Q.37 For an enzyme that follows Michaelis-Menten kinetics, a competitive inhibitor (A) increases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯. (B) decreases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯. (C) increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯. (D) decreases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.

Q.37 For an enzyme that follows Michaelis–Menten kinetics, a competitive inhibitor
(A)
increases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
(B)
decreases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
(C)
increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
(D)
decreases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.

Correct Answer: (C) increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.

Competitive inhibitors bind reversibly to the enzyme’s active site, competing directly with the substrate and reducing the enzyme’s apparent affinity for substrate. This shifts the Michaelis-Menten curve rightward, requiring higher substrate concentrations to reach half-maximal velocity, while sufficient substrate overcomes inhibition to achieve the original maximum rate.​

Option Analysis

(A) Increases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
Incorrect. Competitive inhibition spares π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯ because high substrate displaces the inhibitor from the active site, saturating all enzyme molecules. No source supports π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯ increase here.​

(B) Decreases both πΎπ‘š and π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
Incorrect. πΎπ‘š rises due to competition, not falls; decreased πΎπ‘š signals higher affinity, opposite to competitive effects. π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯ also stays constant.​

(C) Increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
Correct. Inhibitor occupancy raises apparent πΎπ‘š (substrate concentration at Β½ π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯), but π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯ remains unchanged as substrate outcompetes at saturation.​

(D) Decreases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯.
Incorrect. Decreased πΎπ‘š typifies uncompetitive inhibition (binds ES complex), not competitive, which always elevates πΎπ‘š.​

In Michaelis-Menten kinetics, competitive inhibitors play a key role by binding the enzyme active site, mimicking substrate structure to block access. This competition elevates the apparent Kmβ€”the substrate concentration yielding half Vmaxβ€”while Vmax holds steady, as excess substrate displaces the reversible inhibitor. Understanding this distinction proves vital for CSIR NET exams in biochemistry and enzymology.​

Mechanism Breakdown

Competitive inhibition follows the modified Michaelis-Menten equation:

v=Vmax[S]/Km(1+[I]/ki)+[S]

Here, inhibitor concentration [I] and dissociation constant Ki inflate Km without altering Vmax. Lineweaver-Burk plots confirm this: parallel y-intercepts (same Vmax), steeper slopes (higher Km).​

Comparison Table

Inhibition Type Km Effect Vmax Effect Reversibility by Substrate
Competitive Increases ​ Unchanged ​ Yes ​
Non-competitive Unchanged ​ Decreases ​ No ​
Uncompetitive Decreases ​ Decreases ​ No ​

This pattern equips students tackling competitive inhibitor Michaelis-Menten kinetics questions in exams like CSIR NET.

2 Comments
  • Sonal Nagar
    January 6, 2026

    increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯

  • Bhanwar
    January 24, 2026

    Increases πΎπ‘š but does not affect π‘‰π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯β˜‘οΈπŸ‘

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest Courses