to 4, respectively, while exhibiting stronger emission compared
to the perfect duplex 7•9, were still significantly weaker than
observed for a 4•C mismatch in 7•10. Nucleoside 4 therefore
positively responds to the presence of a C nucleoside in a
complementary oligodeoxynucleotide and can be classified as a
base discriminating fluorescent nucleoside.
In summary, the thieno[3,4-d]pyrimidine core represents a new
motif for emissive nucleobase analogs, with emission in the
visible range and respectable quantum yield. The corresponding
ribonucleoside triphosphate can be enzymatically incorporated
into RNA oligonucleotides using T7 RNA polymerase and the
resulting fluorescent constructs can be employed as hybridization
probes, positively reporting the presence of a C mismatch by
enhanced emission. Nucleobase 4 therefore expands the repertoire
of emissive isomorphic nucleoside analogs and opens up new
opportunities to explore photophysical properties of modified
nucleic acids.
Several factors could be responsible for the enhanced emission
observed for the mismatched duplex 7•10. Possibly the simplest
one would be severe destabilization caused by the putative 4-C
interaction leading to ineffective hybridization and, consequently,
high abundance of the more emissive single stranded RNA 7.
To preemptively address such a possibility, we have conducted
the hybridization and fluorescence experiments at slightly elevated
ionic strengths (500 mM NaCl). Importantly, thermal denatura-
tion studies with all 4-containing duplexes and their corresponding
control unmodified duplexes indicated that the incorporation
of the thiophene modification had minimal effect on duplex
stability (Table 2). While the perfectly-matched and least emissive
duplex 7•9 suffered a ∼6 ◦C of destabilization, all modified
duplexes were as stable as or more stable than their unmodified
counterparts (Table 2, Figures S6, S7†). Additional native gel
retardation experiments with 32P-labeled transcript RNA 7 with
ssRNA as the control (Figure S8†) showed that all duplexes were
completely intact under the condition utilized for the emission
measurements.12 Taken together, these results suggest that the
modified nucleobase is likely to reside inside the helix and that
the drastic emission enhancement observed for a mismatched
duplex where 4 is found opposite C, when compared to a perfect
duplex with 4 opposite A, is likely to result from differences in the
microenvironment of the fluorescent nucleobase.
Numerous mechanisms, operating either in the ground or
excited states, may account for the different impact of the opposite
base upon the photophysical characteristics of an emissive nucle-
obase. Bulging out of a duplex, differential hydration of a non-
canonical base pair, or base-pairing mediated tautomerization,
constitutes a few ground state processes. Photo-induced electron
or proton transfer represents plausible excited state events. Based
on the Stern–Volmer titrations reported above it is clear that
quenching by specific nucleobases is not directly correlated with
the observed enhanced emission upon mispairing of 4 with C,
although it is likely to impact the quantum yield of the emis-
sive nucleobase. Additional experiments are required to further
ascertain the fundamental causes of the observed photophysical
behavior of 4 when incorporated into oligonucleotides.
Acknowledgements
We thank the National Institutes of Health (GM 069773) for
support. We are grateful to Yun Xie and Mary Noe.
Notes and references
1 (a) The International HapMap Consortium, Nature, 2005, vol. 437,
p. 1299; (b) H. Haga, Y. Yamada, Y. Ohnishi, Y. Nakamura and T.
Tanaka, J. Hum. Genet., 2002, 47, 605; (c) A. J. Brookes, Gene, 1999,
234, 177; (d) A. Chakravarti, Nat. Genet. Suppl., 1999, 21, 56.
2 (a) T. Pastinen and T. J. Hudson, Science, 2004, 306, 647; (b) J. J.
McCarthy and R. Hilfiker, Nat. Biotechnol., 2000, 18, 505.
3 (a) Reviews: Y. Suh and C. Cantor, Mutat. Res., 2005, 573, 1; (b) B.
Sobrino, M. Brion and A. Carracedo, Forensic Sci. Int., 2005, 154,
181; (c) R. M. Twyman, Curr. Top. Med. Chem., 2004, 4, 1423; (d) K.
Nakatani, ChemBioChem, 2004, 5, 1623; (e) C. S. Carlson, T. L.
Newman and D. A. Nickerson, Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol., 2001, 5, 78;
(f) P. Y. Kwok, Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet., 2001, 2, 235.
4 (a) A. Friedrich, J. D. Hoheisel, N. Marme´ and J.-P. Knemeyer, FEBS
Lett., 2007, 581, 1644; (b) T. S. Kumar, J. Wengel and P. J. Hrdlicka,
ChemBioChem, 2007, 8, 1122; (c) E. Ergen, M. Weber, J. Jacob, A.
Herrmann and K. Mu¨llen, Chem.–Eur. J., 2006, 12, 3707; (d) U.
Asseline, M. Chassignol, Y. Aubert and V. Roig, Org. Biomol. Chem.,
2006, 4, 1949; (e) L. Valis, N. Amann and H.-A. Wagenknecht, Org.
Biomol. Chem., 2005, 3, 36; (f) K. Yamana, Y. Fukunaga, Y. Ohtani, S.
Sato, M. Nakamura, W. J. Kim, T. Akaike and A. Maruyama, Chem.
Commun., 2005, 2509; (g) A. O. Crockett and C. T. Wittwer, Anal.
Biochem., 2001, 290, 89; (h) P. L. Paris, J. M. Langenhan and E. T.
Kool, Nucleic Acids Res., 1998, 26, 3789.
5 A. Okamoto, Y. Saito and I. Saito, Photochem. Photobiol. C: Pho-
tochem. Rev., 2005, 6, 108.
6 (a) K. Tainaka, K. Tanaka, S. Ikeda, K.-I. Nishiza, T. Unzai, Y.
Fujiwara, I. Saito and A. Okamoto, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129,
4776; (b) Y. Saito, E. Mizuno, S. S. Bag, I. Suzuka and I. Saito, Chem.
Commun., 2007, 4492; (c) F. Takei, H. Suda, M. Hagihara, J. Zhang, A.
Kobori and K. Nakatani, Chem.–Eur. J., 2007, 13, 4452; (d) R. H. E.
Hudson and A. Ghorbani-Choghamarani, Org. Biomol. Chem., 2007,
5, 1845; (e) J. H. Ryu, Y. J. Seo, T. Hwang, J. Y. Lee and B. H. Kim,
Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3538; (f) Q. Xiao, R. T. Ranasinghe, A. M. P.
Tang and T. Brown, Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3483; (g) N. Moran, D. M.
Bassani, J.-P. Desvergne, S. Keiper, P. A. S. Lowden, J. S. Vyle and
J. H. R. Tucker, Chem. Commun., 2006, 5003; (h) E. Mayer-Enthart and
H.-A. Wegenknecht, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2006, 45, 3372; (i) D. J.
Hurley, S. E. Seaman, J. C. Mazura and Y. Tor, Org. Lett., 2002, 4,
2305.
Table 2 Thermal melting of duplexes derived from modified (7) and
unmodified (8) RNA transcriptsa
Tm/◦C
Tm/◦C
7 Y. Tor, Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3425.
8 (a) N. J. Greco and Y. Tor, Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3515; (b) Y. Tor,
S. Del Valle, D. Jaramillo, S. G. Srivatsan, A. Rios and H. Weizman,
Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3608.
9 N. J. Greco and Y. Tor, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2005, 127, 10784.
10 (a) S. G. Srivatsan and Y. Tor, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 2044;
(b) S. G. Srivatsan and Y. Tor, Tetrahedron, 2007, 63, 3601.
11 (a) S. Wang and E. T. Kool, Biochemistry, 1995, 34, 4125; (b) N.
Sugimoto, S. Nakano, M. Yoneyama and K. Honda, Nucleic Acids
Res., 1996, 24, 4501; (c) F. Barone, L. Cellai, M. Matzeu, F. Mazzei
and F. Pedone, Biophys. Chem., 2000, 86, 37; (d) H. Binder, J. Phys.:
Condens. Matter, 2006, 18, S491.
Modified duplex
Unmodified duplex
7•9
53.3 0.7
52.8 0.1
54.6 0.5
50.3 0.7
8•9
59.4 0.1
48.3 0.7
50.3 0.7
49.8 1.4
7•10
7•11
7•12
8•10
8•11
8•12
a Duplexes were formed by annealing a 1 : 1 mixture of the oligonucleotides
in 20 mM cacodylate buffer (pH 7.0, 500 mM NaCl, 0.5 mM EDTA).
Concentration of each duplex was 1 lM.12
This journal is
The Royal Society of Chemistry 2008
Org. Biomol. Chem., 2008, 6, 1334–1338 | 1337
©