\u201cMetal-modified base pairs\u201d vs. \u201cmetal-mediated pairs of bases\u201d: not just a semantic issue!

Bernhard Lippert

doi:10.1007/s00775-022-01926-7

Abstract

A “nucleobase pair” is not identical with a “pair of basic ligands”, as only in the first case, the existence of inter-base hydrogen bonds is implied. The cross-linking of two nucleobases or two basic ligands by a metal ion of suitable geometry produces either “metal-modified” or “metal-mediated” species, but in the author’s opinion, this difference is not always properly made. This commentary is an attempt to provide a clearer distinction between the two scenarios.Graphical abstract

Highlights

The past few decades have witnessed a plethora of structural and spectroscopic reports on metal ions cross-linking natural nucleobases, model nucleobases, or artificial nucleobase surrogates [1–3]
The potential relevance of such “metallobase pairs” and their applications ranges from biology
The term “metal-modified base pair” has originally been used by ourselves for describing cross-linking adducts of linear metal entities with canonical natural nucleobases, in which hydrogen bonds are lost at the expense of coordinative metal–ligand bonds, usually associated with the release of a proton from the original H bond [12–14]

Summary

Introduction

The past few decades have witnessed a plethora of structural and spectroscopic reports on metal ions cross-linking natural nucleobases, model nucleobases, or artificial nucleobase surrogates [1–3]. The term “metal-modified base pair” has originally been used by ourselves for describing cross-linking adducts of (mostly) linear metal entities with canonical natural nucleobases, in which hydrogen bonds are lost at the expense of coordinative metal–ligand bonds, usually associated with the release of a proton from the original H bond [12–14].

Results

Conclusion