centred
2g g
∗

(and have a relatively high energy).

This is true for most complexes. The metal tends to have rather high-lying orbitals while the ligands tend to donate
rather low-lying ones to the overall complex. As long as this order is retained, there is no chemical redox behaviour
going on.

For some systems, however, the orbitals are either so similar or even crossed-over that suddenly a metal orbital will
become lower-lying than a ligand orbital. In this case, an electron that used to reside in a ligand orbital will relax
into a metal orbital — a redox process. You can for example think of the reaction of iodide with copper(II) in this
manner: copper(II) will immediately get reduced to copper(I) by iodide ions. While this is a unidirectional process,

some systems are also known to bind ligands in a redox fashion reversively, meaning that the electrons will be
exchanged both ways. The binding mode of oxygen to haemoglobin is understood in this manner.

Finally, sometimes there is a change in oxidation state that is merely formal. Tetracarbonylhydridoiron(0)
[Fe(CO) H] is such a case. It can be protonated to formally give tetracarbonyldihydridoiron(II) [Fe(CO) or
+
4 4
H2 ]

deprotonated to give tetracarbonylferrate(–II) [Fe(CO) ] . Both changes in oxidation state are merely formal and
4
−

chemically all that is happening is a protonation/deprotonation.

Share Improve this answer Follow edited Dec 14, 2019 at 3:18 answered Sep 28, 2017 at 13:48
Jan
64.5k 11 175 362

Another point here is that ligands are labile. The H O molecules aren't "glued" to the complex but "swap" in and out. The Fe
2
3+

can also have ligands other than H O if there any are in the solution. This ligand swapping is why it is called a "complex."
2

– MaxW
Sep 28, 2017 at 15:10

@MaxW As I tried to address when referring to the redox binding mode of oxygen to haemoglobin, lability does not mean that
no redox process is involved.
– Jan
Sep 29, 2017 at 6:59

Another thing: Even if the ligands are firmly glued to the central metal and no swapping occurs at any reasonable timescale (eg
[Fe(CN) ] 6 ) it is called a complex.
– Jan
Sep 29, 2017 at 7:09
4−