Marked differences in light-switch behavior of Ru(II) complexes possessing a tridentate DNA intercalating ligand

The tridentate ligand 3-(pyrid-2'-yl)dipyrido[3,2-a:2',3'-c]phenazine (pydppz) has been prepared in two steps by elaboration of 2-(pyrid-2'-yl)-1,10-phenanthroline. Both homoleptic [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+) and heteroleptic [Ru(tpy)(pydppz)](2+) (tpy = 2,2';6',2' '-terpyridine) complexes have been prepared and characterized by H-1 NMR. The absorption and emission spectra are consistent with low-lying MLCT excited states, which are typical of Ru(II) complexes. Femtosecond transient absorption measurements show that that the (MLCT)-M-3 excited state of the heteroleptic complex [Ru(tpy)(pydppz)](2+) (tau approximate to 5 ns) is longer-lived than that of the homoleptic complex [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+) (tau = 2.4 ns) and that these lifetimes are significantly longer than that of the (MLCT)-M-3 state of the parent complex [Ru(tpy)(2)](2+) (tau = 120 ps). These differences are explained by the lower-energy (MLCT)-M-3 excited state present in [Ru(tpy)(pydppz)](2+) and [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+) compared to [Ru(tpy)(2)](2+), resulting in less deactivation of the former through the ligand-field state(s). DFT and TDDFT calculations are consistent with this explanation. [Ru(tpy)(pydppz)](2+) and [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+) bind to DNA through the intercalation of the pydppz ligand; however, only the heteroleptic complex exhibits luminescence enhancement in the presence of DNA. The difference in the photophysical behavior of the complexes is explained by the inability of [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+) to intercalate both pydppz ligands, such that one pydppz always remains exposed to the solvent. DNA photocleavage is observed for [Ru(tpy)(pydppz)](2+) in air, but not for [Ru(pydppz)(2)](2+). The DNA damage likely proceeds through the production of small amounts of O-1(2) by the longer-lived complex. Although both complexes possess the intercalating pydppz ligand, they exhibit different photophysical properties in the presence of DNA.