Cr<sup>3+</sup> Binding to DNA Backbone Phosphate and Bases: Slow Ligand Exchange Rates and Metal Hydrolysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interaction between chromium ions and DNA is of great interest in inorganic chemistry, toxicology, and analytical chemistry. Most previous studies focused on in situ reduction of Cr(VI), producing Cr(3+) for DNA binding. Recently, Cr(3+) was reported to activate the Ce13d DNAzyme for RNA cleavage. Herein, the Ce13d is used to study two types of Cr(3+) and DNA interactions. First, Cr(3+) binds to the DNA phosphate backbone weakly through reversible electrostatic interactions, which is weakened by adding competing inorganic phosphate. However, Cr(3+) coordinates with DNA nucleobases forming stable cross-links that can survive denaturing gel electrophoresis condition. The binding of Cr(3+) to different nucleobases was further studied in terms of binding kinetics and affinity by exploiting carboxyfluorescein-labeled DNA homopolymers. Once binding takes place, the stable Cr(3+)/DNA complex cannot be dissociated by EDTA, attributable to the ultraslow ligand exchange rate of Cr(3+). The binding rate follows the order of G > C > T ≈ A. Finally, Cr(3+) gradually loses its DNA binding ability after being stored at neutral or high pH, attributable to hydrolysis. This hydrolysis can be reversed by lowering the pH. This work provides a deeper insight into the bioinorganic chemistry of Cr(3+) coordination with DNA, clarifies some inconsistency in the previous literature, and offers practically useful information for generating reproducible results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".