4.6 Article

A novel ratiometric AIE-based fluorescent probe for specific detection of Hcy/Cys and imaging of living cells in vivo

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 45, 期 41, 页码 19521-19530

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1nj03606h

关键词

-

资金

  1. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [ZR2019PD004, ZR2019BD061, ZR2019PF020]
  2. Foundation of Shandong Academy of Sciences [2019QN0036]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study synthesized an AIE + ICT ratiometric fluorescent probe that can distinguish the presence of Hcy and Cys, with higher sensitivity towards Hcy. The probe has low cytotoxicity, is cell-permeable, and can be used for ratiometric fluorescence imaging of Cys in living cells.
Thiol-containing small molecules such as cysteine (Cys), homocysteine (Hcy), and glutathione (GSH) play a key role in a wide range of physiological processes. But it is a challenging work to distinguish these biothiols since they have a similar structure and reactivity. An AIE + ICT ratiometric fluorescent probe is synthesized by incorporating TPE into the coumarin ring through a Schiff-base C=N. The sensing mechanism of the probe lies on the nucleophilicity of the sulfhydryl group and the adjacent amino group of Hcy/Cys, breaking the Schiff-base C=N in the probe structure and forming a five or six-membered ring thiazolidine adduct. Only Hcy/Cys triggers an obvious ratiometric change from orange-yellow to blue. The ratiometric probe can detect Hcy/Cys quantitatively, and the lower limits of detection for Hcy and Cys are 0.554 mu M and 1.816 mu M, respectively. Moreover, the probe showed a slight preference for Hcy over Cys. The difference in the sensing behavior of the probe for Hcy/Cys is believed to be the consequence of the more highly efficient ICT and PET of thiazolidine adducts. Preliminary studies show that the probe has low cytotoxicity, is cell-permeable and can be employed for the ratiometric fluorescence imaging of exogenous and endogenous Cys in living cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据