5
$\begingroup$

I have:

$$\begin{array}{c|c} \dfrac{v }{ [S]}/\pu{s^{-1}} & v \cdot 10^2/\pu{mol dm^-3 s^-1} \\ \hline 0.257\ & 5.15\\ 0.895 & 4.48\\ 2.00\ & 3.35\\ 3.59\ & 1.8\\ 4.82\ & 0.48\\ \hline \end{array}$$

And I want to calculate $K_M$ graphically.

I know that I should use the equation:

$$\frac{1}{v}=\frac{1}{v_\mathrm{max}}+\frac{K_M}{v_\mathrm{max}[S]},$$

and that I should plot $1/v$ against $1/[S]$, and then the slope will equal $K_M$/$v_\mathrm{max}$.

I began with converting the data given from $v/[S]$ to $1/[S]$ by dividing each data point with $v$. This gave:

$$\begin{array}{c|c} \dfrac{1}{[S]}/\pu{dm^3 mol^{-1}} & v \cdot 10^2/\pu{mol dm^-3 s^-1} \\ \hline 4.99*10^{-4}\ & 5.15\\ 0.0019 & 4.48\\ 0.0059\ & 3.35\\ 0.0199\ & 1.8\\ 0.1004\ & 0.48\\ \hline \end{array}$$

Plotting $1/v$ against $1/[S]$ gives the graph:

Plot of 1/v vs 1/[S]

But when I want to calculate $K_M$ through: $$\text{slope} \times V_\mathrm{max} = \text{slope} \times \frac{1}{\text{intercept}}$$ I don't get the answer which is in our answer key. Unfortunately, only the answer for $K_M$ is given, and not how to get the answer. The answer is $K_M = \pu{0.0102 mol dm-3}$. Could someone explain where I am going wrong?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your calculations are wrong on $\frac{1}{\ce{[S]}}$. $\endgroup$ – Mathew Mahindaratne May 26 at 17:32
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You somehow reversed the order of the data points, too. That's why there is a hyperbole and not a straight line. Because of the format of the data, it is easier to do an Eadie Hofstee fit instead of the Lineweaver-Burk you attempted. $\endgroup$ – Karsten Theis May 26 at 18:37
  • $\begingroup$ When I am editing your question, I realized you have plot $\frac{1}{[S]}$ vs $v$ instead of $\frac{1}{[S]} $ vs $\frac{1}{v} $. That's why you got a hyperbole instead of straight-line as Karsten Theis suggested. $\endgroup$ – Mathew Mahindaratne May 26 at 20:43
  • $\begingroup$ @MathewMahindaratne I think the values plotted represent 1/v (off by a factor 100), but are in the wrong order, i.e. the first substrate concentration is plotted against the last rate etc. $\endgroup$ – Karsten Theis May 27 at 1:03
8
$\begingroup$

What you have given is: $$\begin{array}{c|c} \hline \dfrac{v}{[S]}, \ \pu{s^{-1}} & v, \ \pu{mol dm^-3 s^-1} \\ \hline 0.257 & 5.15 \times 10^{-2}\\ 0.895 & 4.48 \times 10^{-2}\\ 2.00 & 3.35 \times 10^{-2}\\ 3.59 & 1.8 \times 10^{-2}\\ 4.82 & 0.48 \times 10^{-2}\\ \hline \end{array}$$

Michaelis-Menten equation for enzyme kinetics is:

$$v = \frac{V_\mathrm{max} \cdot [S]}{K_M + [S]} \tag1$$

When rearrange this equation (reciprocal) to get Lineweaver-Burk relationship:

$$\frac{1}{v} = \frac{1}{V_\mathrm{max}} + \frac{K_M}{V_\mathrm{max}[S]} \tag2$$

When multiply the equation $(2)$ by $v \times V_\mathrm{max}$, you get:

$$V_\mathrm{max} = v + \frac{vK_M}{[S]} \tag3$$

When rearrange the equation $(3)$, you get $y = mx + c$ type equation (straight-line equation):

$$v = - K_M \cdot \frac{v}{[S]} + V_\mathrm{max} \tag4$$

The data you have is $\frac{v}{[S]}$ and $v$, which fix the relationship given in the equation $(4)$. Thus, if you can plot them against each other ($\frac{v}{[S]}$ versus $v$) you'd get a straight line with negative lope. The numerical value of the slope is $K_M$ so you can calculate K$_M$ graphically. Also, the $y$-intercept of the graph is equal to $V_\mathrm{max}$:

Plot of v/[S] vs v

From the equation of the graph: $\text{|The slope|} = 0.0102$ and $y\text{-Intercept} = 0.054$

Thus, $K_M = \pu{0.0102 mol L-1}$ and $V_\mathrm{max} = \pu{0.054 mol L-1 s-1}$

Once I found OP's mistake of plotting, I was curious to see how this set of data would show the Lineweaver-Burk relationship. Thus, I make the table for $\frac{1}{[S]}$ and $\frac{1}{v}$:

$$\begin{array}{c|c} \hline \dfrac{1}{[S]}, \ \pu{L mol-1} & \dfrac{1}{v}, \ \pu{L s mol-1} \\ \hline 4.99 & 19.42 \times 10^{-2}\\ 19.98 & 22.32 \times 10^{-2}\\ 59.70 & 29.85 \times 10^{-2}\\ 199.44 & 55.56 \times 10^{-2}\\ 1004.17 & 208.33 \times 10^{-2}\\ \hline \end{array}$$

As predicted by Lineweaver-Burk, the plot of $\frac{1}{[S]}$ versus $\frac{1}{v}$ is a straight-line with a positive slope:

Plot of 1/[S] vs 1/v

From the equation $(2)$, which is the equation of the graph: $\text{The slope} = 0.1891 = \frac{K_M}{V_\mathrm{max}}$ and $y\text{-Intercept} = 18.379 = \frac{1}{V_\mathrm{max}}$

Thus, $V_\mathrm{max} = \frac{1}{18.379} = \pu{0.0544 mol L-1 s-1}$ and $K_M = 0.1891 \times V_\mathrm{max} = 0.1891 \times 0.0544 = \pu{0.0103 mol L-1}$

Both graph give the same values for $K_M$ and $V_\mathrm{max}$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Very nice answer indeed: went the extra mile! Glad I was the first upvoter! It should get the green checkmark ASAP! $\endgroup$ – Ed V May 27 at 0:05
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much! Truly appreciate it! $\endgroup$ – confused May 27 at 10:03

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.