Lesson 5 · 35 min

Symmetry, distortion and the Jahn–Teller effect

The octahedra in CuF₂ are stretched; those in NiF₂ are almost regular. The character table tells how the d orbitals group in any geometry, and the Jahn–Teller theorem predicts which ions stretch their own octahedra.

In this lesson

  • Predict how the d orbitals group in any coordination geometry, from the character table or the d-orbital character formula
  • Draw the correlation diagram for an octahedron stretched along z until it becomes square planar
  • Decide which dⁿ ions undergo a strong or weak Jahn–Teller distortion, and test the prediction against measured bond lengths
  • Tell apart the grouping that symmetry decides and the order of the levels, which has to be computed

Crystals of nickel(II) fluoride and copper(II) fluoride have almost the same structure: each metal ion sits in an octahedron of six FX−\ce{F-} ions. In NiFX2\ce{NiF2} the six Ni–F bonds are nearly equal — four of 2.02 Å and two of 1.98 Å. In CuFX2\ce{CuF2} four are 1.92–1.93 Å and the other two 2.30 Å, about a fifth longer. CrFX2\ce{CrF2} is the same: four bonds of 1.98–2.01 Å and two of 2.43 Å. Nickel, copper and chromium are close neighbours and the ligands are identical, so the difference must lie in the d electrons: NiX2+\ce{Ni^2+} is d⁸, CuX2+\ce{Cu^2+} d⁹ and CrX2+\ce{Cr^2+} high-spin d⁴. Why should one electron more, or a few fewer, make an octahedron deform itself?

Predict first

Pull the two axial ligands (on the z axis) of a d⁹ octahedron slightly away, and the four equatorial ones slightly closer. What happens to the energies of dz2d_{z^2} and dx2−y2d_{x^2-y^2}?

Pick an answer and lock it in before you look. A wrong guess teaches more than no guess.

The character table says which orbitals stay together

The t2gt_{2g} and ege_g of the last lesson are group-theory names. Treat the d orbitals as functions — dxy∝xyd_{xy} \propto xy, dz2∝2z2−x2−y2d_{z^2} \propto 2z^2 - x^2 - y^2 and so on — and how they transform under the symmetry operations is listed among the quadratic functions in the last column of the character table. Look up OhO_h: (2z2−x2−y2, x2−y2)(2z^2 - x^2 - y^2,\ x^2 - y^2) belong together to EgE_g and (xy, xz, yz)(xy,\ xz,\ yz) to T2gT_{2g}, so an octahedral field must give a pair and a trio of degenerate orbitals — no energies needed. Representations take capital letters, orbitals lower-case ones: ege_g, t2gt_{2g}.

You can reach the same answer without the table. The character of the quadratic functions under an operation R depends on R alone, so the five d orbitals have one general character formula; reducing it with the reduction formula used for counting infrared bands gives the grouping in any geometry.

χd(R)=12[(tr⁡R)2+tr⁡R2]−1,tr⁡R=±1+2cos⁡θ\chi_d(R) = \tfrac{1}{2}\left[(\operatorname{tr} R)^2 + \operatorname{tr} R^2\right] - 1, \qquad \operatorname{tr} R = \pm 1 + 2\cos\theta
Take + for a proper rotation by θ and − for an improper one. Example: for C4C_4 in OhO_h, tr R = 1 and R2=C2R^2 = C_2 has trace −1, so χ = (1 − 1)/2 − 1 = −1; the identity gives χ = (9 + 3)/2 − 1 = 5, the five d orbitals.
χd(R)\chi_d(R)
character of the five d orbitals under R
tr⁡R\operatorname{tr} R
trace of the 3×3 matrix of R (sum of its diagonal)
tr⁡R2\operatorname{tr} R^2
trace of the operation R applied twice
θ\theta
angle of rotation

Worked example

The d orbitals in a trigonal bipyramid

Fe(CO)X5\ce{Fe(CO)5} is a trigonal bipyramid, point group D3hD_{3h}, with classes EE, 2C32C_3, 3C23C_2, σh\sigma_h, 2S32S_3 and 3σv3\sigma_v (h = 12). Find how its d orbitals group.

Character table · angular overlap model · 3D

Symmetry sorts the d orbitals

Loading 3D view…

Drag to rotate · scroll or pinch to zoom · arrow keys rotate too

dz²: eg, +0.60 Δo

Levels (in units of Δo for the same ligands, barycentre 0)

Point group (computed from the ligand positions) OhO_{h} Γ(d)=Eg+T2g\Gamma(d) = E_{g} + T_{2g}

Characters of the d orbitals under each class
OperationEE8C38C_{3}6C2′6C_{2}'6C46C_{4}3C23C_{2}ii6S46S_{4}8S68S_{6}3σh3\sigma_{h}6σd6\sigma_{d}
χ(d)\chi(d)5-11-115-1-111
The reduction, and the quadratic functions in the table
SpeciesQuadratic functions in the tableComputed level
EgE_{g}2z²−x²−y², x²−y²dz², dx²−y² +0.60 Δo
T2gT_{2g}xy, xz, yzdxy, dxz, dyz −0.40 Δo

dz² → ege_{g} · +0.600 Δo · 2 orbital(s) in this set

The d orbitals transform like the quadratic functions z², x²−y², xy, xz and yz, so the character of any operation R on the five of them depends on R alone: χ(R) = [(tr R)² + tr R²]/2 − 1. The point group is computed from the ligand positions and Γ(d) reduced with the reduction formula; the levels come from the angular overlap model, and each level’s species is found by projecting its orbitals onto the group’s operations — the tests check it against the quadratic functions printed in the character table. Lower-case letters label orbitals, capitals representations. The trigonal prism has all edges equal. The cloud is a deterministic |ψ|² sampling of a hydrogen-like 3d orbital; the ligands (white spheres) are drawn to scale.
Switch between the six geometries. The point group and Γ(d) are computed from the ligand positions, the levels from the angular overlap model, and each level’s name from its symmetry — check that they always agree with the character table. In the square plane and the square pyramid, with σ bonding only, b2b_2 and ee happen to lie at the same height (orange): an accidental degeneracy of the model. Move the π slider off zero and they part.
How the d orbitals group in common geometries
GeometryPoint groupd-orbital setsExamples
OctahedralOhO_heg+t2ge_{g} + t_{2g}[Ti(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[Ti(H2O)6]^3+}, [Co(NHX3)X6]X3+\ce{[Co(NH3)6]^3+}
TetrahedralTdT_de+t2e + t_{2}[CoClX4]X2−\ce{[CoCl4]^2-}, [NiClX4]X2−\ce{[NiCl4]^2-}
Square planarD4hD_{4h}a1g+b1g+b2g+ega_{1g} + b_{1g} + b_{2g} + e_{g}[Ni(CN)X4]X2−\ce{[Ni(CN)4]^2-}, [PtClX4]X2−\ce{[PtCl4]^2-}
Square pyramidalC4vC_{4v}a1+b1+b2+ea_{1} + b_{1} + b_{2} + e[Ni(CN)X5]X3−\ce{[Ni(CN)5]^3-}
Trigonal bipyramidalD3hD_{3h}a1′+e′+e′′a_{1}' + e' + e''Fe(CO)X5\ce{Fe(CO)5}, [Ni(CN)X5]X3−\ce{[Ni(CN)5]^3-}
Trigonal prismaticD3hD_{3h}a1′+e′+e′′a_{1}' + e' + e''Mo in MoSX2\ce{MoS2}

Lower the symmetry and the levels split

Stretch the octahedron along z and OhO_h drops to D4hD_{4h}. The old ege_g splits into a1ga_{1g} (dz2d_{z^2}, down) and b1gb_{1g} (dx2−y2d_{x^2-y^2}, up); t2gt_{2g} splits into ege_g (dxzd_{xz}, dyzd_{yz}) and b2gb_{2g} (dxyd_{xy}) — for weak π donors such as FX−\ce{F-} and HX2O\ce{H2O} the pair falls and dxyd_{xy} rises. When a degenerate set splits its barycentre stays put: in ege_g one orbital falls by δ₁/2 as the other rises by δ₁/2; in t2gt_{2g} two fall by δ₂/3 each and one rises by 2δ₂/3. Because t2gt_{2g} points between the ligands, δ₂ is much smaller than δ₁. Which level splits into which in such a descent in symmetry is fixed by the correspondence between the character tables of the two groups.

Keep pulling until the axial ligands leave and you reach the square plane: dx2−y2d_{x^2-y^2} alone at the top — the reason, met in the last lesson, that d⁸ ions favour square-planar coordination.

The Jahn–Teller theorem

In 1937 H. A. Jahn and E. Teller proved that a non-linear molecule in an orbitally degenerate electronic state always has some distortion that lowers its energy and removes the degeneracy: the Jahn–Teller effect. In a regular octahedron CuX2+\ce{Cu^2+} (d⁹) is t2g6eg3t_{2g}^6e_g^3, and the three ege_g electrons can be arranged as (dz2)2(dx2−y2)1(d_{z^2})^2(d_{x^2-y^2})^1 or as (dz2)1(dx2−y2)2(d_{z^2})^1(d_{x^2-y^2})^2 — two arrangements of equal energy, which is what orbital degeneracy means. Stretching the octahedron lowers dz2d_{z^2} by δ₁/2 and raises dx2−y2d_{x^2-y^2} by δ₁/2: two electrons gain and one loses, a net fall of δ₁/2.

That energy falls linearly with the distortion, while stretching or squeezing bonds costs energy quadratically, like a spring — so the regular octahedron cannot be the energy minimum and the ion must distort by some finite amount. The electronic energy has a cusp at the octahedron: stretching and squashing both lower it. Real copper(II) compounds are almost always elongated.

Angular overlap model · symmetry labels computed

The Jahn–Teller distortion: stretching an octahedron

Measured crystals (click to load)
The coordination octahedron (axial bonds vertical)
Correlation diagram (in units of Δo)
−0.4−0.20.00.80.91.01.11.21.31.4NiF₂CuF₂CrF₂r(axial) / r(equatorial)
Change in d-electron energy with distortion (relative to the octahedron, in Δo)

d⁴ t2g3eg1t_{2g}^{3}e_{g}^{1} · 4 unpaired electron(s)

In the regular octahedron the electrons in the σ-antibonding eg set can be placed in 2 equivalent ways: an orbitally degenerate ground state, a strong Jahn–Teller effect.

At r(axial)/r(equatorial) = 1.00, point group Oh: the d-electron energy is the same as in the octahedron.

Levels now, lowest first: t2gt_{2g}ege_{g}

Levels come from the angular overlap model with eσ ∝ r⁻⁵ (how the crystal-field splitting varies with distance), keeping Σeσ fixed so that the barycentre does not move; every ligand is also a weak π donor, eπ = 0.2 eσ, which splits t₂g as well. Each level’s species is computed by projecting its orbitals onto the operations of D₄h. The curve holds only the d-electron energy: it is linear in the distortion (a cusp), whereas stretching or squeezing bonds costs energy quadratically, so a degenerate ground state always distorts to some finite extent — how far depends on the stiffness of the bonds, which is not computed here. Measured bond lengths: CuF₂ and CrF₂ by neutron diffraction (Chatterji and Hansen, 2011), NiF₂ by X-ray diffraction (Costa et al., 1993).
Try d¹ to d¹⁰ in turn (and high and low spin for d⁴–d⁷): which curves have a cusp at 1.00? A deep cusp marks a strong Jahn–Teller ion, a shallow one a weak ion. Click CuFX2\ce{CuF2}, CrFX2\ce{CrF2} or NiFX2\ce{NiF2} to load the measured ratio of axial to equatorial bond lengths.
Jahn–Teller activity of octahedral dⁿ ions
dⁿConfigurationJahn–Teller effectExamples
d¹t2g1t_{2g}^{1}weak[Ti(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[Ti(H2O)6]^3+}
d²t2g2t_{2g}^{2}weak[V(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[V(H2O)6]^3+}
d³t2g3t_{2g}^{3}none[Cr(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[Cr(H2O)6]^3+}
d⁴ high spint2g3eg1t_{2g}^{3}e_{g}^{1}strongCrFX2\ce{CrF2}, [Mn(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[Mn(H2O)6]^3+}
d⁴ low spint2g4t_{2g}^{4}weak—
d⁵ high spint2g3eg2t_{2g}^{3}e_{g}^{2}none[Mn(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Mn(H2O)6]^2+}, [Fe(HX2O)X6]X3+\ce{[Fe(H2O)6]^3+}
d⁵ low spint2g5t_{2g}^{5}weak[Fe(CN)X6]X3−\ce{[Fe(CN)6]^3-}
d⁶ high spint2g4eg2t_{2g}^{4}e_{g}^{2}weak[Fe(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Fe(H2O)6]^2+}
d⁶ low spint2g6t_{2g}^{6}none[Co(NHX3)X6]X3+\ce{[Co(NH3)6]^3+}
d⁷ high spint2g5eg2t_{2g}^{5}e_{g}^{2}weak[Co(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Co(H2O)6]^2+}
d⁷ low spint2g6eg1t_{2g}^{6}e_{g}^{1}strong—
d⁸t2g6eg2t_{2g}^{6}e_{g}^{2}noneNiFX2\ce{NiF2}, [Ni(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Ni(H2O)6]^2+}
d⁹t2g6eg3t_{2g}^{6}e_{g}^{3}strongCuFX2\ce{CuF2}, [Cu(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Cu(H2O)6]^2+}
d¹⁰t2g6eg4t_{2g}^{6}e_{g}^{4}none[Zn(HX2O)X6]X2+\ce{[Zn(H2O)6]^2+}

Concept check

Which of these ions shows a strong Jahn–Teller distortion in an octahedral complex?

Try the calculation

In an elongated d⁹ complex, ege_g splits by δ₁ = 7000 cm⁻¹ and t2gt_{2g} by δ₂ = 2000 cm⁻¹, each about an unchanged barycentre. By how much has the d-electron energy fallen compared with the regular octahedron?

cm⁻¹

Five-coordinate and trigonal-prismatic complexes

The two common shapes of five-coordinate complexes differ little in energy. [Ni(CN)X5]X3−\ce{[Ni(CN)5]^3-} is the classic case: in crystals of [Cr(en)X3][Ni(CN)X5] ⋅ 1.5 HX2O\ce{[Cr(en)3][Ni(CN)5].1.5H2O} the same anion occurs both as a square pyramid and as a distorted trigonal bipyramid (Raymond, Corfield and Ibers, 1968). In the trigonal bipyramid dz2d_{z^2} points at the two axial ligands and lies highest; (dx2−y2,dxy)(d_{x^2-y^2}, d_{xy}) form e′e' in the equatorial plane; (dxz,dyz)(d_{xz}, d_{yz}) form e′′e'', lowest of all. Fe(CO)X5\ce{Fe(CO)5} is a trigonal-bipyramidal d⁸ molecule: its 8 electrons fill e′′e'' and e′e' and leave dz2d_{z^2} empty.

The trigonal prism is D3hD_{3h} as well, with six ligands on two eclipsed triangles. Now the cone-shaped lobes of dz2d_{z^2} fit between the two layers of ligands, and it becomes the lowest level. The Mo(IV) ions of molybdenum disulfide, MoSX2\ce{MoS2}, sit in trigonal prisms: their two d electrons pair up in dz2d_{z^2}, which is why MoSX2\ce{MoS2} is a diamagnetic semiconductor.

Character table · angular overlap model · 3D

Symmetry sorts the d orbitals

Loading 3D view…

Drag to rotate · scroll or pinch to zoom · arrow keys rotate too

dz²: a1′, −0.36 Δo

Levels (in units of Δo for the same ligands, barycentre 0)

Point group (computed from the ligand positions) D3hD_{3h} Γ(d)=A1′+E′+E′′\Gamma(d) = A_{1}' + E' + E''

Characters of the d orbitals under each class
OperationEE2C32C_{3}3C23C_{2}σh\sigma_{h}2S32S_{3}3σv3\sigma_{v}
χ(d)\chi(d)5-11111
The reduction, and the quadratic functions in the table
SpeciesQuadratic functions in the tableComputed level
A1′A_{1}'x²+y², z²dz² −0.36 Δo
E′E'x²−y², xydx²−y², dxy −0.16 Δo
E′′E''xz, yzdxz, dyz +0.33 Δo

dz² → a1′a_{1}' · −0.359 Δo · 1 orbital(s) in this set

The d orbitals transform like the quadratic functions z², x²−y², xy, xz and yz, so the character of any operation R on the five of them depends on R alone: χ(R) = [(tr R)² + tr R²]/2 − 1. The point group is computed from the ligand positions and Γ(d) reduced with the reduction formula; the levels come from the angular overlap model, and each level’s species is found by projecting its orbitals onto the group’s operations — the tests check it against the quadratic functions printed in the character table. Lower-case letters label orbitals, capitals representations. The trigonal prism has all edges equal. The cloud is a deterministic |ψ|² sampling of a hydrogen-like 3d orbital; the ligands (white spheres) are drawn to scale.
Compare the trigonal bipyramid with the trigonal prism: both are D3hD_{3h} and both split into a1′+e′+e′′a_1' + e' + e'', yet the order is exactly reversed — symmetry decides only the grouping; which level lies higher has to be computed from the geometry (and a model).

Key takeaways

  • The d orbitals transform like the quadratic functions, χ_d(R) = [(tr R)² + tr R²]/2 − 1; reducing it gives the grouping in any geometry: Oₕ e_g + t₂g, T_d e + t₂, D₄ₕ a₁g + b₁g + b₂g + e_g, D₃ₕ a₁′ + e′ + e″.
  • Symmetry decides the grouping, not the order: the trigonal bipyramid and the trigonal prism are both D₃ₕ, with their levels in opposite order.
  • Stretching an octahedron along z: e_g → a₁g + b₁g and t₂g → e_g + b₂g, each about its barycentre; pull the axial ligands off and you have a square plane.
  • The Jahn–Teller theorem: a non-linear molecule in an orbitally degenerate state distorts. The effect is strong when e_g holds an odd number of electrons (high-spin d⁴, low-spin d⁷, d⁹); in CuF₂ and CrF₂ the axial bonds are about 20 % longer than the equatorial ones, while NiF₂ barely changes.
Progress is stored only in this browser and never uploaded.

Data and references

  1. H. A. Jahn and E. Teller, “Stability of polyatomic molecules in degenerate electronic states. I. Orbital degeneracy”, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 161, 220–235 (1937).
  2. F. A. Cotton, Chemical Applications of Group Theory, 3rd ed., Wiley, 1990, chapter 9 and Appendix IIA (character tables).
  3. T. Chatterji and T. C. Hansen, “Magnetoelastic effects in Jahn–Teller distorted CrF₂ and CuF₂ studied by neutron powder diffraction”, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 23, 276007 (2011); arXiv:1106.1349.
  4. M. M. R. Costa, J. A. Paixão, M. J. M. de Almeida and L. R. Andrade, “Charge densities of two rutile structures: NiF₂ and CoF₂”, Acta Cryst. B49, 591–599 (1993).
  5. K. N. Raymond, P. W. R. Corfield and J. A. Ibers, “Structure of tris(ethylenediamine)chromium(III) pentacyanonickelate(II) sesquihydrate”, Inorg. Chem. 7, 1362–1372 (1968).
  6. C. E. Housecroft and A. G. Sharpe, Inorganic Chemistry, 5th ed., Pearson, 2018, chapter 20 (ligand-field theory, the angular overlap model and the Jahn–Teller effect).