Table 3.
MnP | couple | index | Ei0′/V vs. SHE* | ki0/10−2 cm s−1 | αi |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
MnTE-2-PyP | MnIIIP/MnIIP | 1 | 0.145 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
2 | 0.094 | 0.7 | 0.3 | ||
3 | ≤ −0.046 | ≤ 0.3 | 0.3 | ||
MnIVP/MnIIIP | 5 | ≥ 0.812 | 1.0 | 0.3 | |
6 | 0.470 | 1.3 | 0.3 | ||
7 | ≤ 0.301 | ≤ 1.6 | 0.4 | ||
MnTE-3-PyP | MnIIIP/MnIIP | 1 | −0.020 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
2 | −0.045 | 0.8 | 0.3 | ||
3 | ≤ −0.121 | ≤ 0.3 | 0.3 | ||
MnIVP/MnIIIP | 5 | ≥ 0.779 | 1.0 | 0.3 | |
6 | 0.390 | 1.3 | 0.3 | ||
7 | ≤ 0.271 | ≤ 1.4 | 0.4 |
The calculated values differ somewhat from the previously published potentials determined by cyclic voltammetry,24 due to the differences in methodology and electrode calibration. Yet, importantly, the differences in the formal reduction potentials among the studied members of Mn(III) N-alkylpyridylporphyrin series are correct and thus all relationships based on these differences are correct as well.