| Literature DB >> 33281983 |
Jonas Becher1, Daria V Berdnikova1, Heiko Ihmels1, Christopher Stremmel1.
Abstract
A small series of five novel berberine derivatives was synthesized by the Cu-catalyzed click reaction ofEntities:
Keywords: DNA ligands; DNA recognition; G4-DNA; berberine alkaloids; nucleic acids
Year: 2020 PMID: 33281983 PMCID: PMC7684686 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.16.230
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Beilstein J Org Chem ISSN: 1860-5397 Impact factor: 2.883
Scheme 1The structures and numbering of berberine (1a) and the alkyl-substituted derivatives 1a–e and the binding equilibrium with quadruplex DNA (G4-DNA).
Scheme 2Synthesis of the berberine–adenine conjugates 4a–e.
Figure 1Representative spectrophotometric (A) and spectrofluorimetric (B) titration of compound 4c with 22AG (1) and a2 (2) (c = 20 μM; cDNA = 200 μM) in K+-phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) with 10% v/v DMSO). The arrows indicate the development of the absorption or emission bands with increasing DNA concentration. Insets: Plots of Abs./Abs.0 and I/I0, respectively, versus cDNA/c. Inset B1: Picture of the emission color and intensity of compound 4c in the absence (left) and the presence (right) of 22AG.
The binding constants, Kb, fluorescence light-up factors, I/I0, and shifts of the melting temperature, ΔTm, of compounds 4a–e with G4-DNA.
| log | log | Δ | Δ | ||||||
| 5.89 ± 0.07 (1:1) | 39 | 5.27 ± 0.08 (1:1), 10.3 ± 0.1 (2:1) | 58 | 3.4 | −0.5 | ||||
| 5.64 ± 0.15 (1:1), 10.8 ± 0.2 (2:1) | 21 | 5.39 ± 0.14 (1:1), 10.6 ± 0.2 (2:1) | 20 | 6.2 | 0.9 | ||||
| 5.23 ± 0.09 (1:1), 10.7 ± 0.1 (2:1) | 107 | 10.6 ± 0.3 (2:1) | 71 | 6.4 | −0.1 | ||||
| 5.09 ± 0.13 (1:1), 10.8 ± 0.1 (2:1) | 94 | 11.1 ± 0.2 (2:1) | 52 | 9.9 | 0.0 | ||||
| 10.7 ± 0.1 (2:1) | 29 | 11.1 ± 0.1 (2:1) | 35 | 12.9 | 1.1 | ||||
aDetermined from the analysis of the photometric titration data with Specfit/32TM with the adequate fits for complexes with ligand:DNA ratio 1:1 and 2:1. K in M−1 for 1:1 complexes and M−2 for 1:2 complexes. bDetermined from the fluorimetric titrations. cDetermined from the fluorimetric FRET experiment of F21T or Fa2T (cDNA = 0.2 µM) at LDR 5.0 in Na-cacodylate buffer [c(K+) = 10 mM, pH 7.2]; LDR = 5; estimated error ± 0.5 °C.
Figure 2Melting temperatures, ΔT, of G4-DNA (cDNA = 0.2 µM) F21T (black), F21T plus ds26 (15 equiv, red), FkrasT (blue), FmycT (green), FkitT (light blue), and Fa2T (magenta) in the presence of 4e at different LDR = 0.00, 1.25, 2.50, 5.00 in Na-cacodylate buffer (cK+ = 10 mM, pH 7.2); estimated error ±0.5 °C. F21T: fluo-d[(G3TTA)3G3]-tamra; Fa2T: fluo-d[(ACAG4TGTG4)2-tamra; FmycT: fluo-d(TGAG3TG3TAG3TG3TA2)-tamra; FkrasT: fluo-d(AG3CG2TGTG3A2GAG2A)-tamra]; FkitT: fluo-d(AG3AG3CGCTG3AG2AG3)-tamra], fluo = fluorescein, tamra = tetramethylrhodamine; ds26: d(CA2TCG2ATCGA2T2CGATC2GAT2G).
Figure 3CD spectra of 22AG (A) and a2 (B) in the presence of the ligands 4c (in K+-phosphate buffer (pH 7.0 with 10% v/v DMSO) at LDR 0.00 (black), 0.05 (red), 0.20 (blue), 0.50 (magenta), and 1.00 (green); cDNA = 20 µM; T = 20 °C. The arrows indicate the development of the CD bands with increasing LDR. Insets: Plots of intensity of the ICD signal of the ligand–DNA mixtures (LDR 1.0; 361 nm) for 22AG (A) and a2 (B) versus the alkyl chain lengths n of 4a–e.
Figure 4The simplified structure of the complex between 1e and quadruplex DNA (left; [38]) and the proposed orientation of the ligands 4a–e with quadruplex DNA (right) according to ICD analysis (gray: G4 quartet; red: ligand).