Synthesis, characterization and investigation of the antibacterial activity of cationic complexes of Ru(II)-p-cymene phosphine with weakly-coordinating acetonitrile ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synthesis and characterization of ruthenium(II)-arene triarylphosphine complexes, [Ru(η 6 - p -cymene)(PAr 3 )(NCCH 3 )Cl][PF 6 ], where Ar = (3,5- t Bu 2 C 6 H 3 -) ( L1 ), (3,5-Me 2 C 6 H 3 -) ( L2 ), (4-MeO-3,5-Me 2 C 6 H 2 -) ( L3) and (4-MeOC 6 H 4 -) ( L4 ), are described. The structures have been confirmed by IR and 31 P NMR spectroscopy and by single crystal X ray diffraction studies. The redox behavior of the complexes has been investigated by voltammetry in CH 3 CN, with stability over a wide potential window ΔE ≅ 2.7 V. The antibacterial properties of the complexes have been studied against a Gram-positive and a Gram-negative strain. Complex 2 exhibits strong activity against S. aureus (MIC 25 µmol L -1 , IC 50 13.5 µmol L -1 ) and notably potent activity against MRSA (MIC 12.5 µmol L -1 , IC 50 8.52 µmol L -1 ). Complex 3 also demonstrates activity against S. aureus (MIC 25 µmol L -1 , IC 50 15.9 µmol L -1 ) and MRSA (IC 50 11.04 µmol L -1 ), though its MIC against MRSA is >100 µmol L -1 . By contrast, complex 4 is inactive. The interactions of 2 and 4 with phospholipid monolayers were investigated by the Langmuir monolayer method, in a system that simulates the Staphylococcus aureus cell membrane. Complex 2 interacts with and disrupts the organization of these monolayers, and this result possibly indicates that cell membrane rupture causes the antibacterial effect.
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) | 0.000 | 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".