Literature DB >> 39

Formation of transient complexes in the glutamate dehydrogenase catalyzed reaction.

T Sanner.   

Abstract

The reaction of glutamate dehydrogenase and glutamate (gl) with NAD+ and NADP+ has been studied with stopped-flow techniques. The enzyme was in all experiments present in excess of the coenzyme. The results indicate that the ternary complex (E-NAD(P)H-kg) is present as an intermediate in the formation of the stable complex (E-NAD(P)H-gl). The identification of the complexes is based on their absorption spectra. The binding of the coenzyme to (E-gl) is the rate-limiting step in the formation of (E-NAD(P)H-kg) while the dissociation of alpha-ketoglutarate (kg) from this complex is the rate-limiting step in the formation of (E-NAD(P)H-gl). The Km for glutamate was 20-25 mM in the first reaction and 3 mM in the formation of the stable complex. The Km values were independent of the coenzyme. The reaction rates with NAD+ were approximately 50% greater than those with NADP+. Furthermore, high glutamate concentration inhibited the formation of (E-NADH-kg) while no substrate inhibition was found with NADP+ as coenzyme. ADP enhanced while GTP reduced the rate of (E-NAD(P)H-gl) formation. The rate of formation of (E-NAD(P)H-kg) was inhibited by ADP, while it increased at high glutamate concentration when small amounts of GTP were added. The results show that the higher activity found with NAD+ compared to NADP+ under steady-state assay conditions do not necessarily involve binding of NAD+ to the ADP activating site of the enzyme. Moreover, the substrate inhibition found at high glutamate concentration under steady-state assay condition is not due to the formation of (E-NAD(P)H-gl) as this complex is formed with Km of 3 mM glutamate, and the substrate inhibition is only significant at 20-30 times this concentration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1975        PMID: 39     DOI: 10.1021/bi00694a011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochemistry        ISSN: 0006-2960            Impact factor:   3.162


  31 in total

1.  Wireless capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  G Iddan; G Meron; A Glukhovsky; P Swain
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-05-25       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Magnetic resonance colonography versus conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colonic endoluminal lesions.

Authors:  G Pappalardo; E Polettini; F M Frattaroli; E Casciani; C D'Orta; M D'Amato; G F Gualdi
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 3.  Virtual magnetic resonance colonography.

Authors:  J F Debatin; T C Lauenstein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline for video capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  J-F Rey; G Gay; A Kruse; R Lambert
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 10.093

5.  History and development of capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  Gavriel J Iddan; C Paul Swain
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2004-01

Review 6.  Comparison of wireless capsule endoscopy and conventional radiologic methods in the diagnosis of small bowel disease.

Authors:  Suthat Liangpunsakul; Dean D T Maglinte; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2004-01

Review 7.  Role of video endoscopy in managing small bowel disease.

Authors:  P Swain; A Fritscher-Ravens
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  A novel diagnostic tool for detecting oesophageal pathology: the PillCam oesophageal video capsule.

Authors:  R Eliakim; K Yassin; I Shlomi; A Suissa; G M Eisen
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2004-11-15       Impact factor: 8.171

9.  Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia.

Authors:  Peter B Cotton; Valerie L Durkalski; Benoit C Pineau; Yuko Y Palesch; Patrick D Mauldin; Brenda Hoffman; David J Vining; William C Small; John Affronti; Douglas Rex; Kenyon K Kopecky; Susan Ackerman; J Steven Burdick; Cecelia Brewington; Mary A Turner; Alvin Zfass; Andrew R Wright; Revathy B Iyer; Patrick Lynch; Michael V Sivak; Harold Butler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-04-14       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?

Authors:  C J A Bowles; R Leicester; C Romaya; E Swarbrick; C B Williams; O Epstein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  2 in total

1.  High throughput screening reveals several new classes of glutamate dehydrogenase inhibitors.

Authors:  Ming Li; Aron Allen; Thomas J Smith
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 3.162

Review 2.  Role of Exosomes in the Progression, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Gliomas.

Authors:  Ji Shi; Ye Zhang; Bing Yao; Peixin Sun; Yuanyuan Hao; Haozhe Piao; Xi Zhao
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-11-27
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.