| Literature DB >> 35887366 |
Mohamed S El-Attar1, Sadeek A Sadeek1, Sherif M Abd El-Hamid2, Hazem S Elshafie3.
Abstract
Coumarin is highly distributed in nature, notably in higher plants. The biological features of coumarin include antibacterial, anticancer and antioxidant effects. It is well known that metal ions present in complexes accelerate the drug action and the efficacy of organic therapeutic agents. The main aim of the current study is the synthesis of different complexes of the interaction between ciprofloxacin hydrochloride (CIP) and coumarin derivative 7-hydroxy-4-methylcoumarin (HMC) with Zr(IV). The chelates of CIP with Zr(IV) were prepared and characterized by elemental analysis, melting point, conductance measurements, spectroscopic techniques involving IR, UV-Vis, 1H NMR, and thermal behavior (TG-DTG) in the presence of HMC, dimethylformamide (DMF), pyridine (Py), and triethylamine (Et3N). Results of molar conductivity tests showed that the new synthesized complexes are electrolytes with a 1:1 or 1:2 electrolyte ratio, with the chloride ions functioning as counter ions. According to IR spectra, CIP acts as a neutral bidentate ligand with Zr(IV) through one carboxylato oxygen and the carbonyl group, HMC as a monodentate through the carbonyl group, and DMF through the oxygen atom of the carbonyl group and the N atom of Py and Et3N. The thermal behavior of the complexes was carefully investigated using TG and DTG techniques. TG findings signal that water molecules are found as hydrated and coordinated. The thermal decomposition mechanisms proposed for CIP, HMC, and Zr(IV) complexes are discussed and the activation energies (Ea), Gibbs free energies (∆G*), entropies (∆S*), and enthalpies (∆H*) of thermal decomposition reactions have been calculated using Coats-Redfern (CR) and Horowitz-Metzeger (HM) methods. The studied complexes were tested against some human pathogens and phytopathogens, including three Gram-positive bacteria (Bacillus subtilis, B. cereus, Brevibacterium otitidis) and three Gram-negative bacteria (Escherichiacoli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae), and compared to the free CIP and HMC parent compounds.Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial activity; coumarin; human pathogens; metal complexes; natural products; phytopathogens; plant metabolites; semisynthetic bio-drugs
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35887366 PMCID: PMC9316271 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23148019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 6.208
Scheme 1Structure of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride (CIP) (I) and 7-hydroxy-4-methylcoumarin (HMC) (II).
Elemental analysis and physico-analytical data for CIP, HMC, and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Compounds | Yield% | mp/°C | Color | Content (calc.) Found (%) | Λ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | H | N | M | Cl | |||||
| - | 305 | White | (55.52) | (5.17) | (11.43) | - | (9.65) | 70.20 | |
| 79 | 190 | Yellow | (59.11) | (5.42) | - | - | - | 15.12 | |
| 75 | 290 | Faint brown | (40.85) | (4.79) | (5.30) | (11.50) | (8.94) | 76.23 | |
| 80 | 200 | Green | (37.65) | (5.75) | (5.86) | (9.54) | (7.42) | 122.15 | |
| 78 | 340 | Greenish yellow | (39.91) | (5.51) | (5.82) | (9.48) | (7.37) | 125.26 | |
| 85 | 160 | Brownish yellow | (46.15) | (5.71) | (6.53) | (10.63) | (8.26) | 120.30 | |
Selected infrared absorption frequencies (cm−1) for CIP, HMC, and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Compounds | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 3530 m | 1706 vs | - | 1620 vs | - | - | - |
|
| 3499 ms | - | - | 1674 vs | - | - | - |
|
| 3489 w | - | 1670 ms | 1609 vs | 1389 vs | 845 s | 625 m, 540 m |
|
| 3533 w | - | 1628 s,br | 1539 w | 1389 s | 848 w | 637 ms, 560 wbr |
|
| 3444 w | - | 1678 m | 1624 s | 1389 vs | 845 s | 679 ms, 539 w |
|
| 3517 mbr | - | 1686 m | 1620 mbr | 1389 vs | 849 vs | 629 s, 539 w |
Keys: s = strong, w = weak, m = medium, br = broad, ν = stretching.
Scheme 2Coordination mode of Zr(ΙV) with CIP, HMC, and (L = DMF, Py, and Et3N).
UV–Vis spectra for CIP, HMC, and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Assignments (nm) | CIP | HMC | (A) | (B) | (C) | (D) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| π–π* transitions | 243, 298 | 258 | 252, 304 | 277, 312 | 282, 302 | 282, 302 |
| n–π* transitions | 338 | 410 | 385 | 404, 431 | 323, 407, 431 | 323, 407, 442 |
| Ligand-metal charge transfer | - | - | 525, 574 | 522, 545, 567 | 514, 572 | 514, 572 |
1H NMR values (ppm) and tentative assignments for CIP, HMC, and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Assignments (ppm) | CIP | HMC | (A) | (B) | (C) | (D) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| δH, -CH and -CH3 | 1.33 | - | 0.96–1.35 | 1.19–1.31 | 0.79–1.33 | 1.13–1.24 |
| δH, -NH; piperazine | 2.00 | - | - | - | - | - |
| δH, -+NH2 | - | - | 2.11–2.35 | 2.36 | 2.12–2.36 | 2.36 |
| δH, -CH2 aliphatic | 2.78, 3.46 | 2.35–2.50 | 2.41–2.51 | 2.50 | 2.45–2.56 | 2.49–2.51 |
| δH, H2O | - | 3.79 | 3.15–3.86 | 3.37, 3.57 | 3.04–3.63 | 3.01–3.36 |
| δH, -CH2 aromatic | 6.04–8.66 | 6.12–7.60 | 5.09–9.88 | 6.12–8.80 | 6.12–9.91 | 6.12–7.60 |
| δH, -COOH and -OH | 11.00 | 10.50 | 10.69 | 10.67 | 10.68 | 10.20 |
The maximum temperature Tmax (°C) and weight loss values of the decomposition stages for HMC and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Compounds | Decomposition | Tmax (°C) | Weight Loss (%) | Lost Species | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calc. | Found | ||||
|
| First step | 60 | 13.30 | 13.25 | 1.5H2O |
|
| First step | 100 | 11.35 | 11.27 | 5H2O |
|
| First step | 65 | 18.82 | 18.78 | 10H2O |
|
| First step | 60 | 18.71 | 18.69 | 10H2O |
|
| First step | 50 | 6.29 | 6.26 | 3H2O |
Thermal behavior and kinetic parameters determined using Coats–Redfern (CR) and Horowitz–Metzger (HM) equations, operated for HMC and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D).
| Compounds | Decomposition Range (K) | Ts | Method | Parameter | R a | SD b | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ea | A | ΔS* | ΔH* | ΔG* | ||||||
|
| 313–393 | 333 | CR | 53.26 | 1.14 × 106 | −0.1297 | 50.52 | 93.21 | 0.999 | 0.03 |
| 471–593 | 540 | CR | 68.67 | 1.27 × 105 | −0.1513 | 64.57 | 139.17 | 0.995 | 0.05 | |
|
| 673–754 | 704 | CR | 106.80 | 1.8 × 108 | −0.092 | 102.42 | 150.49 | 0.990 | 0.13 |
|
| 693–803 | 766 | CR | 61.43 | 1.21 × 104 | −0.1708 | 57.41 | 140.08 | 0.990 | 0.11 |
|
| 708–823 | 770 | CR | 177.80 | 5.96 × 1010 | −0.046 | 171.8 | 204.90 | 0.998 | 0.05 |
|
| 423–493 | 456 | CR | 45.13 | 5.4 × 102 | −0.217 | 40.45 | 162.34 | 0.994 | 0.074 |
| 743–818 | 768 | CR | 77.66 | 1.46 × 102 | −0.2119 | 70.85 | 244.39 | 0.990 | 0.15 | |
a = correlation coefficients of the Arrhenius plots and b = standard deviation.
Antibacterial activity of CIP, HMC, and their Zr(IV) complexes (A), (B), (C), and (D) against G+ve and G-ve bacterial strains.
| Tested Compounds | Tested G+ve Bacterial Strains | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
| D.iz a | AI b | MIC c (μg/mL) | D.iz | AI | MIC (μg/mL) | D.iz | AI | MIC (μg/mL) | ||
|
| 26 ± 0.58 | - | 0.50 ± 0.005 | 34 ± 0.43 | - | 0.50 ± 0.007 | 22 ± 0.29 | - | 0.75 ± 0.005 | |
|
| 18 ± 0.22 | 0.69 | 0.25 ± 0.03 | 8 ± 0.15 | 0.24 | 0.25 ± 0.01 | 7 ± 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.25 ± 0.006 | |
|
| 66+3 ± 0.26 | 2.5 | 0.75 ± 0.01 | 27 ± 0.36 | 0.79 | 0.75 ± 0.006 | 27+1 ± 0.65 | 1.23 | 0.50 ± 0.01 | |
|
| 61+3 ± 0.25 | 2.35 | 0.75 ± 0.006 | 24 ± 0.24 | 0.71 | 0.25 ± 0.02 | 19 ± 0.21 | 0.86 | 0.50 ± 0.03 | |
|
| 58+2 ± 0.45 | 2.23 | 0.50 ± 0.007 | 26 ± 0.32 | 0.76 | 0.50 ± 0.01 | 19 ± 0.17 | 0.86 | 0.75 ± 0.007 | |
|
| 49+2 ± 0.49 | 1.88 | 0.50 ± 0.01 | 22 ± 0.15 | 0.65 | 0.75 ± 0.03 | 16 ± 0.09 | 0.73 | 0.25 ± 0.01 | |
| ZrOCl2·8H2O | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| Control (DMF) | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| Standards | Moxifloxacin | 40 ± 0.5 | 1.54 | - | 36 ± 1.2 | 1.06 | - | 25 ± 0.24 | 1.14 | - |
| Lomefloxacin | 24 ± 0.2 | 0.92 | - | 25 ± 0.5 | 0.74 | - | 26 ± 0.31 | 1.18 | - | |
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 28 ± 0.3 | - | 0.75 ± 0.01 | 23 ± 0.3 | - | 0.50 ± 0.02 | 20 ± 0.4 | - | 0.75 ± 0.03 | |
|
| 7 ± 0.05 | 0.25 | 0.50 ± 0.007 | ND | - | 0.25 ± 0.01 | 12 ± 0.31 | 0.60 | 0.25 ± 0.007 | |
|
| 31+1 ± 0.81 | 1.1 | 1.0 ± 0.02 | - | - | 1.0 ± 0.007 | 16 ± 0.19 | 0.8 | 1.0 ± 0.02 | |
|
| 26 ± 0.23 | 0.93 | 0.50 ± 0.005 | 29+1 ± 0.92 | 1.26 | 0.50 ± 0.005 | 27+1 ± 0.88 | 1.35 | 1.0 ± 0.01 | |
|
| 28 ± 0.09 | 1 | 0.75 ± 0.03 | 33+2 ± 0.68 | 1.43 | 0.75 ± 0.01 | 21NS ± 0.60 | 1.05 | 0.75 ± 0.005 | |
|
| 35+2 ± 0.45 | 1.25 | 1.0 ± 0.006 | 34+2 ± 0.76 | 1.48 | 1.0 ± 0.03 | 21NS ± 0.51 | 1.05 | 0.50 ± 0.02 | |
| ZrOCl2·8H2O | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| Control (DMF) | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | |
| Standards | Moxifloxacin | 22 ± 1.7 | 0.78 | - | 22 ± 0.3 | 0.96 | - | 16 ± 0.1 | - | - |
| Lomefloxacin | 17 ± 0.1 | 0.61 | - | 13 ± 0.3 | 0.56 | - | 19 ± 0.1 | - | - | |
Statistical significance: PNS, P not significant, p > 0.05; P+1, P significant, p < 0.05; P+2, P highly significant, p < 0.01; P+3, P very highly significant, p < 0.001; student’s t-test (paired). a D.iz: diameter of inhibition zone (mm); b AI: activity index (%); c MIC: minimum inhibitory concentration (μg/mL); ND: not detectable.