Evidence Hub

Instigating the in vitro antidiabetic activity of new tridentate Schiff base ligand appended M(II) complexes: From synthesis, structural characterization, quantum computational calculations to molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulation studies

Yogesh Deswal, Sonika Asija, Aisha Tufail, Amit Dubey, Laxmi Deswal, Naresh Kumar, Sonia Saroya, Jagat Singh Kirar et al.

Applied Organometallic Chemistry, 2023

70 citations

Abstract

In search of novel medications that could be effective in preventing and treating diabetes, four new [Co(L)(H2O)3] (2), [Ni(L)(H2O)3] (3), [Cu(L)(H2O)] (4) and [Zn(L)(H2O)] (5) complexes were synthesized from 4‐Chloro‐2‐(((3‐mercapto‐5‐[pyridin‐4‐yl]‐4H‐1,2,4‐triazol‐4‐yl)imino)methyl)phenol ligand (H2L), which is obtained by the condensation of 5‐chlorosalicylaldehyde with 4‐amino‐5‐(pyridin‐4‐yl)‐4H‐1,2,4‐triazole‐3‐thiol in 1:1 ratio. The Fourier‐transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) (1H and 13C), elemental analyses, UV–visible, electron spin resonance (ESR), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive X‐ray analysis (EDAX), and X‐ray diffraction (XRD) studies were used to successfully characterize the compounds. The ligand act in a tridentate manner and coordinates to the metal ions through Nazomethine, Ophenolic and Sthiol functionalities. On the premise of their spectral and physico‐analytical data; octahedral geometry for complex 2 and 3, while square planar and tetrahedral geometry for complex 4 and 5 was proposed. Theoretical calculations of the synthesized compounds have been performed by using density functional theory (DFT)/B3LYP method and parameters such as HOMO‐LUMO energy values and MESP were calculated. In vitro examinations against α‐amylase and α‐glucosidase reveal promising results for the compounds. Nickel (II) complex (3) against α‐amylase and zinc (II) complex (5) against…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a simulation / modelling, done in cell cultures (in vitro) and computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free