4.7 Article

Ratiometric detection of Cu+ in aqueous buffered solutions and in live cells using fluorescent peptidyl probe to mimic the binding site of the metalloprotein for Cu+

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 256, 期 -, 页码 393-401

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2017.10.087

关键词

Copper; Probe; Fluorescent; Ratiometric; Chemosensor; Cu+

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1A2B2006897, 2015M2B2B1068623]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1A2B2006897, 2015M2B2B1068623] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ratiometric detection of Cu+ in aqueous buffered solutions and live cells is highly recomended. We synthesized a fluorescent probe (1) based on the peptide receptor to mimic the binding site of the metalloprotein (CusF) for Cu+. 1 sensitively and selectively detected Cu+ among various biological relevant metal ions in aqueous solutions at physiological pH through a ratiometric response. Job's plot analysis indicated that 1 formed a 2:1 complex with Cu+ and the binding affinity of 1 for Cu+ was measured to be 5.73 x 10(-21) M-2 from a competition experiment with bathocuproine disulfonate. The probe showed significant ratio metric responses to Cu+ over a wide range of pH (6.5 similar to 10.5). The binding mode study showed that the imidazole and indole groups of the peptide receptor played a critical role in the tight binding to Cu+. 1 penetrated successfully in living A549 cells and detected intracellular Cu+ ions in Golgi apparatus through ratiometric response. Giving the recent growing interests in fluorescent imaging of Cu+, the development of a fluorescent ratiometric probe (1) based on the peptide receptor to mimic the binding site of the metalloprotein for Cu+ will provide a potential tool for detection of intracellular metal ions in live cells. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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