2′-Deoxy-2′-fluoro-arabinonucleic acid: a valid alternative to DNA for biotechnological applications using charge transport

Abstract

The 2′-deoxy-2′-fluoro-arabinonucleic acid (2′F-ANA) can be used as a valid alternative to DNA in bioelectronic applications by reason of its similar charge conductivity combined with greater resistance to hydrolysis and nuclease degradation.

Oxalate decarboxylase uses electron hole hopping for catalysis

“…The EHPath program finds the fastest multistep hopping pathways ( 15 ). The required electron transfer parameters V , λ , and were obtained using a square-tunneling barrier model, Marcus’s two-sphere model ( 3 , 79 , 80 ), and the difference in the donor and acceptor redox potentials. The inner-sphere reorganization energy for the Mn(II)/(III) self-exchange reaction was taken from Johnson and Nelson ( 81 ).…”

Mutation effects on charge transport through the p58c iron–sulfur protein

“…10), and thus assuming that the occupation probability of site N + 1 is always zero. We need not, indeed, make a choice between these two models, since they lead to the same results in terms of residence times 62 and because the main focus of our analysis is the protein-mediated charge transport and its sensitivity to the Y345C mutation. Model 2 was used to compute the data in Table 4.…”

“…10, does not affect the expression for the average time s to transit the complex in terms of the rate constants for the individual CT steps. 10,60,62 Therefore, the transit time can be written as 10,62 s ¼…”

Correlation between Charge Transport and Base Excision Repair in the MutY–DNA Glycosylase

“…The CT rate constant k for each CT step was calculated using a nonadiabatic CT rate expression with Marcus’ high-temperature Franck–Condon factor In eq , is the electronic coupling between the initial and final electronic states, is the reorganization energy, is the reaction free energy, and is the temperature (in our study, = 298 K). In the EHPath (and the updated EHPath_multirun.py) code, is obtained from the charge donor–acceptor distance using a square-tunneling barrier model, is obtained using Marcus’ two-sphere model − and is approximated as the difference in the donor and acceptor redox potentials (see refs. 19 and 42 for further details regarding the CT parameters).…”

“…Depending on the donor–acceptor distance in a given molecular conformation, the excess charge can either tunnel directly from the donor to the terminal acceptor site or it can follow a multistep hopping pathway. Both CT processes are consistently described by birth-and-death kinetic models. − As described previously, the final charge acceptor either behaves as an absorber or is in contact with a charge drain, and the overall mean residence time τ of the charge in a path (the charge transit time) can be written in a compact form (a different derivation for the kinetic model with an absorber is reported in ref …”