Structural and spectroscopic properties of Ru(II) complexes of 4-(aryl)thiosemicarbazones of thiophen-2-carbaldehyde

Six Ru(II) complexes of formula [Ru(L)(2)(PPh3)(2)] have been prepared where LH = 4-(aryl)thiosemicarbazones of thiophen-2-carbaldehyde. X-ray crystal structures of five of the complexes are reported. In all the complexes ruthenium is six coordinate with a distorted octahedral cis-P-2, cis-N-2, trans-S-2 donor environment, and each of the two thiosemicarbazone ligands are coordinated in a bidentate fashion forming a four membered chelate ring. The complexes undergo a one-electron oxidation at similar to 0.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl. The EPR spectrum of the electrochemically oxidized solution at 100 K shows a rhombic signal, with transitions at g(1) = 2.27, g(2) = 2.00 and g(3) = 1.80. DFT calculations on one of the complexes suggest that there is 35% ruthenium and 17% sulfur orbital contribution to the HOMO. These results suggest that the assignment of metal atom oxidation states in these compounds is not unambiguous. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Isolation, structure, chemistry, and photochemistry of cis-bis(2,2'-bipyridyl)carbonylchlororuthenium(II) perchlorate

The molecular structure and chemical and photochemical reactions of [Ru(bpy)2(CO)Cl]+ClO4–, which has been isolated from the reaction of ruthenium trichloride and 2,2′-bipyridyl(bpy) in dimethylformamide, are described.

Enantiomeric conformation controls rate and yield of photoinduced electron transfer in DNA sensitized by Ru(II) Dipyridophenazine complexes

Photosensitized oxidation of guanine is an important route to DNA damage. Ruthenium polypyridyls are very useful photosensitizers as their reactivity and DNA-binding properties are readily tunable. Here we show a strong difference in the reactivity of the two enantiomers of [Ru(TAP)2(dppz)]2+, by using time-resolved visible and IR spectroscopy. This reveals that the photosensitized one-electron oxidation of guanine in three oligonucleotide sequences proceeds with similar rates and yields for bound delta-[Ru(TAP)2(dppz)]2+, whereas those for the lambda enantiomer are very sensitive to base sequence. It is proposed that these differences are due to preferences of each enantiomer for different binding sites in the duplex.