Substrate Concentration
At a low substrate concentration the rate of reaction increases with increasing substrate concentration. When a certain substrate concentration is reached, increasing it further has no further effect on the rate of reaction. At the time when the rate of reaction is no longer increasing, all the active sites are filled.
At low substrate concentrations there are still spare enzyme active sites available therefore increasing the substrate concentration increases the collisions and increases the rate of reaction.
Inhibitors
Inhibitors are also another factor which could affect the rate of reaction as they prevent the enzyme from working to its full extent. A competitive inhibitor is a similar shape to the substrate and can fit in the active site therefore temporarily blocks the normal substrate from reacting so the enzyme works less efficiently and the rate of reaction is reduced. A non-competitive inhibitor combines with a site other than the active site and distorts the tertiary structure of the enzyme that in turn distorts the normal active site and so the substrate fits less well and the rate of reaction is reduced.
I have previously done an experiment with Catalase and hydrogen peroxide but it was to find the effect of the substrate concentration. I used potato instead of liver and I counted the number of bubbles per minute. The results were that when I increased the concentration of hydrogen peroxide the rate of reaction increased at a directly proportional rate. If I doubled the concentration of hydrogen peroxide then the rate of reaction would double also.
Prediction
I predict that as the concentration increases the rate of reaction will increase with it at a proportional rate, this is because there will be more enzymes present therefore more substrate can react at any one time. At a high enzyme concentration the overall production of oxygen and water will be high as there are lots of enzymes therefore more reactions can take place at any one time, therefore the point at which the enzymes are all combined with a substrate will be much higher than if there were only a low enzyme concentration. I have predicted this on the grounds that all the variables, which I do not want changed or present, are not.
Preliminary
In my preliminary I had to decide which concentration of liver to hydrogen peroxide would produce the best results. I chose different ratios of each substance.
I found that using the ratio 5:2 produced too much oxygen and that I would get more conclusive results if I used the ratio 5:1 as this would produce a lot of oxygen when the liver is fully concentrated, yet would produce a little when it is almost fully diluted therefore a wide range of results will be produced.
I also did a Potato experiment- factors that determine the reactivity of catalase This experiment uses the enzyme to decompose hydrogen peroxide. The source of the catalase is a potato.The cork borer is used to make a cylinder of potato which is then sliced up into discs of equal thickness. The slices can then be added to the hydrogen peroxide which is broken down into water and oxygen, according to the equation:
2H2O2 2H20 + O2
This shows that as the concentration of hydrogen peroxide increases, the number of bubbles increases with it.
Variable
I will have to control the variables somehow to make sure that a fair test is carried out. The pressure is controlled by the atmosphere, and seeing as I have no control over that I will have to assume that the pressure is constant.
The temperatures of the solutions may change slightly throughout the experiment due to a change in room temperature due to the weather or the radiators. Ideally I would use a water bath but the change in temperature on the day I did this experiment would be negligable.
The pH of my should only have a negligable change as I have used the same concentration and volume of hydrogen peroxide. (Hydrogen peroxide can sometimes change the pH of a solution)
Liquidating the liver homogenate controls the surface area.
The volume of the reactants will be kept the same by me. The total solution will always be 6 cm3 . Even though there will be slightly different numbers of enzyme in each extract of the liver homogenate the ratio of liver to hydrogen peroxide will stay constant. I cannot control the number of enzymes in the liver homogenate.
I am using these relatively large volumes as they can be easily measured and come with a low percentage error than if I were using smaller volumes.
Main Experiment
Equipment:
- 15 Boiling tubes for all the repeat experiments.
- Delivery tube with a rubber bung for a boiling tube. This stops gas from escaping when it exits the boiling tube and goes into the measuring cylinder.
- 100 cm³ measuring cylinder as I can read the volume of oxygen collected accurately and it has a larger capacity to collect more oxygen.
- Tub (large) for water has to be deep enough to have the beehive shelf completely emerged in water.
-
4 10cm³ syringes so that the solutions can be measured to within 1 mm3 . Each syringe should be used for the same solution as using one syringe for both the hydrogen peroxide and the liver homogenate solution would lead to contamination which would make the end result incorrect, therefore label the syringes. Try not to suck up any bubbles when taking the solution as this will affect the volume you put into the reaction.
-
100 cm3 of 10g/l liver homogenate (liquidated) so that the volume can be easily measured.
-
100 cm3 Hydrogen Peroxide
- Beehive shelf so that the oxygen goes straight up into the measuring cylinder.
- 4 beakers to hold the diluted solutions.
- Boss and clamp holds the measuring cylinder upright so that I can read the readings accurately.
- Stop clock to make sure that my readings are accurate.
- Boiling tube rack to hold the boiling tubes.
- 3 beakers for holding the individual solutions.
- Marker Pen for marking which solution is which.
Safety
No eating, drinking and long hair should be tied back. The dangers of each solution should be clear i.e. with a hazard card. Spillages should be wiped up with a paper towel. Wear goggles and a lab coat due to the hydrogen peroxide being corrosive and an irritant. If you do get some hydrogen peroxide come into contact with your eye flood the eye immediately with water and report it. If Hydrogen peroxide comes into contact with your skin, it will go white. In this case rinse the area immediately with water. All enzymes are potential allergies and could irritate the membranes of the eyes or the nose if inhaled. They may also cause an asthmatic attack.
Method
- Put goggles and a lab coat on.
- Get all the apparatus and lay it out in front of you and check you have it all.
- Fill the water bath with water from a nearby tap until it is 3/4 of the way full.
- Make sure that the beehive shelf will be completely emmersed in the water and allow 1/2cm to slide the measuring cylinder on top.
- Take the delivery tubing and feed it under the beehive shelf until it pokes out the hole in the centre slightly. (the non-bung end)
- Take the measuring cylinder and sill it right to the top, put your hand firmly over the top and place the mouth of the measuring cylinder, along with your hand, underwater. Once underwater you may remover your hand. In this stage try not to let any bubbles into the measuring cylinder.
- Carefully slide the measuring cylinder over the top of the delivery tube and rest it on top of the beehive shelf with the end of the delivery tube in the middle of the opening of the measuring cylinder.
- Fix the measuring cylinder in place using the boss and clamp. Try and fix the measuring cylinder directly upright otherwise your readings may be slightly inaccurate.
- Make sure that there are no bubbles in the measuring cylinder.
- Take 6 boiling tubes and label them 10, 8, 6, 4, 2 and 0 which corresponds to the liver homogenate concentration
-
Fill the designated syringe for the hydrogen peroxide with 5cm3 from the hydrogen peroxide beaker. Make sure that there are no bubbles.
- Label the syringe 'hydrogen peroxide'.
- Add this hydrogen peroxide to the boiling tube labelled '0'
-
Suck up 1cm3 of water in the syringe (no bubbles)
- Label the syringe 'Water'
- Take the bung on the end of the delivery tube and place it part way across the opening of the boiling tube, with the syringe ready pointing into the boiling tube in the other half. This is ready for a quick covering of the boiling tube to try and prevent the oxygen from escaping.
-
Take the stop clock, slowly put all the '0cm3 concentration of liver homogenate' into the boiling tube marked '0' and start the stop clock.
- Make sure that the oxygen is going into the measuring cylinder.
- When a minute (60 seconds) has passed, record the volume of oxygen collected. Read the measurement at eye level from the bottom the meniscus.
- Repeat steps 4-9 leaving out the labelling.
- Label the other syringe ‘Liver’
- Reset all the equipment like before.
-
Take 2 cm3 of the liver homogenate and put this in one of the beakers.
- Label that beaker 2
-
Then get 8 cm3 of water and put that in the same beaker. This is your 20% concentrated solution.
-
Put in the boiling tube labelled ‘2’ 5 cm3 of hydrogen peroxide.
- Suck up 1 cm of the 20% solution in the fourth syringe.
- Label that syringe ‘solution’
- Repeat step 16
- Repeat steps 17, 18 and 19 but don’t forget that this time it is 20% concentrated.
-
The next solution requires 4cm3 of liver homogenate and 6cm3 water.
-
Make these like in steps 23, 24 and 25 but take 4 cm3 of liver homogenate label the beaker 4
- Reset all the apparatus.
- Repeat steps 16, 17, 18 and 19 to obtain results for the 40% liver concentration.
- Repeat steps 4-9
-
The next solution requires 6cm3 of liver homogenate and 4cm3. water.
-
Repeat steps 23-25 but add 6cm3 liver homogenate and 4 cm3 and lebel it 60%
- Repeat steps 16-19 not forgetting that it is 60% concentrated.
- Reset all the apparatus.
- The next concentration is 80%
-
Repeat steps 23-25 but add 8 cm3 .liver homogenate and 2 cm3 water
- Repeat steps 16-19. Don’t forget the solution is 80% concentrated
- Finally the next concentration is 100%
-
Repeat steps 23-25 but just use 10cm3 liver homogenate and no volume of water.
- Repeat steps 16-19.
- Finish by tidying the apparatus away into the appropriate places for cleaning and put your safety clothing away.
Fair Test
I made sure that I measured all the volumes as exactly as I could, measuring the volume of oxygen collected in the measuring cylinder at eye level from the bottom of the meniscus. I used the same concentrations of hydrogen peroxide and liver homogenate throughout. I tried to stop the stop clock at the same time each time
Results
Standard deviation is a measure of how widely values are dispersed from the average value. It is computed as the average squared deviation of each number from its mean.
Lower case sigma means 'standard deviation'.
Capital sigma means 'the sum of'.
x bar means 'the mean'.
Analysis
My graph shows that there is a relationship between the volume of oxygen collected in a minute and the concentration of the liver homogenate. My results show that in 1 minute, the 100% concentrated liver homogenate produced 21cm3 of oxygen, at 80% the reaction produced 14cm3 of oxygen, at 60% the reaction produced 12 cm3 of oxygen, at 40% the reaction produced 7 cm3 of oxygen and at 20% the reaction produced 3cm3 of oxygen. At 0% there was no oxygen produced. By changing the percentage concentration of the liver homogenate I am changing the number of enzymes present in the reaction. The volume of oxygen produced indicates the rate of reaction in that the faster the oxygen is produced the faster the rate of reaction. From my background knowledge I already know that when an enzyme is present in a reaction the rate of reaction increases anyway. For example, compare 40% concentration of liver to 80% concentration of liver. The rate of reaction is (14-7) 7 cm3 per minute slower for the 40% concentration than the 80% concentration. This means that the velocities of the reactions of the different concentrations increase as the concentration of the liver homogenate increases. I can tell this because the volume of oxygen released increases due to the increased probability of successful collisions with a hydrogen peroxide molecule increases producing more water and oxygen molecules. I cannot obtain the rate of reaction from my graph as a time scale would have to be introduced along one of the axis to allow this and I do not really have enough results either. I predicted that ‘as the concentration increases the rate of reaction will increase with it at a proportional rate’. My graph shows this in that there is a positive correlation between the concentration and the rate of reaction. In my results the 40% liver concentration, less oxygen was produced than the 80% concentration therefore my prediction was correct. There is a difference of (14.3-6.7) 8 cm3 of oxygen collected( to the nearest integer) between them. However, the volume of oxygen collected is not directly proportional to the concentration of liver homogenate as the difference between each concentration when the percentage concentration is increased is not constant, for example, the difference in the volume of oxygen collected between 20%% and 40% is 4cm3 of oxygen, whereas between 60% and 80% concentration the difference in the volume of oxygen collected is 2cm3.
I am not really very confident with my results as there was so many places where my results could have been affected by my accuracy and by other things that I cannot control. As I can see from my graph, my results are not that accurate otherwise they would be in a perfect straight line therefore there must have been different things which were affecting the experiments to either speed it up or slow it down.
Evaluation
In this evaluation I will consider my error, how my results are affected by this error, what the error is caused by and how it an be improved, and what affect his improvement will haven on my results.
I only used concentrations in factors of 20%, 100%, 80%, 60%, 40%, 20% and the control experiment of 0%. I could have gone up in factors of 10% which would have given me a wider range of results, which could have helped to give me a better graph, a more accurate line of best fit and would have helped me identify more accurately if any of my results were anomalous. Because I only have 5 points on my graph at the moment it is hard to distinguish an anomalous result. In addition I could have done even more repeat results that would have given me even more information which could have been used to calculate more accurate averages and therefore a more accurate graph and line of best fit. This may have also changed my standard deviation. I did not take more than 3 repeats because I was limited in time and I only just managed to get my three repeats done in time.
If I had got more results during the time that I was collecting the volume of oxygen. (I.e. every 15 seconds up to a minute) then this would have allowed me to calculate the rates of reaction for each concentration of liver homogenate by drawing a graph and calculating the gradient for each concentration. This would have helped to show that the rate of reaction increases as the percentage of liver homogenate concentration increases. However this would not have helped to give me more accurate results as the volume of oxygen collected at the end of a minute would still be the same as my graph in this coursework.
I also should have tested the delivery tubing to see if there were any leaks in it by letting water flow through it when it was set up like in the experiment. If there were leaks then I could have either covered these with a thick coating of Vaseline or got a new delivery system. If there were a leak in the tubing that I used it is probable that some oxygen escaped and was not measured in the measuring cylinder. This would directly affect my results and would make them inaccurate. If I had no leaks, however, then my results would not have been affected by this means.
When starting the reaction by adding the hydrogen peroxide and the liver homogenate together they reacted immediately so I had to quickly put the bung in very quickly. When I was doing this some of the oxygen may have escaped before I put the bung in. This would have directly affected my results and therefore my accuracy. I should have used a double-holed rubber bung and a syringe to put the liver in the boiling tube and leave the syringe in the second hole throughout the minute that they were reacting. This would have been a good idea as it would have prevented any oxygen escaping between me adding the liver and putting the bung in the boiling tube. Using the syring and the double-holed bung would have prevented any oxygen loss at this point in my experiment and therefore made my results more accurate.
It was a good idea to use boiling tubes instead of something larger as this reduces loss of volume when I was transferring the solutions.
When using the measuring cylinders and syringes I used ones which were too large. I should have adjusted the size of the measuring cylinder to the volume of oxygen that I was collecting so that my percentage error would be reduced. I should have used a 50cm3 measuring cylinder for the 100% liver concentration and then a 20cm3 measuring cylinder for the rest of the concentrations. You can calculate percentage error using the formula:
Accuracy * 100%
Volume
This means that the 100cm3 measuring cylinder has a percentage error of ±25% as I could only read it to ±0.25cm3 where as if I had used the ±20cm3 measuring cylinder my percentage error would only be 10% as I could read this syringe to ±0.01cm3. I could only read the 10 cm3 syringe to ±0.1 therefore the percentage error is ±10%. I I had used a 5cm3 syringe to measure all the soultions I would have been able to read these to ±0.025cm3 which is only a ±2.5% percentage error. For each repeat that I did, the experiment was ±55% accurate which is quite poor. Alternatively I could have used a gas syringe or a burette to measure the volume of oxygen collected, which would have been more accurate and given me better results.
None of my results are anomalous. This might be because the same bad effects might have happened on every repeat, therefore all the results would have been affected and shifted in the same way, or that the apparatus that I used was secure.
A major source of error is the sample preparation and maintaining the solutions as they can decay over time. It would have been better if the hydrogen peroxide and the liver solution were kept in a water bath and keep the hydrogen peroxide out of the sunlight as it can be decomposed by UV light.
The liver homogenate may have also had some impurities in it which may have affected my results, or there may have been a difference in sixe in the bits of liver floating around which would slow the reaction down if the bits were larger as a reaction can only occur on the surface of a solid. There is no way to really overcome this unless you really make sure that all there are no liver bits present.
I could not start the timer and squirt the liver into the hydrogen peroxide at the same time therefore the timing was a bit inaccurate. I would have been better if I had ha d a partner to start the stop clock for me once the liver was introduced to the hydrogen peroxide. This may have improved my results slightly.
Seeing as rates of reaction are so sensitive to temperature I still would have liked to have used a water bath during this experiment as this would have regulated the temperature.