R.L.B. Alanazi, M. Zaki and W.A. Bawazir
Journal of Molecular Structure 1246 (2021) 131203
1
34.4, 140.3, 143.4, 147.5, 152.8, 160.4 (Ar C–ligand L); Uv–vis
to the hot solution of ligand L until a dark color solution was ob-
tained. The resulting solution was refluxed for 4 h and after this,
the 1,10 phenanthroline (0.21 g, 1.2 mmol) dissolved in DMF was
added drop by drop to the refluxing solution leading to the forma-
tion of a dark green color precipitate. The solution obtained was
further refluxed for 2.5 h at 80 °C and the precipitate obtained
was left overnight. The next day the dark green color precipitate
was filtered and washed several times with a 1:1 methanol and
dichloromethane solution and dried in vacuo.
–
3
∗
∗
(
1 × 10 M, DMF, nm): 275 (π –π ), 325 (n–π ), 480 (LMCT),
1
1
1
1
5
35 ( A g→ A g), 620 ( A g→ B g). ESI–MS (m/z, DMF) 552.03
1
2
1
1
+
+
[
C
H
N NiO S + H ] .
2
6
18
7
5 0.5
2
.3.3. Synthesis of the complex (2)
Similarly, the solution of Triazino[5,6–b]indole ligand L (0.289
g, 1.0 mmol) was obtained in 5 ml of DMF after 10 min of heat-
ing. The CuSO .6H O (0.32 g, 1.2 mmol) solution prepared in 3 ml
4
2
Yield = 90%, M.P. 195 °C, Anal. (%) Calc. for C28H22N CuO S0.5:
7
5
of DMF, was gradually added to the hot solution of ligand L un-
C, 59.20; H, 3.90; N, 17.26. Found: C, 59.35; H, 3.12; N, 17.50.
til a dark green color solution was obtained. The resulting solution
–
3
M, DMF): 125 ꢁ–1 cm2 mol–1. IR (KBr) (νmax
ꢀ
ꢀ
M
(1 × 10
was refluxed for 4 h and the 2,2 –Bipyridine (0.18 g, 1.2 mmol) dis-
/
cm–1): 3430.63 υ(O–H)stretch; 3056.98 υ(C–H) stretch; 1164.69 υ(C–
solved in DMF was slowly added to the refluxing solutions which
cause the appearance of the dark green color precipitate. The so-
lution obtained was further refluxed for 2 h at 80 °C and the pre-
cipitate obtained was left overnight. The next day, the dark green
color product was filtered and washed several times with a 1:1
methanol and dichloromethane solution and dried in vacuo.
Yield = 89%, M.P. 125 °C, Anal. (%) Calc. for C26H22N CuO S0.5:
H)bend {in–plane aromatic}; 856.77 υ(C–H)bend {out–plane aro-
matic}; 1593.42 υ(C=N); 1609.22 υ(C=C); 1220.63 υ(C–O); 420.31
–
3
υ(Cu–N), 520.13 υ(Cu–O). Uv–vis (1 × 10 M, DMF, nm): 285 (π
∗
∗
2
2
–
π , strong), 320 (n–π , strong), 492 (LMCT), 635, 695 ( Eg→ T g,
2
+
+
broad). ESI–MS (m/z, DMF) 617.43 [C28
H
N CuO S + H ] .
22
7
5 0.5
7
5
2
.4. DNA binding evaluations
C, 57.40; H, 4.08; N, 18.02. Found: C, 57.35; H, 4.02; N, 18.10.
–
3
M, DMF): 112 ꢁ–1 cm2 mol–1. IR (KBr) (νmax
ꢀM (1 × 10
cm–1): 3429.81 υ(O–H)stretch; 3050.21 υ(C–H) stretch; 1123.67 υ(C–
Absorption spectral study experiments were conducted by grad-
/
ually adding increasing DNA concentration to a constant volume of
H)bend {in–plane aromatic}; 770.71 υ(C–H)bend {out–plane aro-
matic}; 1589.21 υ(C=N); 1603.08 υ(C=C); 1257.91 υ(C–O); 427.92
complexes (50 μM) in each set. The intrinsic binding constant (Kb)
–
3
were calculated from the changes in the variations in absorbance
υ(Cu–N), 525.80 υ(Cu–O). Uv–vis (1 × 10 M, DMF, nm): 280 (π
∗
∗
2
2
at the maximum wavelength of the intra ligand band and the Kb
value was evaluated by using Wolf–Shimmer Eq. (1) [26];
–
π , strong), 300 (n–π , strong), 490 (LMCT), 600, 680 ( Eg→ T g,
2
+
+
broad). ESI–MS (m/z, DMF) 595.51 [C
H
N CuO S + 3H ] .
2
6
22
7
5 0.5
[
DNA]
[DNA]
1
=
+
(1)
ε
a − εf
εb − ε
Kb(εa − εf )
2
.3.4. Synthesis of the complex (3)
Similar to complex 1, Triazino[5,6–b]indole ligand L (0.289 g,
.0 mmol) was dissolved in 5 ml of DMF after 10 min of heating.
The metal salt NiSO .6H O (0.31 g, 1.2 mmol) dissolved in a min-
f
where, [DNA], εa, εf and εb are the amount of the DNA added,
apparent extinction coefficient, extinction coefficient, apparent ex-
tinction coefficient for free complex and fully bound complex, re-
spectively. However, the Kb values were calculated from the ratio
1
4
2
imum amount of distilled water was added to the hot solution of
ligand L. On the addition of metal salt, the color of the solution
changes from orange to brown along with the appearance of the
precipitate. The resulting solution was refluxed for 3 h and the 1,10
phenanthroline (0.21 g, 1.2 mmol) dissolved in DMF was slowly
added to the refluxing solution which causes the disappearance of
the precipitate and the change in color from light brown to dark
brown. The clear solution obtained was further refluxed for 4 h at
of slope to intercept in the [DNA]/(εa–ε ) vs [DNA] graph.
f
Steady state fluorescence emission studies in the range of 300–
8
00 nm were also performed by employing a methodology iden-
tical to the electronic absorption titration studies and the bind-
ing propensity of complexes were evaluated using the Scatchard
Eq. (2) and (3) [27];
C = CT (I/Io − P)(1 − P)
(2)
8
0 °C and was reduced and left for 7–8 days in the cupboard. Af-
f
ter a week brown color product obtained was isolated and washed
several times with a 1:1 methanol and dichloromethane solution
and dried in vacuo.
r/C = K(n − r)
(3)
f
Yield = 87%, M.P. >300 °C, Anal. (%) Calc. for C28H18 N NiO S0.5:
7
3
where CT is the total concentration of the complex, C is the con-
f
C, 63.79; H, 3.44; N, 18.60. Found: C, 63.35; H, 3.41; N, 18.27. ꢀ
M
centration of free complex, added, I and Io are fluorescence intensi-
ties in the presence and absence of CT–DNA, respectively, and P is
the ratio of the observed fluorescence intensity of the bound com-
plex to that of the free complex. The value of P was determined
from the intercept by plotting the graph of I/Io vs. 1/[DNA], r indi-
cates the ratio of CB (= C – C ) to the concentration of DNA, where
1 × 10 M, DMF): 120 ꢁ–1 cm2 mol–1. IR (KBr) (νmax /cm–1):
–3
(
3
8
054.01 υ(C–H) stretch; 1122.67 υ(C–H)bend {in–plane aromatic};
53.43 υ(C–H)bend {out–plane aromatic}; 1581.38 υ(C=N); 1607.51
1
υ(C=C); 1215.95 υ(C–O); 426.12 υ(Ni–N), 525.45 υ(Ni–O). H NMR
(
400 MHz, DMSO–d , δ): 9.57 (–NH, indole); 8.99 (–CH=N); 7.94,
6
T
f
7
.59, 7.39, 7.19, 6.95, 6.83 (aromatic–H, L and phen); 3.37 (H O);
2
Cb represents the concentration of complex in the bounded DNA (r
.49 (CH –DMSO). 1 C NMR (100 MHz, DMSO–d , δ): 173.55 (–
3
2
3
6
=
Cb/[DNA]). The binding parameters K is the binding constant was
CH=N); 126.2, 129.7, 132.7, 134.5, 148.4, 156.01 (Ar C, Phenan);
10.2, 112.0, 115.9, 117.7, 118.7, 122.2, 127.3, 128.4, 131.2, 132.7,
33.9, 134.4, 140.1, 143.2, 147.4, 151.3, 160.7 (Ar C–ligand L). Uv–vis
calculated from the slope and “n” is the binding site number was
1
determined from the intercept from the Plot of r/C versus r.
f
1
Similarly, in Ethidium bromide displacement studies, the EB–
DNA solution was prepared by mixing 100 μM CT–DNA and 100
μM EB in an aqueous buffer incubated for 30 min before being
used for titrations with metal complexes. The competitive inter-
action studies of complexes towards CT–DNA were evaluated by
gradually adding the volume of interacting complexes to the so-
lution of EB–DNA in each set where EB is almost fully bound to
DNA helix. The impact of the EB–DNA solution on adding the in-
creasing concentration of ligand/ metal complexes was directly im-
pacted the change in the emission profile of EB–DNA [28]. For this
–
3
∗
∗
(
1 × 10 M, DMF, nm): 281 (π –π , strong), 319 (n–π , strong),
1
1
1
1
4
80 (LMCT) 550 ( A g→ A g, broad), 625 ( A g→ B g, broad).
1
2
1
1
+
+
ESI–MS (m/z, DMF) 576.34 [C
H
N NiO S + H ] .
2
8
18
7
3 0.5
2
.3.5. Synthesis of the complex (4)
Similar to complex 2, the solution of Triazino[5,6–b]indole lig-
and L (0.289 g, 1.0 mmol) was obtained in 5 ml of DMF after 10
min of heating in a round bottom flask. In the beaker CuSO .6H O
4
2
(
0.32 g, 1.2 mmol) dissolved in 3 ml of DMF was gradually added
3