JCE Online Journal of Chemical Education
 | Subscriptions  | Software Orders  | Support  | Contributors  | Advertisers  | 

JCE Print

JCE Digital Library

JCE Software

Only@JCE Online

About JCE


  Home > JCE Print > Journal of Chemical Education > Issues > 2002  > March  >
Chemical Education Today
Letters
Understanding Enzyme Inhibition
Addison Ault
Department of Chemistry, Cornell College, Mount Vernon, IA 52314-1098

Cover
March 2002
Vol. 79 No. 3
p. 311

Full Text

Having published "An Introduction to Enzyme Kinetics" in this Journal (1), I turned quickly to Raymond S. Ochs's recent paper entitled "Understanding Enzyme Inhibition" (2). While there was much of interest to me in Ochs's paper, I found myself in disagreement with him at several points.

In contrast to Ochs, I believe inhibition is best characterized by the linear double reciprocal plots, since the three possible effects on a straight line correspond exactly to the three possible modes of inhibition: a slope effect (competitive inhibition), an intercept effect (uncompetitive inhibition), and both slope and intercept effects (noncompetitive, combined, or "mixed" inhibition). It is clear that there can be no other possibilities.

Furthermore, whereas Ochs presents the initial velocity equations as eqs 5, 6, and 7, I believe that an intuitive understanding of the initial velocity equations is more easily obtained from equations in the forms shown in eqs 6 and 8 and the unnumbered equation at the bottom of the left column of page 385 in my paper. The reason I believe this is that the terms in the denominators of the fractions in the equations in my paper correspond exactly to the forms in which the enzyme can be present, and the kinetics are completely determined by the relative amounts of the forms.

Also, when the inhibitor can bind to both E and ES (noncompetitive, combined, or "mixed" inhibition), the Km in the presence of the inhibitor can be either greater or smaller than in its absence. Ochs's assertion that "the fact that Km is unchanged in the mixed case" can be true only if the affinity of the inhibitor for E and for ES is exactly the same--an unlikely possibility.

Additionally, while it may be surprising or even counterintuitive that Km is smaller in the presence of a purely uncompetitive inhibitor than in its absence, further analysis provides the needed insight, as I explained in my paper starting with the last paragraph on page 384 (1).

Finally, I do not believe that the concern for data analysis is relevant. A series of experiments will contain a certain amount of information, and a mathematically and statistically valid analysis of either a "direct" plot or a "double reciprocal" plot will extract the same information.

Literature Cited

  1. Ault, Addison. J. Chem. Educ. 1974, 51, 381-386.
  2. Ochs, Raymond S. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1453-1456.

See author's reply.

More Information
*  Citation
Ault, Addison. J. Chem. Educ. 2002 79 311.
*  Keywords
Biochemistry; Enzymes; Kinetics; Teaching / Learning Aids
*  History
Created:
Last Updated:
January 31, 2002
March 16, 2005
  Home > JCE Print > Journal of Chemical Education > Issues > 2002  > March  > Page 311


Subscriptions

JCE HS CLIC

Our Secondary School editors work hard to distill all the JCE materials to produce a fraction of particular interest to high school teachers. We call it CLIC.


Contributions Welcome
JCE welcomes your submission

Advertisers
In recent years we have worked hard to better match our advertisers with our readers. When shopping for chemistry education materials, visit our advertisers' WWW sites first.

Be An Ambassador
Take JCE along on your outreach missions. Copies of the Journal, guest access to JCE Online, our publications catalog, and more are available for your participants.