# Structure of tri-aqua-tris-(1,1,1-tri-fluoro-4-oxo-pentan-2-olato)cerium(III) as a possible fluorescent compound.
> 蛍光性候補化合物としてのトリアクア・トリス（1,1,1-トリフルオロ-4-オキソペンタン-2-オラト）セリウム（III）の結晶構造解析


## Abstract

This study reports the crystal structure of a cerium(III) coordination complex bearing three 1,1,1-trifluoro-4-oxopentan-2-olate (tfa) anions as bidentate ligands and three water molecules as monodentate ligands, yielding a nine-coordinate Ce center in a monocapped square-antiprismatic geometry. The CF₃ groups of all three independent tfa units exhibit positional disorder at approximately 0.8:0.2 occupancy ratios. Intermolecular hydrogen bonding between tfa and water molecules along the [110] and [1-10] directions produces a two-dimensional layered network. The fluorine substituents extend the Ce–Ce intermolecular distance relative to the analogous acetylacetonate derivatives, a structural feature intended to suppress concentration quenching. Despite this design, Ce-based luminescence was not detected experimentally.

### Mechanism

Incorporation of fluorine-bearing tfa ligands was intended to increase Ce–Ce distances and thereby reduce concentration quenching, but Ce-based fluorescence emission was not observed under the experimental conditions.

## Bibliographic

- **Authors**: Koizumi A, Hasegawa T, Itadani A, Toda K, Zhu T, Sato M
- **Journal**: Acta Crystallogr E Crystallogr Commun
- **Year**: 2018 (2018-02-01)
- **PMID**: [29850060](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29850060/)
- **DOI**: [10.1107/S2056989018001135](https://doi.org/10.1107/S2056989018001135)
- **PMC**: [PMC5956343](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5956343/)
- **Study type**: other
- **Delivery route**: not specified
- **Effect reported**: not assessed

## Delivery context

The delivery route is not clearly identifiable from this paper. For hydrogen intake, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk (empirical LFL of 10%; high-concentration devices are not recommended).

## Safety notes

The delivery route is not clearly identifiable from this paper. For hydrogen intake, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk (empirical LFL of 10%; high-concentration devices are not recommended).

See also:
- [Inhalation concentration and LFL / UFL](https://h2-papers.org/en/safety-notes/inhalation-concentration)
- [Consumer Affairs Agency accident cases](https://h2-papers.org/en/safety-notes/accident-cases)

---

> **Cite as**: H2 Papers — PMID 29850060. https://h2-papers.org/en/papers/29850060
> **Source**: PubMed PMID [29850060](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29850060/)