Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 40 issue 4 (december 2006) : 267 - 271

EFFECT OF METAL IONS ON THE CYTOSOLIC NADP+- DEPENDENT ISOCITRATE DEHYDROGENASE FROM GERMINATING BLACKGRAM, VIGNA MUNGO (L.) HEPPER

M. Ayub Ali*, W. Joykumar Singh, L. Inaotombi Devi, S. Kunjeshwori Devi, L. Rupachandra Singh
1Department of Biochemistry, Manipur University, Canchipur - 795 003, Manipur

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Ali* Ayub M., Singh Joykumar W., Devi Inaotombi L., Devi Kunjeshwori S., Singh Rupachandra L. (2024). EFFECT OF METAL IONS ON THE CYTOSOLIC NADP+- DEPENDENT ISOCITRATE DEHYDROGENASE FROM GERMINATING BLACKGRAM, VIGNA MUNGO (L.) HEPPER. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 40(4): 267 - 271. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The cytosolic NADP+-dependent isocitrate dehydrogenase from germinating blackgram shows
an absolute requirement of a divalent metal ion such as Mn2+ or Mg2+ for expression of its full
activity. Other metal ions like Co2+, Zn2+ and Cu2+ could also activate the enzyme, though the
degree of activation was lower than that of either Mn2+ or Mg2+ at the same concentration. In
contrast, three metal ions Sn2+, Ba2+ and Ca2+ were found to be inhibitory. The kinetics analysis with Mn2+ shows sigmoidal response suggestive of a positive co-operativity in metal ion binding. The A0.5 was 3.3 μM as deduced from a Hill plot with a Hill coefficient value of 2.1.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Chen, R. et al. (1988). Eur. J. Biol. Chem., 175: 565-572.
    2. Curry, R.A. and Ting, I.P. (1976). Biochem Biophys., 176: 501-509
    3. Henson, C.A. et al. (1986). Physiol. Plant., 67: 538-544.
    4. Kaur, A. et al. (1996). J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol., 5: 55-58.
    5. Kratochvil, B. et al. (1967). Anal. Chem., 39: 45-51.
    6. Lowry, O.H. et al. (1951). J. Biol. Chem., 193: 265-275.
    7. Murakami, K. et al. (1997). Biometals., 10: 169-174.
    8. Randall, D.D. and Givan, C.V. (1981). Plant Physiol., 68: 70-73.
    9. Satoh, Y. (1972). Plant Cell Physiol., 13: 493-503.
    10. Satoh, Y. and Nakamura, Y. (1984). Physiol. Plant., 62: 561-565
    11. Srivastava, P.K. and Singh, D.S. (2001). Indian J. Biochem. Biophys., 38: 335-341.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)