4.4 Review

The DNA Duplex as an Aqueous One-Dimensional Soft Crystal Scaffold for Photochemistry

期刊

BULLETIN OF THE CHEMICAL SOCIETY OF JAPAN
卷 91, 期 12, 页码 1739-1748

出版社

CHEMICAL SOC JAPAN
DOI: 10.1246/bcsj.20180278

关键词

DNA; Base surrogate; Photochemistry

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [JP18H03933, JP16H05925, JP17H05150, JP17K14514, JP16K17932, JP16H00762]
  2. JSPS A3 Foresight Program
  3. Adaptable and Seamless Technology Transfer Program through Target-driven RAMP
  4. D (A-STEP) from the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  5. Asahi Glass Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this account, we demonstrate that DNA duplex is an ideal scaffold for photochemistry, particularly for comparison of photochemical theory with experiments. The well-defined structure of a DNA duplex can be regarded as an aqueous one-dimensional soft crystal composed of a chromophore-like base-pair assembly. When any base pair in the duplex is replaced with a chromophore, orientation, distance, and association number of chromophores can be precisely controlled. We have developed a new methodology for introduction of chromophores into DNA duplexes using D-threoninol. By using the DNA duplex as a scaffold, experiments on exciton interactions of chromophore assemblies can be compared with molecular exciton theory. A fluorescent resonance energy transfer (FRET) system was also constructed by introducing donor pyrene and acceptor perylene into the DNA duplex using D-threoninol monomers. Using this system, we demonstrated orientation-dependent FRET. We found that theories on both exciton interaction and FRET qualitatively coincide with experimental data and revealed the limitation of the point-dipole approximation. We also evaluated the intrinsic quantum yield of photodimerization of stilbene derivatives by suppressing a side reaction. We propose that there is a correlation of quantum yield of photodimerization with the energy gap of HOMO or LUMO, a hypothesis that deserves theoretical investigation.

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

4.4
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