2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2004.02.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Luminescent pH sensing and DNA binding properties of a novel ruthenium(II) complex

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a previous study, the fluorescent light could be quenched by the addition of the complex which can compete with EtBr to bind with DNA. This is a proof that the complexes intercalate to base pairs of DNA [32][33][34]. The quenching extent of fluorescence of EtBr-DNA is used to determine the extent of binding between the complex and DNA.…”
Section: Fluorescence Spectroscopic Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a previous study, the fluorescent light could be quenched by the addition of the complex which can compete with EtBr to bind with DNA. This is a proof that the complexes intercalate to base pairs of DNA [32][33][34]. The quenching extent of fluorescence of EtBr-DNA is used to determine the extent of binding between the complex and DNA.…”
Section: Fluorescence Spectroscopic Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hydrodynamic measurements that are sensitive to length change (i.e., viscosity and sedimentation) are regarded as the least ambiguous and the most critical tests of a binding model in solution in the absence of crystallographic structural data [29]. A classical intercalation model demands that the DNA helix must lengthen as base pairs are separated to accommodate the binding complex, leading to the increase of DNA viscosity, as for the behaviors of the known DNA intercalators [6][7][8][9][10][11]25]. In contrast, a partial and/or non-classical intercalation of the complex could bend (or kink) the DNA helix, reducing its effective length, and thus its viscosity concomitantly [30].…”
Section: Viscosity Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The interaction of Ru(II) complexes with DNA has been well documented [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. We have recently investigated DNA-binding properties of a dinuclear Ru(II) complex [6], and the mononuclear structurally analogue Ru(II) complexes with deprotonatable/protonatable imidazole [7,8] and ferrocenyl [9] groups. However, the vast majority of these studies have focused on the complexes of type [Ru(bpy) 2 (L)] 2+ and [Ru(phen) 2 (L)] 2+ (where bpy = 2, 2 0 -bipyridine, phen = 1,10-phenanthroline and L = bidentate N-heterocyclic ligands) containing two ancillary ligands of bpy or phen, the studies on the Ru(II) complexes containing one ancillary ligand have been rather limited [10][11][12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4. The addition of the complex to DNA pretreated with EB causes obvious reduction in emission intensity, indicating that the complex competes with EB in binding to DNA (Bai et al 2004;Tysoe et al 1999). In the further investigation, the binding of the compounds in title were evaluated by K q (the quenching constant) value.…”
Section: Eb Displacement Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%