| Literature DB >> 32443884 |
Paula C Alves1,2, Patrícia Rijo3,4, Catarina Bravo1,2, Alexandra M M Antunes1, Vânia André1,2.
Abstract
We report herein three novel complexes whose design was based on the approach that consists of combining commercially available antibiotics withEntities:
Keywords: antibiotics; bioactivity; mechanochemistry; pipemidic acid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32443884 PMCID: PMC7287797 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25102374
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Pipemidic acid.
Figure 2General representation of complexes I–III: (M(PA)2(H2O)2)(NO3)2, where M = Mn(II), Zn(II) and Ca(II), respectively, and PA = pipemidic acid.
Figure 3Crystal structure of complex I, depicting the distorted octahedral geometry of the metal centre, similar to complexes II and III.
Figure 4Overlap of the three isostructural complexes (I = blue; II = pink; III = green).
Hydrogen bonding details for complexes I, II and III.
| Sym. Op. | D–H⋯A | DĤA (°) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| N5–H1N⋯O4 | 0.91(4) | 2.43(5) | 3.065(5) | 126(4) | |
| N5–H1N⋯O6 | 0.91(4) | 2.02(4) | 2.936(6) | 177(5) | ||
| 1 − | O1w–H1w⋯O2 | 0.90(3) | 1.86(3) | 2.742(4) | 169(6) | |
| -½ + | N5–H2N⋯O2 | 0.93(4) | 1.82(4) | 2.741(4) | 170(4) | |
| ½ + | O1w–H2w⋯O5 | 0.89(6) | 2.17(5) | 2.990(6) | 153(6) | |
| ½ + | O1w–H2w⋯O6 | 0.89(6) | 2.22(6) | 2.998(5) | 146(5) | |
|
| N5–H1N⋯O4 | 0.89(3) | 2.58(3) | 3.069(5) | 116(3) | |
| N5–H1N⋯O6 | 0.89(3) | 2.06(3) | 2.933(5) | 168(3) | ||
| x, −1 + | O1w–H1w⋯O2 | 0.88(2) | 1.89(2) | 2.753(3) | 167(4) | |
| −½ + | N5–H2N⋯O2 | 0.87(3) | 1.86(3) | 2.733(4) | 174(4) | |
| ½ − | O1w–H2w⋯O5 | 0.87(3) | 2.17(3) | 2.974(5) | 154(3) | |
| ½ − | O1w–H2w⋯O6 | 0.87(3) | 2.27(3) | 3.039(5) | 149(3) | |
|
| N5–H1N⋯O4 | 0.93(6) | 2.55(7) | 3.096(6) | 118(5) | |
| N5–H1N⋯O6 | 0.93(6) | 2.03(6) | 2.952(6) | 172(7) | ||
| 1 − | O1w–H1w⋯O2 | 0.89(3) | 1.85(4) | 2.740(6) | 172(7) | |
| ½ + | N5–H2N⋯O2 | 0.93(3) | 1.86(4) | 2.769(5) | 168(5) | |
| −½ + | O1w–H2w⋯O5 | 0.89(6) | 2.43(7) | 3.031(7) | 125(6) | |
| −½ + | O1w–H2w⋯O6 | 0.89(6) | 2.09(6) | 2.978(6) | 171(5) |
Figure 5Supramolecular arrangements depicting (a) the hydrogen-bonded chains formed by the interaction between the water molecules and pipemidic acid; (b) the hydrogen bonds established between pipemidic acid in consecutive complexes; (c) the three-dimensional (3D) framework. Hydrogen atoms not involved in hydrogen bonds have been omitted for clarity; using spacefill style, water molecules are represented in blue and nitrate anions are represented in dark green.
Figure 6Hirshfeld surface analysis for complex I (a) and 2D fingerprint plots for the full interactions (b) and for the O-H interactions (c), similar results for complexes II and III.
Figure 7Powder X-ray diffractograms of complex I recorded after mechanochemistry (in blue) and after 5 months on a shelf (in green), at ambient condition, compared to the respective simulated diffractogram (in black).
Figure 8Variable temperature powder X-ray diffraction (VT-PXRD) of complex I recorded at five different temperatures and displaying different crystallinity patterns. The data obtained for complexes II and III is depicted in Figures S13 and S14 in Supporting Information.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of each reagent and complexes I, II and III for Escherichia coli (Gram-negative) and Staphylococcus aureus (Gram-positive). The concentrations tested ranged from 500 to 0.061 µg/mL.
| Compounds |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| MIC (µg/mL) | MIC (µg/mL) | |
| Pipemidic acid | 7.81 | 15.62 |
| Mn(NO3)2·4H2O | 3.90 | 62.50 |
| Complex | 3.90 | 7.81 |
| Zn(NO3)2·6H2O | 31.25 | 31.25 |
| Complex | 7.81 | 7.81 |
| Ca(NO3)2·4H2O | 7.81 | 62.50 |
| Complex | 15.62 | 7.81 |
| Negative control (DMSO) | 62.50 | 62.50 |
| Positive control | 0.488 (VAN) | 0.488 (NOR) |
VAN = vancomycin; NOR = norfloxacin.
Viability of Artemia salina after 24 h in the presence of 8 µg/mL of complexes I, II and III. After 24 h in the presence of 10% DMSO (% v/v, negative control), none of the Artemia salina in the respective well survived.
| Sample | % Viability | % Viability Range |
|---|---|---|
| Salt | 87.43 ± 3.77 | 83.66–91.20 |
| Sample solvent | 84.87 ± 5.70 | 79.17–90.57 |
| PA | 77.55 ± 2.00 | 75.55–79.55 |
| Complex | 77.80 ± 2.09 | 75.71–79.89 |
| Complex | 72.19 ± 5.93 | 66.26–78.12 |
| Complex | 79.67 ± 4.07 | 75.60–83.74 |
| Negative control | 0 ± 0 | 0 |
Note: These results are expressed as percentage of the viability average ± standard deviation. PA = pipemidic acid. Sample solvent = DMSO (0.08% v/v).
Figure 9Graphical representation of the viability of Artemia salina after 24 h in the presence of 8 µg/mL of complexes I, II and III. PA = pipemidic acid. Sample solvent = DMSO (0.08% v/v).
Masses weighed for the synthesis of complexes I–III.
| Compound | Complex I | Complex II | Complex III |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pipemidic acid | 0.1508 g | 0.1519 g | 0.1518 g |
| (0.50 mmol) | (0.50 mmol) | (0.50 mmol) | |
| M | 0.0646 g | 0.0778 g | 0.0687 g |
| (0.25 mmol) | (0.25 mmol) | (0.25 mmol) |
Complex I: M = Mn(NO3)2·4H2O; Complex II: M = Zn(NO3)2·6H2O; Complex III: M = Ca(NO3)2·4H2O.
Crystal data and structure refinement information for complexes I–III.
| I | II | III | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formula | (C28H34N10O6Mn·2(H2O))·2(NO3) | (C28H34N10O6Zn·2(H2O))·2(NO3) | (C28H34N10O6Ca·2(H2O))·2(NO3) |
| Fw | 821.64 | 832.08 | 806.78 |
| Crystal form, colour | Plate, colourless | Block, colourless | Needle, colourless |
| Crystal size (mm) | 0.05 × 0.05 × 0.12 | 0.02 × 0.12 × 0.22 | 0.04 × 0.06 × 0.25 |
| Crystal system | Monoclinic | Monoclinic | Monoclinic |
| Space group | |||
| 24.347(5) | 24.282(3) | 24.533(7) | |
| 6.9370(14) | 6.8977(10) | 7.0158(18) | |
| 20.234(4) | 20.316(3) | 20.251(6) | |
| 99.740(7) | 100.656(5) | 98.103(15) | |
|
| 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 3368.1(12) | 3344.1(8) | 3450.8(16) | |
| 1.620 | 1.653 | 1.553 | |
| 0.482 | 0.825 | 0.270 | |
| θ range (°) | 2.869–26.576 | 2.406–26.578 | 2.445–26.556 |
| Refl. Collected/ | |||
| Independent refl. | 25703/3513 | 16919/3410 | 57149/3561 |
|
| 0.1696 | 0.1100 | 0.2113 |
| 0.0574, 0.1268 | 0.0628, 0.1605 | 0.0733, 0.1801 | |
| GOF on | 1.039 | 1.017 | 1.103 |
1 = Σ||Fo| − |Fc||/Σ|Fo|. 2 = [Σ(w(Fo2 − Fc2)2)/Σ(w(Fo2)2)]1/2.