Which method is best for GCL assay and Why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TytoAlba95
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on two protocols for estimating Glutamate Cysteine Ligase (GCL) activity: Dasgupta 2007 and Seelig 1985. Protocol 1 measures GCL activity by assessing the formation of a blue compound through the reaction of inorganic phosphate with ferrous sulfate-ammonium molybdate, while Protocol 2 employs a coupled enzyme assay to monitor the decrease in NADH absorbance at 340 nm. The consensus is that Protocol 2, the coupled enzyme assay, is superior due to its ability to provide a more accurate measurement of enzyme activity by accounting for the baseline NADH levels in tissue extracts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of enzyme kinetics and assay protocols
  • Familiarity with spectrophotometric measurement techniques
  • Knowledge of biochemical pathways involving L-glutamate and L-cysteine
  • Experience with coupled enzyme assays and their applications
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of coupled enzyme assays in biochemical analysis
  • Learn about the role of NADH in enzymatic reactions and its measurement
  • Explore the specifics of the Seelig 1985 protocol for GCL activity estimation
  • Investigate the limitations and advantages of using inorganic phosphate measurements in enzyme assays
USEFUL FOR

Biochemists, laboratory technicians, and researchers involved in enzyme activity assays, particularly those studying GCL and related metabolic pathways.

TytoAlba95
Messages
132
Reaction score
19
I'm trying to choose a protocol for estimating GLutamate Cysteine ligase assay. I've two of them.
Reaction:
L-glutamate + L-cysteine + ATP
\rightleftharpoons
gamma-glutamyl cysteine + ADP + Pi

#Protocol 1: Dasgupta 2007
Though this method, the author has estimated GCL activity by measuring a blue coloured compound formed by a reaction between Pi and Ferrous sulphate-ammonium molybdate reacgent. She has basicially estimated Phosphate.

#Protocol 2: Seelig 1985
It is a coupled enzyme assay.
The enzyme activity is measured in reaction mixtures containing L-glutamate, L-a-aminobutyrate, and ATP by a coupled enzyme procedure in which the rate of formation of ADP, in the presence of pyruvate kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, phosphoenolpyruvate, and NADH, is obtained from the decrease in the absorbance of NADH at 340 nm.

Which one of these is better and why?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
My take on :
SanjuktaGhosh said:
Which one of these is better and why?

I think doing the double coupled enzyme assay is better over estimating the inorganic phosphate. Because inorganic phosphate is rather ubiquitous and the coupled enzyme assay will estimate the decrease in NADH which is supplied from outside and added to the basal level of NADH present in the tissue extract, which can be substracted.

#Here's a link (Taussky 1953) to the original paper from which Protocol 1 is derived.
 

Similar threads

Glycolysis & Creb Cycle Biochemistry
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
15K