Km isn’t always affinity
Only under specific assumptions does \(K_m \approx K_d\); often it’s a blend of binding plus catalytic steps—so “higher affinity” isn’t always correct.
Shortcuts: Enter replot · Paste data below to fit parameters.
Paste pairs as [S], v — comma, tab, or space separated; one pair per line. Example:
2, 8.35, 18.110, 33.2
| # | [S] | v |
|---|---|---|
| No data. | ||
| Vmax (fit) | — |
|---|---|
| Km (fit) | — |
| SSE | — |
| R² | — |
| Init guess | — |
| Status | — |
Fitter uses Nelder–Mead on the standard MM model \(v = V_{max}[S]/(K_m+[S])\).
The Michaelis–Menten model describes how the initial reaction velocity \(v\) changes with substrate concentration \([S]\) for many single-substrate enzyme reactions. In its classical form, \( v = \dfrac{V_{max}[S]}{K_m + [S]} \). Here \(V_{max}\) is the maximum rate reached at saturating substrate, and \(K_m\) is the substrate concentration at which the reaction proceeds at half the maximum rate (\(v = V_{max}/2\)). When you vary \([S]\) across a sensible range and measure \(v\), the resulting curve rises quickly at low \([S]\) and then saturates, reflecting the catalytic machinery becoming fully occupied.
Although the nonlinear equation is the primary model, several linear transformations are traditionally used for visualization and quick diagnostics: the Lineweaver–Burk plot (\(1/v\) vs \(1/[S]\)), the Eadie–Hofstee plot (\(v\) vs \(v/[S]\)), and the Hanes–Woolf plot (\([S]/v\) vs \([S]\)). Linear plots can make outliers easier to spot and help you see whether a subset of points deviates systematically. Keep in mind that reciprocal transforms can overweight low-concentration noise; for quantitative parameter estimation, modern practice favors direct nonlinear regression of \(V_{max}\) and \(K_m\) against the original equation.
To get stable estimates, span substrate concentrations from well below to several times above \(K_m\) (a common rule of thumb is \(0.1\,K_m\) up to \(5\text{–}10\,K_m\)). If \(K_m\) is unknown, pilot runs help bracket the curve. Aim for at least 8–12 concentrations with replicates, keep temperature, pH, ionic strength, and cofactors controlled, and report consistent units (e.g., \([S]\) in mM, \(v\) in µM·min\(^{-1}\) or absorbance units·min\(^{-1}\) calibrated to concentration). Randomize run order to reduce drift, and record blank/background rates to subtract non-enzymatic signal.
\(K_m\) is often interpreted as an inverse measure of apparent substrate affinity (lower \(K_m\) → higher apparent affinity), but strictly it also reflects catalytic steps in the mechanism; it is not simply a dissociation constant unless specific conditions are met. \(V_{max}\) depends on total active enzyme and the catalytic constant \(k_{\text{cat}}\) via \(V_{max} = k_{\text{cat}}[E]_0\). When comparing systems, normalize by enzyme concentration to report \(k_{\text{cat}}\) and the catalytic efficiency \(k_{\text{cat}}/K_m\), which captures both turnover and substrate capture in the low-\([S]\) limit.
Real enzymes can deviate from the simple model. Competitive, noncompetitive, and uncompetitive inhibition modify the apparent \(K_m\) and/or \(V_{max}\); cooperativity (Hill kinetics) produces sigmoidal curves; and bi-substrate reactions require more elaborate rate laws (e.g., ordered/ping-pong mechanisms). Use the basic Michaelis–Menten analysis as a starting point, then consider these extensions if systematic patterns remain unexplained.
This tool plots the Michaelis–Menten curve from your \(V_{max}\) and \(K_m\), lets you paste experimental data, and performs in-browser nonlinear fitting for educational insight. Results are illustrative — for publication-grade analysis, include replication, error models, weighting, and confidence intervals.
Only under specific assumptions does \(K_m \approx K_d\); often it’s a blend of binding plus catalytic steps—so “higher affinity” isn’t always correct.
Catalase pushes \(k_{\text{cat}}\) into the tens of millions per minute—among the fastest known enzymes, near diffusion limits.
Lineweaver–Burk makes low-[S] errors dominate; pretty straight lines can still hide biased fits, so direct nonlinear regression is kinder.
At high [S], some enzymes slow down as substrate blocks productive binding, bending the curve downward—no inhibitor needed.
“Perfect” enzymes plateau near \(10^8–10^9\ \mathrm{M^{-1} s^{-1}}\); beyond that, catalysis is waiting on molecules to collide.