Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Module 1 - Biochemical Engineering
Module 1 - Biochemical Engineering
[𝑬]𝟎 [𝑺]
𝒗 = (𝒌𝟐 )
(𝑲𝒎 + [𝑺])
MICHAELIS-MENTEN EQUATION
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙 [𝑺]
𝒗=
𝑲𝑴 + [𝑺]
2. At high substrate concentrations ([𝑺] ≫ One way to compare the catalytic efficiencies of
𝑲𝑴) 𝒌𝒄𝒂𝒕
two enzymes is to compare their ratios .
𝑲𝑴
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛 [𝑆] = 𝐾𝑚
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙[𝑺] 𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙 [𝑺] 𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙[𝑺]
𝒗= = =
𝑲𝑴 + [𝑺] [𝑺] + [𝑺] 𝟐[𝑺]
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙 ✓ We start with a natural form of enzyme
∴𝒗= with a goal of designing an ezyme that
𝟐
starts from the same native enzyme but is
more efficient.
✓ This means that when the susbtrate ✓ For one to imprve enzymes, we must do
concentration is equal to 𝐾𝑀 , the interventions immediately in DNA; they
reaction will be running at half the sometimes use mutageneis.
maximum velocity. ✓ The overall goal of protein engineerring is
✓ the Michaelis constant is equal to catalytic efficiency together with
the substrate concentration at catalytic stability.
which the rate of reaction is equal
to one-half the maximum rate.
In summary
For reactions described by Michaelis-
Mentenkinetics, two parameters are needed:
✓ 𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙 (𝒌𝒄𝒂𝒕 [𝑬]𝟎 ) which is a function of the
total enzyme concentration, and
✓ 𝑲𝑴, which is not a function of total enzyme
concentration; it is only a function of rate
parameters.
Two enzymes may have the same values for
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑡 but different affinities for the substrate
(represented by 𝐾𝑀 ).
Linearizing Michaelis-Menten Equations Exercise 1.4.1
✓ Given rate versus substrate concentration Determine the Michaelis-Menten parameters
data, the parameters 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 and 𝐾𝑀 may be 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 and 𝐾𝑀 for the reaction:
obtained by curve-fitting or linear
regression.
✓ There are several ways of linearizing the
Michaelis-Mentenequation.
1 𝐾𝑀 + [𝑆]
𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 =
𝑣 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 [𝑆]
✓ Lineweaver-Burk equation:
1 𝐾𝑀 + [𝑆]
= → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟐)
𝑣 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 [𝑆]
1 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥
Results in a line of slope − 𝐾 and intercept .
𝑀 𝐾𝑀
𝑲𝑴 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙
✓ While 𝐾𝑀 is an intrinsic parameter,
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 is not.
o 𝐾𝑀 is a function of rate parameters
and is expected to change with
temperature or pH.
o 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 is a function of both the rate
parameter 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑡 (𝑘2 ) and the initial
enzyme concentration.
✓ Integration of
𝑑 [𝑆] 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 [𝑆]
𝑣=− =
𝑑𝑡 𝐾𝑀 + [𝑆]
✓ Yields
𝐾𝑀
[𝑆]0 − [𝑆] ln[𝑆]0
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 − = 𝑡
𝑡 [𝑆]
1.1. ALLOSTERY
Kinetics of Allosteric Binding
✓ Some enzymes have multiple binding sites,
and the binding of one substrate can
facilitate the binding of the subsequent
substrates. This is known as cooperative
binding or allostery.
o The affinity of the second substrate
increases because of the binding of
the first substrate; this is true for all
subsequent binding substrates.
✓ The activity of allosteric enzymes can be
altered by regulatory molecules binding
on allosteric sites; their properties can
thus be adjusted to meet the immediate
needs of a cell.
o Binding of substrates in allosteric
sites helps enzyme regulation; ✓ When one oxygen molecule binds
there is cooperative binding, thus, (refer to the hemoglobin), the binding
affinity will increase. of that first oxygen molecule causes a
✓ Michaelis-Menten kinetics fails to describe structural change in the hemoglobin. It
the kinetics of cooperative binding; enhances the binding of other oxygen
allosteric enzymes often display molecules.
sigmoidal plots. ✓ The rate expression in this case of
allosteric enzymes becomes a three-
parameter rate law:
✓ The dark yellow color: one pair or 𝛼
and 𝛽 monomers.
[𝑰]
𝑲𝑴,𝒂𝒑𝒑 = 𝑲𝑴 (𝟏 + )
𝑲𝑰
✓ The net effect of competitive inhibition is
an apparently higher value of𝐾𝑚 . Since
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 is unaffected, high concentrations of
substrate can overcome the inhibition to
reach 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥.
where
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙,𝒂𝒑𝒑 =
[𝑰]
𝟏+𝑲
𝑰
✓ The inhibition scheme can be described as:
Where
✓ For Noncompetitive Inhibition
′ [
𝐾𝑚 𝐸𝑆] [𝐸][𝐼 ]
[𝐸]𝑂 = + [𝐸𝑆] + → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟒)
[𝑆 ] 𝐾𝐼
✓ Note that,
𝐾 ′ [𝐸𝑆]
[𝐸] = 𝑚
[𝑆 ]
′ [
𝐾𝑚 𝐸𝑆] [𝐼 ] 𝐾𝑀′ [𝐸𝑆]
[ ]
∴ 𝐸𝑂= [
+ 𝐸𝑆 +] ∙( )
[𝑆] 𝐾𝐼 [𝑆]
→ (𝒆𝒒. 𝟓)
✓ Factor [ES] out,
𝐾𝑀′ 𝐾𝑀′ [𝐼 ]
[𝐸]𝑂 = [𝐸𝑆]( +1+ ∙ ) → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟔)
[𝑆] [𝑆] [𝐾𝐼 ]
2. ENZYME INHIBITION: NON [𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
[𝐸𝑆] = ∙
COMPETETIVE DERIVATION (RAPID 𝐾𝑀′ ′ [ ]
𝐾𝑀 𝐼 [𝐼 ] [𝑆]
+ 1 + +
EQUILIBRIUIM APPROACH) [𝑆 ] 𝐾𝐼 [𝑆] 𝐾𝐼
→ (𝒆𝒒. 𝟕)
[𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
∴ [𝐸𝑆] =
𝐾 ′ [𝐼 ] [𝐼 ]
𝐾𝑀′ + [𝑆] + 𝑀 + [𝑆 ]
𝐾𝐼 𝐾𝐼
(
→ 𝒆𝒒. 𝟖 )
✓ Factor 𝐾𝑀′
[𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
[𝐸𝑆] =
[𝐼 ] [𝐼 ]
✓ Defining the constants, 𝐾𝑀′ (1 + 𝐾 ) + [𝑆] (1 + 𝐾 )
𝐼 𝐼
[𝐸][𝑆] [𝐸𝐼 ][𝑆] → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟗)
𝐾𝑀′ = = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏)
[𝐸𝑆] [𝐸𝑆𝐼 ] ✓ Group the denominator
✓ Note that in this model, we assume that [𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
[𝐸𝑆] = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏𝟎)
Km for the formation of the ES complex is [𝐼 ] ′ + [𝑆])
(1 + ) (𝐾𝑚
the same as the formation of the ESI 𝐾𝐼
complex from EI + S. Same goes for I. ✓ Expressing in terms of v
[𝐸][𝐼 ] [𝐸𝑆][𝐼 ] 𝑣 = 𝑘2 [𝐸𝑆] → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏𝟏)
𝐾𝐼 = = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟐) ✓ Substituting (eq.10) to (eq.11)
[𝐸𝐼 ] [𝐸𝑆𝐼 ]
✓ For the total enzyme balance, [𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
𝑣 = 𝑘2
[𝐸]𝑂 = [𝐸] + [𝐸𝑆] + [𝐸𝐼 ] + [𝐸𝑆𝐼 ] [𝐼 ] ′ + [𝑆 ])
(1 + ) (𝐾𝑚
→ (𝒆𝒒. 𝟑) 𝐾𝐼
✓ The objective is to express [ES] as a [𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
𝑣= ∙ ′ → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏𝟐)
function of measurable properties: [𝐼 ] (𝐾𝑚 + [𝑆])
(1 + )
[𝐸]𝑂 , [𝑆], [𝐼] 𝐾𝐼
✓ Express (eq.3) as a function of [ES] from ✓ Note that
[𝐸 ]𝑂
(eq.1) and (eq.2) 𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥,𝑎𝑝𝑝 = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏𝟑)
[𝐼 ]
(1 + )
𝐾𝐼
𝐾𝑀′ [𝐸][𝐼 ] [𝐸𝑆][𝐼 ]
[𝐸]𝑂 = [𝐸𝑆] + [𝐸𝑆] + + ✓ Thus, the final equation is,
[𝑆 ] 𝐾𝐼 𝐾𝐼
→ (𝒆𝒒. 𝟒)
𝒗𝒎𝒂𝒙,𝒂𝒑𝒑 [𝑺]
✓ Note that: 𝒗=
(𝑲′𝒎 + [𝑺])
𝐾′
[𝐸] = 𝑀 [𝐸𝑆]
[𝑆]
′
𝐾𝑀 𝐾 ′ [𝐼 ]
∴ [𝐸]𝑂 = [𝐸𝑆] + [𝐸𝑆] + 𝑀 [𝐸𝑆]
[𝑆] 𝐾𝐼 [𝑆]
[𝐼 ]
+ [𝐸𝑆] → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟓)
𝐾𝐼
✓ Factor out the [ES]
𝐾′ 𝐾 ′ [𝐼 ] [𝐼 ]
[𝐸]𝑂 = [𝐸𝑆] ( 𝑀 + 1 + 𝑀 + )
[𝑆 ] 𝐾𝐼 [𝑆] 𝐾𝐼
→ (𝒆𝒒. 𝟔)
✓ Isolate [ES] and multiply the numerator
and denominator with [S]
3. ENZYME INHIBITION: UNCOMPETETIVE ✓ Factor out [S]
DERIVATION (RAPID EQUILIBRIUIM [𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
[𝐸𝑆] = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟖)
APPROACH) [𝐼 ]
𝐾𝑀′
+ [𝑆] (1 + 𝐾 )
𝐼
✓ Multiply numerator and denominator by
[𝐼]
(1 + 𝐾 )
𝐼
[𝐸]𝑂 [𝑆]
[𝐼 ]
(1 + )
𝐾𝐼
[𝐸𝑆] = → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟗)
𝐾𝑀′
+ [𝑆]
[𝐼 ]
(1 + )
𝐾𝐼
✓ we can now express the equation in terms
of v,
𝑣 = 𝑘2 [𝐸𝑆] → (𝒆𝒒. 𝟏𝟎)
1 1 1 1
= 𝐾𝑚 + 1 → =−
𝑣 [𝑆 ] [𝑆] 𝐾𝑚
✓ Plot in excel only the chosen points
𝑲𝒎,𝒂𝒗𝒈 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟒𝟒𝟓 𝑴
✓ Solve for 𝐾𝐼
✓ Recall that for noncompetitive inhibition,
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 [𝑆 ]
𝑣= ∙
[𝐼 ] 𝐾𝑚 + [𝑆]
1+ 𝐾
𝐼
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥,𝑎𝑝𝑝 =
[𝐼 ]
1+
𝑘2
✓ We can use any point, for our case, we used
0.33