Chemistry Cleland Diagram & Binding Order from Lineweaver Burke Plots

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Head
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diagram Plots
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on analyzing a Cleland diagram and binding order derived from Lineweaver-Burk plots, focusing on the complexities of sequential and ping-pong mechanisms in enzyme reactions. The initial graphs suggest a sequential reaction when Cysteine is saturated, yet the parallel slopes imply a ping-pong mechanism for other conditions. There is uncertainty regarding the binding order of ATP and its role, especially since it exhibits the highest K_m, indicating lower affinity but is still saturating the enzyme. The participant expresses difficulty in conceptualizing the interactions of three substrates simultaneously, noting that additional complexities arise compared to two-substrate scenarios. The conversation highlights the need for further clarification on these binding dynamics and mechanisms.
The Head
Messages
137
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
(b) Draw a Cleland diagram for the mechanism of the reaction shown above that is consistent with the following data. Briefly justify your reasoning.

(d) In light of the data in parts (b) and (c), can you conclude that ATP binds first to the enzyme? Briefly explain your reasoning.

(e) Kinetic data give the following KM values for the three substrates:
ATP KM = 1.8 mM Cys KM = 0.1 mM GlcN KM = 0.2 mM
At steady-state inside the cell, the enzyme is entirely saturated with ATP. How would you rationalize this fact in light of the above KM data?
Relevant Equations
N/A
I am mostly focused on parts (b) and (d), which I typed out. For (b), I can tell the first pair of graphs is a sequential reaction (when Cysteine is saturated), but it appears ping-pong for the others because the slopes are roughly parallel. I know sequential has to reactants binding (so I guess that would be ATP and GlcN), and I suppose that a reaction occurs there and then maybe Cysteine binds to react with an intermediate?

But then again, if Cysteine is saturated, I don't know if that makes sense, because Cysteine should be able to bind.

Also, how do we know ATP binds first (part d)? Part (e) also confuses me, because ATP has the highest K_m, so the lowest binding affinity, but ATP is saturating the enzyme. It seems like there would be less binding for that.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.23 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.23 PM.png
    29.3 KB · Views: 208
  • Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.37 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.37 PM.png
    27.9 KB · Views: 186
  • Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.49 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.49 PM.png
    23.3 KB · Views: 185
  • Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.58 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-02-14 at 7.11.58 PM.png
    12.2 KB · Views: 195
Physics news on Phys.org
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top