4.6 Article

Synthesis, crystal structure, electronic spectroscopy, electrochemistry and biological studies of carbohydrate containing ferrocene amides

期刊

APPLIED ORGANOMETALLIC CHEMISTRY
卷 26, 期 7, 页码 369-376

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/aoc.2874

关键词

ferrocene; furanose; pyranose; amides; biological activity

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi
  2. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi
  3. [MLP-0008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of four new ferrocenecarbohydrate amides was prepared from pentose and hexose sugar derivatives. These include (5-amino-5-deoxy-1,2-O-isopropylidene-a-d-xylofuranose)-1-ferrocene carboxamide (2a), (5-amino-3-O-benzyl-5-deoxy-1,2-O-isopropylidene-a-d-xylofuranose)-1-ferrocene carboxamide (2b), (methyl-6-amino-6-deoxy-2,3-O-isopropylidene-beta-d-ribofuranoside)-1-ferrocene carboxamide (2c) derived from furanose sugars and (6-amino-6-deoxy-1,2:3,4-di-O-isopropylidene-a-d-galactopyranose)-1-ferrocene carboxamide (2d) derived from pyranose sugar. The compounds were characterized by spectroscopic means and the structure of amide derived from a-d-xylofuranose (2a) was determined by X-ray crystallography. The electronic and optical properties of the compounds were studied by means of cyclic voltammetry and absorption spectroscopy. The UV and electrochemical studies of these compounds, performed in aqueous solutions under physiological conditions (at pH 7.4), confirmed their stability. These results indicated that the compounds were suitable for conducting biological studies. The CD spectral analysis displays the effect of sugar substituents on the compounds. The cytotoxicity and antimicrobial activity of these conjugates were investigated on different cancer cell lines and microbes respectively. The degree of inhibition varied over a broad spectrum of Gram- positive and Gram-negative bacteria. In addition, the compounds also exhibited antioxidant properties. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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